Beer Can

Federal Judge Awards 1.46 million dollars to Crew-Member Against Vespe

Recommended Posts

Close to 20 years ago, we did a seminar with marine insurance company executives and a maritime lawyer. It was printed in Sailing World magazine. The bottom line recommendation was that if you race your boat, you should have at least $1M in liability. It appears it is time to adjust that number upwards to $2M looking at the results of the Vesper case. You could do a straight limit of $2M on your boat policy, or a $1M limit on your boat policy and a personal umbrella of $1M or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

umbrella policies of several million $ are pretty inexpensive, so there is no reason to stop at $1 million

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While there is little doubt that Mr.Schwartz's insurance can cover it, these rulings DO give one pause to race anything with crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Winds were building to 8-12 knots with choppy waters".

 

 

 

 

 

Whoa! 8 to 12, In the Drake's Passage?? The horror!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking bullshit if you ask me. Personal responsibility is a thing of the past!

Get back on the campaign trail Donald. You are bucking the evolution of 800 years of common law jurisprudence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The injury may not have ended his sailing career but suing his owner certainly did. You don't play lawyers in the sailing community and not alienate everyone who knows you in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

umbrella policies of several million $ are pretty inexpensive, so there is no reason to stop at $1 million

+1

Hard to imagine anyone who can afford to run a TP52 program not having at least a $25 million umbrella facility. Even an owner with a 40' racer-cruiser is likely to have $10 million ir more in coverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding liability limits. I see loss of life awards in the $4m range. If you have 8 crew and a low speed chase incident, you do the math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could probably find 100 40 footers with no insurance at all and 5000 more with whatever BOATUS has standard - $300,000? - before I found one with $10,000,000 coverage.

 

umbrella policies of several million $ are pretty inexpensive, so there is no reason to stop at $1 million


+1
Hard to imagine anyone who can afford to run a TP52 program not having at least a $25 million umbrella facility. Even an owner with a 40' racer-cruiser is likely to have $10 million ir more in coverage.

 


Yes - no different than a factory worker, or more apropos a sailor on a tanker.

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got 10 million PL.

I agree it's different for a pro.

But wasn't there another case recently where an amateur sued (or more correctly the health insurance mob) the owner a couple of months after getting sconed on the head by a boom?

If this started happening in amateur ranks, I'd simply stop saying yes to all the walkups and anyone I don't know, which would be a sad day as this is how sailing works, it's how I got my first taste of racing.

Fair rights is great, till some arsehole uses it to abuse the system, and in the US this seems more the fault of the health insurance co's?

SB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore the sailing bit for a second.

 

Here is an employee injured in the workplace who can no longer perform his job. $1.5m seems pretty reasonsble to me. Imagine the average Aussie forklift / truck driver injured at work due to lack of servicing or the boss asking to operate machinery behind its capacity he has to reskill - pretty sure they would get around $1.5m, so the same amount for a highly skilled top level sailor is pretty reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got 10 million PL.

I agree it's different for a pro.

But wasn't there another case recently where an amateur sued (or more correctly the health insurance mob) the owner a couple of months after getting sconed on the head by a boom?

If this started happening in amateur ranks, I'd simply stop saying yes to all the walkups and anyone I don't know, which would be a sad day as this is how sailing works, it's how I got my first taste of racing.

Fair rights is great, till some arsehole uses it to abuse the system, and in the US this seems more the fault of the health insurance co's?

SB

 

In the USA one of the conditions of having health insurance is that you can not stop your insurance provider from suing to recover costs when an injury is not your fault

 

if you have a minor injury on a boat, you can always lie to your insurance company, and say " i got hurt moving the sofa for my wife"

 

but, if you get taken away in an ambulance, that's not an option - they will likely try to recover from the owners insurance company

 

any owner with half a brain knows and expects this.

 

in the case we are discussing.., an employee was hurt (seriously, it appears) on the job - of course he is suing...

 

this is a suit for pain and suffering, and lost income, so not for medical expenses.., but still for an employee-employer relationship, it's not unexpected just because it happened on a sailboat

 

i think even most amateurs, if they got hurt on a boat and couldn't do their job anymore, would do the same thing

 

if as an owner you are not willing to accept that, you should probably sail singlehanded

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi US7070,

Edit: I may be guilty of thread drift then, as my comments were not aimed at the pro.

