Do You Think You're Suited For Federal Employers? Check This Quiz 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. Federal Employers' Liability Act is one example. It protects railroad workers.

To be able to claim damages under the FELA the plaintiff must demonstrate that their injury was at least in part caused due to the negligence of their employer.


Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

While both workers compensation and FELA are laws that provide protection to employees, there are a few 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 gives rapid assistance to injured workers regardless of who is responsible for the accident. FELA, in contrast requires claimants to prove that their railroad company was at least partially responsible for their injuries.

In addition, 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 determining damage. For example workers can be awarded an amount of compensation that is up to 80 percent of their average weekly salary, in addition to medical expenses and an affordable cost of living allowance. Additionally, a FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case they must prove that the railroad's negligence was at least a role in the death or injury. This is a higher standard than what is required for a successful workers compensation claim. This is a consequence of the history of FELA. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to enhance rail safety by permitting injured workers to sue for damages.

As fela law firm of more than 100 years of FELA litigation, railway companies now regularly adopt and deploy safer equipment, but the trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops are some of the most dangerous places to work. This makes FELA important for ensuring the safety of all railway workers as well as taking action against employers' inability to protect their employees.

If you are a railway employee who was injured on the job, it is crucial that you seek legal advice as quickly as you can. Contacting a BLET authorized legal counsel (DLC) firm is the most effective way to start. Click here to locate the DLC firm in your area.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is a federal law that allows seamen to sue their employers in the event of injuries and deaths. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 as a way to protect sailors who put their lives at risk on the high seas or in other navigable waters. They are not covered by 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 requirements of maritime workers.

The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws, which limit the amount of negligence compensation to the maximum amount of lost wages for injured workers is a law that allows unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. Additionally to this, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove their death or injury was directly resulted from an employer's negligent actions. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for unspecified damages including future and past pain and suffering as well as future and past loss of earnings capacity, and mental distress.

A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in either a federal or state court. The plaintiffs in a suit filed under the Jones Act have the right to a trial by jury. This is a fundamentally different method than the majority of workers' compensation laws which are usually legal and do not give injured workers the right to a jury trial.

In the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was asked to clarify if a seaman’s contribution to their own injury was subjected to a higher proof standard than in FELA claims. The Court ruled the lower courts were correct when they ruled that the seaman must prove his involvement in the accident directly caused his injury.

Sorrell received US$1.5 million in compensation for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer asserted that the guidelines given to the jury by the trial court were wrong, as they instructed the jury that Norfolk was only responsible for the negligence that caused the injury. Norfolk also argued that the standard for causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be exactly the same.

Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA

The Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue directly their employers for negligence that led to injuries. This is a significant distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk fields. After an accident, they can be compensated and maintain their families. The FELA, which was passed in 1908, was a recognition of the inherent hazards of the job. It also set up uniform liability standards.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees, which includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and locomotives to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. To allow an injured worker to be successful in a lawsuit they must prove that their employer breached their duty of care by not providing a safe work environment and that the injury occurred as the direct result of the inability.

Some employees may find it difficult to meet this requirement, particularly when a piece of equipment that is defective is involved in causing an accident. A lawyer with experience in FELA claims can be of great assistance. A lawyer who knows the safety requirements for railroaders, and the regulations that govern these requirements can help strengthen the legal case of a worker by giving a solid legal basis.

Some railroad laws that can help the worker's 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 cases their agents (such as managers, supervisors, or company executives), comply with these regulations to ensure the safety of their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation can be considered sufficient to justify a claim for injury under the FELA.

If an automatic coupler, grab iron or other railroad device is not installed correctly or is defective, this is a common example of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured due to this, they could be entitled compensation. However, the law also stipulates that if the plaintiff contributed to their injury in some way (even if minimal) the claim could be reduced.

FELA Vs. Boiler Inspection Act

FELA is a set of federal laws that allow railroad employees and their families to collect significant damages for injuries they that they sustain during work. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits, like medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages may also be sought. This is a way to penalize the railroad for negligent acts and deter other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.

Congress passed FELA in 1908 due to public outrage at the alarming rate of fatalities and accidents on the railroads. Before FELA there was no legal way for railroad workers to sue employers for injuries they sustained on the job. Injured railroad workers and their families were frequently left without adequate financial support during the time they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.

Railroad workers who are injured can bring claims for damages under FELA in either federal or state court. The act eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and the assumption of risk and replaced them with a system 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 permits an open trial before a jury.

If a railroad operator violates a federal railroad safety law, such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is solely responsible for any injuries that result. The railroad is not required 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 are a railroad employee who has been injured or injured, you must immediately contact an experienced lawyer for railroad injuries. A good lawyer will be able to assist you in submitting your claim and getting the most benefits possible for the time you aren't working because of the injury.