10 Things Everyone Hates About Federal Employers Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

Workers in high-risk industries who are injured are usually protected by laws which hold employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for example are covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).

To recover damages under the FELA the victim must demonstrate that their injury was at a minimum, 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 the two. These differences relate to the process of submitting claims as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages that are awarded in the event of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate relief to injured workers regardless of who was at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants prove that their railroad's employer is at a minimum partially responsible for their injuries.

In addition, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts, rather than the state's workers compensation system. It also provides jurors for trials. It also sets specific guidelines for the calculation of damages. A worker can receive up to 80% of their average weekly salary, as well as medical expenses, as well as an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. A FELA lawsuit could also include compensation for discomfort and pain.

For a worker to succeed in a FELA case they must prove that the railroad's negligence was at least a role in the resulting injury or death. This is a higher requirement than the one required for a successful workers' compensation claim. This requirement is a product of the history of FELA. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in order to improve security on rails by permitting workers to sue for large damages when they were injured during their job.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than 100 years, they employ dangerous equipment and train tracks as well as in their yards, machine shops, and other work areas. FELA is crucial to ensure the safety of railway workers and to correct employers' negligence in protecting their employees.

If you are a railway worker who has been injured on the job it is imperative that you seek legal advice as soon as possible. The best way to begin is by contacting a BLET-approved Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to find a BLET-approved DLC firm in your area.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is a federal law that allows seamen to sue their employers for on-the-job injuries and deaths. It was passed in 1920 to ensure that seamen are protected from risking their lives and limbs on the high seas and other navigable waters since they are not covered by the laws on workers' compensation like those that cover employees on land. It was modeled after the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) which was which protects railroad employees. It was also crafted to satisfy the needs of maritime employees.

The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of compensation for negligence to the maximum amount of lost wages for an injured worker is a law that allows unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that their employer's negligence caused their death or injury. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for damages that are not specified such as past and future suffering and pain, past and future loss of earnings capacity and mental distress.

A suit for a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought in either an state court or a federal court. In a case brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a jury trial. This is a distinct method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are usually legal and do not give injured workers 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 her own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of proof than the standard for proof in FELA cases. The Court ruled the lower courts were right when they ruled that the seaman must prove his involvement in the accident directly led to his injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million in compensation for his injury. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the trial court's instructions to the jury were incorrect as they instructed the jury to decide to hold Norfolk responsible only for any negligence directly contributing to his or her injury. Norfolk claimed that the causation standard should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.

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 working in high-risk industries. After an accident, they will be compensated and support their families. The FELA that was enacted in 1908 was an acknowledgement of the inherent risks of the job. It also established uniform standards for liability.

FELA requires railroads to provide a secure working environment for their employees, including the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and trains to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. To be successful, an injured worker must demonstrate that their employer has breached their obligation to them by failing to provide them with a safe working environment, and that their injury was the direct result of this failure.

Some employees may find it difficult to comply with this requirement, particularly in the event that a defective piece of equipment can be the cause of an accident. This is why a lawyer with experience in FELA cases can be of assistance. 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 base.

The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that could help strengthen a worker’s FELA claim. These laws are known as "railway statutes" and require that rail corporations, and in certain instances, their agents (like managers, supervisors, or company executives) must comply with these rules in order to ensure the safety of their employees. Violations of these statutes may be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, meaning that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim of injury under the FELA.

An example of an infraction to the railroad statute is the case where an automatic coupler or grab iron isn't properly installed or has a defect. This is clearly a violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and if an employee is hurt due to the incident they could be entitled to compensation. The law provides 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 lawsuits is a set of federal laws which allows railroad employees and their family members to claim substantial damages if they suffer injuries on the job. This includes compensation for lost earnings as well as benefits like disability payments, medical expenses and funeral costs. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages may also be sought. This is to penalize railroads for negligent actions and deter other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.

Congress approved FELA in response to the public's outrage in 1908 at the shocking rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal avenue for railroad workers to sue their employers when they suffered injuries while on the job. Injured railroad workers and their families were frequently left without adequate financial support during the period they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.

Railroad workers injured in an accident can file claims for damages under FELA in either federal or state court. The law eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk, and replaced them with the concept of 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 coworkers. The law allows for a trial by jury.

If a railroad operator violates one of the federal railroad safety laws such as The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it becomes strictly liable for all injuries that result. It is not necessary for the railroad to prove it was negligent, or even that it was a to the cause of an accident. It is also possible to bring an action under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured as a result of exposure to diesel exhaust fumes.


If you have been injured while working as a railroad employee, you should consult a skilled railroad injury lawyer immediately. A good lawyer can help you file a claim and receive the most benefits during the time you are unable to work due to the injury.