10 Things We Hate About Federal Employers Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

In high-risk industries, workers who suffer injuries are usually protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Federal Employers' Liability Act is one example. It protects railroad employees.

In order to be entitled to damages under FELA the worker must prove that their injury was caused partially due to negligence on the part of the employer.

FELA vs. Workers' Compensation

There are differences between workers' compensation and FELA while both laws provide protection for employees. These differences are related to the process of filing claims, fault assessment and the kinds of damages awarded in instances of injury or death. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants prove that their railroad company is at the very least partially responsible for their injuries.

Additionally, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts, instead of the state's workers compensation system. It also allows the option of a jury trial. It also has specific guidelines for determining damages. A worker could receive up to 80% of their average weekly salary, as well as medical expenses and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. Moreover the FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case, they must show that negligence by the railroad played at least a small part in the resulting injury or death. This is a more stringent requirement than that needed for a successful claim under workers compensation. This is a consequence of the history of FELA. In fela accident attorney , Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase safety on the rails by allowing workers to sue for large damages if they suffered injuries in the course of their work.

As a result of over 100 years of FELA litigation railway companies are now able to adopt and use safer equipment, but trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops remain among the most dangerous places to work. FELA is essential to ensure the safety of railway workers and to address employers' negligence in protecting their employees.

If you are a railway employee who has suffered an injury in the course of work it is essential to seek legal advice as quickly as you can. Contacting a BLET-approved legal counsel (DLC) firm is the most effective way to start. Click here to find the DLC firm in your region.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers for any injuries or deaths they suffer while on the job. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 as a means to protect sailors who put their lives at risk 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 tailored to address the specific needs of maritime employees.

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

A seaman's claim under the Jones Act may be brought in a state or federal court. Plaintiffs in a suit brought under the Jones Act have the right to a trial by jury. This is a distinct method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are typically statute-based and do not grant 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 involvement in their own injury was subject to a more strict standard of proof than FELA claims. The Court ruled the lower courts were right when they determined a seaman must prove that his role in the accident directly caused his injury.

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

FELA Vs. Safety Appliance Act

The Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue directly their employers for negligence that resulted in injuries. This is a significant distinction for injured workers in high-risk industries. This allows them to receive compensation for their injuries and also to support their families following an accident. The FELA, which was passed in 1908 was an acknowledgement of the inherent dangers of the work. It also established standardized liability requirements.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees. This includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and locomotives to tracks, switches and other safety equipment. To be successful an injured worker must demonstrate that their employer has violated their duty of responsibility by not providing them with a safe working environment, and that their injury resulted directly from the failure.

Some workers may find it difficult to comply with this requirement, particularly in the event that a defective piece of equipment is involved in causing an accident. This is why an attorney who has 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 strengthen a worker's legal case by giving a solid legal basis.


The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that could strengthen the worker's FELA claim. These laws, also known as "railway statues," require that rail companies and, in certain instances, their agents (such as supervisors, managers or company executives) adhere to these rules to ensure the safety of their employees. Infractions to these laws can be considered negligence per se, meaning that a violation of any one of these rules is enough to justify an injury claim under FELA.

When an automatic coupler, grab iron or other railroad device is not installed correctly or is damaged it is a typical example of a railroad law violation. This is clearly a violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and when an employee is injured because of it the employee may be entitled to compensation. The law states that the claim of the plaintiff could be reduced if they contributed in any way to the injury (even when the injury is not severe).

FELA Vs. Boiler Inspection Act

FELA is a set of federal laws that allow railroad employees and their families to recover significant damages for injuries they that they sustain during work. This includes compensation for lost earnings and benefits like disability payments, medical expenses and funeral expenses. In addition when an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim could be made for punitive damages. This is to penalize the railroad and dissuade other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.

Congress adopted FELA in response to the public's anger in 1908 about the alarming rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before FELA, there was no legal way for railroad employees to sue their employers when they were injured on the job. Railroad workers who were injured, and their families, were often denied financial support during the period they were unable to work because of their accident or negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA railroad workers who suffer injuries may make a claim for damages in federal or state courts. The law replaced defenses such as the Fellow Servant Doctrine or assumption of risk with a system based on comparative fault. This means that the railroad worker's share of the blame for an accident is determined by comparing his or her actions to those of coworkers. The law also permits the possibility of a jury trial.

If a railroad carrier violates the federal railroad safety law, such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is solely responsible for any injuries that result from it. This does not require the railroad to prove that it was negligent or that it was a to the accident. It is also possible to file an action under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured as a result of exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you've been injured while working as a railroad worker you must contact a seasoned railroad injury lawyer right away. A qualified lawyer can assist you file a claim and receive the maximum benefits for the time you are not able to work because of the injury.