Seaman status in United States admiralty law

Last updated

The status of a seaman in admiralty law provides maritime workers with protections such as payment of wages, working conditions, and remedies for workplace injuries under the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (Jones Act), and the doctrines of "unseaworthiness" and "maintenance and cure". [1] Each of these remedies have the same criteria for the status of "seaman". [2] Having the status of "seaman" provides maritime employees with benefits that are not available to those without the status. However, the determination of who is a "seaman" is complex.

Contents

History

The term "seaman" has been used in admiralty law for centuries. U.S. courts have continued to narrow the definition of the term and the remedies available to those with the status through their rulings over that time. The Supreme Court notably tried to summarize the remedies available to those with the status in The Osceola. [3]

The court codified the maintenance and cure and unseaworthiness remedies, but their ruling on remedies involving negligence did not go over well with Congress. The court stated that seamen cannot recover for injuries caused by the negligence of another crewmember and that they are "not allowed to recover an indemnity for the negligence of the master, or any member of the crew". [3] : 175 

Seamen's Act and Jones Act

The Merchant Marine Act of 1915 (Seamen's Act) was in response to the ruling in The Osceola. It attempted to create a negligence action for seamen. § 20 of the 1915 Act provided: "That in any suit to recover damages for any injury sustained on board vessel or in its service seamen having command shall not be held to be fellow-servants with those under their authority." [4]

In 1920, Congress passed the Jones Act, which provides a cause of action in negligence for "any seaman" injured "in the course of his employment". [5] The Act was passed in part in response to the Supreme Court's prior ruling in Chelentis v. Luckenbach S.S. Co., that did not provide remedies for an injured fireman because it was caused by a superior officer who was considered a member of the crew and not a fellow servant. [6]

The Jones Act requires that those seeking remedies under the Act are "seaman", but does not define the term. [7] U.S. courts have attempted to interpret the term in their rulings since the 1920 Act was passed. As Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said in her McDermott International, Inc. v. Wilander opinion, "'seaman' is a maritime term of art". [8] Wilander interprets Congress's use of the term to be the "established meaning" in general maritime law up to the passing of the Jones Act.

The use of the term prior to the Jones Act was extremely broad, including "not only sailors and ship's officers of all known types but also bartenders, cabin boys, carpenters, chambermaids, clerks, cooks, coopers, divers, doctors, dredge workers, engineers, firemen, fishermen, harpooners, horsemen, interpreters, masons, muleteers, musicians, pilots, pursers, radio operators, seal hunters, stewards, surveyors, and waiters". [9]

U.S. courts, including the Supreme Court continued to interpret the seaman status liberally until International Stevedoring Co. v. Haverty, [10] when the court held that a stevedore is a "seaman" under the Act. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. recognized that "as the word is commonly used, stevedores are not 'seamen'. ... But words are flexible ... We cannot believe that Congress willingly would have allowed the protection to men engaged upon the same maritime duties to vary with the accident of their being employed by a stevedore rather than by the ship." [10] : 5  Justice Holmes quickly found out that he was incorrect in his assumption that Congress wanted to make the term even broader. Within a year, Congress responded to the Haverty ruling by enacting the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA), [11] "to restrict maritime workers other than 'masters or members of a crew of any vessel' to a workers' compensation remedy against their employers". [12]

Swanson v. Marra Brothers, Inc., made it clear that the LHWCA provides relief for land workers and the Jones Act provides relief for "master or member of a crew of any vessel". [13]

Wilander

Prior to Wilander, the U.S. courts often followed one of two tests to see if a maritime worker was eligible for the status of "seaman".

The Robinson test [14] was to see if "a seaman contributed to the function of the vessel or to the accomplishment of its mission". The test from Johnson v. John F. Beasley Const was whether the employee made "a significant contribution to the maintenance, operation, or welfare of the transportation function of the vessel". [15]

In Wilander, O'Connor determined that at the time the Jones Act was passed, "it was only necessary that a person be employed on board a vessel in furtherance of its purpose", and that, "the Jones Act established no requirement that a seaman aid in navigation". [16]

Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis

In 1995, the Supreme Court was again faced with the question of who qualifies for "seaman" status. In Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis, O'Connor again wrote the majority opinion and here laid out two elements necessary to qualify as a seaman under the Jones Act: "The worker's duties must contribute to the function of the vessel or to the accomplishment of its mission, and the worker must have a connection to a vessel in navigation (or an identifiable fleet of vessels) that is substantial in terms of both its duration and its nature." [17]

Definition

Because "seaman" is not defined in the statutes providing them with these special protections, it is necessary to analyze the case law interpreting the statutes and come up with a general rule.

