TheItalian captain's cowardice

[guyser]

Well I'm certainly no legal expert and while the owner will bear responsibility for liability but I think the captain in this case should bear the full brunt of any personal repercussions involving his loss of control over the ship and subsequent actions such as abandoning his passengers, crew and ship.

Thank you.

I suspected as much and agree. In thinking about it, the Capt will pay, but the company will have to pony up large to settle the suits already filed.....and oh they will pay !

[Post To The Left]

The captain's antics while certainly amusing and depressing at the same are distracting from the real issue: Uncontrolled Capitalism in the cruise industry.

In 1886 the American government passed a law, thePassenger Vessel Services Act of 1886 (PVSA), this simple piece of legislation basically kills the American domestic cruise industry and opens the door for foreign owned vessels with little to no controls over what they do. Sure this happened in Italy today but it's only a matter of time before something happens to a cruise ship sailing from an American port.

As is the case with capitalism the first order of the day is to profit and if there are no regulations the shareholders force the company to sacrifice everything (safety, environmental costs) in the name of profit.

The crews on these ships are from various nations, they have no common language and they work in sweatshop conditions 12-14hrs a day, seven days a week. They have no idea of what to do in an emergency because it would cost money to train them to function like a real crew. This is why this industry, and capitalism in general, needs to be regulated and reined in to prevent disasters like this happening (another case would be the gulf oil explosion).

Sure this time it was the fault of the captain but what about next time when a freak wave hits a ship, or a equally overworked shipping vessel's crew crash collide into a cruise ship.

One is crew-to-passenger ratios, which have widened over the past few decades from an average of one crew member for every two passengers to one for every three, according to the International Transport Workers’ Fed-eration. Crew members work 12-to-14-hour days, seven days a week, for months at a stretch, with minimal time off. “Half the ship is working in a state of fatigue,” says James Walker, a former cruise-industry lawyer who now represents aggrieved crew. “All types of safety studies have shown if you’re really exhausted you can be impaired to the point of intoxication.” The mostly Asian crew of the Costa Concordia had been on an eight-month shift when the ship capsized after running ashore off the Tuscan island of Giglio. Accommodations were like the Titanic’s steerage section. Only managers had shared cabins, and the others slept in dormitory bunks.

“These are bean-counter dynamics,” says lawyer and author of Unsafe on the High Seas Charles Lipcon, who is in talks with several potential Concordia plaintiffs.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/22/costa-concordia-disaster-brings-hard-look-at-cruise-ship-safety.print.html

[jbg]

As is the case with capitalism the first order of the day is to profit and if there are no regulations the shareholders force the company to sacrifice everything (safety, environmental costs) in the name of profit.

The crews on these ships are from various nations, they have no common language and they work in sweatshop conditions 12-14hrs a day, seven days a week. They have no idea of what to do in an emergency because it would cost money to train them to function like a real crew. This is why this industry, and capitalism in general, needs to be regulated and reined in to prevent disasters like this happening (another case would be the gulf oil explosion).

One of the few times you'll hear me rooting for regulation (the financial industry being the other) but, I agree heartily. Safety should not be a race to the bottom (pun intended).

[-TSS-]

If it wasn't a serious issue involving deaths of people, the captain's behaviour would make just brilliant comedy.

[cybercoma]

Actually, as has already been posted by guyser, it's not part of international law.

If it's not international law, then it's some sort of law related to shipping:

He is under formal investigation in the case, accused of multiple manslaughter and abandoning ship before the evacuation of more than 4,200 passengers and crew was complete.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/23/costa-concordia-captain-francesco-schettino-faces-news-charges-in-cruise-ship-sinking-reports-say/

[Guest Derek L]

If it's not international law, then it's some sort of law related to shipping:

No, it’s not International law, but Italian Criminal & Maritime Law.

[cybercoma]

Right, but isn't maritime law partly governed by international conventions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty_law#International_conventions

[GostHacked]

Right, but isn't maritime law partly governed by international conventions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty_law#International_conventions

They were in Italian waters, so I am not sure that would apply as much as the Italian rules.

[Guest American Woman]

There is no international law against abandoning ship or stipulating that the captain has to be the last to leave the ship, but the cruise ship was sailing under the Italian flag - it was registered in Italy - so Italian maritime law applies, and Italian maritime code criminalizes the act of abandoning ship.

