The maritime profession is one of the world’s oldest and most essential, yet it carries inherent risks. When a seaman is injured or falls ill in the service of a vessel, a specialized area of federal law known as Admiralty Law (or Maritime Law) provides a framework for their protection and compensation. Unlike land-based workers who typically rely on state workers’ compensation systems, seamen have unique rights and remedies forged over centuries of maritime tradition and enacted into federal statutes.

Maintenance and Cure

One of the oldest and most deeply rooted concepts in maritime law is the doctrine of “maintenance and cure.” This is a no-fault remedy available to seamen who become injured or ill while in the service of a vessel, regardless of who, if anyone, was to blame for the condition.

“Maintenance” Explained

“Maintenance” refers to the vessel owner’s obligation to provide an injured or ill seaman with their reasonable daily living expenses while they are recovering ashore. These are expenses the seaman would not have incurred had they been living aboard the vessel. Maintenance payments typically cover essentials such as:

• Lodging or rent/mortgage payments
• Food or groceries
• Utilities (electricity, water, gas)

The amount of maintenance is usually a daily rate and is intended to provide for basic sustenance, not to replace lost wages entirely. The rate can sometimes be specified in a seaman’s employment contract or collective bargaining agreement, but if not, it must be a reasonable amount based on actual living costs in the seaman’s locality.

“Cure” Explained

“Cure” is the vessel owner’s duty to provide an injured or ill seaman with necessary medical care, treatment, and attention until they reach “maximum medical recovery” (MMR) or “maximum medical improvement” (MMI). MMR is the point at which it appears that the seaman’s condition is permanent and that further medical treatment will not improve their condition. This obligation includes paying for:

• Doctor visits and consultations
• Hospitalization and surgical procedures
• Medications
• Physical therapy and rehabilitation
• Diagnostic tests (X-rays, MRIs, etc.)
• Necessary medical equipment

The employer’s obligation to provide cure extends until the seaman is fit to return to duty or until their condition cannot be improved further.

Available Regardless of Fault

A key aspect of maintenance and cure is that these benefits are owed to the seaman irrespective of any negligence on the part of the employer or even the seaman (with very limited exceptions, such as willful misconduct). The seaman only needs to demonstrate that their injury or illness occurred, manifested, or was aggravated while they were in the service of the ship. This no-fault system ensures that seamen receive prompt medical attention and basic support during their convalescence without the immediate need to prove liability. Failure by an employer to promptly and properly pay maintenance and cure can lead to additional damages, including attorney’s fees and even punitive damages in some cases.

Unseaworthiness

Separate from the Jones Act (which focuses on negligence) and maintenance and cure (which is no-fault), an injured seaman may also have a claim based on the doctrine of “unseaworthiness.” This is another ancient maritime principle that places a strict, non-delegable duty on the vessel owner to provide a seaworthy vessel.

Duty to Provide a Seaworthy Vessel

A shipowner owes every member of the crew the absolute duty to furnish a vessel and its appurtenances (equipment, gear, etc.) that are reasonably fit for their intended use or purpose. This duty extends to the vessel itself, its parts and equipment, and even the adequacy and competence of its crew.

Defining “Unseaworthiness”

A vessel is deemed “unseaworthy” if any part of the ship, its equipment, or its crew is not reasonably fit for its intended purpose, and this unfitness creates a dangerous condition that contributes to a seaman’s injury. Unseaworthiness is not about whether the vessel can stay afloat; it pertains to its overall fitness for the operations at hand. It can be a temporary condition or a permanent defect.

Strict Liability: Negligence Need Not Be Proven

Liability for unseaworthiness is strict. This means that if an unseaworthy condition causes or contributes to a seaman’s injury, the vessel owner is liable for damages even if the owner was not negligent and had no notice of the dangerous condition. The focus is on the condition of the vessel, not on the conduct of the owner. The injured seaman only needs to prove that an unseaworthy condition existed and that this condition was a cause of their injury.

Examples of Unseaworthy Conditions

A multitude of conditions can render a vessel unseaworthy. Some common examples include:

• Defective or missing safety equipment (e.g., faulty lifeboats, missing handrails, inadequate fire suppression systems).
• Broken or improperly maintained machinery, winches, cranes, or tools.
• Slippery decks due to oil, grease, or other substances not promptly cleaned, or decks that are inherently unsafe due to their design or condition.
• Inadequate lighting in work areas or passageways.
• Poorly designed or maintained ladders, stairs, or gangways.
• Insufficient crew members to perform tasks safely, or crew members who are not adequately trained or are incompetent for their assigned duties.
• Improperly stowed cargo that shifts or falls.
• Lack of proper ventilation, especially in areas where hazardous fumes may accumulate.
• Food or water provided to the crew that is unfit for consumption.
• An improperly trained or violent crew member, if their actions make the vessel an unsafe place to work.