As I said, I have no issue with the pro, this is his job.

Even with amateurs, if the owner is negligent, I have no issue with that either. This is normal fact of life stuff..

But sailing is a dangerous sport, I dont think you'll find anyone to disagree. My issue is when does this negate personal responsibility?

I'v been smacked on the head more times than I can count, fractured ribs, come away bloodied and bruised, had to seek medical attention, as have most of the guys I've sailed with

I haven't had to sue anyone. My point is though that it appears it is the medical insurance orgs that decide to litigate for purely financial reasons, there appears little or no accord to personal responsibility.

I could be wrong, and I note that sailing is not alone in this regard.

SB

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not an expert.., but in the usa at least most insurance works that way...

 

if you have a loss that's not your fault, the insurance company for the person at fault pays

 

i assume that in australia, that's the way it works for car wrecks - if somebody goes through a red light and totals your car, their insurance company will cover the loss, not yours. if the other insurance company refuses to pay, your insurance company may elect to sue them.

 

but because you have single provider national health care, it's not an issue with respect to covering the cost of treating any injuries

 

usually in the usa, the insurance companies figure it out and don't waste time and money going to court

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is though that it appears it is the medical insurance orgs that decide to litigate for purely financial reasons, there appears little or no accord to personal responsibility.

 

SB

That & ambulance chasers looking for a pay day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My point is though that it appears it is the medical insurance orgs that decide to litigate for purely financial reasons, there appears little or no accord to personal responsibility.

 

SB

That & ambulance chasers looking for a pay day.

 

 

 

seems to me that if yo believe in "personal responsibility", then you should agree that the person at fault - or at least their insurance company - should pay for the damages, and not the insurance company of the person not at fault

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

My point is though that it appears it is the medical insurance orgs that decide to litigate for purely financial reasons, there appears little or no accord to personal responsibility.

 

SB

That & ambulance chasers looking for a pay day.

 

 

 

seems to me that if yo believe in "personal responsibility", then you should agree that the person at fault - or at least their insurance company - should pay for the damages, and not the insurance company of the person not at fault

 

 

Yes, that's what I am trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

November I had my bicep tendon severed at home on a Sunday, scared me more than it hurt. Went to work on Monday, walk into the docs office Monday PM, he took one look and said come back Thursday and we'll fix it. Out patient surgery, Doc went in on the inside of my elbow, two inch scar. The x-ray of the tendon anchor repair looked very straightforward. Was back at work the following Monday. Missed 1.5 days of office work. Had to cancel KW but started back racing at Charleston. No formal physical therapy, i just kept straightening the arm over and over. No stiffness, no future pain and suffering,etc. I'm just a weekend warrior racing 24 regattas/weekends a year at 47 years of age... Question: Can this guy not get a job associated with his degree? If this guy is found racing on a pro level again, does Swartz have any recourse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The is a good chance the owner told him to sue him. "I'm insured mate, there's no reason for you to suffer."

 

My mum sued my dad after a car accident when they were young to get the insurance company to cover medical costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the owner doesn't realize how high next year's premium will be.

I think this and similar owners can cover it. I know Swan Regattas required $2.0m coverage to participate years ago. People with extensive assets are litigation targets and well insured. It's relatively inexpensive especially with umbrella coverage.

Didn't he have another tender called 'Pussy Galore'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get too far into the insurance weeds,

 

Not only do you need adequate liability coverage, If you have crew on board, you need P&I liability coverage. (protection & Indemnity)

 

Most traditional marine policies are written w P&I coverage, but many BO's just add their boats to their homeowners policy or get one from a direct writer like State farm or Allstate, which often is basic liability only.

The problem is that it excludes injury to employees. (which a crew on a boat is considered)

 

P&I coverage is designed to include Jones act injuries to crew aboard a vessel.

 

If you add an umbrella on top, you should make sure it is "following form" to pick up the P&I below,

again, many personal umbrellas will exclude Jones act/ employee injury claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

He is a pro, but he couldn't get from one boat to another in 8-10 knots? His boss created a dangerous situation? Were all of the other crew injured or was the owner just negligent in Kenny's case? He got injured doing what everyone else was able to do easily, and what many of us have done many times, but this was the owner's negligence. Right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

He is a pro, but he couldn't get from one boat to another in 8-10 knots? His boss created a dangerous situation? Were all of the other crew injured or was the owner just negligent in Kenny's case? He got injured doing what everyone else was able to do easily, and what many of us have done many times, but this was the owner's negligence. Right.