Edited to add: Crew members have testified that the captain wasn't wearing his glasses at the time, and was having trouble seeing the control panel. Things do not look good for him.

Edited March 4, 2012 by American Woman

[Guest Derek L]

Right, but isn't maritime law partly governed by international conventions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiralty_law#International_conventions

As GostHacked correctly inferred, they were in Italian territorial (shallow) waters……..If the incident had occurred in International waters, he could be tried in the The Hague.

[Guest Derek L]

There is no international law against abandoning ship or stipulating that the captain has to be the last to leave the ship, but the cruise ship was sailing under the Italian flag - it was registered in Italy - so Italian maritime law applies, and Italian maritime code criminalizes the act of abandoning ship.

Edited to add: Crew members have testified that the captain wasn't wearing his glasses at the time, and was having trouble seeing the control panel. Things do not look good for him.

Not directly, but in International waters, the Captain must comply with the International Safety Management Code, which has a stated purpose of ensuring the safety of the crew/passengers.

Ironically, one such case worth reading is the sinking of another Italian owned and captained cruise ship, the SS Andrea Doria

[bush_cheney2004]

Ironically, one such case worth reading is the sinking of another Italian owned and captained cruise ship, the SS Andrea Doria

Right...the Andrea Doria - Stockholm collision is a standard topic for training captains and conning officers.

[Guest Derek L]

Right...the Andrea Doria - Stockholm collision is a standard topic for training captains and conning officers.

Perhaps we’re dating ourselves……I’m waiting for Wild Bill to reflect on the RMS Titanic sinking though

[bush_cheney2004]

Perhaps we’re dating ourselves……I’m waiting for Wild Bill to reflect on the RMS Titanic sinking though

Now you know why we had to learn how to calculate course, speed, and CPA (closest point of approach) on polar graph paper covered in plexiglas. Melbourne-Evans was another textbook case (1969):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne%E2%80%93Evans_collision

[Guest Derek L]

Now you know why we had to learn how to calculate course, speed, and CPA (closest point of approach) on polar graph paper covered in plexiglas. Melbourne-Evans was another textbook case (1969):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne%E2%80%93Evans_collision

Another example could be USS Belknap vs USS JFK.........Hence the "Belknap Light"......

The ultimate lesson learned is that a Carrier will always win……

Edited March 5, 2012 by Derek L

[bush_cheney2004]

Another example could be USS Belknap vs USS JFK.........Hence the "Belknap Light"......

The ultimate lesson learned is that a Carrier will always win……

Station keeping with a "birdfarm" trying to recover aircraft is never fun. It's worse with the entire group in formation. First the flagship signals the maneuver, then you have to signal understanding of the manuever, then the flagship signals "EXECUTE", and we all hope each ship does it correctly...at night...rigged for dark.

That's why these things go bump in the night.

[Guest Derek L]

Station keeping with a "birdfarm" trying to recover aircraft is never fun. It's worse with the entire group in formation. First the flagship signals the maneuver, then you have to signal understanding of the manuever, then the flagship signals "EXECUTE", and we all hope each ship does it correctly...at night...rigged for dark.

That's why these things go bump in the night.

Indeed, though never bridge crew (nor technically Navy), from an observers point of view, exercising with a CVBG, and on several occasions an Iowa centered SAG, is defiantly “interesting” to say the least.

[bush_cheney2004]

Indeed, though never bridge crew (nor technically Navy)....

That's what's so hard to figure in this case except for gross incompetence by the captain and/or bridge watch. Today's navigation aids and ship control systems are vastly superior and redundant compared to dead reckoning and LORAN A/C. The ship knows exactly where it is in relation to chart features, and the software will warn the crew of proximity to "bad" water. Christo!

[Guest Derek L]

That's what's so hard to figure in this case except for gross incompetence by the captain and/or bridge watch. Today's navigation aids and ship control systems are vastly superior and redundant compared to dead reckoning and LORAN A/C. The ship knows exactly where it is in relation to chart features, and the software will warn the crew of proximity to "bad" water. Christo!

Exactly.

I’d assume (and echo your point) baring any evidence suggesting the bridge crew had faulty navigation equipment/charts, the case of the MS Costa Concordia is clearly one of incompetence on the part of the captain.