Owner responsibility

Whether it's business, personal property, or a boat, I think responsibility flows all the way to the top. Just as the master is responsible for everything under their responsibility, then the owner is also responsible for the boat overall. That includes the funding, the establishing of standards and expectations, the setting of policies, and the selection, hiring, and direction of the Master.

None of this relieves anyone else of responsibility. Several people can be responsible for the same thing. But just as the Master can't escape responsibility by saying it was the mate's job, the owner can't escape by saying the Master was in charge. The Master doesn't have unlimited power. He/she works within a framework, within a budget, within expectations and under some amount of general direction. Ultimately people should serve as checks and balances on each other.

In rather simple ways, these roles are tested every day. Let's pick a situation where an owner is going to fly his family and friends and meet the boat in Nassau to spend a couple of weeks in the Bahamas. The Captain and crew are to move it from Miami to Nassau. The Captain looks at the weather and decides whether to go or not. But the attitude of the owner does impact the captain. Is this an owner who has established over time that safety is paramount, that if in doubt the Captain should say no? Or is this the owner who flies off the handle if things don't go perfectly, who fired the last captain for not crossing and being ready to meet the family, and who applies pressure constantly? Is this an owner who second guesses every move? Now a captain shouldn't be influenced and should quit before going, but as in any job when it's your livelihood you may be influenced. Perhaps it's not to go in known dangerous situations but it may be to take the chance in borderline situations. Repairs and maintenance are the same. What is the budget? Is every expenditure second guessed? An owner can and often does create the environment and culture.

Yes, everyone at all levels should be held responsible for their own actions. However, as you rise from deck hand or stew on up to Master and then to owner, the responsibility increases at each level as well. You are responsible for everyone under you. And while the Master is responsible for everything on the boat, the owner is responsible for everything within the realm of ownership of the boat. One person's responsibility doesn't relieve others of theirs. No one acts with impunity.

The days of business owners claiming, "I didn't know" or "He was in charge" are over. Chairmen and even entire boards of directors are held responsible. Not just the Chief Operating Officer or a division President. Even something as simple as an annual report now requires assumption of responsibility of the information in it. No longer, "I didn't prepare it". The IRS doesn't accept, "My accountant did it." We can't just pass responsibility on to others. Being the Master of a boat is a serious role. Being owner of one is as well. Every time a boat is used lives are at stake. Insurance makes it clear. The owner is always ultimately responsible. Just like a car. You give someone the key to your car and say drive it to New York and I'll meet you there. He's responsible for driving safely, but none of that relieves you of any responsibility as owner.

And in addition to legal responsibility, there is moral responsibility. I do know if I was the owner of a boat that went into a hurricane or of one that was overloaded and capsized while loaded with school children, I would personally never recover from that the rest of my life. That's why I would do everything within my power to keep something like that from happening. And ultimately as owner I have that power. If either the Captain or I have reservations and concerns, the boat doesn't move. Either, not both.

A vessel master who knowingly takes an unsafe vessel to sea which may endanger lives should be ultimately responsible, same as an airline pilot who would fly an unsafe aircraft, fear of being fired or losing status is no excuse for potentially causing death. The buck cannot be continually passed up the chain, hence the term Master, if we continually let the those supposedly in charge off the hook, then we will have real serious problems as we are seeing in many day to day instances at the street level.

No suggested the Master did not pay the ultimate price, however he was the author of his own demise and that of others, to widen the net of responsibility in the cases like this is to forever relieve the ultimate burden of sole responsibility for ones actions.
Employees and the consumer have the ultimate responsibility and indeed the strongest weapon to be used against unscrupulous Corporations, as long as we pass this weapon to Government to act on our behalf we will suffer more and more loss of authority over consumerism and such like as individuals.
No doubt there are those who disagree with the above, that indeed is there absoluter right no matter how misplaced it may be ( tongue in cheek)

No one is saying pass the buck. They're saying all are responsible. Holding the Owner responsible too in no way relieves the Master of any responsibility.

And you use aircraft and yes, the airlines are definitely held responsible too. They get lax in maintenance and other areas and it impacts safety. Again, none of it relieves the Pilot of responsibility.

We're not talking about letting anyone off the hook. Don't let the master off the hook, but don't let the owner off either. Don't let anyone off.