 

 

Maritime law, which forms the need for Jones act coverage on crew aboard ships, is similar to workers compensation, which means non negligence based. If you hurt yourself at sea you're covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

My point is though that it appears it is the medical insurance orgs that decide to litigate for purely financial reasons, there appears little or no accord to personal responsibility.

 

SB

That & ambulance chasers looking for a pay day.

 

 

 

seems to me that if yo believe in "personal responsibility", then you should agree that the person at fault - or at least their insurance company - should pay for the damages, and not the insurance company of the person not at fault

 

 

That overlooks the possibility that 1- it's your own fault and the insurance company needs to suck it up 2- it's truly an -accident- and there is no identifiable party at fault (and your insurance company needs to suck it up).

 

The problem here is the shift in corporate practice, which is driving the legal system. The insurance companies, instead of viewing themselves as fiduciary bodies of trust which are entrusted with large amounts of money to cover clients losses... especially when those losses are catastrophic... they view themselves as cash vacuum-cleaners. Take as much cash as possible and give back as little as possible. It is a perversion of the profit motive.

 

FWIW I agree with the concept that this is basically a workplace accident.

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to get too far into the insurance weeds,

 

Not only do you need adequate liability coverage, If you have crew on board, you need P&I liability coverage. (protection & Indemnity)

 

Most traditional marine policies are written w P&I coverage, but many BO's just add their boats to their homeowners policy or get one from a direct writer like State farm or Allstate, which often is basic liability only.

The problem is that it excludes injury to employees. (which a crew on a boat is considered)

 

P&I coverage is designed to include Jones act injuries to crew aboard a vessel.

 

If you add an umbrella on top, you should make sure it is "following form" to pick up the P&I below,

again, many personal umbrellas will exclude Jones act/ employee injury claims.

 

You're trying to compare normal beer can racing owner coverage (most yacht clubs require liability aka P&I) which you're not paying your crew and they're not employed by you with a full blown grand prix campaign which will have full coverage covering everything across the board.

 

State Farm is not going to insure a grand prix boat. Ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore the sailing bit for a second.

Here is an employee injured in the workplace who can no longer perform his job. $1.5m seems pretty reasonsble to me. Imagine the average Aussie forklift / truck driver injured at work due to lack of servicing or the boss asking to operate machinery behind its capacity he has to reskill - pretty sure they would get around $1.5m, so the same amount for a highly skilled top level sailor is pretty reasonable.

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

My point is though that it appears it is the medical insurance orgs that decide to litigate for purely financial reasons, there appears little or no accord to personal responsibility.

 

SB

That & ambulance chasers looking for a pay day.

 

 

 

seems to me that if yo believe in "personal responsibility", then you should agree that the person at fault - or at least their insurance company - should pay for the damages, and not the insurance company of the person not at fault

 

 

Take as much cash as possible and give back as little as possible.

FB- Doug

 

 

You just defined the raison d'etre of all, or at least most contemporary corporations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

... ... ...

Take as much cash as possible and give back as little as possible.

 

 

 

You just defined the raison d'etre of all, or at least most contemporary corporations.

 

 

Unfortunately so. It's a big change from the way capitalism once worked, IMHO a change for the bad.

There's a difference between profit and pillage.

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that it is his workplace, I'm surprised it wasn't a worker's comp issue.

 

 

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Given that it is his workplace, I'm surprised it wasn't a worker's comp issue.

 

 

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

 

 

He was only covered while racing. Not delivering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember this is US law. Jones Act probably means nothing but confusion to non-US but it is the law of the land with maritime stuff. Land based stuff does not apply here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

He is a pro, but he couldn't get from one boat to another in 8-10 knots? His boss created a dangerous situation? Were all of the other crew injured or was the owner just negligent in Kenny's case? He got injured doing what everyone else was able to do easily, and what many of us have done many times, but this was the owner's negligence. Right.

 

 

+1

 

Also, this is a question; Wouldn't his own "I'm a professional sailor" insurance cover this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

He is a pro, but he couldn't get from one boat to another in 8-10 knots? His boss created a dangerous situation? Were all of the other crew injured or was the owner just negligent in Kenny's case? He got injured doing what everyone else was able to do easily, and what many of us have done many times, but this was the owner's negligence. Right.

