Frigid waters add to maritime risks for Alaskan crabbing fleet
In Alaska, October means the start of the crabbing season. Consumers often take for granted the process gone through to place the delicacy on plates across the country, but the harsh conditions that affect the Bering Sea can present fishermen with an array of hazards not faced by those who work on boats in warmer waters. In an effort to reduce accidents, and possible subsequent legal claims, the Coast Guard has teamed up with personnel from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to observe and inspect crabbing vessels and to offer additional safety training.
The Coast Guard has been deployed in the Aleutian Island chain off the southwest tip of the state and the Bering Sea in order to improve response time in the event of emergencies.
One aspect of the crab fishermen’s job that makes their profession particularly perilous is the location, as early-October temperatures through parts of the Aleutian Island chain have already dipped into the 40s (Fahrenheit), meaning seamen who fall overboard face the additional risk of hypothermia. Because of the frigid and rough seas, accidents are often more serious than those in warmer waters, increasing the risk of serious injury and death.
Under maritime law, specifically according to the Unseaworthyness Doctrine, the owner of a vessel owes it to the members of the boat’s crew to provide a seaworthy vessel. Failure to do so makes the owner liable for compensation to any seaman injured on the unseaworthy vessel. Potential damages could include pain and suffering, loss of wages (current and future), retraining costs and the cost of medical and nursing services for the injured seaman.
A vessel can be deemed unseaworthy for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
- Inadequate or improperly trained crew
- Defective, insufficient or unsafe tools and/or equipment
- Faulty design
- Unsafe work procedures, practices or conditions
- Improper training
- Excessive work hours
- Lack of qualified supervision
If a crewmember is injured, and a maritime attorney can prove the vessel on which the crewmember was injured was not seaworthy, then the owner of the vessel can be held liable for several forms of compensation.
Shipowners who operate crab boats off the shore of Alaska run a higher risk of having their vessels deemed unseaworthy, because the often-rough seas and the cold air and water conditions increase the chance that a maritime lawyer could prove the conditions to be excessively dangerous. If the owner of the vessel can’t prove that the necessary steps were taken to care of the ship’s crew, the chances that a court would rule in an injured seaman’s favor would increase. In addition to pain and suffering, and some form of compensation to cover lost wages (including lost future wages, if injuries require long-term absence from work), the shipowner also is obligated under admiralty law to provide maintenance and cure: free medical treatment until the injured seaman reaches “maximum medical cure” and basic room and board expenses until they either are able to return to work or the period of the voyage ends.
Not only do the rough water conditions make accidents a legitimate possibility, the cold temperatures above and below the surface also increase the likelihood of illness and cold-related conditions like hypothermia.
Also coming into play are maritime laws like the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA) and the Jones Act.
If an accident occurs more than three miles offshore (in international waters), the case could fall under DOHSA protection. DOSHA was passed in 1920 so that the surviving family members of seamen who died while working in international waters could receive compensation for the loss of the deceased’s future earnings.
However, it’s more likely that the case of an injury to a seaman working in the Alaskan crabbing fleet would fall under the Jones Act, which applies to accidents on either side of the three-mile boundary, as long as the vessel on which they were working was on navigable waters. To qualify for Jones Act coverage, an injured Jones Act seaman or his surviving family must prove the seaman was a U.S. citizen and a regular member of the vessel’s crew (a label given to those who work at least 30 percent of their available working time on a single vessel or fleet of vessels under common ownership). If crewmembers are aboard for extended periods of time for a long trip, they obviously fall under the required “regular crew member” label, as is required in all Jones Act claims.
This year’s crabbing fleet is expected to be larger than in years past. Prior to the start of crabbing season last week, the Coast Guard Marine Safety Detachment in Unalaska conducted exams aboard 41 of the 93 vessels. No overloading of pots was noted. A few deficiencies — including expired life rafts, hydrostatic releases and Electronic Position Indicating Radio Beacon batteries — were found during the Coast Guard safety checks, but were corrected prior to the vessels getting underway. Proof of a favorable Coast Guard inspection could be useful evidence in any claim filed against a shipowner.
In the case of the Alaskan crabbing fleet, more than 20 fishermen attended Coast Guard safety training at the community pool and local harbor in Unalaska, where topics included proper use of life rafts, survival unit and flare training. Twelve fishermen attended the Unalaska damage control training and several vessel captains requested that Coast Guard examiners conduct emergency drills aboard their vessels prior to the start of the crabbing season.
No amount of training and safety preparation, of course, guarantees the elimination of accidents, so in the event of an accident, seamen or their surviving family will need representation by an accomplished maritime lawyer who specializes in cases dealing with the Jones Act and maritime law.
Seamen can claim unseaworthiness even if the condition is temporary. In 1960, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a seaman who slipped and fell down a ladder because of a rail that was covered with fish slime. The slime remained on the rail from a previous unloading operation. The court ruled that the vessel owner's duty to provide a seaworthy vessel also applied to temporary conditions. 
This is why the employer, upon contracting the seaman’s services, will try to assess the seaman's medical condition and history and determine if he suffers from any illness or injury. However, a seaman who willfully conceals an illness or serious injury may not be eligible for benefits if the condition worsens. However, if a seaman was not asked about illnesses or injuries at the time of hiring, he may not be at fault for concealment. Courts are sometimes lenient in regards to a seaman’s failure to disclose illnesses or injuries, because the seaman may believe, in all honesty, that he is completely medically fit for the job, in spite of previous injuries or illnesses.