Seattle Maritime Injury Lawyer Blog

Recent drilling rig blowout inspires safety concerns

August 1, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

Late last month, a drilling rig stationed off the Gulf of Mexico experienced a significant blowout. A cloud of gas surrounding the rig ignited and subsequently burned out of control in the wake of the blowout. After the rig experienced the blowout, all 44 workers stationed on the rig were evacuated in order to prevent further explosion injuries. The blowout and subsequent fire have many maritime safety experts and legislators questioning whether the offshore safety culture has changed significantly enough since the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill disaster.

After the natural gas well being drilled offshore blew out, workers scrambled to shut the well down through the utilization of a blowout preventer. However, the workers were forced to evacuate before they could completely shut down the well. What caused the resulting cloud of gas to ignite was undetermined in the immediate wake of the significant safety incident.

This incident is especially disturbing given that blowout preventer malfunctions inspired the oil spill in the Gulf in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon explosion. Though legislators and safety regulators mandated changes to this equipment and safety practices related to blowout prevention practices on offshore rigs, the latest blowout in the Gulf suggests that these experts did not go far enough in their attempts to protect workers from future dangerous explosions and spills.

Those who fish must be wary of lightening

July 12, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

Some kinds of accidents are completely preventable. If vessel owners, supervisors and maritime workers follow safety protocols, wear appropriate safety gear and respond to the unexpected in the ways that they have been trained to, tragedies can be averted. However, other accidents are only somewhat preventable. When it comes to navigating bad weather on a commercial fishing vessel, there is only so much that maritime workers can do to avoid the worst.

There are various trainings, safety protocols and preventative measures that can be taken to mitigate a risk of accidents during poor weather conditions on commercial fishing vessels, just as there are on recreational fishing vessels. These precautionary measures should be taken seriously, as failure to do so can lead to a far higher risk of injury and death.

In the case of freak lightening, there is little that can prevent related injury if the lightning occurs seemingly out of nowhere and strikes without warning. However, taking weather reports seriously and responding to weather-related warnings urgently can help to prevent injury. The only truly safe place one can be during a lightening storm is in a well-constructed stationary building. However, taking shelter in the safest area of a commercial fishing vessel will give workers the best possible shot at avoiding lightening-related injury and death.

ICS educates ship owners about cultivating a culture of safety

June 17, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

In late May, we discussed some of the ways in which maritime operations can benefit from safety culture changes. The concept of cultural change involves far more than simply instituting revised safety policies devoid of context. Cultural change assumes that not only will policies, prevention measures, training and operations be affected by increased attention toward safety, it presumes that increased focus on safety will influence and inform every aspect of operations.

In an effort to reduce the rate of maritime injuries, occupational illness and maritime accidents currently occurring within the industry, the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) has embraced the concept of cultural change in regards to maritime safety. It recently published guidance to be used by ship owners in reforming their own safety culture and instituting broad change for the benefit of maritime workers. This guidance is free and widely available for all industry employers.

The Secretary General of the ICS recently explained that the new guidance is “intended to provide some basic advice to companies on the successful implementation of an effective safety culture. This covers the vital need for all concerned, at sea and ashore, to understand the relationship between unsafe acts and serious incidents that may result with loss of life.”

New maritime research is focused on bridge systems and safety

June 4, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

The bridge is a common maritime term for the room from which a large vessel is generally commanded. Though decisions about its operation are made all over the vessel, the bridge is generally considered to be central command and from this place the consequences of important navigational, logistical and safety choices are weighed.

Too often, accidents resulting in maritime injuries start with decisions that are made by individuals stationed at the bridge. Both the technical equipment they engage with as well as the more complex personal choices they grapple with may affect the well-being of everyone aboard. Accordingly, a new research and development project focused on bridge safety is currently being launched.

The new project is being funded by numerous organizations with assistance from the European Union broadly. It aims to consider both the technical and human aspects of bridge operations that lead to safety crises. By contemplating ways to forge both technical and human safety gaps in bridge operations, the experts conducting this three year project hope to influence safety positively throughout the operations of any given vessel.

U.S. District Court in Hawaii dismisses lawsuit challenging applicability of Jones Act in Hawaii

May 30, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

A lawsuit filed in U.S District Court in Hawaii challenges the applicability of the Jones Act in the state. The lawsuit was filed by attorney and former Hawaii state lawmaker John Carroll and alleges that provisions of the Jones Act are in violation of the commerce clause by restricting shipping between states to American-owned and manned ships. Carroll blames the Jones Act for Hawaii’s high cost of living and other economic ills.

The U.S. District Court dismissed the case on the grounds that the population Carroll represents, all Hawaiian consumers, is unduly large and diverse. Carroll previously challenged the Jones Act in 2009, and his previous case was dismissed on the same grounds as the present case. Carroll already filed an appeal of the ruling.

2002 Protocol to the Athens Convention Relating to The Carriage of Passengers and Their Luggage By Sea, 1974 Goes Into Effect on April 23, 2014

May 30, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

By: Richard J. Davies, Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC, Seattle, Washington

When Does The 2002 Protocol Go Into Effect?

Under Article 20, the 2002 Protocol will go into effect 12 months after 10 member states have ratified it. On April 23, 2013, Belgium became the 10^th member state to ratify the 2002 Protocol and it will now come into full force on April 23, 2014. The provisions of the 2002 Protocol will apply to any cruise that does not originate or stop in a United States port of call. In any case that involves a cruise outside of the United States, the 2002 Protocol will now significantly alter the landscape of the claim by imposing a form of strict liability for any “shipping incident” and substantially increasing the liability limits for the passenger’s injury.

