Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
When workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are typically protected by laws that require employers to higher safety standards. Railroad workers, for example, have the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).
To recover damages under the FELA, a victim must prove that their injury was at a minimum, caused by the negligence of the employer.
FELA vs. Workers' Compensation
There are differences between workers' compensation and FELA while both laws offer protection to employees. These differences relate to claims processes as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages that are awarded for injury or death. Workers' compensation law gives rapid assistance to injured workers regardless of who is responsible for the accident. FELA requires that claimants prove that their railroad company is at least partly responsible for their injuries.
FELA also allows workers to sue federal courts on behalf of the state workers' compensation system and provides a trial by jury. It also has specific guidelines for the calculation of damages. For instance workers can be awarded compensation of up to 80% of their average weekly wage, plus medical expenses and an affordable cost of living allowance. A FELA lawsuit may also include compensation for discomfort and pain.
For a worker to succeed in a FELA case, they must show that the railroad's negligence was at least a role in the resulting injury or death. This is a much higher standard than what is required for a successful claim under workers' compensation. This requirement is a result of the history of FELA. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to increase rail safety by allowing injured workers to sue for damages.
As a result of over a century of FELA litigation, railway companies now regularly adopt and use safer equipment, however the trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops are still among the most dangerous workplaces. This is what 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 suffered an injury in the course of work, it is crucial to seek legal advice as soon as possible. The best way to begin is by contacting the BLET designated Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to locate 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 on-the-job injuries and deaths. It was passed in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limb on the high seas and other navigable waters as they are not covered by the laws on workers' compensation like those that cover employees on land. It was modeled after the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), a law that covers railroad employees. It was also tailored to meet the needs of maritime workers.
The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of compensation for negligence to the amount of lost wages for an injured worker, provides unlimited liability in maritime cases that involve negligence by employers. 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 to recover damages that are not specified like the past and present pain and suffering, 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 a federal or state court. In a case brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a jury trial. This is a fundamentally new approach to workers' compensation laws. Most of these laws are statutory in nature and do not grant injured employees the right to trial by jury.
In the case Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was requested to clarify if a seaman’s contribution to their own injury was subject to a stricter proof standard than in FELA claims. fela accident attorney decided that the lower courts were correct when they determined that a seaman's contribution to his own accident must be proved to have directly contributed to the injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million as compensation for his injury. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were incorrect as they instructed the jury to determine Norfolk responsible only for any negligence that directly contributed to the victim's injury. Norfolk also argued that the standard for causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be exactly the same.
FELA vs. Safety Appliance Act
The Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue directly their employers for negligence that led to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk industries. This enables workers to receive compensation for their injuries and also to support their families following an accident. The FELA was enacted in 1908 in recognition of the inherent dangers of the job and to set up uniform liability standards for businesses that operate railroads.
FELA requires railroads to provide a secure working environment for their employees, which includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from locomotives and cars to tracks, switches, and other safety equipment. To be successful, an injured worker must prove that their employer violated their duty of responsibility by not providing them with a safe working environment and that the injury resulted directly from this negligence.
This requirement can be difficult to meet for some workers, especially when a malfunctioning piece of equipment is involved in an accident. An attorney with experience in FELA claims can be a great help. A lawyer who understands the safety requirements for railroaders, and the regulations that govern these requirements can strengthen a worker's legal case by giving a solid 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, also known as "railway statues," require that rail companies and, in certain instances, their agents (such as supervisors, managers or company executives) must adhere to these rules to ensure the safety their employees. Violating these statutes can constitute negligence in and of itself, meaning that a violation of any one of these rules is sufficient to justify an injury claim under FELA.
When an automatic coupler, grab iron or another railroad device isn't installed correctly or is damaged it is a typical instance of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured as a result of this, they could be entitled to compensation. However, the law also stipulates that if a plaintiff contributed to their injury in any way (even if minimal) the amount they claim will be reduced.
FELA Vs. Boiler Inspection Act
FELA is a set of federal laws that permit railroad workers and their families to recover significant damages for injuries they sustained on the job. This includes the compensation for lost earnings and benefits such as disability payments, medical expenses and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages may also be claimed. This is intended to punish railroads for their negligence and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.
Congress adopted FELA in response to the public's anger in 1908 about the alarming rate of accidents and deaths on railroads. Before FELA, there was no legal mechanism for railroad employees to sue their employers when they were injured while on the job. Railroad workers injured and their families were frequently left without adequate 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 who suffer injuries may file a claim for damages in state or federal courts. The act abolished defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. The act determines a railroader's share of responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions with the actions of their coworkers. The law also permits an open trial before a jury.
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. The railroad does not need to prove that it was negligent or that it contributed to an accident. It is also possible to make a claim under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured as a result of exposure to diesel exhaust fumes.
If you are a railroad worker who has been injured and you need to immediately seek out an experienced lawyer for railroad injuries. A reputable attorney will be able to assist you in filing your claim and obtaining the most benefits possible for the time you aren't working due to your injury.