Part 5 - Employer Defenses

Notice Requirements

Ship owners and other maritime employers sometimes use the defense that a seaman had “notice” of a defect or dangerous condition to avoid paying a claim.  As a practical matter, seldom, if ever, do safety notice requirements prevent an injured seaman from recovering in a Jones Act case.  For example, liability for an injury resulting from a slip and fall on a wet substance on a floor or deck, is determined based on the length of time the substance was there and whether or not the crew had time to notice it and clean it up.  Another example is a crewmember slipping on the deck of a vessel that is wet with ocean spray because the non-skid surface needed to be replaced.  The liability in this case would depend on the amount of wear on the non-skid surface or tape and whether it is substantial enough to indicate that the vessel owner had at least constructive notice of the defect.  Constructive notice means that the owner “knew or should have known” of the defect.  This can also be determined if the vessel had ordered a new surface or new tape, or if based on past records, it was time to resurface the non-skid area. 

Vessel owners owe an absolute duty to provide a safe place for seaman and other individuals performing duties on a vessel.  This includes providing safe ingress and egress to the vessel, safe equipment for use on the vessel, and safe living quarters.  The doctrines of unseaworthiness, the Jones Act statute, the existence of General Maritime claims and 905(b) claims under the Longshore Act confirm the ship owner’s duty regardless of notice requirements.