Garcia alleges that because Yankee Springs was not included in subdivisions (d) and (e), Martinez had no right to recover worker's compensation benefits and thus was not subject to the WDCA's exclusive remedy provision set forth in section 131, M.C.L.A. § 418.131(1). See Pallarito v. Vore, 164 Mich. App. 650, 654, 417 N.W.2d 567, 569 (1987) ("The applicability of the exclusive remedy provision [of the WDCA] turns not upon the characterization of the asserted cause of action, but upon whether the employee has a right to recover benefits under the act."). The discrete issue Defendants raise is whether Garcia has sufficiently alleged that Martinez was excluded from the WDCA under subsection (d) of section 115.