Federal Employers: 11 Things You've Forgotten To Do

Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

In high-risk industries, workers who are injured are usually 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, a worker must prove that their injury was caused at least in part by negligence on the part of the employer.

Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

While both workers' compensation and FELA are laws that provide protections to employees, there are a few differences between them. These differences are related to the claims process, fault assessment and types of damages awarded in instances of death or injury. Workers' compensation law gives rapid aid to injured workers, regardless of who was at fault for the accident. FELA however, in contrast demands that claimants prove that their railroad employer was at least partly responsible for their injuries.

In addition, FELA allows workers to sue in federal court instead of the state's workers compensation system. It also allows jurors for trials. It also has specific guidelines for determining damages. A worker could receive up to 80% of their weekly average wage, together with medical expenses and a reasonable cost-of-living benefit. Additionally the FELA suit could also include compensation for pain and suffering.

To win a FELA claim, a worker must prove that the railroad's negligence was at the very least a factor in the injury or death. This is a higher requirement than the one required to win a workers compensation claim. This requirement is a product of FELA’s history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to improve rail safety by permitting injured workers to claim damages.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than 100 years, they continue to employ dangerous equipment and train tracks, as well as in their machines shops, yards and other work areas. This makes FELA crucial for ensuring safety of all railway workers as well as taking action against employers' inability to safeguard their employees.

If you are a railway worker who has been 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 most effective way to start. Follow this link to find a BLET-approved DLC firm near you.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that allows seafarers to sue their employers for injuries or fatalities during work. It was passed in 1920 to ensure that seamen are protected from risking their lives and limb on the high seas and other navigable waters as they are not covered by workers' compensation laws like those that cover land-based workers. It was modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which was which protects railroad workers. It was also tailored to accommodate the needs of maritime workers.

Unlike workers' compensation laws that limit the amount of compensation for negligence to a maximum of an injured worker's lost wages, the Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in the event of employer negligence. In addition, under the Jones Act, plaintiffs are not required to prove their injuries or deaths were directly resulted from an employer's negligent conduct. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers to recover damages that are not specified including the suffering and pain, as well as future loss of earning capacity and mental distress, among others.

A claim against a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought in an state court or a federal court. The plaintiffs in a suit filed under the Jones Act have the right to a trial by jury.  fela lawsuits  is a fundamentally different approach to the majority of workers' compensation laws which are generally statute-based and do not grant injured employees the right to a trial by 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 their own injuries was subject to a more strict standard of proof than FELA claims. The Court ruled that the lower courts were correct in determining that a seaman's role in his own accident must be proven as having directly caused his or her injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injuries. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer argued that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were not correct in that they told the jury that Norfolk was only accountable for the negligence that directly caused his injury. Norfolk claimed that the standard of causation should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.

FELA in opposition to. Safety Appliance Act

The Federal Employers' Liability Act allows railroad workers to sue directly their employers 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 provide for their families. The FELA was passed in 1908 in recognition of the inherent dangers of the job and to establish uniform liability standards for companies who operate railroads.

FELA requires that railroads offer a safe working environment for their employees. This includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from locomotives and cars to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. 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 safe working environment and that their injury was the direct result of this negligence.

This rule can be difficult to fulfill for some workers, especially when a piece of equipment is involved in an accident. A lawyer with experience in FELA claims is a great resource. An attorney who understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can help a worker's case by providing a strong legal basis.

The Railroad Safety Appliance Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act are two railroad laws that could help strengthen a worker’s FELA claim. These laws, also known as "railway statues," require that rail corporations, and in some instances, their agents (such as managers, supervisors or company executives) must adhere to these regulations to ensure the safety of their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, meaning that a violation is sufficient to support a claim for injuries under the FELA.

A typical illustration of an infraction to the railroad statute is when an automatic coupler or grab iron is not correctly installed or is defective. This is clearly a violation of the Safety Appliance Act, and when an employee is injured as a result the employee may be entitled to compensation. The law provides 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).

Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA

FELA is a set of federal laws which allows railroad employees and their family members to claim substantial damages if they get injured while on the job. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits like medical expenses or disability payments, as well as funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages could also be claimed. This is in order to punish the railroad and dissuade other railroads from engaging in similar actions.

Congress approved FELA in 1908 in response to public outrage at the alarming number of fatalities and accidents on the railroads. Prior to FELA there was no legal basis for railroad workers to sue their employers when they suffered injuries in the course of their work. Railroad workers injured and their families were frequently left without adequate financial support during the time they were unable to work because of their injuries or the negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA railroad workers who are injured may seek damages in state or federal courts. The act abolished defenses such as The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk, and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. The act determines a railroader's share of responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions with those of their coworkers. The law also allows for the possibility of a jury trial.

If a railroad company is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety laws, like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is liable for all injuries that result. This does not require the railroad to prove that it was negligent or even that it was a contributory to the cause of an accident. It is also possible to file an action under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured due to exposure to diesel exhaust fumes.

If you've been injured while working as a railroad employee, you should contact an experienced railroad injury attorney immediately. A reputable attorney will be able to assist you in filing your claim and receiving the most benefits possible in the time you are not working because of the injury.