ARK
MUSIC

Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

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

To be able to claim damages under the FELA the plaintiff must be able to prove that their injuries were at least in part caused through the negligence of the employer.

Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

While both workers' compensation and FELA are laws that offer protection to employees, there are some significant differences between the two. These differences are based on the process of filing claims, fault assessment and types of damages awarded in cases of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws provide immediate relief to injured workers, regardless of who was responsible for the accident. FELA, however requires claimants to prove that their railroad company was at a minimum partially responsible for their injuries.

FELA also permits workers to sue federal courts in lieu of the state workers' compensation system and also allows a trial with a jury. It also sets specific rules for the calculation of damages. For instance workers can be awarded compensation of up to 80 percent of their weekly salary, in addition to medical expenses and a reasonable cost of living allowance. A FELA lawsuit could also include compensation for pain and discomfort.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case they must prove that the railroad's negligence was at least a part 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 machines shops, yards and other work areas. FELA is important to ensure the safety of railway workers, and to address employers' inability to protect their employees.

It is essential to seek legal counsel as soon as you can when you are a railway worker who has been injured at work. Contacting a BLET authorized legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to begin. Click here to find a BLET-approved DLC firm in your area.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers for injuries or deaths while on the job. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 to provide a means to safeguard sailors who are at risk on the high seas or other navigable waters. They are not covered by workers' compensation laws unlike 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 needs of maritime employees.

The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of negligence compensation to the maximum amount of lost wages for an injured worker, provides unlimited liability in maritime cases that involve negligence by employers. In addition to this, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their injuries or deaths were directly caused by an employer's negligent behavior. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for damages that are not specified including future and past suffering, past and future loss of earnings capacity and mental distress.

A suit for seamanship under the Jones Act can be brought in either the state court or in a federal court. The plaintiffs in a suit filed under the Jones Act have the right to jury trial. This is a distinct approach than most workers' compensation laws, which are usually 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 determine whether the contribution of a seaman to his or his own injury was subject to a higher standard of evidence than the standard of evidence in FELA cases. The Court decided that the lower courts were right when they determined the seaman had to prove that his role 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 solely responsible for negligence that directly caused the injury. Norfolk also argued that the standard for causation in fela law firm cases and Jones Act cases should be the exact same.

FELA vs. Safety Appliance Act

Contrary to laws regarding workers' compensation, the Federal Employers' Liability Act enables railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence leading to injuries. This is a crucial distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk industries. After an accident, they will be compensated and support their families. The fela railroad settlements was passed in 1908 to recognize the inherent dangers associated with 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, including the use of well-maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and trains to tracks, switches and other safety gear. To allow an injured worker to succeed in a claim they must prove that their employer acted in breach of their duty of care by not providing a safe work environment and that the injury occurred as a direct result of the failure.

Some workers may find it difficult to comply with this requirement, particularly if a defective piece equipment is involved in causing an accident. A lawyer with experience in FELA claims can be a great help. A lawyer who knows the safety requirements for railroaders, and the regulations that govern these requirements, can help bolster the legal case of a worker by providing a solid legal foundation.

Certain railroad laws that could aid the worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws, also referred to as "railway statues," require that rail corporations and, in some instances, their agents (such as supervisors, managers or company executives) adhere to these rules to ensure the safety their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation is enough to justify a claim for injuries under the FELA.

If an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any other railroad device is not installed correctly or is damaged, this is a common instance of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured as a result of this, they may be entitled compensation. The law stipulates that the claim of the plaintiff could be reduced if they were responsible in any way to the injury (even when the injury is not severe).

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a set of federal laws which allow railroad employees and their families to collect substantial damages for injuries sustained during work. This includes compensation for lost earnings as well as benefits like medical expenses, disability payments and funeral costs. In addition when an injury causes permanent impairment or death, a claim may be brought for punitive damages. This is to penalize railroads for their negligence and deter other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.

Congress approved FELA in 1908 due to public outrage over the shocking number of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal avenue for railroad workers to sue employers when they suffered injuries while on the job. Railroad workers injured in the line of duty and their families were often left without financial assistance during the time they were unable to work due to injuries or negligence on the part of the railroad.

Injured railroad workers can bring claims for damages under FELA in either federal or state court. The act abolished defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and the assumption of risk and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. This means that the railroad worker's share of the blame for an accident is determined by comparing their actions to those of coworkers. The law also allows for a jury trial.

If a railroad carrier violates one of the 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 even that it was a contributing to the accident. You can also make an action to recover injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.

If you are a railroad worker who has suffered an injury, you should immediately contact an experienced lawyer for railroad accidents. The right lawyer will be able to assist you in submitting your claim and getting the highest amount of benefits in the time you aren't working due to your injury.