Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

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

To be able to claim damages under FELA the worker must prove their injury was caused at least in part by negligence on the part 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 them. These distinctions are related to the claims process, fault assessment and the kinds of damages awarded in cases of injury or death. Workers' compensation law gives rapid relief to injured workers regardless of who is responsible for the accident. FELA requires that claimants prove that their railroad employer is at least partially responsible for their injuries.

FELA also allows workers to sue federal courts instead of the state workers' compensation system and also allows a trial with a jury. It also establishes specific guidelines for the calculation of damages. For example an employee can receive compensation of up to 80 percent of their weekly wage, plus medical expenses and a reasonable cost of living allowance. Additionally the FELA suit could also include compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case they must prove that the railroad's negligence was at least a role in the death or injury. This is a far higher standard than that required for a successful claim under workers compensation. This is a consequence of the FELA's past. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to increase rail safety by allowing injured workers to sue for damages.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than a century, they still employ dangerous equipment and train tracks, as well as in their yards, machine shops, and other workplaces. This makes FELA crucial for ensuring safety of all railway workers as well as addressing the failures of employers to protect their employees.

It is essential to seek legal advice as soon as you can if you are railway worker who has been injured at work. Contacting a BLET designated legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to get started. Click on this link to find a DLC firm in your area.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that permits seafarers to sue their employers for injuries or deaths during work. 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 other navigable waters. They are not covered by workers' compensation laws unlike employees who work on land. It was modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which is which covers railroad workers. It was also tailored to satisfy the needs of maritime employees.

The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of negligence recovery to the amount of lost wages for injured workers and provides unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that an employer's negligence caused their death or injury. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers in order to recover damages that are not specified including the past and present suffering and pain, future loss of earning capacity as well as mental distress, for example.

A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in either a state or federal court. In a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a jury trial. This is a distinct method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are generally legal and do not give the injured employee 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 subjected to a higher standard of proof than FELA claims. The Court held that lower courts were right when they determined the seaman had to prove that his contribution to his accident directly caused his injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million as 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 only responsible for the negligence that caused his injury. Norfolk claimed that the standard of causation in fela railroad cases and Jones Act cases should be exactly the same.

Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA

Unlike workers' compensation laws in contrast, the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that leads to injuries. This is a significant distinction for injured workers working in high-risk fields. This enables workers to receive compensation for their injuries as well as take care of their families following an accident. The FELA was passed in 1908 to recognize the inherent dangers of the job and to establish standard liability requirements for companies who operate railroads.

FELA requires railroads to offer a safe working environment for their employees. This includes the use of repaired and maintained equipment. This includes everything from trains and cars to tracks, switches, and other safety gear. In order for an injured worker to succeed in a claim they must show that their employer breached their duty of care by failing to provide a reasonably safe working environment and that the injury was a direct result of the negligence.

This requirement may be a challenge for some workers, particularly when a malfunctioning piece of equipment is involved in an accident. An experienced lawyer who has experience with FELA claims can be of great assistance. A lawyer who understands the safety requirements for railroaders, as well as the regulations that regulate these requirements, can help bolster a worker's legal case by giving a solid legal basis.

Certain railroad laws that could aid workers' FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws are referred to as "railway statutes" and require that rail corporations, and in some instances, their agents (like managers, supervisors, or company executives) must follow these rules in order to protect their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, meaning that a violation can be considered sufficient to justify a claim for injuries under the FELA.

If an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any another railroad device isn't installed properly or is damaged, this is a common instance of a lawful railroad violation. If an employee is injured because of this, they could be entitled to compensation. However, the law stipulates that if a plaintiff contributed to their 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 which allow railroad employees and their families to claim substantial damages from injuries sustained on the job. This includes compensation for the loss of earnings and benefits including medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. In addition when an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim may be made for punitive damages. This is intended to punish railroads for negligent actions and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.

Congress passed FELA in response to the public's anger in 1908 over the shocking number of deaths and accidents on railroads. Prior to FELA, there was no legal mechanism for railroad workers to sue their employers if they suffered injuries at work. Railroad workers injured in the line of duty and their families were often denied financial assistance during the period they were unable to work due to their injuries or negligence on the part of the railroad.

Injured railroad workers can bring claims for damages under FELA in either state or federal court. The act eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk and replaced them with a system 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 also permits the possibility of a jury trial.

If a railroad company is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety laws, like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is held liable for any injuries that result. This does not mean that the railroad injury fela lawyer to prove that it was negligent or even that it was a contributory to the cause of an accident. It is also possible to file a claim under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured as a result of exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you are a railroad worker who has suffered an injury, you should immediately contact an experienced lawyer for railroad accidents. The right lawyer can assist you in filing your claim and obtaining the maximum benefits available for the time you aren't working because of your injury.