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. Railroad workers, for instance, have the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).
In order to recover damages under FELA, a worker must prove their injury was caused partially due to negligence on the part of the employer.
Workers' Compensation vs. FELA
While both workers compensation and FELA are laws that offer protections to employees, there are a few differences between the two. These distinctions are related to claims processes as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages awarded for death or injury. Workers' compensation law gives immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants show that their railroad's employer is at the very least partially responsible for their injuries.
FELA also permits workers to sue federal courts in lieu of the state workers' compensation system, and allows for a trial by jury. It also establishes specific rules for determining damages. For example workers can be awarded an amount of compensation that is up to 80 percent of their weekly wage, plus medical expenses and an appropriate cost of living allowance. Furthermore the FELA suit could include 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 role in the death or injury. This is a far higher standard than what is required for a successful claim under workers' compensation. This requirement is a result of the history of FELA. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase the safety of rail lines by allowing workers to sue for substantial damages when they were injured during their job.
Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than a century, they still use dangerous equipment and train tracks, as well as in their machines shops, yards and other work areas. FELA is important to ensure the safety of railway workers and to correct employers' inability to protect their employees.
It is crucial to seek legal advice as soon as you can when you are a railway worker who has been injured while at work. The best way to start is to reach out to an approved BLET designated Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to find a BLET-approved DLC firm near you.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is a federal law that allows seamen to sue their employers for work-related injuries and deaths. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 as a means to safeguard sailors who risk their lives on the high seas or 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 specifically designed to meet the unique 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 an injured worker is a law that allows 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 behavior. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for damages that are not specified including future and past suffering and pain in the past and future, loss of earnings capacity and mental distress.
A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in a state or federal court. Plaintiffs in a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act have the right to jury trial. This is a fundamentally new approach to the laws governing workers' compensation. The majority of these laws are statutes and do not give injured employees the right to trial before a jury.
In the case 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 stricter standard of proof than FELA claims. The Court ruled the lower courts were right when they ruled that a seaman must prove that his involvement in the accident directly led to his injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million in compensation for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer claimed that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were incorrect, as they instructed the jury that Norfolk was only responsible for negligence that directly caused the injury. Norfolk argued the standard of causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be the exact same.
Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA
Unlike workers' compensation laws in contrast, the Federal Employers' Liability Act enables railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence leading to injuries. This is a major distinction for injured workers in high-risk industries. This allows them to be compensated for their injuries as well as maintain their families after an accident. The FELA was enacted in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers associated with the job and to set up standard liability requirements for companies who operate railroads.
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 trains and cars to switches, tracks, and other safety gear. To be successful an injured worker must show that their employer did not fulfill their obligation of care by failing to provide them with a reasonably secure working environment and that their injury resulted directly from the failure.
Some workers may find it difficult to meet this requirement, especially if a defective piece equipment can be the cause of an accident. This is why an attorney with expertise in FELA cases can be of assistance. An attorney who understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders as well as the regulations that govern them can enhance a worker's case by establishing a solid legal basis.
The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that can strengthen workers' FELA claim. These laws, referred to as "railway statues," require that rail corporations, and in some cases their agents (such as managers, supervisors or company executives), comply with these rules to ensure the safety their employees. Infractions to these laws can be considered negligence by itself, which means that a violation of any one of these rules is sufficient to justify an injury claim under FELA.
A common instance of a railroad statute violation is the case where an automatic coupler or grab iron isn't correctly installed or is defective. If an employee is injured due to this, they could be entitled to compensation. The law states that the claims of the plaintiff can be reduced when they contributed in any way to the injury (even when the injury is not severe).
Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA
fela settlements is a set of federal laws that permit railroad workers and their families to recover substantial damages for injuries caused on the job. This includes compensation for loss of earnings as well as benefits including medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. Additionally when an injury causes permanent impairment or death, a claim could be brought for punitive damages. This is to penalize railroads for negligent actions and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.
Congress adopted FELA in 1908 in response to public outrage over the shocking rate of fatalities and accidents on the railroads.