Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

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

To claim damages under the FELA the victim must prove that their injury was at a minimum, caused through the negligence of the employer.

FELA against. Workers' Compensation

While both workers' compensation and FELA are laws that provide protections to employees, there are some significant differences between the two. These distinctions are related to the process of filing claims as well as fault assessment and the types of damages that are awarded in the event of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws provide immediate relief to injured workers, regardless of who was at fault for the accident. FELA however, in contrast demands that claimants prove that their railroad employer was at least partly responsible for their injuries.

Additionally, FELA allows workers to sue in federal court instead of the state's workers' compensation system and provides the option of a jury trial. It also sets specific guidelines for determining damages. A worker may receive up to 80% their average weekly wage together with medical expenses, and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. Moreover the FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case, they must show that the railroad's negligence played at least a small part in the resulting injury or death. This is a higher requirement than the one required for a successful workers compensation claim. This requirement is a result of the history of FELA. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to enhance rail safety by permitting injured workers to claim damages.

As a result of over a century of FELA litigation railway companies today regularly adopt and deploy safer equipment, however the railroad tracks, trains, yards and machine shops are still among the most dangerous workplaces. This is what makes FELA essential for ensuring the safety of all railway workers and addressing employers' failures to safeguard their employees.

If you are a railway worker who has been injured in the course of work it is imperative that you seek legal advice as quickly as possible. The best way to start is to contact an approved BLET designated Legal Counsel (DLC). Click on this link to find the DLC firm in your region.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is a federal law that allows seamen to sue their employers for work-related injuries and deaths. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 to provide 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 closely modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), which covers railroad workers and was specifically designed to meet the specific requirements of maritime workers.

The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of negligence compensation to the amount of lost wages for injured workers, provides unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. Additionally, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their death or injury was directly resulted from an employer's negligent actions. 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 trial by jury. This is a distinct approach to the majority of workers' compensation laws which are generally statute-based and do not grant injured workers the right to a jury trial.

In the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was asked to clarify if a seaman’s involvement in their own injury was subject to a stricter evidence standard than FELA claims. The Court decided that the lower courts were correct when they determined that a seaman's contribution to his own accident has to be proven to have directly caused his or her injury.

Sorrell received US$1.5 million in compensation for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer claimed that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were wrong, as they instructed the jury that Norfolk was solely responsible for the negligence that caused his injury. Norfolk argued that the standard of causation should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.

Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA

The Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue directly their employers for negligence that caused injuries. This is a crucial distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk fields. After an accident, they are able to be compensated and provide for their families. The FELA was passed in 1908 to recognize the inherent dangers of the job and to set up standard liability requirements for companies that operate railroads.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees, including the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and trains to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. To be successful an injured worker must prove that their employer did not fulfill their obligation of care by not providing them with a reasonably secure working environment and that the injury was the direct result of the failure.

Some workers may have difficulty to meet this requirement, particularly if a defective piece equipment is involved in causing an accident. A lawyer with experience in FELA claims is a great resource. Having an attorney that understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders as well as the regulations that govern them can help the case of a worker, by providing a strong legal basis.

Some railroad laws that can aid a worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the railroad injury fela lawyer Safety Appliance Act. These laws, also known as "railway statues," require that rail corporations and, in some instances, their agents (such as supervisors, managers or company executives), comply with these rules to ensure the safety their employees. Violations of these statutes may be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim of injuries under the FELA.

A typical illustration of railroad statute violations is the case where an automatic coupler or grab iron is not properly installed or has a defect. This is clearly a violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and if an employee is hurt due to the incident they could be entitled to compensation. However, the law stipulates that if the plaintiff contributed to the injury in some way (even even if it was a minor cause) the amount they claim will be reduced.

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a set of federal laws that allows railroad workers and their family members to recover substantial damages if they are injured on the job. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits, like medical expenses, disability payments, and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages can also be claimed. This is in order to punish the railroad and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.

Congress adopted FELA in 1908 as a result of public outrage over the appalling rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before FELA, there was no legal mechanism for railroad employees to sue their employers when they suffered injuries on the job. Railroad workers who were injured and their families were often left without adequate financial support during the period that they could not work due to their injury or the negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA, railroad workers who are injured can seek damages in federal employers’ Liability or state courts. The act replaced defenses like the Fellow Servant Doctrine or the assumption of risk with the concept of the concept of comparative fault. The law determines the railroad worker's part of the blame for an accident by comparing their actions to those of their coworkers. The law also permits an open trial before a jury.

If a railroad operator is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety laws, like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is liable for all injuries that result. This does not require the railroad to prove it was negligent or that it was a contributing to the accident. It is also possible to file a claim under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured by exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you have been injured on the job as a railroad worker you must contact a seasoned railroad injury lawyer immediately. A qualified lawyer can assist you file a claim and obtain the most benefits during the time you are unable to work due to your injury.