To qualify as a seaman, a maritime employee must be a sea-based employee and a "master or a member of a vessel's crew" who makes some contribution to the ship's work. It is not necessary for the employee to assist in the navigation or transportation of the vessel, but the employee "must have a connection to a vessel in navigation (or to an identifiable fleet of such vessels) that is substantial in terms of both its duration and its nature". [18]

However, according to 46 U.S.C.S. 10101(3), a seaman is an individual (except scientific personnel, sailing school instructors, or sailing school students) engaged or employed in any capacity on board a vessel. [19]

Additionally, to qualify as a seaman under the Jones Act, a maritime worker must have spent 30% of their career aboard a vessel in navigable waters. [20]

Related Research Articles

Admiralty law or maritime law is a body of law that governs nautical issues and private maritime disputes. Admiralty law consists of both domestic law on maritime activities, and private international law governing the relationships between private parties operating or using ocean-going ships. While each legal jurisdiction usually has its own legislation governing maritime matters, the international nature of the topic and the need for uniformity has, since 1900, led to considerable international maritime law developments, including numerous multilateral treaties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Merchant Marine</span> U.S. civilian mariners

The United States Merchant Marine is composed of United States civilian mariners and U.S. civilian and federally owned merchant vessels. Both the civilian mariners and the merchant vessels are managed by a combination of the government and private sectors, and engage in commerce or transportation of goods and services in and out of the navigable waters of the United States. The Merchant Marine primarily transports domestic and international cargo and passengers during peacetime, and operate and maintain deep-sea merchant ships, tugboats, towboats, ferries, dredges, excursion vessels, charter boats and other waterborne craft on the oceans, the Great Lakes, rivers, canals, harbors, and other waterways. In times of war, the Merchant Marine can be an auxiliary to the United States Navy, and can be called upon to deliver military personnel and materiel for the military.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom of the seas</span> Customary international maritime law

Freedom of the seas is a principle in the law of the sea. It stresses freedom to navigate the oceans. It also disapproves of war fought in water. The freedom is to be breached only in a necessary international agreement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States labor law</span> US laws on fair pay and conditions, unions, democracy, equality and security at work

The rights and duties for employees, labor unions, and employers are set by labor law in the United States. Labor law's basic aim is to remedy the "inequality of bargaining power" between employees and employers, especially employers "organized in the corporate or other forms of ownership association". Over the 20th century, federal law created minimum social and economic rights, and encouraged state laws to go beyond the minimum to favor employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 requires a federal minimum wage, currently $7.25 but higher in 29 states and D.C., and discourages working weeks over 40 hours through time-and-a-half overtime pay. There are no federal laws, and few state laws, requiring paid holidays or paid family leave. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 creates a limited right to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in larger employers. There is no automatic right to an occupational pension beyond federally guaranteed Social Security, but the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 requires standards of prudent management and good governance if employers agree to provide pensions, health plans or other benefits. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 requires employees have a safe system of work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Merchant Marine Act of 1920</span> US federal law

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 is a United States federal statute that provides for the promotion and maintenance of the American merchant marine. Among other purposes, the law regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports. Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act is known as the Jones Act and deals with cabotage. It requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the U.S. flag, are owned by U.S. citizens, and are crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. The act was introduced by Senator Wesley Jones. The law also defines certain seaman's rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967</span> United States labor law

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 is a United States labor law that forbids employment discrimination against anyone, at least 40 years of age, in the United States. In 1967, the bill was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The ADEA prevents age discrimination and provides equal employment opportunity under the conditions that were not explicitly covered in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The act also applies to the standards for pensions and benefits provided by employers, and requires that information concerning the needs of older workers be provided to the general public.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chief mate</span> Licensed mariner and head of the deck department of a merchant ship

A chief mate (C/M) or chief officer, usually also synonymous with the first mate or first officer, is a licensed mariner and head of the deck department of a merchant ship. The chief mate is customarily a watchstander and is in charge of the ship's cargo and deck crew. The actual title used will vary by ship's employment, by type of ship, by nationality, and by trade: for instance, chief mate is not usually used in the Commonwealth, although chief officer and first mate are; on passenger ships, the first officer may be a separate position from that of the chief officer that is junior to the latter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sea captain</span> Commander of a ship or other sea-going vessel

A sea captain, ship's captain, captain, master, or shipmaster, is a high-grade licensed mariner who holds ultimate command and responsibility of a merchant vessel. The captain is responsible for the safe and efficient operation of the ship, including its seaworthiness, safety and security, cargo operations, navigation, crew management, and legal compliance, and for the persons and cargo on board.

Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), combined three pending federal cases for a hearing in certiorari in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces. The opinion is an extension of the English common-law concept of sovereign immunity.