+1

 

Also, this is a question; Wouldn't his own "I'm a professional sailor" insurance cover this?

What professional sailor insurance would that be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it have made any difference if the owner had required all crew to sign a liability waiver stating that sailing is a dangerous sport and each participant willingly takes those risks? I'm thinking of the ski ticket model and assumption of risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it have made any difference if the owner had required all crew to sign a liability waiver stating that sailing is a dangerous sport and each participant willingly takes those risks? I'm thinking of the ski ticket model and assumption of risk.

In skiing it's a retail transaction. This guy was hired to sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it have made any difference if the owner had required all crew to sign a liability waiver stating that sailing is a dangerous sport and each participant willingly takes those risks? I'm thinking of the ski ticket model and assumption of risk.

 

This may work in an amateur race, but the injured crew was an employee and is entitled to workers compensation.

Work comp insurance is required for all W2 employees. If crewman was an independent contractor, then i dont know legal implications.

The employer definitely fucked up because he did not send him to seek medical evaluation but instead asked the injured crewman to participate in further races after the injury. Typically when a biceps tendon is torn and reattached in a timely manner, there is no permanent disability, but in this case the injury was on March 28 and he had it repaired on May 2nd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it have made any difference if the owner had required all crew to sign a liability waiver stating that sailing is a dangerous sport and each participant willingly takes those risks? I'm thinking of the ski ticket model and assumption of risk.

 

The lift ticket waiver (among others) has been demonstrated to be pretty useless in court any number of times. A liability waiver does not obviate all duty of care on the vendor.

 

As seeker noted, employment raises the bar even higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

years ago flying out to do a regatta from the UK

Agents asks do I want insurance etc etc so I say ok yes to cover yacht race.

No no and after weeks of hunting couldnt find cover from UK based operator?

Every other sport you could imagine there was cover for but not yacht racing WTF?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sailing is not a dangerous sport. I imagine it is on par with cycling or skiing from a number or injuries or deaths perspective. Lawn bowls probably has a similar death figure from all those older folks getting all serious down the local club. Driving to work has higher deaths per participant or hours carried out than sailing.

 

The guy was at work and therefore his employer has to demonstrate that it was not his fault or pay the money. This does raise the question in the UK where wealthy owners are often paying a few crew on their yachts to sail where the line is drawn. Alas I am not likely to to rich enough any time soon to have to consider this risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

... ... ...

Take as much cash as possible and give back as little as possible.

 

 

 

You just defined the raison d'etre of all, or at least most contemporary corporations.

 

 

Unfortunately so. It's a big change from the way capitalism once worked, IMHO a change for the bad.

There's a difference between profit and pillage.

 

FB- Doug

 

What a cute view of the industrial revolution. The good ol' days.

 

whiteslavesslavegirls.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

He is a pro.

Boats he races on are a workplace.

This is about money.

Of course he sued.

If you got injured the same way and you didn't sue, you'd be a dumbass.

He is a pro, but he couldn't get from one boat to another in 8-10 knots? His boss created a dangerous situation? Were all of the other crew injured or was the owner just negligent in Kenny's case? He got injured doing what everyone else was able to do easily, and what many of us have done many times, but this was the owner's negligence. Right.

 

 

+1

 

Also, this is a question; Wouldn't his own "I'm a professional sailor" insurance cover this?

 

 

Yeah, but then they would go after the owner of the vessel under the Jones Act. And I'd bet you some money that sailor has no personal employment insurance anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Would it have made any difference if the owner had required all crew to sign a liability waiver stating that sailing is a dangerous sport and each participant willingly takes those risks? I'm thinking of the ski ticket model and assumption of risk.

 

The lift ticket waiver (among others) has been demonstrated to be pretty useless in court any number of times. A liability waiver does not obviate all duty of care on the vendor.

 

As seeker noted, employment raises the bar even higher.

 

 

The lift ticket waiver is anything but useless, especially now that most ski tourism states have enacted a version of the SSA. None of these laws or waivers protects against the negligence of the resort - they were created to prevent plaintiff's attorneys from bankrupting ski areas with compelling, heavily injured plaintiffs that fucked themselves up with no help from the resort or lifties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sailing is not a dangerous sport. I imagine it is on par with cycling or skiing from a number or injuries or deaths perspective.

