Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

In high-risk industries, workers who are injured are typically protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Federal Employers' Liability Act for instance, protects railroad workers.

To claim damages under the FELA the victim must be able to prove that their injuries were at least partially caused by the negligence of the employer.

FELA Vs. Workers' Compensation

There are differences between workers' compensation and FELA, even though both laws provide protection to employees. These differences relate to claims processes as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages awarded in the event of death or injury. Workers' compensation law gives immediate assistance to injured workers regardless of who was responsible for the accident. FELA however, requires that claimants demonstrate that their railroad company was at least partially responsible for their injuries.

FELA also allows workers to sue federal courts on behalf of the state workers' compensation system, and also allows a trial with a jury. It also has specific guidelines for determining damages. For example an employee can receive an amount of compensation that is up to 80 percent of their average weekly earnings, as well as medical expenses and an appropriate cost of living allowance. Moreover an FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case, they must show that negligence by the railroad played at least a part in the injury or death. This is a higher standard than the one required to win a workers compensation claim. This requirement is a result of FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in order to improve the safety of rail lines by allowing workers to sue for substantial damages if they were injured in the course of their job.

In the wake of more than 100 years of FELA litigation railway companies are now able to adopt and deploy safer equipment, but the railroad tracks, trains, yards and machine shops are still one of the most hazardous work environments. FELA is crucial to ensure the safety of railway workers, and to tackle employers' negligence in protecting their employees.

If you are a railway employee who has suffered an injury while on the job, it is crucial that you seek legal advice as soon as you can. The best way to begin is to reach out to an approved BLET-approved Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to find a BLET-approved DLC firm in your area.

fela attorneys vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers in the event of injuries and deaths. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 to provide a means to safeguard sailors who put their lives at risk on the high seas or in other navigable waters. They are not covered by workers' compensation laws unlike workers on land. It was modeled on the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), which protects railroad employees. It was also designed to satisfy the needs of maritime employees.

Contrary to the laws governing workers' compensation which limit the recovery 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 their employer's negligence caused their injury or death. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers in order to seek compensation for unspecified damages including the pain and suffering, future loss of earning capacity, mental distress, etc.

A seaman's claim under the Jones Act may be brought in either a state or federal court. Plaintiffs in a suit brought under the Jones Act have the right to a jury trial. This is a distinct approach than most workers' compensation laws which are typically statutory and do not afford injured employees the right to a trial by jury.

In the case Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was requested to clarify if a seaman’s involvement in their own injury was subject to a more strict proof standard than in FELA claims. The Court held that lower courts were right when they determined the seaman had to prove that his involvement in the accident directly caused his injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million in compensation for his injuries. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer argued that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were wrong in that they told the jury that Norfolk was only responsible for the negligence that caused the injury. Norfolk also argued that the standard for causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be the exact same.

FELA vs. Safety Appliance Act

Unlike workers' compensation laws and the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is a crucial distinction for injured workers working in high-risk fields. This allows them to be compensated for their injuries and to take care of their families following an accident. The FELA was enacted in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers associated with the job and to set up uniform liability standards for businesses 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 locomotives to tracks, switches and other safety equipment. In order for an injured worker to be successful in a lawsuit they must prove that their employer acted in breach of their duty of care by failing to provide a safe working environment and that the injury was a direct result of this negligence.

Some workers may find it difficult to comply with this requirement, particularly when a piece of equipment that is defective can be the cause of an accident. This is why having a lawyer who has expertise in FELA cases can help. An attorney who understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders as well as the regulations that govern them can help a worker's case by providing a solid legal foundation.

The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that could strengthen a worker’s FELA claim. These laws are known as "railway statutes" and require that rail corporations, and in certain cases their agents (like managers, supervisors, or executives of companies) must follow these rules to ensure the safety of their employees. Violations of these statutes may be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation is sufficient to support a claim for injury under the FELA.

A common instance of railroad statute violations is when an automatic coupler or grab iron is not properly installed or is defective. If an employee is injured due to this, they could be entitled compensation. However, the law also stipulates that if the plaintiff contributed to the injury in any way (even if minimal) the claim could be reduced.

FELA vs. Boiler Inspection Act

FELA is a set of federal laws which allows railroad employees and their family members to recover substantial damages if they get injured on the job. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits, such as medical costs, disability payments, and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages could also be claimed. This is a way to penalize the railroad for negligent acts and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar actions.

Congress passed FELA as a response to the public's outrage in 1908 about the alarming number of deaths and accidents on railroads. Prior to FELA there was no legal basis for railroad workers to sue employers when they suffered injuries in the course of their work. Injured railroad workers and their families were frequently left without financial assistance during the time they were unable to work due to their injury or the negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA, railroad workers injured may make a claim for damages in federal employers’ liability or state courts. The act replaced defenses like the Fellow Servant Doctrine, or the assumption of risk with an approach based on comparative fault. This means that the railroad worker's share of the responsibility for an accident is determined by comparing their actions to those of his coworkers. The law also permits a jury trial.

If a railroad carrier violates any of the federal railroad safety statutes like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is liable for all injuries that result. It is not necessary for the railroad to prove that it was negligent or that it was a to the cause of an accident. It is also possible to make an action under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured due to exposure to diesel exhaust fumes.

If you are a railroad employee who has been injured, you should immediately contact an experienced railroad injury lawyer. A reputable attorney can assist you in submitting your claim and getting the maximum benefits available during the time that you are not working because of the injury.