Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
When workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are generally 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 claim fela settlements under the FELA the plaintiff must prove that their injury was at least in part caused due to the negligence of their employer.
FELA vs. Workers' Compensation
While both workers compensation and FELA are laws that offer 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 instances of injury or death. Workers' compensation law offers quick assistance to injured workers regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA however, however requires claimants to prove that their railroad employer was at least partially accountable for their injuries.
Additionally, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts, rather than the state's workers compensation system. It also allows the option of a jury trial. It also sets specific rules for the calculation of damages. For instance an employee can receive compensation of up to 80% of their average weekly salary, in addition to medical expenses and an appropriate cost of living allowance. Furthermore an FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.
To be successful for a worker in a FELA case, they must show that the railroad's negligence played at least a part in the injury or death. This is a higher requirement than that required to win a workers' compensation claim. This is a consequence of FELA's history. 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 100 years, they use dangerous equipment and tracks for trains, as well as in their machines shops, yards and other work areas. FELA is important to ensure the safety of railway workers, and to tackle employers' inability to protect their employees.
If you are a railway worker who has been injured while on the job it is essential to seek legal advice as quickly as you can. The best way to start is to contact a BLET-approved Legal Counsel (DLC). Click on this link to locate a DLC firm in your area.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is federal law that allows seafarers to sue their employer for injuries or deaths while on the job. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 as a means to safeguard sailors who risk their lives on the high seas or in other navigable waters. They are not covered under workers' compensation laws unlike workers on land. It was closely modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which covers railroad workers, and was tailored to address the specific needs of maritime employees.
The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which restrict the amount of compensation for negligence to the amount of lost wages for injured workers, 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 led to their injury or death. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers to seek compensation for unspecified damages like past and present suffering and pain, future loss of earning capacity, mental distress, etc.
A claim against a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought either in the state court or in a federal court. In a suit under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a completely new approach to the workers' compensation laws. The majority of these laws are statutory and do not give injured workers the right to trial before a 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 injuries was subject to a more strict proof standard than in FELA claims. The Court ruled the lower courts were correct when they determined a seaman must prove that his role in the accident directly caused his injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million in compensation for his injuries. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were not correct in that they instructed the jury to find Norfolk responsible only for any negligence that directly contributed to the injury. Norfolk argued the standard of causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be exactly the same.
Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA
Unlike workers' compensation laws, the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is a significant distinction for injured workers in high-risk sectors. This allows them to be compensated for their injuries and also to take care of their families following an accident. The FELA was enacted in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers associated with the work and to establish standard liability requirements for companies who operate railroads.
FELA requires railroads to provide a secure working environment for their employees, which includes the use of well-maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from trains and cars to tracks, switches and other safety equipment. In order for an injured worker to succeed in a claim they must prove that their employer violated their duty of care by not providing a safe work environment and that the injury was directly caused by the negligence.
Some workers may find it difficult to comply with this requirement, particularly when a piece of equipment that is defective is responsible for causing an accident. An attorney with experience in FELA claims can be of great assistance. An attorney who understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can enhance a worker's case by establishing a solid legal basis.
Some railroad laws that may help workers' FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws, referred to as "railway statues," require that rail companies and, in certain cases their agents (such as supervisors, managers or company executives), comply with these regulations to ensure the safety of their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim for injuries under the FELA.
When an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any other railroad device is not installed properly or is damaged This is a common example of a railroad law violation. This is a clear violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and if an employee is hurt due to the incident the employee may be entitled to compensation. However, the law also stipulates that if a plaintiff was a contributor to the injury in some way (even if minimal) the claim could be reduced.
FELA vs. Boiler Inspection Act
FELA is a series of federal laws which allow railroad workers and their families to collect significant damages for injuries they caused on the job. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits, like medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. In addition in the event that an injury causes permanent impairment or death, a claim could be made for punitive damages. This is a way to penalize railroads for their negligence and deter other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.
Congress passed FELA in response to the public's anger in 1908 about the alarming rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Prior to FELA there was no legal basis for railroad workers to sue their employers when they suffered injuries on the job. Injured railroad workers, and their families, were often left without financial support during the time they were unable work due to injuries or negligence on the part of the railroad.
Under the FELA railroad workers injured can make a claim for damages in federal or state courts. The act has replaced defenses like the Fellow Servant Doctrine or assumption of risk with an approach based on comparative fault. The act determines a railroader's portion of the responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions to the actions of their coworkers. The law allows for an investigation by jury.
If a railroad company violates a federal railroad safety statute such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is completely liable for any injuries resulting from the violation. It is not necessary for the railroad to prove it was negligent, or even that it was a contributory to the cause of an accident. You can also bring an action to recover injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.
If you've been injured while working as a railroad worker you must contact a seasoned railroad injury attorney immediately. A good lawyer can help you file your claim and get the maximum amount of compensation during the time you are not able to work because of the injury.