Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

If workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are usually protected by laws that hold employers to higher safety standards. Railroad workers, for example are covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).

To recover damages under the FELA, a victim must be able to prove that their injuries were at least in part caused due to the negligence of their employer.

Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

While both workers' compensation and FELA are laws that provide protection to employees, there are significant differences between the two. These differences relate to the process of submitting claims, fault evaluation and the types of damages awarded for death or injury. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA however, however demands that claimants prove that their railroad employer was at least partly accountable for their injuries.

FELA also permits workers to sue federal courts instead of the state workers' compensation system, and provides a trial by jury. It also has specific rules for the determination of damages. A worker could receive up to 80% their average weekly salary, as well as medical expenses, and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. Additionally, a FELA suit could include compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful in a FELA claim the worker must show that the railroad's negligence was a factor in the resulting injury or death. This is a much more stringent requirement than that needed for a successful claim under workers compensation. This is a consequence of FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to increase rail safety by permitting injured workers to claim damages.

As a result of over 100 years of fela lawyer litigation railway companies are now able to implement safer equipment, however the railroad tracks, trains, yards and machine shops are one of the most hazardous places to work. This is what makes FELA crucial for ensuring safety of all railway workers and taking action against employers' inability to safeguard their employees.

It is important that you seek legal advice as quickly as you can if are a railway worker who is injured at work. Contacting a BLET authorized legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to begin. Click on this link to find the DLC firm in your region.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that allows seafarers to sue their employers for injuries or deaths during work. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 as a means to protect sailors who put their lives at risk on the high seas and other navigable waters. They are not covered under workers' compensation laws unlike land-based employees. It was modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which was a law that covers railroad workers. It was also tailored to accommodate the needs of maritime workers.

Contrary to the laws governing workers' compensation that limit the amount of compensation for negligence to a maximum of an injured worker's lost wages Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in cases that involve employer negligence. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that an employer's negligence caused their death or injury. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for damages that are not specified including future and past suffering as well as future and past loss of earnings capacity and mental distress.

A claim by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in a state or federal court. Plaintiffs in a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act have the right to a jury trial. This is a completely different approach than most workers' compensation laws, which are usually statutory and do not afford injured workers the right to a trial by jury.

In the case Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was asked to clarify if a seaman’s contribution to their own injury was subject to a stricter proof standard than in FELA claims. The Court ruled that the lower courts were right in determining that the seaman's involvement in his own accident has to be proven as having directly caused his or her injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injury. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were incorrect as they instructed the jury to find Norfolk responsible only for any negligence directly contributing to the injury. Norfolk also argued that the standard for causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be exactly the same.

Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA

In contrast to the laws governing workers' compensation, the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence leading to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk fields. After an accident, they will be compensated and maintain their families. The FELA was passed in 1908 in recognition of the inherent dangers of the job and to set up standard liability requirements for companies who operate railroads.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe working environment for their employees, which includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and trains to tracks, switches, and other safety equipment. To allow an injured worker to succeed in a claim they must prove that their employer violated their duty of care by failing to provide a reasonably safe work environment, and that the injury occurred as the direct result of this inability.

Some workers may find it difficult to comply with this requirement, especially when a piece of equipment that is defective can be the cause of an accident. An attorney with experience in FELA claims can be a great help. Having an attorney that understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders as well as the regulations that govern them can enhance the case of a worker by providing a solid legal foundation.

The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that can strengthen the worker's FELA claim. These laws are known as "railway statutes" and require that rail corporations, and in some instances their agents (like managers, supervisors, or executives of companies) must follow these rules in order to ensure the safety of their employees. Violation of these laws could be considered negligence by itself, which means that a violation of any one of these rules is sufficient to justify an injury claim under FELA.

If an automatic coupler grab iron or other device for railroads is not installed properly or is defective This is a common example of a railroad law violation. This is a clear violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and when an employee is injured because of it they could be entitled to compensation. The law states that the claims of the plaintiff can be reduced if they were responsible in any way to the injury (even if it is minimal).

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a series of federal laws that allow railroad workers and their families to recover substantial damages from injuries that they sustain during work. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits like medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. Additionally, if an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim could be filed for punitive damages. This is intended to punish railroads for their negligence and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.

Congress approved FELA as a response to the public's anger in 1908 at the shocking number of deaths and accidents on railroads. Before FELA, there was no legal basis for railroad workers to sue their employers when they suffered injuries at work. Injured railroad workers and their families were often left without adequate financial support during the time that they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.

Railroad workers who are injured can bring claims for damages under FELA in either federal or state court. The law eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and the assumption of risk and replaced them with a system of comparative fault. This means that a railroad worker's share of the blame for an accident is determined by comparing their actions to those of coworkers. The law also permits the possibility of a jury trial.

If a railroad carrier is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety laws such as The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it becomes strictly liable for all injuries that result. This does not require the railroad to prove it was negligent, or even that it was a to the accident. You may also file an action to recover injuries caused by diesel exhaust fumes under the Boiler Inspection Act.

If you've been injured while working as a railroad worker you must contact a seasoned railroad injury lawyer right away. The right lawyer will be able to assist you in filing your claim and getting the most benefits possible during the time that you aren't able to work due to your injury.