 

Skiing is an inherently dangerous sport according to the laws of most nations. Not sure how else to characterize a sport where you stick waxed planks to your feet at the top of a steep icy mountain and then careen down it with no requirements for learning or licensing or anything.

 

 

Sailing, not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

... ... ...

Take as much cash as possible and give back as little as possible.

 

 

 

You just defined the raison d'etre of all, or at least most contemporary corporations.

 

 

Unfortunately so. It's a big change from the way capitalism once worked, IMHO a change for the bad.

There's a difference between profit and pillage.

 

FB- Doug

 

What a cute view of the industrial revolution. The good ol' days.

 

whiteslavesslavegirls.jpg

 

 

Yet there are times/places when the benefits of an organized socioeconomic system were distributed relatively fairly. Maybe things come/go in cycles? Certainly market forces have been a big part of why we no longer crouch under the bushes eating grubs.

 

FWIW I agree that sailing is nowhere near as risky as many other more-common sports.

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can get a court to accept a Jones Act Claim? The owner and ship owes. Zero question. If a US Seaman gets sick or hurt in any way while a crew on a US vessel. The ship or owner will pay all the medical cost and get the sailor home. I suspect the boat or owner had/has some insurance weakness or issues. Any reasonable admiralty insurance underwriter would have settled this. The rules and law are just too clear to go to trial or appeal. In this case the defense is laughable. Got got hurt as a paid hand on a us vessel following an order. Pay the man. Pay without being asked much less sued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

... ... ...

Take as much cash as possible and give back as little as possible.

 

 

 

You just defined the raison d'etre of all, or at least most contemporary corporations.

 

 

Unfortunately so. It's a big change from the way capitalism once worked, IMHO a change for the bad.

There's a difference between profit and pillage.

 

FB- Doug

 

What a cute view of the industrial revolution. The good ol' days.

 

whiteslavesslavegirls.jpg

 

 

Yet there are times/places when the benefits of an organized socioeconomic system were distributed relatively fairly. Maybe things come/go in cycles? Certainly market forces have been a big part of why we no longer crouch under the bushes eating grubs.

 

 

You pined above for the 'better days' when capitalism worked. I don't know whether you mean before the civil war, when 'capitalist success' rode mostly on the stolen labor of slaves and the stolen land and resources and murder of the native americans. Or do you mean the decades right after the war, when areas hundreds of thousands of acres wide were as destitute as parts of Africa. Or maybe later, when America really ascended the international economic ladder with the help of child labor, lynching, spouses as property, and similar cultural foibles which made life much better for the Rockefellers and Astors and Carnegies.

 

Fairly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the most *astounding* part is that he was essentially ordered to race with that injury for two days. I can only imagine the pain and impossibility and now the permanent damage...

 

The Jones Act part is settled and foreigners will not understand it. But the requirement to sail injured? That was just stupid om the owner's or his captain's part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Would it have made any difference if the owner had required all crew to sign a liability waiver stating that sailing is a dangerous sport and each participant willingly takes those risks? I'm thinking of the ski ticket model and assumption of risk.

 

This may work in an amateur race, but the injured crew was an employee and is entitled to workers compensation.

Work comp insurance is required for all W2 employees. If crewman was an independent contractor, then i dont know legal implications.

The employer definitely fucked up because he did not send him to seek medical evaluation but instead asked the injured crewman to participate in further races after the injury. Typically when a biceps tendon is torn and reattached in a timely manner, there is no permanent disability, but in this case the injury was on March 28 and he had it repaired on May 2nd.

 

And that was my hunch, that this was as much about subsequent actions and inactions as it was about the injury, does not reflect well on the program.

Deng Xiao Peng: Greed is good.O wait that was Gekko, he said its good to get rich, haha, le difference. Properly modified by Fordism it did work well for the US for 50 years, now not so much. Now its closer to "never give a sucker a break, its a lead pipe cinch".

Good to hear that the law has evolved to accept individual liability better than previously, but now everybody and everything has to have liability insurance in force all the the time, must be good to be an agent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You pined above for the 'better days' when capitalism worked. I don't know whether you mean before the civil war, when 'capitalist success' rode mostly on the stolen labor of slaves and the stolen land and resources and murder of the native americans. Or do you mean the decades right after the war, when areas hundreds of thousands of acres wide were as destitute as parts of Africa. Or maybe later, when America really ascended the international economic ladder with the help of child labor, lynching, spouses as property, and similar cultural foibles which made life much better for the Rockefellers and Astors and Carnegies.

