Some unsettling maritime terms: the interpretation of found, cargo, ballast and voyage

References

• Individual states are being given a greater voice in maritime manners, which have long been the sole domain of the Federal government. Fruhling, L.(1997), Stating their case. Work Boat, 54, 58-72.
   Google Scholar
• 1990 . George Barnes v. Andover Company L. P. 1990 American Maritime Code 1265
   Google Scholar
• Alexandervich v. Gallagher Brothers Sand & Gravel Corp. Barnes [2], 1962 AMC 308, 298 F. 2d 918, [2nd Cir. 1961]
   Google Scholar
• 1996 . Hollenbeck v. Ocean International, Inc. 685 So. 2d 163, 175, (La. App. 1 Cir)
   Google Scholar
• 1962 . Vaughan v. Atkinson 369 US 527, 531, 1962 AmericanMaritime Code 1131, 1134
   Google Scholar
• 1938 . Calmar, S. S., Corp. v. Taylor 303 US 525, 528, 1938, American Maritime Code 341, 343
   Google Scholar
• 189 US 158. (1903). However, the duty was derived from medieval maritime codes, (the Rules of Oleron, the Laws of Wisbuy, and the Laws of Hanse Towns).
   Google Scholar
• 11 Federal Case 480, 482-483, (C. C. D. Me. 1823).
   Google Scholar
• 1975 . Vella v. Ford Motor Co. Barnes [2], 1975 American Maritime Code 563, 565-66, 421 US 1, 5; Vaughan v. Atkinson, [5]
   Google Scholar
• 1943 . Aguilar v. Standard Oil Co. 318 US 724, 730, 1943 AmericanMaritime Code 451, 456; Maintenance is an applied provision in contracts of maritime employment
   Google Scholar
• 1932 . Cortes v. Baltimore Insular Line 287 US 367, 371, 1933 American Maritime Code 9, 10
   Google Scholar
• The shipowner's obligation to pay maintenance arising regardless of fault and continues until the seafarer reaches maximum cure. See: Norris, M. J. (1985), Law Of Seaman, (Rochester, NY: Lawyers Cooperative Publishing Company)
   Google Scholar
• 623 So.2d 1257, (La. 1993).
   Google Scholar
• Maraist , F. 1996 . Admiralty In A NutShell , St. Paul, Minnesota : West Publishing Company . Ref [16]; See:
   Google Scholar
• The International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) attempts to get FOC ships to sign collective bargaining agreements with national labour unions or to bargain with the ITF itself, putting all members of the crew in the ITF special seafarers department. Those vessels without ITF blue certificates (collective bargaining agreements) are frequently struck in ports. If the ITF were successful FOC and COC would no longer exist. Ships would be registered in the nations of their owners and the unionized crews would be of the same nations as their vessel and its owner. Many Asian seafarers unions and other so-called labour unions in the ThirdWorld have protested the workings of the ITF because it would eliminate jobs for Asian seafarers. It is the opinion of this author that such a position is very selfish and short-sighted. Indeed these labour organizations are not interested in the welfare of the seamen, but in their own business of crewing ships. The ITF's success will improve conditions for all seafarers. There are two international agencies concerned with operations of ships. The International Labour Organization (ILO) and the InternationalMaritime Organization (IMO). The ILOaddresses all labour problems including seafaring. The IMOis concerned strictly with issues such as pollution and safety. International Transport Workers' Federation (1996). ITF Standard Collective Bargaining Agreement For Crews on Flags Of Convenience Ships, (Worthing, UK: College Hill Press); Donn, C. (1991), National regulation of international industry: industrial relations in the maritime industry, Research Paper Number 14 (Syracuse, NY: Le Moyne College Institute of Industrial Relations); Maritime Education and Resource Center (1990), International Seafarers' Code: A Compendium of I. L. O. Conventions and Recommendations for Seafarers (Quezon, Philippines: Maritime Education and Resource Center); Chapman, P. K. (1992), Trouble On Board: The Plight of International Seafarers (Ithaca, NY: ILR Press)
   Google Scholar
• 46 United States Code 10313 et. seq.; MacArthur, W. (1919), The Seaman's Contract, (San Francisco: MacArthur).
   Google Scholar
• Act of 20 July 1790 , c29, Section 6, 1 Stat 133; MacArthur [16]
   Google Scholar
• Norris [12]; MacArthur [16]
   Google Scholar
• Shipping Commissioner Act (1872) , c 33, 17 Stat 269; MacArthur [16]; Norris [12]
   Google Scholar
• 46 United States Code , Sections 596–597
   Google Scholar
• Forsyth , C. 1993 . Transnational Corporations: problems for study in the new international order of maritime shipping . Maritime Policy and Management , 20 : 207 – 214 . Forsyth, C. (1988), Economic infrastructure and the development of state autonomy: a case study of U.S. maritime policy. Sociological Spectrum, 8, 303–322; MacArthur [16]; Clee, C. (1926), Desertion and the freedom of the seaman. International Labour Review, 13, 649–672, 808–849
   Google Scholar
• 1955 . Funk & Wagnall's Dictionary , New York : Funk &Wagnall's Company .
   Google Scholar
• The general categories are: passenger, RoRo cargo, vehicles carrier, offshore supply, fishing, dredger, general cargo, refrigerated cargo, container, tanker, bulk carrier, and icebreaker. Lloyd's Register of Shipping, (1997), (London: Lloyd's Register of Shipping), pp. 15–18
   Google Scholar
• Forsyth , C. J. 1989 . The American Merchant Seaman and His Industry: Struggle and Stigma , 52 New York : Taylor & Francis .
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg , J. P. 1958 . The Maritime Story , 52 – 53 . 71 Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press . Goldberg explains that the act was designed to equalize the operating costs of American vessels with those of foreign ships. If one attributed the greater cost of operating American ships primarily to differences in wage costs, then this act was a good attempt at equalization, although the American Merchant Marine has virtually disappeared ‘under’ the act. The idea was that the elimination of the forced aspect of the labour of seamen, and application of this principle to the seamen of foreign ships in American ports as well would strengthen the position of the American merchant marine. It permitted all seamen to desert at will in ports of theUS. The writers of the act assumed it would cause seamen on foreign ships to quit in American ports and subsequently demand wages prevailing in those ports. This has not happened
   Google Scholar
• Wissman , R. W. 1942 . The Maritime Industry: Federal Regulations in Establishing Labor and Safety Standards , New York : Cornell Maritime Press . Marvin, W. L. (1919), The American Merchant Marine, (New York: Scribner); Lane, C. D. (1941), The Merchant Marine, (New York: Norton & Co.); Kilgour, J. G. (1975), The United States Merchant Marine, (New York: Praeger Publishers); Forsyth [21]
   Google Scholar
• Approximately two-thirds of world crews are Filipino, consequently any discussion of this issue concerns Filipino labor; Chapman [15]; Forsyth [21].
   Google Scholar
• Chapman[15]; Donn [15]; Forsyth[21]
   Google Scholar
• Forsyth , C. J. , Bankston , W. and Thompson , C. 1989 . The merchant marine desertion penalty: a study in legal evolution . International Review Of Modern Sociology , 19 : 53 – 67 . Beer, P. (1986), Keeping up with the Jones Act. Tulane Law Review, 61, 379–414; Taylor, P. S. (1923), The Sailors' Union of the Pacific, (New York: The Ronald Press Company); Forsyth [24]
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg [25]
   Google Scholar