lun-lun 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

誠徵高手幫我翻譯 翻譯要順暢別使用翻譯軟體唷感謝

Under the common law, everyone is required to exercise care for his or her own safety. If an employee fails to exercise such care, he or she will be deemed to be contributorily negligent even though the negligence of the employer was also a contributing cause of the injury. The common-law rule is that if the employee’s contributory negligence is responsible to any degree in causing the accident, the employee is barred from recovery.Therefore, even if the employer’s negligence was the primary cause of the injury, the employee will not be entitled to damages.

The contributory negligence defense has been largely replaced by the comparative negligence defense under which the employee’s negligence is taken into account in reducing the amount of recovery. Comparative negligence laws enable employees to recover a portion of their damages even when they are partially at fault.

Employers can avoid liability if the employee’s injury resulted from the negligent act or omission of a fellow employee. As mentioned previously, these employer defenses-contributory neglligence, comparative negligence, and negligence of a fellow employee-successfully defeated most employee’s lawsuits. Worker’s compensation statutes were enacted to prevent employers from relying on these common-law defenses to defeat employee claims.

The operation of statutes of limitations may also preclude an injured worker from bringing suit against the employer. The period of time in which an action can be brought varies by state.However, the period is generally two years.

1 個解答

評分
  • Leo
    Lv 7
    1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    Under the common law, everyone is required to exercise care for his or her own safety. If an employee fails to exercise such care, he or she will be deemed to be contributorily negligent even though the negligence of the employer was also a contributing cause of the injury. The common-law rule is that if the employee's contributory negligence is responsible to any degree in causing the accident, the employee is barred from recovery. Therefore, even if the employer's negligence was the primary cause of the injury, the employee will not be entitled to damages.

    在一般法律規範下, 每個人都應該被要求重視維護自己的安全. 如果一位員工未能重視維護自身的安全, 他或她就會被視為疏忽行為人; 即使資方的疏忽也是導致傷害的可能原因. 一般法律通則規定如果疏忽行為人, 不管任何程度; 是導致該意外的原因, 該員工就應該要負責復原. 因此, 即使資方的疏忽是導致傷害的主因, 員工在損害方面是不會獲得任何權益的.

    The contributory negligence defense has been largely replaced by the comparative negligence defense under which the employee's negligence is taken into account in reducing the amount of recovery. Comparative negligence laws enable employees to recover a portion of their damages even when they are partially at fault.

    Employers can avoid liability if the employee's injury resulted from the negligent act or omission of a fellow employee. As mentioned previously, these employer defenses-contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and negligence of a fellow employee-successfully defeated most employee's lawsuits. Worker's compensation statutes were enacted to prevent employers from relying on these common-law defenses to defeat employee claims.

    疏忽行為人的辯護已經大幅度的被依員工疏失程度來降低復原賠償總額的相對疏失辯護所取代. 相對疏失辯護法使得員工可以在當他們即使只應負某部份損害責任時負擔該部份他們造成的損失就可以了. 如果員工受傷是由於疏忽行為或是一位員工同仁的疏失, 資方就可以免負連帶保證的責任. 如前所述, 這些資方以行為疏失, 相對疏失, 以及員工同仁疏失來為自己辯護並成功擊敗大部份的員工訴訟案件. 員工的薪資福利法是用來保證資方不可以用這些法規辯護來戰勝員工的訴願.

    2009-06-03 00:39:07 補充:

    The operation of statutes of limitations may also preclude an injured worker from bringing suit against the employer. The period of time in which an action can be brought varies by state. However, the period is generally two years.

    法規限制的行使也可能讓受傷的員工無法對雇主資方進行訴訟. 每州對訴訟的時間規範也都不一樣. 但是, 一般來說; 追溯期限是兩年.

    • 登入以對解答發表意見
還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。