 

Fairly?

 

I think he means from 1946 to 1963...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You pined above for the 'better days' when capitalism worked. I don't know whether you mean before the civil war, when 'capitalist success' rode mostly on the stolen labor of slaves and the stolen land and resources and murder of the native americans. Or do you mean the decades right after the war, when areas hundreds of thousands of acres wide were as destitute as parts of Africa. Or maybe later, when America really ascended the international economic ladder with the help of child labor, lynching, spouses as property, and similar cultural foibles which made life much better for the Rockefellers and Astors and Carnegies.

 

Fairly?

 

I think he means from 1946 to 1963...

 

 

Yep, that boon period that came almost entirely because it was ignited by the massive deficit-financed government spending that was the WW2 economy. Or do you mean the socialism experiment that was the G.I. Bill?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, how many "pros" are sailing this week at Key West on small boats like J70s, Melges 24s, C&C 30s and J111s? Do you think all of these owners know what their potential liability might be when their pro pulls a muscle? Do you think they all have 5 million dollar umbrellas? I'll bet a bunch don't even know that their policy might have a navigation warranty that could restrict where or at what time of year, their boat is sailed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are paying for professional crew and you don't know this stuff, I do not feel sorry for your ignorant ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just compared a fully detached bicep to a pulled muscle. No soup (or gym) for you.

 

So, how many "pros" are sailing this week at Key West on small boats like J70s, Melges 24s, C&C 30s and J111s? Do you think all of these owners know what their potential liability might be when their pro pulls a muscle? Do you think they all have 5 million dollar umbrellas? I'll bet a bunch don't even know that their policy might have a navigation warranty that could restrict where or at what time of year, their boat is sailed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You pined above for the 'better days' when capitalism worked. I don't know whether you mean before the civil war, when 'capitalist success' rode mostly on the stolen labor of slaves and the stolen land and resources and murder of the native americans. Or do you mean the decades right after the war, when areas hundreds of thousands of acres wide were as destitute as parts of Africa. Or maybe later, when America really ascended the international economic ladder with the help of child labor, lynching, spouses as property, and similar cultural foibles which made life much better for the Rockefellers and Astors and Carnegies.

 

Fairly?

 

I think he means from 1946 to 1963...

 

 

Yep, that boon period that came almost entirely because it was ignited by the massive deficit-financed government spending that was the WW2 economy. Or do you mean the socialism experiment that was the G.I. Bill?

 

 

That's true and often forgotten or overlooked but it's also true that the leaders of the corporate world back then actually contributed something to society and made sane amounts of wealth - generally 12-20- times their workers incomes. They weren't in large part a bunch of psychopathic kleptocrats whose only concern was "more for me" like the bulk of the senior corporate world today.

 

I doubt Henry the Deuce could have even conceived of paying himself 1000X what he paid his workers - his grandfather & father certainly couldn't have.

 

From what I've seen from living through it all, Uncle Milty Friedman and the Reagan Revolution were the real drivers of the change - prior to that period things were still pretty sane in that world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You just compared a fully detached bicep to a pulled muscle. No soup (or gym) for you.

 

So, how many "pros" are sailing this week at Key West on small boats like J70s, Melges 24s, C&C 30s and J111s? Do you think all of these owners know what their potential liability might be when their pro pulls a muscle? Do you think they all have 5 million dollar umbrellas? I'll bet a bunch don't even know that their policy might have a navigation warranty that could restrict where or at what time of year, their boat is sailed.

 

 

 

When it comes to the Jones Act there may not be much difference. Under our long proven US Jones laws. Even a pulled muscle or even the flu from the ship's rum. The owner and vessel owes all the medical costs, travel costs to get home, wages until the seaman is well, and any other costs his lawyer can think of and report. There are many reasons to not pay guys to sail with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are paying for professional crew and you don't know this stuff, I do not feel sorry for your ignorant ass.

 

Article said he was in line to receive $160k in 2011 as a professional sailor. Don't see how you can afford that kind of talent and not know you also need some sort of workman's comp or liability coverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking bullshit if you ask me. Personal responsibility is a thing of the past!

