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. Federal Employers' Liability Act, for example, protects railroad workers.
To be able to claim damages under the FELA the plaintiff must prove that their injury was at least in part caused through the negligence of the employer.
FELA against. Workers' Compensation
There are differences between workers compensation and FELA while both laws provide protection to employees. These differences are based on the claims process as well as fault assessment and the types of damages awarded in cases of death or injury. Workers' compensation law provides rapid relief to injured workers regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA however, in contrast requires claimants to prove that their railroad employer was at a minimum partially responsible for their injuries.
FELA also permits plaintiffs to sue federal courts in lieu of the state workers' compensation system, and allows for a trial by jury. It also has specific guidelines for determining damages. For instance an employee can receive compensation up to 80% of their average weekly wage, plus medical expenses and an appropriate cost of living allowance. A FELA lawsuit may also include compensation for pain and discomfort.
In order to win a FELA claim, a worker must demonstrate that the railroad's negligence was at the very least an element in the cause of injury or death. This is a higher level than that required to win a workers' compensation claim. This is a consequence of the FELA's past. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to enhance rail safety by allowing injured workers to claim damages.
As railroad injury fela lawyer of over 100 years of FELA litigation railway companies today regularly adopt and use safer equipment, however the railroad tracks, trains, yards and machine shops are still among the most dangerous workplaces. This is what makes FELA important for ensuring the safety of all railway workers as well as addressing the failures of employers to safeguard their employees.
It is important that you seek legal advice as quickly as you can when you are railway worker who is injured at work. Contacting a BLET authorized legal counsel (DLC) firm is the most effective way to start. Click here to find an approved DLC firm in your area.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is federal law which allows seamen to sue their employers for any injuries or deaths they suffer during work. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 to provide a means to safeguard sailors who risk their lives on the high seas or other navigable waters. They are not covered by workers' compensation laws, unlike land-based employees. It was closely modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which covers railroad workers, and was specifically designed to meet the unique needs of maritime employees.
In contrast to workers' compensation laws, which limit recovery for negligence to a maximum of the injured worker's lost wages, Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in the event of employer negligence. In addition under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their injury or death was directly caused by an employer's negligent conduct. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for damages that are not specified like future and past pain and suffering as well as future and past loss of earnings capacity, and mental distress.
A claim by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in either a state or federal court. Plaintiffs in a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act have the right to a trial by jury. This is a completely new approach to the workers' compensation laws. Most of these laws are statutory and do not give injured employees the right to a trial by jury.
In the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell, the US Supreme Court was asked to determine whether the contribution of a seaman to his or their own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of evidence 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 involvement in the accident directly caused his injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injuries. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were incorrect, since they instructed the jury to find Norfolk responsible only for any negligence that directly contributed to the victim's injury. Norfolk asserted that the standard of causation should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.
FELA vs. Safety Appliance Act
Contrary to laws regarding workers' compensation, the Federal Employers' Liability Act enables railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that leads to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk fields. After an accident, they will be compensated and provide for their families. The FELA was enacted in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers of the work and to establish uniform liability standards for businesses that operate railroads.
FELA requires railroads to provide a safe working environment for their employees, including the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and trains to tracks, switches, and other safety equipment. To allow an injured worker to succeed in a lawsuit they must prove that their employer violated their duty of care by failing to provide a reasonably safe work environment, and that the injury was directly caused by that failure.
This requirement can be difficult to meet for some workers, especially when a piece of equipment is involved in an accident. An experienced lawyer who has experience with FELA claims can be a great help. A lawyer who is familiar with the safety requirements for railroaders, as well as the regulations that regulate these requirements, can help bolster the legal case of a worker by giving a solid legal basis.
Some railroad laws that may aid the worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws are known as "railway statutes" and mandate that rail corporations, and in certain cases, their agents (like managers, supervisors or executives of companies) must adhere to these rules in order to protect their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, meaning that a violation can be considered sufficient to justify a claim for injury under the FELA.
When an automatic coupler, grab iron or another railroad device isn't installed correctly or is damaged it is a typical example of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured as a result of this, they could be entitled compensation. The law provides that the claims of the plaintiff can be reduced if they were responsible in any way to the injury (even when the injury is not severe).
FELA vs. Boiler Inspection Act
FELA is a set of federal laws which allow railroad employees and their families to recover substantial damages from injuries sustained during work. This includes compensation for lost earnings as well as benefits like disability payments, medical expenses and funeral costs. Additionally in the event that an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim can be brought for punitive damages. This is to penalize the railroad and deter other railroads from engaging similar conduct.
Congress passed FELA as a response to the public's outrage in 1908 about the alarming number of deaths and accidents on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal basis for railroad workers to sue their employers for injuries they sustained on the job. Railroad workers injured in the line of duty, and their families, were often denied financial aid during the time they were unable to work due to injury or negligence by the railroad.
Under the FELA railroad workers who are injured can file a claim for damages in federal or state courts. The act has replaced defenses like the Fellow Servant Doctrine, or the assumption of risk by establishing a system based on comparative fault. This means that a 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 allows for an investigation by jury.
If a railroad operator violates one of the 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 require the railroad to prove that it was negligent or even that it was a contributing to the cause of an accident. You can also bring an action for injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.
If you are a railroad worker who has been injured, you should immediately contact an experienced railroad injury lawyer. The right lawyer can help you file your claim and receive the maximum amount of compensation for the time you are in a position of no work because of your injury.