Notes

Federal Employers: What's No One Is Talking About
Workers Compensation Vs Federal Employers Liability Act

If workers in high-risk industries are injured, they 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).

To claim damages under the FELA, a victim must prove that their injury was at least partially caused by the negligence of the employer.

Workers' Compensation vs. FELA

While both workers' compensation and FELA are laws that provide protection to employees, there are significant differences between the two. These differences are based on the process of claiming, fault assessment and types of damages awarded in instances of death or injury. Workers' compensation laws provide immediate relief to injured workers regardless of who is at fault for the accident. FELA, however demands that claimants prove that their railroad company was at least partly responsible for their injuries.

Additionally, FELA allows workers to sue federal courts instead of the state's worker' compensation system and provides a jury trial. It also establishes specific rules for determining damages. For example, a worker can receive compensation of up to 80 percent of their weekly salary, in addition to medical expenses and an appropriate cost of living allowance. A FELA lawsuit may also include compensation for pain and discomfort.

To be successful in a FELA claim, a worker must prove that the railroad's negligence was at least a factor in the resulting injury or death. This is a higher standard than what is required for a successful workers compensation claim. This is a part of the FELA's history. In 1908, Congress passed FELA in an effort to increase the safety of rail lines by permitting workers to sue for significant damages if they were injured in the course of their job.

Despite the fact that railroad companies have been suing for more than 100 years, they continue to use dangerous equipment and train tracks, as well as in their machine shops, yards, and other workplaces. This makes FELA essential for ensuring the safety of all railway workers as well as addressing the failures of employers to safeguard their employees.

If you are a railway employee who was injured on the job it is essential to seek legal advice as quickly as you can. Contacting a BLET authorized legal counsel (DLC) firm is the best way to begin. Click this link to find an approved DLC firm near you.

FELA vs. Jones Act

The Jones Act is federal law which allows seafarers to sue their employer for injuries or fatalities during work. The Jones Act was enacted in 1920 as a means to safeguard sailors who are at risk on the high seas and other navigable waters. They are not covered under workers' compensation laws unlike employees who work on land. It was modeled after the Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) which was a law that covers railroad employees. It was also designed to meet 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, Jones Act provides unlimited liability for maritime plaintiffs in cases that involve employer negligence. The Jones Act does not require plaintiffs to prove that their employer's negligence led to their injury or death. The Jones Act also allows injured seamen to sue their employers for unspecified damages including future and past pain and suffering, past and future loss of earnings capacity, and mental distress.

A claim by a seaman under the Jones Act may be brought in either a state or federal court. In a case brought under the Jones Act, plaintiffs have the right to a trial by jury. This is a distinct method than the majority of workers' compensation laws, which are typically statutory and do not afford injured workers the right to a trial by jury.

In the case of Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sorrell, the US Supreme Court was asked to determine whether the contribution of a seaman to his or their own injury was subject to a more rigorous standard of proof than the standard of proof in FELA cases. The Court decided that the lower courts were right in their decision that a seaman's contribution to his own accident must be proved as having directly caused his or her injury.

Sorrell was awarded US$1.5 million for his injuries. Sorrell's employer, Norfolk Southern, argued that the court's instructions to the jury were erroneous in that they instructed the jury to decide to hold Norfolk responsible only for any negligence that directly contributed to 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 employees to sue their employers directly for negligence leading to injuries. This is a major distinction for injured workers in high-risk sectors. This enables them to receive compensation for their injuries and also to maintain their families after an accident. The FELA was passed in 1908 in recognition of the inherent dangers associated with the work and to establish standard liability requirements for companies that operate railroads.

FELA requires that railroads provide a safe work environment for their employees. This includes the use of properly maintained and repaired equipment. This includes everything from trains and cars to tracks, switches, and other safety equipment. To be successful an injured worker must prove that their employer breached their obligation to them by failing to provide 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 defective piece of equipment is involved in an accident. An experienced lawyer who has experience with FELA claims can be a great help. A lawyer who is knowledgeable of the specific safety requirements for railroaders and the regulations that govern them can enhance a worker's case by providing a solid legal basis.

Some railroad laws that can strengthen a worker's FELA case include the Locomotive Inspection Act and the Railroad Safety Appliance Act. These laws are referred to as "railway statutes" and require that railroad corporations, and in some instances their agents (like managers, supervisors or executives of companies) must adhere to these rules to protect their employees. Violation of these laws could be considered negligence in and of itself, meaning that a violation of one of these rules is sufficient to justify a claim for injury under FELA.

A common illustration of an infraction to the railroad statute is when an automatic coupler or grab iron is not correctly installed or is defective. If an employee is injured because of this, they may be entitled to compensation. However, fela case settlements stipulates that if the plaintiff contributed to their injury in some way (even if minimal), their claim may be reduced.

FELA vs. Boiler Inspection Act

FELA is a set of federal laws that allow railroad workers and their families to recover substantial damages for injuries that they sustain while working. This includes the compensation for lost earnings and benefits like medical expenses, disability payments and funeral expenses. If an injury results in permanent impairment or death, punitive damages could also be claimed. This is intended to punish railroads for negligent actions and discourage other railroads from engaging in similar behavior.

Congress adopted FELA in 1908 in response to public outrage at the alarming number of fatalities and accidents on railroads. Before FELA there was no legal avenue for railroad workers to sue their employers when they were hurt on the job. Railroad workers injured and their families were often left without adequate financial support during the period that they were unable to work due to their injury or the negligence of the railroad.

Under the FELA railroad workers injured are able to seek damages in state or federal courts. The act replaced defenses like the Fellow Servant Doctrine, or the assumption of risk with the concept of comparative fault. This means that a railroad worker's portion of the blame for an accident is determined by comparing their actions to those of his coworkers. The law permits an investigation by jury.


If a railroad carrier violates one of the federal railroad safety laws, such as The Safety Appliance Act or Boiler Inspection Act, it is liable for all injuries that result. The railroad does not need to prove negligence or the fact that it caused an accident. It is also possible to make a claim under the Boiler Inspection Act when an employee is injured due to exposure to exhaust fumes from diesel engines.

If you are a railroad worker who has suffered an injury or injured, you must immediately contact an experienced lawyer for railroad accidents. A reputable attorney can assist you in submitting your claim and getting the most benefits possible during the time that you aren't working because of your injury.

Website: https://vimeo.com/708197844