Federal Employee Liability ACT (FELA) Helps Engineer
August 20, 3005
A 39-year-old operating engineer from Local 150 has recovered $800,000 from Burlington Northern for injuries to both feet, suffered June 11, 2002 while he was repairing trailers and railcars owned by Burlington Northern.
The engineer was employed by Central Intermodal, which a subcontractor for Burlington Northern Railroad at 38th and Kedzie in Chicago.
The operating engineer was required to use "A Frame" ladders that were only as high as the trailers that had to be repaired. Hence, when he was required to get on top of the trailer, he had no rails to hold on to. This violated the safety provision of ANSI and OSHA standards which require that ladders travel three feet above the platform one is getting onto.
He was injured when he tried to dismount from the trailer onto the ladder and the ladder tipped. Since he wasn't able to utilize a safe ladder and Burlington Northern exercised control over his work, Burlington Northern had a duty to provide him with a reasonably safe place to work.
"Once we showed they were subservient to the railroad, his claim improved dramatically," said Horwitz.
"We utilized the Federal Employee Liability ACT (FELA) as the primary law on his behalf," said Clifford Horwitz of Horwitz, Horwitz and Associates, Ltd. "We find that most firms are not aware of a rule that allows subcontractors' employees to file claims against a railroad under the FELA. Most believe a person must be employed by the railroad in order to benefit by the FELA provisions," Horwitz said.
However, there is a little known FELA law which permits the extension of benefits to persons who are employed by contractors "subservient to the railroad."
The engineer suffered fractures to both ankles and required a fusion to one ankle. He was able to return to his job with Central Intermodal but continues to suffer chronic pain and suffering. Burlington Northern defended the case claiming that it was the engineer's own negligence for failing to use the ladder properly, that it was a safe ladder and that since Plaintiff was able to return to his job that he wasn't injured that severely