fela lawsuits
In high-risk industries, workers who are injured are typically protected by laws that hold employers to higher standards of safety. Railroad workers, for instance are covered under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).
To claim damages under the FELA the plaintiff must prove that their injury was at a minimum, caused due to the negligence of their employer.
FELA vs. Workers' Compensation
While both workers' compensation and FELA are laws that provide protection to employees, there are a few differences between the two. These differences are related to the process of claiming, fault assessment and types of damages awarded in instances of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws offer immediate relief to injured workers, regardless of who was responsible for the accident. FELA however, on the other hand demands that claimants prove that their railroad company was at least partially responsible for their injuries.
FELA also allows workers to sue federal courts instead of the state workers' compensation system, and also allows a trial with a jury. It also has specific rules for the determination of damages. A worker could receive up to 80% their average weekly wage together with medical expenses and a reasonable cost-of-living benefit. A FELA lawsuit could also include compensation for discomfort and pain.
In order to win a FELA claim, a worker must demonstrate that the railroad's negligence was a factor in the injury or death. This is a higher standard than that required to win a workers compensation claim. This is a part of the FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA to enhance rail safety by permitting injured workers to sue for damages.
Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than 100 years, they employ dangerous equipment and tracks for trains, 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 addressing the failures of employers to protect their employees.
It is important that you seek legal counsel as soon as you can if you are a railway worker who is injured at work. Contacting a BLET authorized legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to get started. Click on this link to locate a DLC firm in your region.
FELA vs. Jones Act
The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to sue their employers for on-the-job injuries and deaths. The Jones Act was passed in 1920 as a means to protect sailors who risk their lives on the high seas or other navigable waters. They are not covered under workers' compensation laws unlike workers on land. It was modeled after the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) which is a law that covers railroad workers. It was also crafted to satisfy the needs of maritime employees.
The Jones Act, unlike workers compensation laws which limit the amount of negligence compensation to a maximum of lost wages for injured workers, provides unlimited liability in maritime cases that involve negligence by employers. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that an employer's negligence led to their injury or death. The Jones Act allows injured seamen to sue their employers in order to recover damages that are not specified including the suffering and pain, future loss of earning capacity and mental distress, among others.
A claim for seamanship under the Jones Act can be brought either in the state court or in a federal court. Plaintiffs in a suit brought under the Jones Act have the right to a trial by jury. This is a distinct method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are generally statutory and do not afford the injured employee the right to a jury trial.
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 for evidence in FELA cases. The Court held that lower courts were right when they determined the seaman had to prove that his role in the accident directly caused 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, as they instructed the jury that Norfolk was solely responsible for negligence that directly caused the injury. Norfolk claimed that the standard of causation should be the same in FELA and Jones Act cases.
Safety Appliance Act vs. FELA
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 an important distinction for injured workers working in high-risk industries. This enables workers to receive compensation for their injuries and also to maintain their families after an accident. The FELA was passed in 1908 to acknowledge the inherent dangers of the job and to set up uniform liability standards for companies who operate railroads.
FELA requires railroads to provide a safe working environment for their employees, including the use of well-maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from locomotives and cars to switches, tracks, and other safety equipment. In order for an injured worker to prevail in a claim, they must prove that their employer breached their duty of care by not providing a safe work environment, and that the injury was the direct result of the 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 an attorney who has experience in FELA cases can be of assistance. An attorney who understands the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can enhance the case of a worker by providing a strong legal foundation.
Certain railroad laws that could aid workers' FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. 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 regulations to ensure the safety of their employees. Infractions to these laws could be considered negligence in and of themselves, which means that a violation can be considered sufficient to support a claim for injuries under the FELA.
An illustration of a railroad statute violation is when an automatic coupler or grab iron is not correctly installed or is defective. If an employee is injured as a result of this, they could be entitled to compensation. However, the law stipulates that if a plaintiff contributed to their injury in some way (even the injury is not severe) the amount they claim will be reduced.
Boiler Inspection Act vs. FELA
FELA is a set of federal laws that allow railroad employees and their families to recover significant damages for injuries they sustained during work. This includes compensation for loss of earnings and benefits, such as medical costs as well as disability benefits and funeral expenses. Additionally when an injury results in permanent impairment or death, a claim could be made for punitive damages. This is to penalize the railroad and dissuade other railroads from engaging similar behavior.
Congress approved FELA as a response to the public's anger in 1908 over the shocking rate of accidents and deaths on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal basis for railroad employees to sue their employers when they were injured while on the job. Railroad workers who were injured and their families were often left without financial support during the time they were unable work due to their accident or negligence of the railroad.
Under the FELA, railroad workers injured may make a claim for damages in state or federal courts. The law eliminated defenses such as The Fellow Servant Doctrine and the assumption of risk and replaced them with the concept of comparative fault. This means that a railroad worker's share of the blame for an accident is determined by comparing his actions with those of his coworkers. The law also allows for a jury trial.
If a railroad company is found to be in violation of federal railroad safety laws such as The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is held liable for any injuries that result. The railroad does not need to prove that it was negligent or that it contributed to an accident. You may also file a claim for injuries caused by diesel exhaust fumes under the Boiler Inspection Act.
If you have been injured on the job as a railroad employee, you should contact an experienced railroad injury attorney immediately. The right lawyer can assist you in filing your claim and obtaining the most benefits possible during the time that you are not working due to the injury.