That's what seems to be missed by what we're saying. Multiple people can be held responsible. The Master is absolutely responsible. But I hired the Master, so from that moment I'm also responsible.

What if the Master is an alcoholic, operating the boat intoxicated? He's responsible. But the owner is also responsible for allowing that. For hiring that Master. For failure to adequately manage. None of this relieves the Master's responsibility. No one should escape responsibility. If a mate knows the Master is operating in that condition and fails to do anything or report it, then he's also got responsibility. None of us should escape by saying "Not my job, man."

"Quote" What if the Master is an alcoholic, operating the boat intoxicated? He's responsible. But the owner is also responsible for allowing that. For hiring that Master.

That I am afraid is part of the core problem, in many Countries that has become classified a disease and prevents the owner from firing him.
Has happened here in Canada with drunk truck driver, owner fired him, had to reinstate and provide counselling. I think we are producing a Nation of forgivers and trying top spread the responsibilities way to thin and finally it comes full circle and bites us really hard, we have instances here where Unions advise their embers not to testify or give information to investigators that may help in an investigation but may but blame on some Union member.
Are Concord liable to be held responsible for the actions of the Captain for the sinking of the Concordia ?

Well, we have contracts regarding drinking and operating and full legal standing to terminate. If we knew of a situation prior to it leading to that point we'd encourage rehab. But operating while under the influence is an entirely different subject. And my policy is the same toward all vehicles. When I was in the corporate world it was the same. We did offer leaves and rehab. But if you operated under the influence, it was automatic termination. Now even then you were still eligible for rehab under our group health plan. I am aware of one employee we put on leave, let him go through rehab, and then finalized his termination. He remained a friend of many in the company, just not an employee. He was honest with his next employer as were we. Oh, and I might just add that we do have breathalyzers on our boats as part of our medical kits.

And, yes, I do believe the owners of the Concordia should have been held responsible. Many in the company knew about the little side trips for show. So, yes, Costa should have had accountability too. But not relieving any of the responsibility of the Captain. But there were several problematic practices that were highlighted in this situation. The owners of cruise ships need to be held to much higher responsibility of many of the things that have happened recently. But they do an amazing job of dodging jurisdictions, just as they do of dodging taxes. But things like making the passengers of a disabled ship with no water or sewage stay on it longer because going to the nearest port would cost them more money.

Once had someone tell me his corporation didn't have a culture. I laughed and said "Yes it does. Just maybe not one you planned." Every corporation, every group, every family, every boat has a culture. We've tried to make it clear to everyone that safety comes first and it is everyone's responsibility.

As owner I have the authority to tell the Captain we're not going to go out today. I do not have the authority to force him to go out. If we go out when a hurricane is about to hit then we are both in the wrong. And so is everyone else who went with us. This forum has a culture. The owner and moderators step in if it's getting too far away from the culture desired.

Once had someone ask me "What's the difference between an Australian and a pot of Yoghurt?"

The answer is related to a living culture.

Now all we need is an Aussie so we can have a Kiwi/Aussie battle....lol

For those who don't know the answer:

"Left on it's on for long enough, the yoghurt will develop it's own culture."

Not quite, It was more along the lines of "the yoghurt is a living culture"

I was expecting our esteemed member Kafue to have attacked me by now

Hi,

As is the time folks spend on death row before getting what's coming

Interesting to compare this to G.M's current death rate and the CEO still employed and I believe she stated, more deaths will follow. However, the offending employees have been disciplined.

as in Government Motors.


or did you forget the politicians' time at the controls?


Wonder how many have been disciplined?

The Tylenol lesson never seems to be learned by many. The right way to do things. When the tampering occurred, Tylenol went public, they were honest and transparent. They then announced how they would see that it wouldn't happen again and tamper proof packaging hit the market. They turned the worst situation they could face into a positive.

Yet, Toyota, GM, Springfield, and many others deny, pretend, lie, mislead, dodge, dart, (Ok Dodge Dart....not intentional), and otherwise do nothing to show they grasp the severity, feel the pain, or will take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again. That's corporate culture.

I find what has gone on at GM disgusting. Criminal. Yes, Criminal. Is it any different to knowingly produce cars with problems that cause deaths versus going into the streets and opening fire with a gun?

And for those in positions to know about these things. The only possible defense to knowingly having permitted these things is saying you're incompetent and didn't know about it. Either way you should be fired.