 

The boat was run by a dummy Corporation as a business.

Probably to avoid sails tax on the purchase and to write off the expenses of a rich dude(s).

 

You cannot hide from the laws if you operate your boat as a business.

The owners should now sue their attorney(s) for not advising them on business/employee safety laws. :o:blink:

 

Ignore the sailing bit for a second.

 

Here is an employee injured in the workplace who can no longer perform his job. $1.5m seems pretty reasonsble to me. Imagine the average Aussie forklift / truck driver injured at work due to lack of servicing or the boss asking to operate machinery behind its capacity he has to reskill - pretty sure they would get around $1.5m, so the same amount for a highly skilled top level sailor is pretty reasonable.

 

Exactly. I suffered my back and life changing injury at work. No matter what anyone says, Get an (love/hate) Injury Attorney.

No one will take care of you or even gives a shit about you unless you fight for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

You pined above for the 'better days' when capitalism worked. I don't know whether you mean before the civil war, when 'capitalist success' rode mostly on the stolen labor of slaves and the stolen land and resources and murder of the native americans. Or do you mean the decades right after the war, when areas hundreds of thousands of acres wide were as destitute as parts of Africa. Or maybe later, when America really ascended the international economic ladder with the help of child labor, lynching, spouses as property, and similar cultural foibles which made life much better for the Rockefellers and Astors and Carnegies.

 

Fairly?

 

I think he means from 1946 to 1963...

Yep, that boon period that came almost entirely because it was ignited by the massive deficit-financed government spending that was the WW2 economy. Or do you mean the socialism experiment that was the G.I. Bill?

I think a large part of that was the supply for workers was somewhat substantially reduced by the war... not to mention America was one of the few nations that didn't need to completely rebuild itself after the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For whatever it's worth, speaking as someone who (tries to be) a responsible 40' racer/cruiser owner, and owner of a small (as in VERY small) maritime business. I'm in the process of renewing my policy for 2016, so I have the numbers right in front of me. Liability limit for each accident (bodily injury and property damage) is $500,000. Medical payments per person, each incident is $25,000.

 

Pretty standard policy through Gowrie Group. So I would assume that's a solid, typical policy for a boat our size. I would honestly be pretty surprised if a 40-foot owner would arbitrarily pump up the standard/recommended insurance 3X to cover an incident such as this.

 

As an aside, the only real injury we have ever had on the boat (knock on wood) was caused by the OEM fairlead adjustment block on the deck (was metal, now replaced), which split our barefoot bowman's toe open. He used e-tape for the rest of the regatta, then went at got stitches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something doesn't add up. There has got to be more to the story.

 

The world of a professional racing sailor is nothing like that of a sailor in the merchant marine and by litigating he had to know he would never work in the industry again. It seems an odd choice to forgo decades of potential employment for what would be, after lawyers fee's, a relatively small amount of cash.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

You pined above for the 'better days' when capitalism worked. I don't know whether you mean before the civil war, when 'capitalist success' rode mostly on the stolen labor of slaves and the stolen land and resources and murder of the native americans. Or do you mean the decades right after the war, when areas hundreds of thousands of acres wide were as destitute as parts of Africa. Or maybe later, when America really ascended the international economic ladder with the help of child labor, lynching, spouses as property, and similar cultural foibles which made life much better for the Rockefellers and Astors and Carnegies.

 

Fairly?

 

holy manifesto, Batman Clean, you read a whole encyclopedia in between the lines here

 

I think he means from 1946 to 1963...

Yep, that boon period that came almost entirely because it was ignited by the massive deficit-financed government spending that was the WW2 economy. Or do you mean the socialism experiment that was the G.I. Bill?

I think a large part of that was the supply for workers was somewhat substantially reduced by the war... not to mention America was one of the few nations that didn't need to completely rebuild itself after the war.

 

 

Yes, both good points, however there was also a recession due to the decreasing aggregate demand after the war and another recession in the late 1940s. So there is a bit more to it, economic history is very seldom an exact science.

 

However the era from 1945~1970 is one where the "middle class" however you define it grew and prospered rather steadily. There are lots of other such eras in Western economic history, which leads us to believe that it might not be just a freak coincidence.

