Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
When workers in high-risk sectors are injured, they are typically protected by laws that require employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for example are covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).
To be able to claim damages under the FELA, a victim must be able to prove that their injuries were at least partially caused due to the negligence of their employer.
FELA vs. Workers' Compensation
There are some differences between workers compensation and FELA although both laws provide protection to employees. These differences are related to claims processes, fault evaluation and the types of damages awarded for death or injury. Workers' compensation law provides immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who was responsible for the accident. FELA requires that claimants prove that their railroad's employer is at least partly 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 sets specific rules for determining damage. For example, a worker can receive an amount of compensation that is up to 80 percent of their average weekly wage, plus medical expenses and a reasonable cost of living allowance. A FELA lawsuit may also provide 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 part of FELA’s history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in order to improve security on rails by permitting workers to sue for substantial damages if they suffered injuries in the course of their employment.
As a result of over 100 years of FELA litigation, railway companies now regularly adopt and use safer equipment, but trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops remain one of the most hazardous work environments. This is what makes FELA crucial for ensuring safety of all railway workers and addressing the failures of employers to safeguard their employees.
If you are a railway employee who was injured on the job it is essential to seek legal advice as quickly as you can. Contacting a BLET designated legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to begin. Click on this link to find a DLC firm in your region.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers in the event of injuries and deaths. It was passed in 1920 to ensure that seamen are protected from risking 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 workers. It was closely modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which protects railroad workers, and was tailored to address the unique needs of maritime employees.
The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which restrict the amount of negligence compensation to the amount of lost wages for injured workers and provides unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. Additionally to this, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their injuries or deaths were directly resulted from an employer's negligent actions. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers to recover damages that are not specified, such as the suffering and pain, future loss of earning capacity as well as mental distress, for example.
A claim for a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought either in the state court or in a federal court. In a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a jury trial. This is a fundamentally different approach to the majority of workers' compensation laws which are usually legal 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 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 evidence in FELA cases. The Court held that the lower courts were right when they determined that a seaman's contribution to his own accident must be shown to have directly caused his or her injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer argued that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were wrong in that they told the jury that Norfolk was solely responsible for the negligence that caused his injury. Norfolk claimed that the standard of causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be the exact same.
FELA Vs. Safety Appliance Act
Contrary to laws regarding workers' compensation and the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is a crucial distinction for injured workers working in high-risk fields. After an accident, they can be compensated and support their families. The FELA was enacted in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers of the job and to establish uniform liability standards for companies that operate railroads.
FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees, including the use of well-maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from trains and cars to switches, tracks, and other safety gear. To be successful, an injured worker must demonstrate that their employer has did not fulfill their obligation of care by failing to provide them with a safe working environment and that their injury was the direct result of this negligence.
This requirement can be a challenge for some workers, especially when a defective piece of equipment is involved in an accident. This is why an attorney who has expertise in FELA cases can be helpful. A lawyer who understands the safety requirements for railroaders, and the regulations that govern these requirements can strengthen a worker's legal case by providing a solid legal foundation.
Certain railroad laws that could strengthen workers' FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws, also known as "railway statues," require that rail corporations, and in some instances, their agents (such as managers, supervisors or company executives) must adhere to these rules to ensure the safety of their employees. Violating these statutes can constitute negligence per se, meaning that a violation of one of these rules is enough to justify a claim for injury under FELA.
When an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any other railroad device is not installed correctly or is defective it is a typical example of a railroad law violation. This is a clear violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and when an employee is injured because of it they could be entitled to compensation. The law stipulates that the claim of the plaintiff may 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 that allows railroad workers and their family members to recover substantial damages if they get injured while working. This includes compensation for the loss of earnings as well as benefits including medical expenses, disability payments, and funeral expenses. If an injury causes permanent impairment or death, punitive damages could also be claimed. This is a way to penalize the railroad for negligent acts and deter other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.
Congress approved FELA in response to public outrage in 1908 about the alarming number of deaths and accidents on railroads. Prior to FELA, there was no legal way for railroad workers to sue their employers when they were injured at work. Railroad workers who were injured and their families were often left without adequate financial support during the period that they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.
Under the FELA, railroad workers injured may make a claim for damages in federal or state courts. fela lawsuit settlements replaced defenses like the Fellow Servant Doctrine or the assumption of risk by establishing the concept of comparative fault. The act determines a railroad worker’s share of responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions to those of their coworkers. The law also allows for an open trial before a jury.
If a railroad company violates a federal railroad safety statute, such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is solely responsible for any injuries that result from it. The railroad does not have to prove negligence or the fact that it caused an accident. You can also make a claim for injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.
If you have been injured on the job as a railroad worker, you should consult a skilled railroad injury lawyer immediately. A qualified lawyer can assist you file a claim and get the most benefits for the time you are not able to work because of your injury.