Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act
When workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are generally protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Federal Employers' Liability Act for instance, protects railroad workers.
To be able to claim damages under FELA the worker must prove their injury was caused partly 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 to employees. These differences are related to the claims process, fault assessment and types of damages that are awarded in the event of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws provide 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.
In addition, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts instead of the state's workers compensation system. It also allows jurors for trials. It also sets specific rules for the calculation of damages. For example, a worker can receive compensation of up to 80 percent of their weekly wage, plus medical expenses and a reasonable cost of living allowance. fela lawyer could also include compensation for discomfort and pain.
To win a FELA claim, a worker must demonstrate that the railroad's negligence was at the very least an element in the cause of injury or death. This is a higher standard than what is required for a successful workers compensation claim. This is a result of FELA’s history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in order to improve the safety of rail lines by permitting workers to sue for significant damages if they suffered injuries in the course of their work.
Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for over 100 years, they employ dangerous equipment and train tracks as well as in their machine shops, yards, and other work areas. This makes FELA important for ensuring the safety of all railway workers as well as taking action against employers' inability to protect their employees.
If you are a railway worker who was injured on the job it is essential that you seek legal advice as soon as possible. Contacting a BLET designated legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to begin. Click on this link to find a DLC firm in your region.
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 law was passed in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limbs on the high seas and other navigable waters, because they aren't covered by workers' compensation laws similar to those that protect employees on land. It was closely modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA), which protects railroad workers, and was tailored to address the unique needs of maritime employees.
The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of negligence recovery to the maximum amount of lost wages for injured workers and provides unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that their employer's negligence caused their injury or death. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for unspecified damages such as past and future suffering as well as future and past loss of earnings capacity, and mental distress.
A claim for compensation by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in a federal or state court. In a case brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a revolutionary approach to workers' compensation laws. The majority of these laws are statutory and do not give injured workers the right to trial before a jury.
In the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell the US Supreme Court was requested to clarify if a seaman’s contribution to their own injury was subject to a stricter evidence standard than FELA claims. The Court decided that the lower courts were correct in determining that the seaman must prove his role in the accident directly led to his injury.
Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injury. 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 only responsible for the negligence that caused the injury. Norfolk asserted that the causation standard should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.
Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA
Contrary to laws regarding workers' compensation and the Federal Employers' Liability Act enables railroad workers to sue their employers directly for negligence that leads to injuries. This is an important distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk fields. 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 risks of the job. It also established uniform liability standards.
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 cars and locomotives to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. To be successful an injured worker must prove that their employer violated their duty of responsibility by failing to provide them with a safe working environment, and that their injury was the direct result of this failure.
This requirement may be difficult to fulfill for some workers, particularly when a piece of equipment is involved in an accident. A lawyer with experience in FELA claims is a great resource. Having an attorney that understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders as well as the regulations that govern them can improve a worker's case by providing a solid legal foundation.
The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that could strengthen workers' 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 their employees. Violations of these statutes may be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation is enough to support a claim for injury under the FELA.
A typical example of a railroad statute violation is the case where 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. However, the law also stipulates that if the plaintiff contributed to their injury in some way (even even if it was a minor cause), their claim may be reduced.
FELA in opposition to. Boiler Inspection Act
FELA is a set of federal laws which allow railroad workers and their families to collect substantial damages for injuries that they sustain during work. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits like medical expenses as well as disability benefits and funeral expenses. Additionally, if an injury causes permanent impairment or death, a claim could be brought for punitive damages. This is intended to punish railroads for negligent actions and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.
Congress approved FELA in 1908 as a result of public outrage at the alarming rate of accidents and fatalities on the railroads. Prior to FELA there was no legal avenue for railroad workers to sue employers for injuries they sustained while on the job. Injured railroad workers, and their families, were often left without financial assistance during the time they were unable work because of their injury or negligence by the railroad.
Under the FELA, railroad workers who are injured may make a claim for damages in state or federal courts. The law eliminated defenses such as The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk, and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. The law determines a railroad worker’s part of the blame for an accident by comparing their actions to the actions of their coworkers. The law allows for an investigation by jury.
If a railroad operator violates a 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. It is not necessary for the railroad to prove it was negligent or that it was a contributory cause of an accident. It is also possible to make an action under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured by exposure to diesel exhaust fumes.
If you've been injured while working as a railroad worker, you should contact an experienced railroad injury attorney immediately. The right lawyer can assist you in filing your claim and getting the highest amount of benefits in the time you aren't able to work due to your injury.