Write About Everything

Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

Industries with high risk of injury that are injured are typically protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for instance are covered by the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA).

To recover damages under the FELA the victim must prove that their injury was at least in part caused through the negligence of the employer.

Workers’ Compensation vs. FELA

There are differences between workers compensation and FELA, even though both laws offer protection to employees. These differences are related to the process of filing claims, fault assessment and the kinds of damages that are awarded in the event of injury or death. Workers’ compensation law gives quick assistance to injured workers regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA requires that claimants demonstrate that their railroad’s employer is at the very least partially responsible for their injuries.

Additionally, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts instead of the state’s workers’ compensation system and provides a jury trial. It also sets specific rules for determining damages. For example workers can be awarded compensation up to 80 percent of their average weekly earnings, as well as medical expenses and an affordable cost of living allowance. Additionally, a FELA suit could include compensation for pain and suffering.

In order for a worker to be successful in a FELA case they must prove that negligence by the railroad played at least a part in the resulting injury or death. This is a higher level than what is required for a successful workers compensation claim. This is a part of FELA’s history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to improve rail safety by permitting injured workers to seek damages.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for over a century, they still employ dangerous equipment and train tracks as well as in their yards, machine shops, and other work areas. This makes FELA crucial for ensuring safety of all railway workers as well as addressing employers’ failures to protect their employees.

If you are a railway worker who has suffered an injury on the job it is essential that you seek legal advice as soon as you can. The best method to start is to contact the designated Legal Counselor from BLET (DLC). Click here to find a BLET-approved DLC firm near you.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law which allows seafarers to sue their employers for injuries or deaths while on the job. The law was passed in 1920 to protect seamen who risk their lives and limb on the high seas and other navigable waters because they aren’t covered by workers’ compensation laws similar to those that protect land-based workers. It was modeled after the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) which is a law that covers railroad employees. It was also designed to accommodate the needs of maritime employees.

The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws, which restrict the amount of negligence recovery to the maximum amount of lost wages for an injured worker, provides unlimited liability in maritime cases involving negligence by employers. 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 seek compensation for unspecified damages, such as the past and present suffering and pain, future loss of earning capacity and mental distress, among others.

A suit for a seaman in the Jones Act can be brought either in an state court or a federal court. In a case brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a revolutionary approach to the laws governing workers’ compensation. Most of these laws are statutory in nature and do not give injured employees the right to 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 involvement in their own injury was subject to a stricter standard of proof than FELA claims. The Court ruled the lower courts were correct when they ruled that a seaman must prove that his contribution to his accident directly led to his injury.


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

FELA in opposition to. Safety Appliance Act

In contrast to the laws governing workers’ compensation, the Federal Employers’ Liability Act enables railroad employees to sue their employers directly for negligence that led to injuries. This is a crucial distinction for injured workers who work in high-risk industries. After an accident, they will be compensated and support their families. The FELA law, which was passed in 1908 was an acknowledgment of the inherent risks of the job. It also established standardized liability requirements.

FELA requires railroads to provide a safe working environment for their employees, which includes the use of well-maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from locomotives and cars to tracks, switches and other safety equipment. To allow an injured worker to succeed in a lawsuit, they must prove that their employer violated their duty of care by not providing a safe working environment and that the injury occurred as a direct result of this inability.

This rule can be difficult to meet for some workers, especially when a defective piece of equipment is involved in an accident. A lawyer with experience in FELA claims is a great resource. A lawyer who is familiar with the safety requirements for railroaders, as well as the regulations that regulate these requirements, can help strengthen a worker’s legal case by providing a solid legal base.

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

If an automatic coupler, grab iron, or any another railroad device isn’t installed properly or is defective it is a typical example of a railroad law violation. If an employee is injured due to this, they may be entitled to compensation. The law provides that the claims of the plaintiff can be reduced when 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 that allow railroad workers and their families to collect substantial damages for injuries sustained during work. This includes compensation for lost earnings and benefits such as disability payments, medical expenses and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages can also be sought. This is to punish the railroad and dissuade other railroads from engaging similar conduct.

Congress approved FELA in response to the public’s outrage in 1908 about the alarming rate of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before fela case settlements Accident Injury Lawyers there was no legal mechanism for railroad workers to sue their employers if they were injured on the job. Railroad workers injured and their families were frequently left without financial assistance during the time they were unable to work due to their injury or the negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA railroad workers injured are able to make a claim for damages in federal or state courts. The act abolished defenses such as The Fellow Servant Doctrine and assumption of risk and replaced them with a system of comparative fault. The act determines a railroader’s share of responsibility for an accident by comparing their actions to those of their coworkers. The law allows for a trial by jury.

If a railroad company is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety statutes like The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is liable for all injuries that result. It is not necessary for the railroad to prove that it was negligent, or even that it was a cause of an accident. You can also make a claim for injuries caused by exhaust fumes from diesel engines under the Boiler Inspection Act.

If you’ve been injured on the job as a railroad worker you should consult a skilled railroad injury attorney immediately. A good lawyer can help you file your claim and receive the maximum amount of compensation for the time you are in a position of no work because of the injury.