How To Beat Your Boss On Federal Employers

Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

If workers in high-risk industries are injured, they are typically protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for example are covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).

To be able to claim damages under the FELA the victim must demonstrate that their injury was at least in part caused due to the negligence of their employer.

FELA vs. Workers' Compensation

There are differences between workers' compensation and FELA, even though both laws provide protection to employees. These distinctions are related to the process of filing claims, fault assessment and the kinds of damages awarded in instances of death or injury. Workers' compensation law offers immediate aid to injured workers, regardless of who is responsible for the accident. FELA requires that claimants demonstrate that their railroad's employer is at least partially responsible for their injuries.

FELA also permits workers to sue federal courts instead of the state workers' compensation system and also allows a trial with a jury. It also provides specific rules for determining damage. For example, a worker can receive compensation up to 80% of their average weekly salary, in addition to medical expenses and an affordable cost of living allowance. Moreover, a FELA suit could include compensation for pain and suffering.

To be successful for a worker in a FELA case they must prove that the railroad's negligence played at least a part in the injury or death. This is a far more stringent requirement than that needed to be successful in a claim under workers' compensation. This is a result of the history of FELA. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase the safety of rail lines by allowing workers to sue for significant damages if they were injured in the course of their work.

In the wake of more than a century of FELA litigation railway companies are now able to adopt and use safer equipment, but railroad tracks, trains, yards and machine shops remain one of the most hazardous places to work. FELA is essential to ensure the safety of railway workers and to address employers' failures in protecting their employees.

It is essential to seek legal counsel as soon as you can if are railway worker who has been injured while at work. The best method to start is by contacting the BLET-approved Legal Counsel (DLC). Follow this link to find a BLET-approved DLC firm near you.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law that allows seamen to sue their employers for injuries or deaths on the job. 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 like those that cover employees on land. It was modeled on the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which was which covers railroad workers. It was also designed to meet the needs of maritime employees.

In contrast to workers' compensation laws which limit the recovery for negligence to a maximum amount of an injured worker's lost wages, Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in cases that involve employer negligence. 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 to recover unspecified damages, such as the suffering and pain, as well as future loss of earning capacity and mental distress, among others.

A seaman's claim under the Jones Act may be brought in either a federal or state court. Plaintiffs in a suit brought under the Jones Act have the right to a jury trial. This is a distinct method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are usually legal and do not give the injured employee 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 his or their own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of proof than the standard of evidence in FELA cases. The Court decided that the lower courts were correct when they ruled that a seaman must prove that his contribution to his accident directly caused his injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million in compensation for his injuries. Norfolk Southern, Sorrell's employer argued that the instructions given to the jury by the trial court were wrong, as they instructed the jury that Norfolk was only responsible for negligence that directly caused his injury. Norfolk argued that the standard of causation should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.

FELA vs. Safety Appliance Act

In contrast to the laws governing workers' compensation in contrast, 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. This enables them to be compensated for their injuries as well as maintain their families after an accident. The FELA was enacted in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers of the work and to establish uniform liability standards for companies that operate railroads.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe work environment for their employees. This includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from locomotives and cars to tracks, switches and other safety equipment. To be successful an injured worker must demonstrate that their employer has did not fulfill their obligation of care by not providing them with a safe working environment and that their injury resulted directly from this negligence.

This rule can be difficult to fulfill for some workers, especially when a piece of equipment is involved in an accident. This is why a lawyer with expertise in FELA cases can be of assistance. A lawyer who is familiar with the safety requirements for railroaders, and the regulations that govern these requirements can strengthen a worker's legal case by providing a solid legal foundation.

Certain railroad laws that could strengthen workers' FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws are known as "railway statutes" and mandate that rail corporations, and in certain cases, their agents (like managers, supervisors or executives of companies) must comply with these rules in order to protect their employees. The violation of these statutes could be considered to be negligence in and of themselves, meaning that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim for injury under the FELA.

A common example of railroad statute violations is when an automatic coupler or grab iron isn't properly installed or has a defect. If an employee is injured because of this, they could be entitled to compensation. The law stipulates that the claim of the plaintiff could be reduced if they contributed 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 allow railroad workers and their families to collect significant damages for injuries they that they sustain while working. This includes compensation for the loss of earnings as well as benefits including medical expenses as well as disability benefits and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages may also be sought. This is to penalize railroads for negligent actions and deter other railroads from engaging in similar conduct.

Congress passed FELA in 1908 due to public outrage over the appalling rate of fatalities and accidents on the railroads. Prior to FELA, there was no legal mechanism for railroad employees to sue their employers when they suffered injuries on the job. Injured railroad workers and their families were often left without adequate financial aid during the time they were unable to work due to their injuries or negligence on the part of the railroad.

Under the FELA, railroad workers who are injured may seek damages in state or federal courts. The act eliminated defenses like The Fellow Servant Doctrine and the assumption of risk and replaced them with a system of comparative blame. This means that a railroad worker's share of the blame for an accident is determined by comparing his or her actions to those of his coworkers. The law also allows for an open trial before a jury.

If a railroad company violates the federal railroad safety law such as The Safety Appliance Act and Boiler Inspection Act it is strictly liable for any injuries that result from it. The railroad does not need to prove that it was negligent or the fact that it caused an accident. You can also bring an action for injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.

If you have been injured while working as a railroad worker you must contact a seasoned railroad injury attorney immediately. A qualified lawyer can assist you file your claim and obtain the maximum benefits in the event that you are not able to work because of the injury.