The Seamen's Act, formally known as Act to Promote the Welfare of American Seamen in the Merchant Marine of the United States or Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, was designed to improve the safety and security of United States seamen and eliminate shanghaiing.

The United States merchant marine forces matured during the maritime history of the United States (1900–1999).

The Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 901–950, commonly referred to as the "Longshore Act" or "LHWCA" is federal workers' compensation law/act enacted in 1927. Initially, it mandated coverage to employees injured on navigable waters of the United States. Today, it mandates that coverage be provided to certain "maritime" workers, including most dock workers and maritime workers not otherwise covered by the Jones Act. In addition, Congress has extended the LHWCA to cover non-appropriated fund employees, Outer Continental Shelf workers, and U.S. government contractors working in foreign countries under the Defense Base Act This coverage is mandated for all employees, including owners and officers of companies that work in or around navigable waters of the United States.

Admiralty law in the United States is a matter of federal law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Limitation of Liability Act of 1851</span> United States law passed in 1851

In United States maritime law, the Limitation of Liability Act of 1851, codified as 46 U.S.C. § 30501 since February 1, 2010, states that the owner of a vessel may limit damage claims to the value of the vessel at the end of the voyage plus "pending freight", as long as the owner can prove it lacked knowledge of the problem beforehand. This Act was the subject of a 2001 United States Supreme Court case in Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc.

Southern Pacific Company v. Jensen, 244 U.S. 205 (1917), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the geographical extent of state workers' compensation laws. The Court held that the New York Workmen's Compensation Act, as applied to laborers in the New York Harbor, intruded on federal admiralty jurisdiction, and that civil suits arising within this jurisdiction were subject to the common law of the sea. The compensation statute passed by the state interfered with federal power and was therefore unconstitutional.

Sheridan v. United States, 487 U.S. 392 (1988), was a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning what constitutes a claim "arising out of" an assault or battery within the meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The Supreme Court held that the FTCA's intentional tort exception did not apply.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Seaman's Manslaughter Statute</span> 1838 United States criminal statute

The Seaman's Manslaughter Statute, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1115, criminalizes misconduct or negligence that result in deaths involving vessels on waters in the jurisdiction of the United States.

MV <i>Seaman Guard Ohio</i>

The MV Seaman Guard Ohio is a floating armory ship owned by AdvanFort and used for storing weapons and security guards on private anti-piracy contracts. In October 2013, the ship was impounded and the crew and armed guards aboard were detained after it allegedly entered Indian waters with illegal arms without adequate permission.

<i>Marine Services International Ltd v Ryan Estate</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Marine Services International Ltd v Ryan Estate, 2013 SCC 44 is a leading case of the Supreme Court of Canada concerning the coexistence of Canadian maritime law with provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights, and it marks a further restriction upon the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity in Canadian constitutional jurisprudence.

<i>SS Kalibia v Wilson</i>

SS Kalibia v Wilson, was the first decision of the High Court of Australia on the extent of the power of the Australian Parliament to make laws about shipping and navigation, including the Admiralty jurisdiction of the High Court. The High Court held that the power was limited to overseas and interstate trade and commerce. There was no separate power about navigation and shipping.

References

  1. ↑ Frank L. Maraist, Thomas C. Galligan Jr., and Catherine M. Maraist (2003), Cases and Materials on Maritime Law, West, p. 347.
  2. ↑ David W. Robertson, Steven F. Friedell, and Michael F. Sturley (2001), Admiralty and Maritime Law in the United States, 240.
  3. 1 2 189 U.S. 158 (1903).
  4. ↑ 38 Stat. 1185.
  5. ↑ 46 U.S.C. App. § 688.
  6. ↑ 247 U.S. 372 (1918).
  7. ↑ 46 U.S.C. App. 688(a).
  8. ↑ 498 U.S. 337, 342 (1991).
  9. ↑ Robertson, David W. (2003). The Supreme Court's Approach to Determining Seaman Status: Discerning the Law Amid Loose Language and Catchphrases. 34 J. Mar. L. & Com. 547, 554.
  10. 1 2 272 U.S. 50 (1926)
  11. ↑ 33 U.S.C. 902(3)(G).
  12. ↑ 34 J. Mar. L. & Com. 547 at 555.
  13. ↑ 328 U.S. 1 (1946).
  14. ↑ 887 F2d. 88, 90 (1984)
  15. ↑ 742 F2d. 1054 (1984)
  16. ↑ 498 U.S. 337, 346 (1991).
  17. ↑ 515 U.S. 347, 376 (1995).
  18. ↑ 34 J. Mar. L. & Com. 547 at 571.
  19. ↑ Jones Act
  20. ↑ "Who Is a Seaman Under the Jones Act?". Adley Law Firm.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.