Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

Industries with high risk of injury that are injured are typically protected by laws that require employers to higher standards of safety. Federal Employers’ Liability Act, for example, protects railroad workers.

To be able to claim damages under FELA the worker must prove that their injury was caused partly due to negligence on the part of the employer.

FELA Vs. Workers’ Compensation

There are some differences between workers’ compensation and FELA while both laws offer protection to employees. These differences are related to the process of filing claims as well as fault assessment and the types of damages awarded in instances of death or injury. Workers’ compensation law provides rapid aid to injured workers, regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA however, on the other hand requires claimants to prove that their railroad company was at least partially accountable for their injuries.

Additionally, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts, instead of the state’s workers’ compensation system and provides the option of a jury trial. It also sets specific rules for determining damage. A worker could receive up to 80% of their average weekly salary, plus medical expenses and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. Furthermore, a FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.

In order for a worker to be successful in a FELA case, they must show that the railroad’s negligence played at least a role in the resulting injury or death. This is a higher standard than the one required for a successful workers compensation claim. This is a consequence of the FELA’s past. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase safety on the rails by permitting workers to sue for substantial damages if they were injured during their job.

As a result of more than a century of fela lawsuits litigation railway companies are now able to adopt and deploy safer equipment, however the railroad tracks, trains, yards and machine shops are still one of the most hazardous workplaces. FELA is essential to ensure the safety of railway workers, and to tackle employers’ inability to protect their employees.

If you are a railway worker who has been injured on the job it is imperative that you seek legal advice as soon as you can. Contacting a BLET designated legal counsel (DLC) firm is the most effective way to start. Click this link to find a BLET-approved DLC firm near you.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers in the event of injuries and deaths. It was enacted in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limb on the high seas and other navigable waters as they are not covered by the laws on workers’ compensation like those that cover employees on land. It was modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), which protects railroad employees. It was also tailored to meet the needs of maritime employees.

Contrary to the laws governing workers’ compensation, which limit recovery for negligence to a maximum amount of an injured worker’s lost wages Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in the event of employer negligence. Additionally to this, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their injury or death was directly caused by an employer’s negligent behavior. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for unspecified damages including future and past pain and suffering, past and future loss of earnings capacity and mental distress.

A claim against a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought in an state court or a federal employers’ court. In a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a distinct approach to the majority of workers’ compensation laws which are usually statutory and do not afford the injured employee the right to a trial by jury.

In the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was requested to clarify whether a seaman’s contribution to their own injury was subject to a stricter standard of proof than fela lawyer claims. The Court decided that the lower courts were right in determining that the seaman’s involvement in his own accident must be proven to have directly contributed to his or her injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injuries. Sorrell’s employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the trial court’s instructions to the jury were not correct as they instructed the jury to decide to hold Norfolk responsible only for any negligence directly contributing to the victim’s injury. Norfolk asserted that the standard of causation should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.

Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA

Unlike workers’ compensation laws and the Federal Employers’ Liability Act allows railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers working in high-risk industries. This enables them to be compensated for their injuries and to support their families following an accident. The FELA law, which was passed in 1908 was an acknowledgement of the inherent hazards of the work. It also set up standardized liability requirements.

FELA requires that railroads offer a safe working environment for their employees. This includes the use of maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from trains and cars to switches, tracks, and other safety gear. To be successful an injured worker must demonstrate that their employer has violated their duty of responsibility by not providing them with a reasonably safe working environment and that the injury resulted directly from this negligence.

Some workers may have difficulty to comply with this requirement, particularly in the event that a defective piece of equipment can be the cause of an accident. This is why a lawyer who has experience in FELA cases can be helpful. A lawyer who understands the safety requirements for railroaders, and the regulations that regulate these requirements, can help bolster a worker’s legal case by giving a solid legal basis.

Some railroad laws that may help the worker’s FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws are referred to as “railway statutes” and mandate that rail corporations, and in some cases their agents (like managers, supervisors, or executives of companies) must follow these rules in order to ensure the safety of their employees. Violations of these statutes may be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim of injuries under the FELA.

When an automatic coupler, grab iron or other railroad device is not installed correctly or is defective, this is a common instance of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured because of this, they could be entitled compensation. However, the law also states that if the plaintiff contributed to their injury in any way (even the injury is not severe) the claim could be reduced.

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a series of federal laws that allow railroad workers and their families to recover substantial damages for injuries that they sustain on the job. This includes compensation for the loss of earnings and benefits including medical expenses, disability payments, and funeral expenses. Additionally when an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim may be filed for punitive damages. This is to penalize railroads for negligent actions and deter other railroads from engaging in similar actions.

Congress adopted FELA in 1908 as a result of public outrage at the alarming rate of accidents and fatalities on the railroads. Before FELA there was no legal basis for railroad employees to sue their employers if they were injured at work. Railroad workers who were injured and their families were often left without adequate financial assistance during the time that they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA, railroad workers injured may seek damages in federal or state courts. The law eliminated defenses such as The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. The law determines a railroader’s share of responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions with the actions of their coworkers. The law allows for a trial by jury.

If a railroad operator violates any of the federal railroad safety statutes like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is held liable for any injuries that result. The railroad does not need to prove that it was negligent or that it contributed to an accident. It is also possible to bring an action under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured as a result of exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you’ve been injured while working as a railroad employee, you must contact a seasoned railroad injury lawyer right away. A good lawyer can assist you in filing your claim and obtaining the maximum benefits available in the time you aren’t working because of the injury.