Claims for unseaworthiness, like Jones Act claims, generally must be filed within three years of the date of injury.

The Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA)

It is important to recognize that not all individuals working in the maritime industry are classified as “seamen” eligible for Jones Act protections. Many maritime workers who are primarily land-based but perform essential maritime activities are covered under a different federal law: the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA).

The LHWCA is a federal workers’ compensation system that provides benefits to maritime workers (other than seamen) who are injured on the navigable waters of the United States or in adjoining areas customarily used in loading, unloading, repairing, dismantling, or building a vessel. Covered employees typically include:

• Longshoremen (dockworkers who load and unload cargo)
• Ship-repairers
• Shipbuilders and ship-breakers
• Harbor construction workers

The LHWCA provides scheduled benefits for injured workers, regardless of employer fault. These benefits typically include:

• Payment of medical expenses related to the work injury.
• Compensation for lost wages (disability payments), which is usually two-thirds of the worker’s average weekly wage.
• Vocational rehabilitation services if the worker cannot return to their former employment.

Unlike the Jones Act, the LHWCA operates more like a traditional workers’ compensation system, where the employee does not sue their employer but instead files a claim for benefits. However, an LHWCA-covered employee may still be able to file a third-party lawsuit against a negligent vessel owner (if not their employer) or other liable third parties.

The Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA)

When a seaman’s death is caused by a wrongful act, neglect, or default occurring on the “high seas”—defined as waters beyond three nautical miles from the shore of any state, the District of Columbia, or U.S. territories—a specific federal statute called the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA) typically provides the exclusive remedy for the surviving family members against the decedent’s employer or the vessel owner.

DOHSA allows the personal representative of the deceased seaman to bring a lawsuit for the benefit of the seaman’s spouse, parent, child, or dependent relatives. The types of damages recoverable under DOHSA are generally limited to pecuniary (financial) losses suffered by these beneficiaries. Such damages may include:

• Loss of financial support the decedent would have provided.
• Loss of services the decedent performed (e.g., household chores, childcare).
• Funeral expenses, if paid by a beneficiary.
• In some circuits, a claim for the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering may be allowed if brought with a Jones Act survival claim.

Traditionally, non-pecuniary damages like loss of society, companionship, or grief were not recoverable under DOHSA for seamen, though legal interpretations have evolved, particularly concerning aviation incidents. For seamen, however, the recovery often remains focused on financial losses.

Other Potential Claims and Considerations

Beyond the primary remedies discussed above, several other aspects of admiralty law may be relevant to an injured seaman’s situation:

Admiralty Extension Act

The Admiralty Extension Act extends admiralty jurisdiction to injuries and damages caused by a vessel on navigable waters, even if the actual injury or damage is sustained on land. For example, if a piece of equipment falls from a ship and injures someone on the dock, or a vessel collides with a pier causing damage, this Act could apply.

Claims Against Third Parties

An injured seaman may have a claim against a third party—someone other than their employer or the vessel owner—whose negligence contributed to their injury. Examples include:

• The manufacturer of defective equipment that failed and caused an injury.
• A negligent contractor working aboard the vessel.
• The owner or operator of another vessel involved in a collision. These third-party claims can be pursued in addition to Jones Act, unseaworthiness, or maintenance and cure claims.

Comparative Negligence

In many maritime personal injury cases, including those under the Jones Act and unseaworthiness, the doctrine of “pure comparative negligence” applies. This means that if the injured seaman is found to be partially at fault for their own injury, their recovery of damages will be reduced by the percentage of their fault. For example, if a seaman is awarded $100,000 in damages but is found to be 20% at fault, their award would be reduced to $80,000. Importantly, under pure comparative negligence, a seaman can still recover some damages even if they are found to be significantly (e.g., more than 50%) at fault, as long as the employer or vessel condition also contributed to the injury.

Importance of Reporting Injuries and Seeking Counsel

It is vital for seamen to report any work-related injury or illness to their superiors as soon as possible and to ensure an official accident report is made. Prompt reporting helps document the incident and facilitates timely medical attention.

Given the complexities of maritime law, with its unique statutes, doctrines, and procedural rules, seeking legal counsel from an attorney experienced in admiralty law is highly recommended for any seaman who has suffer a significant injury. An experienced maritime lawyer can help evaluate the facts of the case, identify all potential claims, and navigate the legal process to protect the seaman’s rights and pursue fair compensation.

Get the Compensation You Deserve: Contact Our Experienced Alabama Admiralty Lawyers Today

If you have been injure working at sea, contact Fuquay Law Firm today for a consultation to discuss your case and learn how we can help.We are dedicate to assisting seamen and maritime workers who have suffered injuries. We have the experience to navigate the complexities of admiralty law and fight for the compensation you deserve.