Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
If workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are usually protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Federal Employers' Liability Act for instance, protects railroad workers.
In order to recover damages under FELA the worker must prove that their injury was caused at least in part by negligence on the part of the employer.
Workers' Compensation vs. FELA
There are differences between workers compensation and FELA while both laws offer protection to employees. These differences relate to the process of submitting claims as well as fault evaluation, and the types of damages awarded for death or injury. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants show that their railroad employer is at a minimum partly responsible for their injuries.
FELA also allows plaintiffs to sue federal courts instead of the state workers' compensation system and also allows a trial with a jury. It also establishes specific guidelines for the determination of damages. A worker could receive up to 80% of their weekly average wage, as well as medical expenses, and an appropriate cost-of-living allowance. Moreover the FELA suit may include additional compensation for pain and suffering.
In order to win a FELA claim the worker must show that the railroad's negligence was at least a factor in the injury or death. This is a higher standard than the one required for a successful workers compensation claim. This is a part of the FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase security on rails by allowing workers to sue for significant damages when they were injured during their employment.
Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for over 100 years, they continue to use dangerous equipment and train tracks, as well as in their machine shops, yards, and other workplaces. FELA is crucial to ensure the safety of railway workers and to correct employers' inability to protect their employees.
If you are a railway employee who has suffered an injury on the job, it is crucial to seek legal advice as soon as you can. The best method to start is by contacting the BLET designated Legal Counsel (DLC). Click here to find an approved DLC firm in your area.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers for work-related injuries and deaths. The law was passed in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limbs on the high seas and other navigable waters since they are not covered by workers' compensation laws like those that cover employees on land. It was closely modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), which protects railroad workers, and was specifically designed to meet the specific needs of maritime employees.
Unlike workers' compensation laws, which limit recovery for negligence to a maximum of an injured worker's lost wages, Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in cases involving employer negligence. Additionally to this, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove that their injury or death was directly caused by the negligence of an employer's conduct. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers to recover unspecified damages including past and present suffering and pain, as well as future loss of earning capacity as well as mental distress, for example.
A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in a federal or state court. In a lawsuit brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a fundamentally new approach to workers' compensation laws. Most of these laws are statutes and do not grant injured employees the right to a 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 her own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of proof than the standard for proof in FELA cases. The Court decided that the lower courts were correct in determining that a seaman's contribution to his own accident has to be proved to have directly caused the injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injuries. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were erroneous, since they instructed the jury to decide to hold Norfolk responsible only for any negligence directly contributing to his or her injury. Norfolk argued the standard of causation in FELA cases and Jones Act cases should be the exact same.
Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA
Contrary to laws regarding workers' compensation and the Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is a significant distinction for injured workers in high-risk sectors. After an accident, they are able to be compensated and provide for their families. The FELA that was enacted in 1908, was an acknowledgement of the inherent hazards of the work. It also set up uniform liability standards.
FELA requires that railroads provide a safe work environment for their employees. This includes the use of maintained and repaired equipment. fela claims railroad employees includes everything from cars and trains to tracks, switches and other safety gear. 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 reasonably safe working environment and that the injury was directly caused by this negligence.
This rule can be difficult to meet for some workers, especially when a piece of equipment is involved in an accident. An attorney with experience in FELA claims can be a great help. Having an attorney that understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can improve a worker's case by providing 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 require that railroad corporations, and in certain instances their agents (like managers, supervisors or company executives) must comply with these rules to ensure the safety of their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation is enough to support a claim for injury under the FELA.
If an automatic coupler, grab iron or other railroad device is not installed properly or is defective, this is a common example of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured due to this, they could be entitled compensation. The law provides that the claim of the plaintiff may be reduced if they were responsible 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 workers and their families to recover significant damages for injuries they sustained on the job. This includes the compensation for lost earnings and benefits such as medical expenses, disability payments and funeral expenses. In addition when an injury causes permanent impairment or death, a claim could be filed for punitive damages. This is a way to penalize railroads for negligent actions and deter other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.
Congress approved FELA as a response to the public's outrage in 1908 about the alarming rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal way for railroad workers to sue their employers if they suffered injuries at work. Railroad workers injured and their families were often left without financial assistance during the time that they could not work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.
Under the FELA railroad workers injured can file a claim for damages in federal or state courts. The act eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. This means that a railroad worker's portion of the responsibility for an accident is determined by comparing their actions with those of his coworkers. The law allows for the jury to decide on the case.
If a railroad operator violates the federal railroad safety law such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is completely liable for any injuries that result from it. The railroad does not have to prove that it was negligent or that it contributed to an accident. You may also file a claim for injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.
If you've been injured while working as a railroad worker you should consult a skilled railroad injury lawyer right away. A reputable attorney can assist you in submitting your claim and getting the highest amount of benefits for the time you aren't able to work due to your injury.