Maritime operations can benefit from safety culture changes

May 24, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

When a ship operator or other maritime employer makes any change to improve the safety of workers, positive progress has been made. However, reducing a given vessel’s rate of maritime injuries is likely only going to occur in any significant way if the entire vessel’s culture is grounded in the execution of safe practices. Much like a hospital can only significantly improve patient safety through cultural changes, maritime operations can only truly improve worker safety by making reform a core value of the venture.

One company recently adopted this kind of site-wide reform and managed to subsequently cut its employees’ serious injury rate by roughly two-thirds. In addition, lesser injuries requiring some time off have been cut in half. Finally, the employer has benefited not only from healthier and more consistent employees, costs tied to insurance claims have been reduced by more than three-quarters annually.

When safety becomes a core value of any given maritime operation, both workers and employers benefit in substantial ways. The key for any successful operational reform is that the value of safety must practically affect every element of a vessel’s functioning. From communications to engagement, training to everyday operational tasks, safety must be a core focus of how any maritime operation does business.

Man Dies in Recreational Boating Accident on Sprague Lake

May 22, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

According to the Associated Press, a man died in a recreational boating accident on Sprague Lake outside of Spokane, Washington on Tuesday, May 21, 2013. A female passenger in the power boat was taken to a Spokane-area hospital, but her condition was not immediately known. The sheriff’s office reported that the two were in a power boat but the boat had not been located at this early stage in the investigation.

As we begin recreational boating season in Washington, it is important to review basic boating safety rules with your family. Although the cause of this incident is unknown, many recreational boating incidents are caused by alcohol, inattention, unsafe speeds on the water, failure to have a proper lookout, and the failure to wear life jackets. Before leaving the dock, make certain that you have enough life jackets for your passengers. Don’t drink alcohol while operating a recreational boat. Alcohol is known to impair judgment and dramatically increase the risk of boating accidents. In the state of Washington, it is illegal to operate a recreational boat with more than a .08 blood-alcohol level.

Trial Date Set For Captain Of The Costa Concordia

May 22, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

Earlier this month, prosecutors in Italy rejected a plea bargain offer from Frencesco Schettino, the captain of the Carnival cruise vessel Costa Concordia at the time it hit a reef and capsized. Schettino is accused of manslaughter, causing a shipwreck and abandoning ship while many of the 4,229 passengers and crew were still aboard the vessel. The 290-meter Costa Concordia struck rocks and sank outside the Tuscan port of Giglio in January of 2012, and 32 people died in the catastrophe. The Costa Concordia still lies on its side in the location of the sinking, and has since become a tourist attraction.

Schettino offered to serve three years and four months in prison for his role in causing the vessel sinking as part of a plea bargain, but prosecutors rejected this offer. If convicted, Schettino may serve as much as 20 years in prison. Prosecutors have already made plea deals with five other Costa Concordia officers, and the deals have since been approved by the court. However, other officers are described as having played a “marginal” role in the disaster. Schettino is the only remaining defendant in the case and will be the only defendant in the trial beginning July 9. The trial will be held in Grosseto, the city nearest the site of the shipwreck.

The Costa Concordia hit ground around dinner time and spawned a chaotic nighttime evacuation. Schettino left the vessel and was reported to be watching the evacuation from shore while many of the passengers and crew remained in peril. The ship listed so badly to one side that some of the life boats couldn’t be launched and many people had to jump into the sea and swim to shore in the dark. In a recording of a telephone call between the Italian coast guard and Shettino, the coast guard famously ordered Schettino to “get back aboard, damn it!”

When is a seaman covered by the Jones Act for injuries on land?

May 22, 2013 | Kraft Davies Olsson PLLC

In order to qualify for coverage under the Jones Act and other general maritime law remedies, a seaman must be in the service of the vessel at the time of the injury or illness. Whether a seaman is in the service of the vessel, is a recurring issue in maritime injury litigation, but is broadly construed by the courts in favor of coverage for the seaman.

The responsibility of vessel owners to seamen for maintenance, cure, and unearned wages is to be construed “broadly, when an issue concerning … scope arises”. Aguilar v. Standard Oil Co., 318 U.S. 724, 729 (1943). The U.S. Supreme Court held, “the words ‘in the course of his employment’ as used in the Jones Act were not restricted to injuries occurring on navigable waters, … they were broadly used by Congress in support of ‘all the constitutional power it possessed’”. Braen v. Pfeifer Oil Transp. Co., 361 U.S. 129, 130-31 (1959). “[T]he nature and foundations of the liability require that it be not narrowly confined or whittled down by restrictive and artificial distinctions defeating its broad and beneficial purposes. If leeway is to be given in either direction, all the considerations which brought the liability into being dictate it should be in the sailor’s behalf.” Aguilar, 318 U.S. at 735.

Whether a seaman is “in the course of employment” is a function of “1) the degree of control the employer-vessel owner had over the seaman at the time of injury; and 2) whether the seaman, at the time of injury, was on personal business or on a mission for the benefit of his employer or attending to the business of the employer.” Lee v. Mississippi River Grain Elevator, Inc., 591 So.2d 1371, 1373 (La. App. 1991).