Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
Industries with high risk of injury that suffer injuries are usually protected by laws that require employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for instance are covered under the
Federal Employers’ Liability Employers' Liability Act (FELA).
In order to recover damages under FELA the worker must prove that their injury was caused at the very least in part by negligence on the part of the employer.
FELA vs. Workers' Compensation
There are some differences between workers' compensation and FELA while both laws provide protection for employees. These differences are based on the process of claiming as well as fault assessment and the types of damages that are awarded in the event of injury or death. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA however, on the other hand requires claimants to prove that their railroad employer was at least partially responsible for their injuries.
FELA also allows plaintiffs to sue federal courts on behalf of the state workers' compensation system and provides a trial by jury. It also sets specific guidelines for the calculation of damages. A worker could receive up to 80% their weekly average wage, as well as medical expenses, and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. A FELA lawsuit could also include compensation for discomfort and pain.
To be successful for a worker in a FELA case, they must show that the railroad's negligence played at least a part in the death or injury. This is a more stringent requirement than that needed to be successful in a claim under workers' compensation. This is a part of the
fela lawsuits's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in order to improve security on rails by permitting workers to sue for significant damages if they were injured during their work.
As a result of more than 100 years of FELA litigation railway companies are now able to implement safer equipment, however the trains, tracks, railroad yards and machine shops are still one of the most hazardous places to work. FELA is crucial 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 crucial to seek legal advice as quickly as you can. The best way to start is to contact the BLET designated Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to find the DLC firm in your area.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is federal law that allows seafarers to sue their employers for any injuries or deaths they suffer on the job. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 as a way to protect sailors who risk their lives on the high seas and other navigable waters. They are not covered under workers' compensation laws unlike employees who work on land. It was modeled after the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) which was a law that covers railroad employees. It was also crafted to meet the needs of maritime workers.
Unlike workers' compensation laws, which limit recovery for negligence to a maximum amount of an injured worker's lost wages Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in cases involving employer negligence. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that their employer's negligence led to their injury or death. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers in order to recover damages that are not specified including the past and present suffering and pain, as well as future loss of earning capacity and mental distress, among others.
A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in either a federal or state court. In a suit under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a fundamentally different method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are typically statute-based and do not grant the injured employee the right to a jury trial.
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 their own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of evidence than the standard of evidence in FELA cases. The Court decided that the lower courts were correct when they determined a seaman must prove that his involvement in the accident directly caused his injury.
Sorrell received US$1.5 million in compensation for his injury. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer argued that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were incorrect and they had instructed the jury that Norfolk was only accountable for the negligence that directly caused the injury. Norfolk asserted that the causation standard should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.
FELA vs. Safety Appliance Act
Contrary to laws regarding workers' compensation, the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence leading to injuries. This is a crucial distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk fields. After an accident, they will be compensated and provide for their families. The FELA was passed in 1908 in recognition of the inherent dangers associated with the job and to establish uniform liability standards for companies that manage railroads.
FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees, including the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from cars and locomotives to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. In order for an injured worker to be successful in a lawsuit they must show that their employer acted in breach of their duty of care by failing to provide a safe work environment and that the injury occurred as a direct result of the failure.
Some workers may find it difficult to meet this requirement, particularly in the event that a defective piece of equipment can be the cause of an accident. An attorney with experience in FELA claims can be of great assistance. A lawyer who knows the safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern these requirements can strengthen a worker's legal case by giving a solid legal basis.
Some railroad laws that can strengthen the worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws, also known as "railway statues," require that rail corporations, and in some cases their agents (such as supervisors, managers, or company executives) adhere to these rules to ensure the safety of their employees. The violation of these statutes could be considered negligence in and of themselves, meaning that a violation is sufficient to justify a claim for injury under the FELA.
An example of railroad statute violations is when an automatic coupler or grab iron isn't properly installed or is defective. If an employee is injured due to this, they could be entitled to compensation. The law states that the claim of the plaintiff may be reduced when they contributed in any way to the injury (even even if the injury is minor).
FELA Vs. Boiler Inspection Act
FELA is a set of federal laws which allows railroad employees and their family members to claim substantial damages if they suffer injuries while working. This includes compensation for loss of earnings as well as benefits such as medical costs, disability payments, and funeral expenses. Additionally, if an injury causes permanent impairment or death, a claim can be filed for punitive damages. This is a way to penalize the railroad for negligent acts and deter other railroads from engaging in similar actions.
Congress passed FELA in 1908 due to public outrage at the alarming rate of accidents and fatalities on the railroads.