 

My observation on liability insurance- it's a two-edged sword. Insurance companies hire good lawyers, so if they have a lot of skin in your game they will send in firepower on your side. Liability coverage is cheap too. OTOH having a really high liability makes you a big target, too; and many times the insurance companies would rather settle out of court.

 

FB- Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

corrosionX your policy porbably assumes amateur competition. I've had Gowrie too but didn't bother to see if it specifically excludes pro stuff.

 

Bill--why do you assume that he could "never work in the industry again?" I don't see that as at all certain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

corrosionX your policy porbably assumes amateur competition. I've had Gowrie too but didn't bother to see if it specifically excludes pro stuff.

 

Bill--why do you assume that he could "never work in the industry again?" I don't see that as at all certain.

 

There was something about that in the legal decision IIRC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole discussion is disgusting. It does not matter that it is a issuance company that has to pay and not the owner. It has to do with principle.

 

Pro sailors are well paid because it has its difficulties and dangers. Comparing this to a fork lift worker whose job is predictable and who gets paid minimum wage is another story. In sailing there is diversity and unexpected events this is the nature of the work and that is why we get so well paid.

 

All injuries and expenses should be paid because it was a workplace, but to make an injury a profitable is bull shit! Projected earnings give me a break.

 

If you want security get a desk job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The world of a professional racing sailor is nothing like that of a sailor in the merchant marine and by litigating he had to know he would never work in the industry again.

 

He's working plenty, just not on grand prix raceboats, cause the bicep doesn't work so good. Push button boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole discussion is disgusting. It does not matter that it is a issuance company that has to pay and not the owner. It has to do with principle.

 

Pro sailors are well paid because it has its difficulties and dangers. Comparing this to a fork lift worker whose job is predictable and who gets paid minimum wage is another story. In sailing there is diversity and unexpected events this is the nature of the work and that is why we get so well paid.

 

All injuries and expenses should be paid because it was a workplace, but to make an injury a profitable is bull shit! Projected earnings give me a break.

 

If you want security get a desk job.

 

Is that the law on coconut island? disgusting or not, it has been the law of the US for a hair under a century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For whatever it's worth, speaking as someone who (tries to be) a responsible 40' racer/cruiser owner, and owner of a small (as in VERY small) maritime business. I'm in the process of renewing my policy for 2016, so I have the numbers right in front of me. Liability limit for each accident (bodily injury and property damage) is $500,000. Medical payments per person, each incident is $25,000.

 

Pretty standard policy through Gowrie Group. So I would assume that's a solid, typical policy for a boat our size. I would honestly be pretty surprised if a 40-foot owner would arbitrarily pump up the standard/recommended insurance 3X to cover an incident such as this.

 

As an aside, the only real injury we have ever had on the boat (knock on wood) was caused by the OEM fairlead adjustment block on the deck (was metal, now replaced), which split our barefoot bowman's toe open. He used e-tape for the rest of the regatta, then went at got stitches.

 

500k? if you're racing, go to a mil.

unless gowrie won't let you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also highly suggest to all of you who do not hire your crew to have your attorney put together a proper 'assumption of risk' waiver. Yes, it is distasteful. No, it won't shield you from liability for negligence. But it WILL provide proof that your crew knew of the risks before they came aboard, which is a very, very important fact. It would, for example, help a lot in a case like this one: http://setexasrecord.com/stories/510644160-sailboat-racer-blames-crewmate-for-racing-injuries

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coconuts: There is no legal "half a job half a hobby" statute. If you decide to hire sailors to sail your boat for money, you take on maintenance and cure just as much as the supertanker owner does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if a 40-foot owner would arbitrarily pump up the standard/recommended insurance 3X to cover an incident such as this.

 

As an aside, the only real injury we have ever had on the boat (knock on wood) was caused by the OEM fairlead adjustment block on the deck (was metal, now replaced), which split our barefoot bowman's toe open. He used e-tape for the rest of the regatta, then went at got stitches.

bowman going open toe or barefoot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize it is a job and compensation needs to be paid when its due. The problem I have is with the amount and it becomes a precedence for future litigation.

 

Is this really the way that we all want professional sailing to go? By encuraging such behavior only opens the doors for others and just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

I understand the law and would like to know if people have been suing like this for hair under a century too? Historical proof or greedy precedence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy is permanently crippled. A bit different than a bruise.

Owners have been trying to NOT pay sailors for their injuries for around 5,000 years now plus or minus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites