[HN Gopher] Stuck at sea for years, a sailor's plight highlights...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Stuck at sea for years, a sailor's plight highlights a surge in
       ship abandonment
        
       Author : achristmascarl
       Score  : 139 points
       Date   : 2024-05-30 13:53 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (apnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (apnews.com)
        
       | UniverseHacker wrote:
       | This is crazy. I'd think as soon as they stopped paying him he
       | does not work for them, and they've abandoned the ship unmanned.
       | He could claim the ship as salvage, sell it, and sue them for his
       | back pay for anytime he did work.
        
         | sidewndr46 wrote:
         | A ship has to be found unmanned in most cases to claim salvage.
         | If it is a hazard in navigable waters and you get permission
         | from the local Coast Guard (or whatever authority) you can put
         | a lien on a ship that you safely remove from those waters to
         | restore normal traffic.
         | 
         | And yes, he can sue his employer. That is likely as effective
         | as trying to get blood from a turnip
        
           | hedora wrote:
           | If I wanted one of these ships, what would maritime law say
           | if I were to dispose of a few thousand gallons of diesel into
           | its tank, and the crew decided to move it into international
           | waters then abandon it?
           | 
           | Presumably, it'd be up to the employer to recover damages
           | from their former (aka my current) employees.
        
             | michaelt wrote:
             | I believe that would make you a "pirate" and the crew
             | "mutineers"
        
             | sidewndr46 wrote:
             | it is complicated, but if it as a berth and paying fees to
             | be stored there you likely are in the wrong. But if the
             | owner stops paying berthing fees, the berth owner has a
             | case against the ship owner. At this point it becomes legal
             | to remove the boat by cooperating with the berth owner. A
             | court is unlikely to grant you ownership of the ship
             | outright however.
             | 
             | Facts like these are what are missing from these stories.
             | They always say something like "the company was going
             | bankrupt" or whatever. Somehow they paid for fuel, berthing
             | fees, port entry fees, docking fees and a host of other
             | stuff you need to do international shipping. They quit
             | paying the crew because they can get away with it.
        
               | gopher_space wrote:
               | You mentioned liens in an earlier comment, and I've been
               | wondering what it would take to apply a worker's or
               | mechanic's lien to general wage theft.
        
               | sidewndr46 wrote:
               | it would be dependent on the country the ship is
               | registered in firstly. Secondly it is based on the
               | country the owning company is in. Basically as an
               | employee you can go either the maritime court route or
               | whatever civil court system the country has.
               | 
               | Most ships are registered in Liberia, so good luck making
               | and collecting a claim based off their law.
        
             | giraffe_lady wrote:
             | I don't know much about the particulars of maritime law but
             | it's a venerable domain with a massive body of precedent
             | and historically a very high level of routine perfidy to
             | base case law around. I don't imagine this would be the
             | clever loophole you're hoping it is.
        
         | jdietrich wrote:
         | As mentioned in the article, many older ships are literally
         | worthless - the cost of cutting them up for scrap matches the
         | value of the scrap metal.
        
       | pavlov wrote:
       | Inhuman things happen at sea.
       | 
       | Sailors and fishermen are recruited internationally from poor
       | countries, then treated like slaves. No country's law reaches
       | these ships, and they're ultimately owned by corporations that
       | have no reason to care.
       | 
       | Another example:
       | 
       | https://www.dw.com/en/chinese-fishing-fleets-in-indian-ocean...
        
         | complaintdept wrote:
         | A lot of shenanigans happen at sea. Cruise ships are registered
         | in countries favorable to them so passengers have zero chance
         | in court when someone gets hurt or a family member disappears
         | (its happened). If you're an American for instance, you'll
         | never take on a cruise ship owner in an American court, it's
         | got to go through some tiny nation of the ship's home port.
         | Passengers agree to this when they buy the ticket.
         | 
         | (no I've never been on a cruise)
        
           | Scoundreller wrote:
           | Interesting how it works so much differently for
           | international aviation
        
         | throw0101d wrote:
         | > _No country 's law reaches these ships_ [...]
         | 
         | The 'flag' of the ship is the law to which it must operate (at
         | least in international waters):
         | 
         | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_state
         | 
         | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_registration
         | 
         | But a lot of popular flags are lax at employment rules--kind of
         | why they're often picked. But you also have to have the
         | resources for law suits, regardless of flag/registration.
        
         | jvanderbot wrote:
         | I hear so many negative things about Chinese fishing fleets.
         | When I was in Africa, I was shown how the chinese ships would
         | be stuck in drydock because they needed repairs or fuel and no
         | locals would sell to them.
         | 
         | But the government is cozy so they are allowed to continue. In
         | some cities, the land is literally sold to the Chinese
         | government in exchange for funds to pad the coffers, or nominal
         | "services" like removing piles of dirt on the land from mining
         | activities.
         | 
         | It's mad neo-colonialism. Instead of armies, you just buy
         | leaders.
        
           | pif wrote:
           | > chinese ships would be stuck in drydock because they needed
           | repairs or fuel and no locals would sell to them.
           | 
           | Why do locals refuse business with them?
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Because they're killing the locals' livelihoods via
             | overfishing.
             | 
             | https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-
             | africa/2024/04/11/... (https://archive.is/0aDEg)
        
               | jvanderbot wrote:
               | TL;DR:
               | 
               | > For the next 20 hours, on a typical day, the bleary-
               | eyed crew would be hauling up fishing nets. If sharks got
               | entangled they would hack off their fins, tossing the
               | mutilated creatures back into the water to die. When
               | dolphins were ensnared, the captain shot them, cut out
               | their teeth and bartered them with passing ships in
               | return for whisky.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | This bit was more what I focused on:
               | 
               | > Illegal fishing is also harming local fishermen.
               | Chinese vessels routinely fish in waters close to the
               | shoreline reserved by law for small-scale local fishers.
               | According to the EJF, Chinese trawlers in Mozambique
               | often line their nets with a fine mesh, allowing them to
               | catch smaller fish usually targeted only by locals. They
               | have also been known to intimidate the local fishermen,
               | ripping their nets and hounding them out of their usual
               | fishing grounds. The volume of fish caught by small-scale
               | fishers in Mozambique has slumped by 30% over the past 25
               | years.
        
               | jvanderbot wrote:
               | I've also read that they routinely turn of ATS/AIS to
               | enter territorial waters undetected.
               | 
               | Not directly a citation, but here's a supporting writeup
               | of decent quality:
               | https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/china-illegal-fishing-
               | fleet...
        
               | throwaway48476 wrote:
               | The outlaw ocean project does a lot of reporting on the
               | depravity of the Chinese fishing fleet.
        
         | ajmurmann wrote:
         | Slightly OT, but the 2019 fictional movie Buoyancy deals with
         | these topics and is depressing and incredible.
        
         | maximinus_thrax wrote:
         | There is an amazing book describing all of these issues and
         | more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Outlaw_Ocean. It was an
         | eye opener for me, I had no idea what kind of awful stuff goes
         | on in the maritime space
        
           | wisemang wrote:
           | The podcast is great as well (I haven't read the book).
        
         | hi-v-rocknroll wrote:
         | Also slavery in Thailand:
         | https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/21/such-brutality...
        
       | giraffe_lady wrote:
       | I believe the crew of the MV Dali are still confined to the ship,
       | since striking the bridge in Baltimore back in March.
        
         | alistairSH wrote:
         | The crew's status as of last week...
         | https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/18/us/baltimore-bridge-dali-ship...
         | 
         | Not as bad a situation as the main topic, but can't be easy
         | either.
        
           | barbazoo wrote:
           | Does that mean they get paid overtime? /s
        
         | IncreasePosts wrote:
         | I don't understand why you can't just get the police to put
         | them in a van and take them to the airport, and put them on a
         | flight back to their home country or wherever they live.
        
           | masfuerte wrote:
           | In other cases I've read about the sailors are owed
           | substantial back wages and they know that if they abandon the
           | ship they definitely won't get paid.
        
           | notaustinpowers wrote:
           | It's most likely due to visa and immigration laws.
           | 
           | When a vessel is docked in a port, they are able to disembark
           | and operate under a special visa that lasts the duration of
           | their vessel's stay, and they are required to leave with the
           | vessel when it disembarks from the port. Since the vessel has
           | left the port, their visas are no longer applicable and they
           | would be arrested if they left the vessel.
        
             | wodenokoto wrote:
             | Which is what parent is asking: why can't they just get
             | deported?
        
               | notaustinpowers wrote:
               | Because even deportation has legal hoops you have to jump
               | through. If they get deported, even willingly, what
               | happens when they come back to American on another
               | vessel?
               | 
               | Their special visas to disembark while at port would most
               | likely not be approved if they have a big "deported" note
               | on it.
               | 
               | On top of that, a lot of these workers are kept in
               | exploitative working conditions and are owed thousands of
               | dollars in backpay. Leaving the vessel to be willingly
               | deported effectively negates any chance of actually being
               | paid and can kill your career right then and there. I
               | highly doubt that's a risk any of them are willing to
               | take.
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | Who is going to man the ship if that happens?
        
           | Goronmon wrote:
           | _I don 't understand why you can't just get the police to put
           | them in a van and take them to the airport, and put them on a
           | flight back to their home country or wherever they live._
           | 
           | I'm not sure I want to give local police the power to put
           | whoever they want on a plane to "wherever".
        
             | krisoft wrote:
             | > I'm not sure I want to give local police the power to put
             | whoever they want on a plane to "wherever".
             | 
             | I presumed that the proposal is a shorthand for "why the
             | police can't offer to escort them to the airport and let
             | them board an airplane to a destination of their own
             | choosing". As in the police would be there to make sure
             | they don't "abscond" in the country without a valid visa,
             | but the seafarers can get back to their family. (if they so
             | choose)
        
           | krisoft wrote:
           | Who will keep the bilge pumps of the ship running? They are
           | not just flees on the back of a dog. They are keeping the
           | ship working, afloat and in good condition. (as good as it
           | can be, given the circumstances)
           | 
           | I understand that the situation is less than ideal, and i
           | hope they get a crew change at the end of whatever contract
           | period they have. And I sure hope their wages are being paid
           | correctly. The mobile phone situation is really bad too. I
           | hope that got rectified since.
           | 
           | Imagine if they haven't hit the bridge. They would be most
           | probably still on the same ship doing the same job. Just the
           | ship would be in some other patch of water. Would you still
           | describe them as "stuck onboard" if that were the case?
        
         | perihelions wrote:
         | That's true: the entire crew is indefinitely detained due to
         | the criminal investigation. They're confined to the ship, and
         | US agents have confiscated all of their personal electronics.
         | 
         | - _" The crew, made up of 20 Indians and a Sri Lankan national,
         | has been unable to disembark because of visa restrictions, a
         | lack of required shore passes and parallel ongoing
         | investigations by the National Transportation Safety Board
         | (NTSB) and FBI."_
         | 
         | ..
         | 
         | - _" According to Mr Messick, the crew has been left largely
         | without communication with the outside world for "a couple of
         | weeks" after their mobile phones were confiscated by the FBI as
         | part of the investigation."_
         | 
         | - _" They can't do any online banking. They can't pay their
         | bills at home. They don't have any of their data or anyone's
         | contact information, so they're really isolated right now," Mr
         | Messick said. "They just can't reach out to the folks they need
         | to, or even look at pictures of their children before they go
         | to sleep. It's really a sad situation."_
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69011124
        
           | bluescrn wrote:
           | Ludicrous and inhumane situation. Even prisoners get phone
           | calls.
           | 
           | Surprised they haven't made a break for shore via life rafts
        
             | r2_pilot wrote:
             | > Even prisoners get phone calls.
             | 
             | If they're both lucky and fortunate and if the weather is
             | nice and assuming there's not more than 500 people to 3
             | phones. Source: dealing with it right now.
        
             | vkou wrote:
             | They've been given replacement phones and SIM cards while
             | their personal electronics have been seized.
        
       | somenameforme wrote:
       | I'm not entirely understanding this. If the ships are genuinely
       | abandoned, what stops the crew from making them their own and/or
       | selling them? Is it simply the paperwork or what?
        
         | giraffe_lady wrote:
         | They're still paying the necessary fees to keep control of the
         | ship, because otherwise local authorities or a creditor or
         | whatever would seize it. They simply stopped paying the crew
         | because the consequences of that are avoidable or acceptable to
         | them.
        
           | ToucanLoucan wrote:
           | To put it more bluntly, they're afraid of their creditors,
           | because their creditors can get justice, because the justice
           | system requires money to effectively use. The workers don't
           | have money, so they aren't a threat.
        
           | throwaway48476 wrote:
           | They don't pay them. If you want an example look up the ship
           | involved in the Beiruit explosion.
        
         | throwaway48476 wrote:
         | When you factor in liabilities the value of the ship can be
         | negative. Often there are port fees that the shipper doesn't
         | pay and because they're in a different country they're
         | unserviceable so the port takes the crew hostage.
        
         | vkou wrote:
         | They'll be tried as mutineers and pirates.
         | 
         | Marine law is optimized for the well-being of ship owners, not
         | anyone else.
        
         | david_allison wrote:
         | FTA: Even if they did sell the ship, it often won't make the
         | workers whole
         | 
         | > Abandoned ships are sometimes so old and worn that "even the
         | scrap guys lose money stripping it of anything of value," said
         | Eric White, a ship inspector for the International Transport
         | Workers' Federation, or ITF, a seafarers' union.
         | 
         | > Left hanging by Teeters were the ships' crews of mostly
         | Ukrainian seafarers, who suddenly had no way of sending money
         | to families back home in what was now a war zone after Russia's
         | invasion. In total, the 22 men were owed $130,000 covering more
         | than three months, White said. If not for $22,000 in donations
         | from local seafarers' charities, none of them would have made
         | it off the ship and back home, according to White.
        
         | fnordfnordfnord wrote:
         | At the time of abandonment, the ship may not be seaworthy. If
         | it requires more repairs or fuel than the crew can afford from
         | their own resources, then they cannot move the ship.
        
         | chiph wrote:
         | Often the crew don't have visas for the country where the ship
         | was abandoned. So they can't transit from the port to the
         | nearest airport and then home unless Customs/Immigration agree
         | to allow it.
         | 
         | They also usually haven't been paid for that time. So they are
         | motivated to stay (usually under deplorable conditions) because
         | of the chance that the new owners will give them their back
         | pay.
         | 
         | Sometimes the local community will ferry food out to the crews.
         | But if the ship runs out of fuel to power the generators
         | they'll be without air conditioning and more importantly -
         | navigation lights to show they're anchored.
         | 
         | https://www.counton2.com/news/local-news/charleston-communit...
        
       | mikey_p wrote:
       | Not an abandonment, but somewhat similar to the Dali, there were
       | 15 ships stranded in the Suez canal from 1967 to 1975. Known as
       | the Yellow Fleet they had problems knowing what to do with the
       | crew over that length of time.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Fleet
        
       | diebeforei485 wrote:
       | If a ship doesn't have insurance it should not be allowed to
       | dock.
       | 
       | It's not that complicated.
       | 
       | When driving into Saudi Arabia in your own car, you are required
       | to show proof of insurance (or can purchase travel insurance at
       | the border).
        
         | Simon_ORourke wrote:
         | That will only lead to areas close enough to land, but within
         | international waters where these uninsured junks will just
         | anchor and wait it out.
         | 
         | https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/apr/12/a...
        
           | diebeforei485 wrote:
           | This is still arguably better. These crew aren't going to be
           | paid by these irresponsible owners anyway. Let them abandon
           | ship in international waters after a couple of missed
           | paychecks.
        
             | ghiculescu wrote:
             | Why is that better?
        
           | will5421 wrote:
           | But would you even start a journey towards a port that
           | requires insurance if you don't have it? You're not going to
           | get the benefit of docking at that port (unloading the ship
           | and getting paid for the cargo).
        
         | throwup238 wrote:
         | _> If a ship doesn 't have insurance it should not be allowed
         | to dock._
         | 
         | That's already the case in the vast majority of ports to pay
         | for situations like the Baltimore bridge collapse, although
         | most damage is a lot smaller and more pedestrian like scraping
         | the dock on approach.
         | 
         | Ports generally require protection and indemnity insurance to
         | pay for damage to third parties and the port, hull and
         | machinery insurance so the boat doesn't get stranded in the
         | port, and wreck removal insurance to remove it if it does.
         | Anyone going through the Panama or Suez canal has to have even
         | more insurance to cover the extra risk of blocking a major
         | global shipping channel.
        
           | diebeforei485 wrote:
           | MBS can change the rules in Saudi to require insurance if he
           | wants to. UAE did something similar recently.
        
       | DrNosferatu wrote:
       | What does he eat?
       | 
       | Who provides him fresh water?
        
       | maCDzP wrote:
       | I believe there is a 99% invisible podcast episode about "Great
       | bitter lake". It's worth a listen.
        
       | kylehotchkiss wrote:
       | This seems like a natural progression of allowing ships to be
       | flagged in countries that barely even have foreign affairs
       | outside of ships
       | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience). That seems
       | like a good place to start - ports would benefit from only
       | allowing docking if your ship is flagged in a country with some
       | definition of seaworthiness
        
       | ec109685 wrote:
       | Saudi Arabia should tax port fees a bit and use that to send
       | people like this back to their home country.
       | 
       | Inhumane.
        
         | hi-v-rocknroll wrote:
         | Saudi Arabia's leadership chopped up a reporter into pieces of
         | meat. I don't think they'll be first to make such a change
         | until compelled to.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-30 23:01 UTC)