Latest Legal News

NEWS & INVESTIGATIONS

Comparative negligence under FELA: what it means and how railroads try to shift blame

If you are a railroad worker hurt on the job, your claim usually falls under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA), not standard workers’ compensation. One of the biggest battleground issues in a FELA case is comparative negligence. Railroads often use it to argue you were partly at fault and to push the value of your case down.

Comparative negligence under FELA: what it means and how railroads try to shift blame

Here is what comparative negligence means under FELA and the common tactics railroads use to shift blame.

What FELA Requires to Recover

FELA allows injured railroad employees to pursue damages when an injury results in whole or in part from the railroad’s negligence.

That can include unsafe work methods, inadequate training, understaffing, defective tools or equipment, poor lighting, uneven walking surfaces, and other preventable hazards.

Comparative Negligence Under FELA: The Basics

Under FELA, the fact that an employee may have been negligent does not bar recovery. Instead, a jury can reduce damages in proportion to the employee’s share of fault.

Example: If a jury finds your total damages are $500,000 but says you were 20 percent at fault, the award can be reduced by 20 percent.

The Key Exception: Safety Statute Violations

FELA includes an important protection for workers. If the railroad violated a safety statute enacted for employee safety and that violation contributed to the injury, the worker cannot be treated as contributorily negligent for purposes of reducing damages.

In practice, this can be a major issue in cases involving violations tied to railroad safety rules and regulations.

Assumption of Risk Is Not a Defense

Railroads sometimes try to frame injuries as just part of the job. But FELA limits that argument. The statute says an employee is not considered to have assumed the risks of employment where the injury resulted in whole or in part from the railroad’s negligence, and it also addresses situations involving safety statute violations.

How Railroads Try to Shift Blame After a Railroad Injury

Railroad claim departments and defense teams often move quickly after an incident. Common strategies include:

1. Controlling the narrative early

They may push for written statements, recorded calls, or informal interviews while you are still in pain or medicated.

2. Focusing on rule compliance by the worker

Expect questions like:

  • Were you wearing the right PPE?
  • Did you follow every rule to the letter?
  • Did you choose the safest path or method?
  • Did you stop the job or report the hazard?

Even when the railroad created unsafe conditions, these questions are often used to argue comparative negligence.

3. Blaming the worker’s judgment under time pressure

Railroads know workers are often expected to move fast. They may later argue you should have slowed down, refused a task, or taken a different approach.

4. Pointing to training and safety meetings as a shield

They may rely on generic training records to claim you were fully trained, even if the real-world job conditions were unsafe or the training was inadequate for the task.

5. Minimizing the railroad’s role in causation

FELA has a worker-friendly causation standard. The railroad can still be liable if its negligence caused or contributed to the injury.

Defense teams often try to reframe the incident as entirely worker-caused to avoid that standard.

What You Can Do to Protect Your FELA Claim

You do not need to fight this alone, but there are practical steps that often matter:

  • Get medical care immediately and follow up consistently.
  • Report the injury, but be cautious about giving detailed statements without advice.
  • Document the scene if you can: photos, equipment numbers, track conditions, lighting, weather, and names of witnesses.
  • Write down what happened while it is fresh, including deadlines, staffing levels, and any prior complaints about the hazard.
  • Keep copies of any paperwork the railroad gives you.

Why This Matters for Case Value

Comparative negligence can affect every part of a FELA case: settlement negotiations, trial strategy, and the final damages a jury awards. Railroads know that even a small blame shift can mean a large reduction in compensation.

Talk With a FELA Lawyer Before the Railroad Locks in Its Version

If you were hurt working for the railroad, McEldrew Purtell can evaluate whether the railroad’s negligence played a role, identify potential safety violations, and push back against blame-shifting tactics. Contact our team today to discuss your FELA rights and the next steps.

Related Articles

Legal Insight: Defining the Ownership of Tracks in Philadelphia – Where Should I look?

This article was created by the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Association for The Verdict newsletter in conjunction with Cormick McLaughlin of McEldrew Purtell and is intended to provide legal insight into the ownership of railroad tracks in the Philadelphia area. Finding…

$700,000 FELA Settlement

Colin Haviland and Daniel Purtell settled an FELA case for $700,000 on behalf of a client who suffered severe injuries as a result of his Railroad employer failing to supply the proper equipment to complete his job. McEldrew Purtell’s client…

Jim McEldrew on Positive Train Control in the Philadelphia Inquirer

McEldrew Purtell Partner and Railroad Attorney James J. McEldrew, III had his commentary on Positive Train Control published on the Philadelphia Inquirer website today.  The article discusses the need for the automated system mandated by Congress in 2008 to be implemented…

$885,000 FELA Settlement

Attorney John Coyle settled an FELA case for $885,000 for a union railroad worker, John Felder, who suffered serious injuries on the job, while loading railroad ties. Mr. Felder and a coworker were tasked with moving railroad ties onto a…