Ship accidents that could have been prevented
We can lessen accidents on the ship. As a personal opinion, the ship itself is a massive machine that when handled improperly, could cause a destructive effect on life, environment, and property. The working environment onboard the ship involves several hazards that could lead to fatal accidents if you neglect safety. Don’t be the next victim of an accident.
Many reasons affect ship accidents. Most of the time you would hear several report that says “Human Error”. If you hear this two words, which is self-explanatory; most people would clearly assume the accident that involves the officer and the master of the ship are unable of their job onboard the ship.
Causes of Accidents
If you dig deeper in the story you would understand the real reason these accidents happen onboard the ship. Let me list down some of the reason that might cause this accidents.
- Lack of sleep - on such cases that a ship has 14 different ports of call in one day. Most likely a car ship. Fewer sleeps and more stress especially in areas like the English Channel, in which heavy traffic and poor visibility could cause fatigue to the master and the officers and crew.
- Lessened number of crew - advancement of technology and multitasking jobs give way for owners of the ship to lessen the number of crew to earn more money. Including crew quarters of the ship that gets smaller to allow a bigger capacity of cargo holds or cargo tanks.
- Strenuous Paperwork’s - with fewer time at ports, many inspectors, and a mountainous number of paperwork’s; you could just imagine how well round up a Captain and his officer to meet the deadline immediately.
- Human Factor - this is self-explanatory and as mentioned a while ago, it contributes a lot in every accident.
“Leadership or lack of leadership may play an important role in an accident. The management style of the Captain often mirrors the organization which he works in, for better or worse.”
… forcetechnology
What can we do to prevent these accidents?
There are several ways to prevent these accidents, and significantly lessened the number of instance. With the existing rules that affects all seafarers; awareness can help reduce ship accidents. Resting hours of the crew are arrange to lessen the stress that causes many accidents onboard, either personal or ship related.
You may add more into these; you can simply send it to my e-mail or feel free to write a comment related to this article.
Click Maritime Guide for more topics/videos, or visit Pinoy Maritime Forum.
Tags: Maritime Articles, maritime category, maritime community, maritime industry, overseas shipping
Loading ...
02:12 AM
Mar 16th
2009
Dear Chris-
Your articles on (1) Straight and Honest Accident Reports; and (2) What Causes Accidents are very astute observations of a problem that is entrenched in the US maritime industry. I cannot comment on why other countries may have this problem but it is a very real problem here in the States. I believe your point is well taken that the “new generation” of seafarers can overcome the problem. Obviously, the early recognition of safety hazards is optimal but, historically, it has not been fostered at the corporate level. A reason for this was cost. Simply put, costs were not allocated in company budgets for safety in the degree they should have been. As a result, when someone was injured, they turned from one of the “team” to a potential person that could sue. So, from the beginning, whether or not the person acted in a manner that they may indicate they are litigious, there was an assumption that they will be and they were treated as a potential enemy. I have seen this many times when a serious accident occurs, the insurer, usually a Lloyds based insurer, will quickly have their designated counsel come to the vessel and take “statements”. Sometimes the counsel even bring court reporters and have a formal statements taken. All of this is, of course done rapidly and without the injured party having the benefit of counsel present or even themselves present. I have seen such statements and they are very “selective” in what is asked and what is not asked. In other words, from the beginning there is a defensive posture rather than an inquiry for the truth. Would one expect less from a lawyer that is representing the interests of the underwriter and/or vessel owner? Often times, I have had to “re-statementize” the person to find out facts that could have been developed by the first counsel but were purposely not. I also see the claims adjusters taking the injured person to a “company doctor”. That is a doctor that does not order all the tests that one should order to appreciate the totality of injuries the person may have suffered, e.g. taking an x-ray which confirms no broken vertebrae but not ordering a CT scan or MRI which would demonstrate the presence of a disk herniation (which an x-ray will not do). I guess what I am getting at, if we are truly being honest with ourselves in this analysis, is that there is a “culture of denial” which is economically motivated starting from the insurer down.
Most accident reports have questions similar to the effect of: “What caused this event?” and “What could we do to correct this from occurring again?” The honesty to which these questions are answered is tantamount to whether corrective measures can be implemented to perhaps avoid a similar occurrence. However, and maybe justifiably so, the person, or persons, answering these questions has probably been told or warned that these answers can serve as a basis of a liability claim by the lawyer representing the injured party (whether they have actually retained a lawyer or not), and undoubtedly they are going to very hesitant to comprehensively and honestly answer these inquiries. It is true that, in American evidentiary law, these types of answers, if they do impute liability to the company, or to a fellow co-worker, are called “statements against interest” and readily come into evidence at a trial.
So what do we do? We cannot do away with the entire judicial system. I believe the answer does not rest on changing just one aspect of the system. For instance, all lawyers are not straight up. That is, there are some lawyers that will take any type of case even if liability is non-existent. They do so on the basis that the insurer/company will pay some “nuisance” value to settle the case. These types of lawyers actually fuel the fears of the underwriters and foster this “culture of denial”. There are many States in the US, if not all, that have developed methods to combat these types of frivolous suits ranging from sanctions, loser pay schemes, and even grievance processes by the State’s Bar Association. But it is not just the lawyers’ fault. It is also the real fear that if the company is honest, they may, in fact, part with some money and they do not want to do that. That is why I believe the “new generation” can actually be a part of this metamorphosis that must occur on the part of management. The “new generation” has grown up and been exposed to the importance of worker safety issues wherein those issues were certainly put on the “back burner” in the 60’s, 70’s and 80s. I truly hope the economic crisis that is currently ever present does not cause safety, and safety related issues, to be retarded due to less of a company economic commitment to them. Safety is important and, if not properly funded, can actually cause greater economic harm in a catastrophic event. The old addage “penny wise and pound foolish” comes to mind.
In conclusion, an injured co-worker needs to be treated as just that, i.e., an injured co-worker who is entitled to full and complete restoration both medically and economically and not a potential liability. Once this mind set is present then I believe we will see not only less litigation but safety improvement through honest and corrective accident reporting.
11:03 PM
Jul 17th
2009
Chris,
Sometimes these accidents simply can’t be avoided and the vessel or employer is at fault. During accidents of this nature, the victim needs to ensure that they are taking the proper course of action to protect themselves. A seaman’s rights to compensation when injury occurs is governed by federal legislation known as the Jones Act. The Jones Act was created in 1920 in part to extend unique rights to compensation for injured seaman. We offer a lot of resources and information on the Jones Act and Maritime Law at our site - maritime accident attorney.com. We are always happy to answer any questions you have.