5 Laws Anyone Working In Federal Employers Should Know Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

When workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are usually protected by laws that require employers to higher safety standards. Railroad workers, for instance are covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).

In order to recover damages under FELA, a worker must prove their injury was caused at least partially due to negligence on the part of the employer.

Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

There are some differences between workers compensation and FELA while both laws provide protection to employees. These differences are related to claims processes as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages awarded for death or injury. Workers' compensation laws provide immediate relief to injured workers regardless of who was at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants show that their railroad company is at least partly responsible for their injuries.

FELA also allows plaintiffs to sue federal courts in lieu of the state workers' compensation system, and also allows a trial with a jury. It also establishes specific guidelines for the calculation of damages. A worker could receive up to 80% their average weekly wage plus medical expenses, and a reasonable cost-of-living allowance. A FELA lawsuit could also include compensation for pain and discomfort.

To be successful in a FELA claim, a worker must demonstrate that the railroad's negligence was an element in the cause of injury or death. This is a higher standard than that required for a successful workers compensation claim. This requirement is a result of the FELA's past. In fela lawyer , Congress passed FELA to increase rail safety by allowing injured workers to claim damages.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than 100 years, they use dangerous equipment and train tracks as well as in their machine shops, yards, and other workplaces. FELA is important to ensure the safety of railway workers and to tackle employers' failures in protecting their employees.

If you are a railway worker who has been injured in the course of work it is imperative to seek legal advice as soon as you can. The best way to begin is to reach out to the BLET-approved Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to find a DLC firm in your region.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that permits seafarers to sue their employers for injuries or fatalities while on the job. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 to provide a means to safeguard sailors who risk their lives on the high seas and other navigable waters. They are not covered by workers' compensation laws, unlike employees who work on land. It was closely modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), which covers railroad workers and was designed to meet the specific needs of maritime employees.

In contrast to workers' compensation laws, which limit recovery for negligence to a maximum of the injured worker's lost wages, Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in the event of employer negligence. In addition under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their injury or death was directly caused by an employer's negligent actions. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for unspecified damages like future and past suffering in the past and future, loss of earnings capacity, and mental distress.

A suit for a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought 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 different approach to the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are typically statutory and do not afford 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 whether a seaman's contribution to his or her own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of evidence than the standard of proof in FELA cases. The Court ruled the lower courts were correct in determining that a seaman must prove that his involvement in the accident directly led to his injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer claimed that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were wrong and they had instructed the jury that Norfolk was solely accountable for the negligence that directly caused his injury. Norfolk asserted that the causation standard should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.

FELA Vs. Safety Appliance Act

The Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue directly their employers for negligence that led to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers in high-risk sectors. This allows them to receive compensation for their injuries and also to take care of their families following an accident. The FELA that was enacted in 1908 was an acknowledgement of the inherent hazards of the work. It also established standardized liability requirements.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe working environment for their employees, including the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and trains to tracks, switches and other safety equipment. To be successful, an injured worker must demonstrate that their employer has did not fulfill their obligation of care by not providing them with a safe working environment and that their injury resulted directly from this negligence.

This rule can be a challenge for some workers, particularly when a defective piece of equipment is involved in an accident. This is why having a lawyer with experience in FELA cases can be helpful. An attorney who understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can improve the case of a worker, by establishing a solid legal foundation.

Some railroad laws that may help the worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws are referred to as "railway statutes" and mandate that rail corporations, and in some instances their agents (like managers, supervisors, or company executives) must adhere to these rules to protect their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation is sufficient to justify a claim for injury under the FELA.

If an automatic coupler, grab iron or other device for railroads is not installed properly or is damaged it is a typical instance of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured because of this, they could be entitled compensation. However, the law stipulates that if a plaintiff was a contributor to the injury in some way (even the injury is not severe), their claim may be reduced.

FELA in opposition to. Boiler Inspection Act

FELA is a set of federal laws that permit railroad workers and their families to recover significant damages for injuries they caused while working. This includes compensation for loss of earnings as well as benefits such as medical costs, disability payments, and funeral expenses. Additionally when an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim may be made for punitive damages. This is to penalize railroads for their negligence and deter other railroads from engaging in similar actions.

Congress approved FELA in response to public outrage in 1908 over the shocking number of deaths and accidents on railroads. Prior to FELA there was no legal avenue for railroad workers to sue employers for injuries they sustained on the job. Railroad workers who were injured and their families were frequently left without financial support during the time that they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.


Under the FELA railroad workers who suffer injuries can seek damages in federal or state courts. The act abolished defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk and replaced them with a system 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 his coworkers. The law also allows for an open trial before a jury.

If a railroad carrier violates a federal railroad safety statute, such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is strictly liable for any injuries that result. It is not necessary for the railroad to prove it was negligent or that it was a contributing to the cause of an accident. It is also possible to make a claim under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured by exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you've been injured on the job as a railroad worker, you should contact an experienced railroad injury lawyer right away. The right lawyer can help you file a claim and receive the most benefits in the event that you are unable to work due to your injury.