FELA 3
FELA is the law that covers liability in the United States railroad industry.
It is absolute: either the employee or the company is wholly liable if there is a workplace injury. Check out this link: It points to a law firm specializing in FELA law. The information about the law, by the way, is accurate.
There are many such firms. There is even a firm from which I have received many mailings (though I was never injured on the job, on company time, or on duty) whose phone number is 800-something or other-FELA.
When I worked for the railroad, I knew a number of folks in the claims department–the department charged with settling injury claims under FELA. In most cases, the company and the injured employee acted in good faith. The employee was hurt, lost time from work, and the company paid, even though the employee may have contributed to the injury.
However, from time to time, they ran into situations such as this one, where good faith was missing and a little bit of videotape invalidated the injury claim.
And, make no mistake, the company used detectives and video when it doubted the good faith of someone who claimed an injury.
Oh, yeah. We won’t mention the charges of criminal fraud.
January 23, 2007 at 8:54 am
And we that have to pay for workman’s comp insurance know that people like the Brit are the reason our premiums are sky high. If the companies did more investigation, our premiums may still be as high, because of the cost of the investigators & fighting the attornys, but fewer people would get by with it. A good rule of thumb, when I was doing it, was “pay what you owe, but owe what you pay”. Not only the WC, but the commercial liability, & the auto, too.
January 23, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Workman’s comp has nothing to do with the railroad. The situation would probably be fairer if it did. What FELA establishes is this: it’s either the employee’s fault or the company’s fault. One or the other bears the entire cost.
Hence the law firms with phone numbers like 1-800-xxx-FELA. They gamble that the company will settle rather than go to court.
Hence the companies hiring detectives with video cameras to sneak around following the employees.
One of the ironies is this: Employee rejects company’s offer. Employee hires law firm. Law firm sues. Company settles. Law firm takes 1/3 (contingency fee). Employee ends up with less than the offer employee rejected to start the process.
It’s happened over and over again. The only winners were the lawyers.
January 23, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Employee hires law firm. Law firm sues. Company settles. Law firm takes 1/3 (contingency fee). Employee ends up with less than the offer employee rejected to start the process.
An ‘argument’ to give to a claimant who throws out “I’ll just hire an attorney” is: 1. “You can’t call anymore to present your side of the claim”, & 2. “Be sure you’re aware of the charges, & take into consideration that the attorney MAY get what seems to be more, but you’ll pay for all the expenses off the top. Then comes the attorney’s fees. You’ll get whatever is left.” 75% of the time, the claimant settled their bogus claim, for what was fair to begin with. I say bogus because I know what I’m talking about. Most people, given the opportunity, will always try for more.