Crew Blames Hero Captain for Somali Pirate Attack

[ToughOmbre]

Thursday, December 03, 2009

AP Story on FOX News

MONTPELIER, Vt. — Richard Phillips, the ship captain toasted as a hero after he was taken captive by Somali pirates, ignored repeated warnings last spring to keep his freighter at least 600 miles off the African coast because of the heightened risk of attack, some members of his crew now allege.

Records obtained by The Associated Press show that maritime safety groups issued at least seven such warnings in the days before outlaws boarded the Maersk Alabama in the Gulf of Aden, about 380 miles offshore.

A piracy expert and the captain's second-in-command say Phillips had the prerogative to heed the warnings or not. But some crew members — including the chief engineer, the helmsman and the navigator — say he was negligent not to change course after learning of the pirate activity.

"If you go to the grocery store and eight people get mugged on that street, wouldn't you go a different way?" said the ship's navigator, Ken Quinn, of Tampa, Fla.

Crew Blames Hero Captain for Somali Pirate Attack

TO

 

[timshatz]

Anybody hurt?

 

[lesofprimus]

If its true, then I would say the crew is dead right and the Captain has to share some/most of the blame....

 

[Gnomey]

I agree Dan, if this is the case then the Captain does share some of the blame as he is controlling where ship is on the ocean and where it is going. If he knew it was dangerous and knew of the guidelines that were laid out but ignored them, then at least some of the blame is his to bear.

 

[Njaco]

Anybody hurt?

just a few less pirates in the world.

 

[gumbyk]

If its true, then I would say the crew is dead right and the Captain has to share some/most of the blame....

Who would he share it with?
IMO, he is the one and only person at fault (assuming that all the facts in this story are straight).
He took the ship into a known active pirate area, against several warnings.

 

[B-17engineer]

This happened how long ago? And the crew just mentions it? Donkey's..... I know I'll get flak but oh well...

 

[wheelsup_cavu]

If its true, then I would say the crew is dead right and the Captain has to share some/most of the blame....

Who would he share it with?
IMO, he is the one and only person at fault (assuming that all the facts in this story are straight).
He took the ship into a known active pirate area, against several warnings.

My guess would be management for ordering him to plot a specific course due to time constraints.


Wheels

 

[gumbyk]

The crew were probably keeping quiet while there was an active investigation going on.

 

[B-17engineer]

I agree with wheels. Maybe time constraints?

 

[gumbyk]

Regardless, the captain has final responsibility for the safety of the ship.
A one-day delay is pretty common in shipping due to weather, loading delays, etc, so I don't think management would have even questioned it.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Well time is money. If he had been ordered to do such then the company should share the blame. If not, then it's on him and the pirates.

 

[RabidAlien]

Geez....even if its true and he did ignore "suggestions" to stay away, once the poo hit the fan, he offered himself up as a hostage in lieu of his crew and ship. So he eff'd up. So what? He still got his crew and cargo out of harms way.

And that would be one pretty long investigation, to have kept silent this long.

 

[GrauGeist]

Yeah, but seriously, the ENTIRE region is infested with pirates...they all knew (the crew) that entering that part of the world is risky business and it's a crap-shoot if you're going to get boarded or not and it's not just confined to that shipping lane (or lanes).

I can bet money on the fact that the skippers of these boats are up against narrow time-frames, and try and make up for time any chance they get.

 

[gumbyk]

read the full story, apparently he didn't offer himself up as a hostage to free the crew.

During his captivity, Phillips was initially reported to have offered himself as a hostage in exchange for his crew's safety. In an Oct. 19 interview with AP, he said that was not true and insisted he never volunteered, as crew members and his family reported at the time.

Yes, he screwed up and he has to deal with the consequences. This is why the captain is the highest-paid person on the boat, because he is the one who has ultimate responsibility for what happens on board.

 

[RabidAlien]

Yeah....I'm still with GrauGeist on this one. Its a crapshoot. They came up short on that trip.

 

[Freebird]

A one-day delay is pretty common in shipping due to weather, loading delays, etc, so I don't think management would have even questioned it.

Nope, darn right they would question it.

Yeah, but seriously, the ENTIRE region is infested with pirates...they all knew (the crew) that entering that part of the world is risky business and it's a crap-shoot if you're going to get boarded or not and it's not just confined to that shipping lane (or lanes).

I can bet money on the fact that the skippers of these boats are up against narrow time-frames, and try and make up for time any chance they get.

Exactly right. There is a catch-22 in the shipping business (both land and sea)
A captain (or manager) who does everything "by the book" and makes safety the #1 priority will find themselves out of a job, as there are others who will guarantee on time delivery "whatever the cost"

 

[diddyriddick]

This happened how long ago? And the crew just mentions it? Donkey's..... I know I'll get flak but oh well...

You won't get flak here. I think you are asking a very good question.

 

[ToughOmbre]

You won't get flak here. I think you are asking a very good question.

Agree as well.

Also from the article.....

"One of the four crew members who spoke to the AP is part of a lawsuit filed against Maersk Line Ltd. alleging the company was negligent in sending the ship into treacherous waters without more protection."

So I guess that it should come as no surprise that the crew is blaming the captain.

TO

 

[GrauGeist]

And I notice that in addition to "addressing safety concerns", there is also a substantial sum of money involved.

So now I wonder, if I'm not happy with the safety conditions at my job, should I get a lawsuit going that includes a cool fifty grand (or more, after all there is attorney fees)?

I mean, it's not about the money, right?