Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

In high-risk industries, workers who suffer injuries are usually protected by laws that require employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for example, have the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).

In order to recover damages under FELA the worker must prove that their injury was caused at least in part by negligence on the part of the employer.

Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

There are some differences between workers compensation and FELA while both laws offer protection to employees. These distinctions are related to the process of submitting claims as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages that are awarded in the event of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate relief to injured workers, regardless of who was at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants show that their railroad's employer is at a minimum partly responsible for their injuries.

In addition, FELA allows workers to sue in federal court instead of the state's worker compensation system. It also provides a jury trial. It also provides specific rules for determining damages. For example an employee can receive compensation up to 80 percent of their average weekly earnings, as well as medical expenses and an affordable cost of living allowance. A fela lawsuits lawsuit may also provide compensation for discomfort and pain.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case they must prove that the railroad's negligence played at least a small part in the death or injury. This is a more stringent requirement than that needed to be successful in a claim under workers' compensation. This is a consequence of FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in order to improve security on rails by allowing workers to sue for large damages when they were injured during their employment.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for over 100 years, they continue to use dangerous equipment and train tracks, as well as in their machine shops, yards, and other work areas. FELA is crucial to ensure the safety of railway workers and to address employers' negligence in protecting their employees.

If you are a railway employee who was injured on the job it is essential to seek legal advice as soon as possible. The best way to start is by contacting an approved BLET designated Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here 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 any injuries or deaths they suffer during work. The law was passed in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limb on the high seas and other navigable waters since they are not covered by the laws on workers' compensation like those that cover land-based employees. It was closely modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which protects railroad workers, and was designed to meet the specific requirements of maritime workers.

Contrary to the laws governing workers' compensation which limit the recovery for negligence to a maximum of the injured worker's lost wages, the 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 led to their injury or death. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers in order to seek compensation for unspecified damages, such as the past and present suffering and pain, future loss of earning capacity and mental distress, among others.

A claim for compensation by a seaman 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 to the majority of workers' compensation laws which are usually legal and do not give injured employees the right to a jury trial.

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 his own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of proof than the standard for proof in FELA cases. The Court ruled the lower courts were correct when they determined the seaman had to prove that his involvement in the accident directly led to his injury.

Sorrell received US$1.5 million as compensation for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer argued that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were wrong and they had instructed the jury that Norfolk was only accountable for the negligence that directly 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

In contrast to the laws governing workers' compensation, the Federal Employers' Liability Act enables railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is a significant distinction for injured workers in high-risk industries. After an accident, they can 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 uniform liability standards for businesses who operate railroads.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees, which includes the use of well-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 violated their duty of responsibility by failing to provide them with a reasonably secure working environment, and that their injury was the direct result of this failure.

Some workers may find it difficult to meet this requirement, especially when a piece of equipment that is defective is responsible for causing an accident. This is why having a lawyer with expertise in FELA cases can be helpful. Having an attorney that understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders as well as the regulations that govern them can improve the case of a worker, by providing a strong legal basis.

The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that can strengthen a worker’s FELA claim. These laws are known as "railway statutes" and require that railroad corporations, and in some cases, their agents (like managers, supervisors, or company executives) must comply with these rules in order to protect their employees. Violating these statutes can constitute negligence per se, meaning that a violation of any one of these rules is enough 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 instance of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured because of this, they could be entitled to compensation. However, the law also stipulates that if the plaintiff was a contributor to the injury in any way (even the injury is not severe) the amount they claim will be reduced.

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a set of federal laws that allows railroad employees and their family members to recover substantial damages if they suffer injuries while on the job. This includes compensation for lost earnings as well as benefits such as disability payments, medical expenses and funeral expenses. If an injury causes permanent impairment or death, punitive damages can also be sought. This is to punish the railroad and deter other railroads from engaging similar behavior.

Congress approved FELA as a response to public outrage in 1908 at the shocking rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Prior to FELA there was no legal avenue for railroad workers to sue their employers when they suffered injuries in the course of their work. Railroad workers injured in the line of duty, and their families, were often left without adequate financial support during the time they were unable to work due to their accident or negligence of the railroad.

Injured railroad workers can bring claims for damages under FELA in either federal or state court. The law replaced defenses such as the Fellow Servant Doctrine or assumption of risk with the concept of the concept of comparative fault. The act determines the railroad worker's portion of the responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions to those of their coworkers. The law permits the jury to decide on the case.

If a railroad company is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety statutes like 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 that it was negligent or that it was a contributory to the accident. It is also possible to bring a claim under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured due to exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you are a railroad worker who has been injured and you need to immediately seek out an experienced railroad injury lawyer. A qualified lawyer can assist you file your claim and obtain the maximum amount of compensation in the event that you are unable to work due to the injury.