Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

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

To be able to claim damages under FELA, a worker must prove their injury was caused at least in part by negligence on the part of the employer.

fela law firm against. Workers' Compensation

There are differences between workers' compensation and FELA, even though both laws provide protection to employees. These differences are related to the process of filing claims, fault assessment and the kinds of damages awarded in cases of injury or death. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who was responsible for the accident. FELA however, in contrast, requires that claimants demonstrate that their railroad company was at a minimum partially responsible for their injuries.

In addition, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts rather than the state's workers' compensation system and provides jurors for trials. It also has specific guidelines for the calculation of damages. A worker could receive up to 80% their weekly average wage, plus medical expenses and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. A FELA lawsuit may also include compensation for discomfort and pain.

To win a FELA claim the worker must show that the railroad's negligence was at least an element in the cause of injury or death. This is a higher standard than that required 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 allowing injured workers to seek damages.

As a result of over a century of FELA litigation railway companies are now able to adopt and use safer equipment, but the trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops remain among the most dangerous places to work. This makes FELA crucial for ensuring safety of all railway workers and addressing the failures of employers to protect their employees.

If you are a railway employee who has been injured on the job it is imperative that you seek legal advice as soon as possible. The best method to start is to reach out to the designated Legal Counselor from BLET (DLC). Click on this link to find a DLC firm in your region.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers for injuries or deaths while on the job. It was passed in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limbs on the high seas and other navigable waters because they aren't covered by workers' compensation laws similar to those that protect land-based workers. It was closely modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which covers railroad workers and was tailored to address the specific requirements of maritime workers.

The Jones Act, unlike workers' compensation laws that limit the amount of negligence compensation to the amount of lost wages for an injured worker is a law that allows unlimited liability in maritime cases that involve negligence by employers. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that an employer's negligence led to their death or injury. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for unspecified damages including future and past pain and suffering as well as future and past loss of earnings capacity, and mental distress.

A claim against seamanship under the Jones Act can be brought in either an state court or a federal court. The plaintiffs in a suit filed under the Jones Act have the right to a jury trial. This is a fundamentally different method than the majority of workers' compensation laws which are typically legal and do not give 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 asked to clarify whether a seaman's contribution to his or her own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of proof than the standard of proof in FELA cases. The Court ruled the lower courts were right when they determined a seaman must prove that his contribution to his accident directly caused his injury.

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

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 significant distinction for injured workers in high-risk industries. After an accident, they are able to be compensated and maintain their families. The FELA was passed in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers of the job and to establish standard liability requirements for companies that manage railroads.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work 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 equipment. To be successful an injured worker must prove that their employer did not fulfill their obligation of care by failing to provide them with a reasonably safe working environment and that their injury resulted directly from the failure.

Some workers may have difficulty to comply with this requirement, particularly if a defective piece equipment is responsible for causing an accident. An attorney with experience in FELA claims can be a great help. A lawyer who is knowledgeable of 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 foundation.

Certain railroad laws that could aid a worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws, also referred to as "railway statues," require that rail companies and, in certain cases their agents (such as managers, supervisors or company executives) adhere to these rules to ensure the safety their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim for injuries under the FELA.

If an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any other railroad device is not installed correctly or is damaged it is a typical instance of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured because of this, they may be entitled to compensation. The law stipulates that the claim of the plaintiff could be reduced if they contributed in any way to the injury (even if it is minimal).

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a set of federal laws which allows railroad workers and their family members to claim significant damages if they get injured on the job. This includes compensation for the loss of earnings and benefits like medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. In addition in the event that an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim could be brought for punitive damages. This is in order to punish the railroad and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.

Congress passed FELA in response to public outrage in 1908 over the shocking rate of accidents and deaths on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal way for railroad workers to sue employers when they were hurt on the job. Railroad workers injured in the line of duty and their families were often left without adequate financial support during the period they were unable to work due to injury or negligence by the railroad.

Under the FELA railroad workers who are injured may file a claim for damages in federal or state courts. The law eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and the assumption of risk and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. This means that the railroad worker's share of the responsibility for an accident is determined by comparing his or her actions to those of his coworkers. The law permits the jury to decide on the case.

If a railroad carrier violates one of the federal railroad safety statutes like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it becomes strictly liable for all injuries that result. The railroad is not required to prove negligence or that it contributed to an accident. You can also make a claim for injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.

If you've been injured while working as a railroad worker, you should consult a skilled railroad injury lawyer immediately. A good lawyer can help you file a claim and obtain the maximum amount of compensation in the event that you are in a position of no work because of your injury.