Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
If workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are generally protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for instance are covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).
In order to be entitled to damages under FELA workers must prove their injury was caused at least partly due to negligence on the part of the employer.
Workers' Compensation vs. FELA
While both workers compensation and FELA are laws that provide protection to employees, there are some significant differences between the two. These distinctions are related to the process of claiming, fault assessment and types of damages that are awarded in the event of death or injury. Workers' compensation law gives immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who was responsible for the accident. FELA requires that claimants demonstrate that their railroad employer is at the very least partially responsible for their injuries.
In addition, FELA allows workers to sue in federal court instead of the state's worker compensation system. It also allows jurors for trials. It also establishes specific rules for determining damages. For example an employee can receive compensation up to 80 percent of their weekly wage, plus medical expenses and an appropriate 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 at least a factor in the injury or death. This is a much higher standard than what is required to be successful in a claim under workers compensation. This is a consequence of FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase security on rails by allowing workers to sue for large damages if they were injured in the course of their job.
As a result of over 100 years of FELA litigation, railway companies now regularly adopt and use safer equipment, but trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops are still some of the most dangerous work environments. This makes FELA important for ensuring the safety of all railway workers and taking action against employers' inability to safeguard their employees.
It is important that you seek legal advice as quickly as you can if you are railway worker who has been injured while at work. The best way to begin is by contacting the designated Legal Counselor from BLET (DLC). Click here to find a DLC firm in your area.
FELA vs. Jones
act felaThe Jones Act is a federal law that allows seamen to sue their employers for work-related injuries and deaths. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 as a means to safeguard sailors who are at risk on the high seas and 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 protects 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 recovery to the amount of lost wages for an injured worker, provides unlimited liability in maritime cases that involve negligence by employers. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that an employer's negligence caused their death or injury. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers in order to seek compensation for unspecified damages, such as past and present suffering and pain, as well as future loss of earning capacity, mental distress, etc.
A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in a
Federal Railroad or state court. In a suit under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a jury trial. This is a completely new approach to the workers' compensation laws. Most of these laws are statutory in nature and do not grant injured employees the right to trial before a jury.
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 their own injury was subject to a higher standard of proof than the standard for evidence in FELA cases. The Court held that the lower courts were correct in their decision that a seaman's role in his own accident must be proven to have directly caused his or her injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million as compensation for his injury. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were erroneous, since they instructed the jury to determine Norfolk responsible only for any negligence that directly contributed to the injury. Norfolk argued that the causation standard should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.
Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA
Unlike workers' compensation laws and the Federal Employers' Liability Act enables railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers in high-risk industries. After an accident, they can be compensated and maintain their families. The FELA law, which was passed in 1908 was a recognition of the inherent risks of the work. It also set up uniform liability standards.
FELA requires railroads to provide a safe working environment for their employees, which includes the use of well-maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from locomotives and cars to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. In order for an injured worker to be successful in a claim they must prove that their employer breached their duty of care by failing to provide a safe work environment and that the injury was the direct result of the failure.
This requirement can be difficult to fulfill for some workers, particularly when a piece of equipment is involved in an accident. An experienced lawyer who has experience with FELA claims is a great resource. A lawyer who is knowledgeable of the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can enhance the case of a worker, by providing a strong legal foundation.
The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that could help strengthen the worker's FELA claim. These laws, also referred to as "railway statues," require that rail corporations and, in some cases their agents (such as supervisors, managers, or company executives), comply with these rules to ensure the safety of their employees. Violations of these statutes may be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation is sufficient to support a claim of injuries under the FELA.
If an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any other device for railroads is not installed correctly or is defective it is a typical instance of a railroad law violation. This is a clear violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and should an employee be injured as a result, they may be entitled to compensation. The law stipulates that the claims of the plaintiff can be reduced if they were responsible in any way to the injury (even when the injury is not severe).
FELA in opposition to. Boiler Inspection Act
FELA is a set of federal laws which allows railroad workers and their family members to recover substantial damages if they suffer injuries on the job. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits, such as medical costs as well as disability benefits and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages may also be claimed. This is intended to punish railroads for negligent actions and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.
Congress adopted FELA as a response to public outrage in 1908 over the shocking number of deaths and accidents on railroads.