Maritime law is steeped in tradition. It’s as old as the shipping trade itself. While some historical legal principles inevitably yield to progress in the industry, some tenets of the law are slow to change.
One example of this is the far-reaching, some say overreaching, legal protection afforded to seamen. “Seaman,” as a legal term, refers to a maritime worker who has a “substantial connection” to a particular vessel or fleet and, through his work duties, contributes to the vessel’s function or accomplishment of its mission.
A few advantages seamen have over the typical land-based worker or even other types of maritime employees include the right to sue their employer for monetary damages when they are hurt or injured on the job, entitlement to pursue legal remedies in either state or federal court, and needing only to prove “slight” negligence or fault in order to establish legal liability against their employer. These remedies are granted exclusively to seamen legislatively under the Jones Act and via the court-made general maritime law.
Our judicial system further provides added leverage to seamen even after a claim appears to have been settled. If it appears that an employer was overbearing or negotiated unfairly in resolving a seaman’s claim, a settlement can be voided after the fact. In recognition of its role as protector of seamen as “wards of the court,” the judiciary will readily scrutinize any settlement agreement if it perceives a seaman has been taken advantage of. Any unfair settlements can be easily set aside, thereby restoring the seaman’s legal rights against the employer.
Although the unique circumstances of the work and life of the seafarer have evolved over time and with advancements in safety and technology, this special class of worker continues to benefit from deeply rooted age-old legal favor.
Industry management, insurance adjusters and legal practitioners should be forever mindful that in the eyes of the law, seamen will always be regarded as wards of the court whose rights and remedies shouldn’t be unjustly compromised.
