Man over board ?

[Tracey.kinney425]

17 hours ago, jbethel11 said:

I'm going to wait for the actual news report. Too many misinformation and rumors for me!

Agreed, news reports yesterday said nothing about a good Samaritan jumping in, at least none of the ones I read.

[jbethel11]

1 minute ago, jimbo5544 said:

I can buy the 1st sentence......

Who is JW?

[sanmarcosman]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Very surprised that the corporate shill would divulge this kind of details of a person's life.  

I'm not. It's part and parcel with the rise of social media users and it's a shame.

[ProgRockCruiser]

This thread is very confusing - have there been a lot of post deletions to "help keep it on topic"?

 

Anyway, the linked on-line articles don't seem to have any additional useful info.  Anyone find anything else?

[Elaine5715]

14 hours ago, Emmabelle said:

On this ship right now.  At about 1:49pm yesterday we started hearing reports of man overboard. Victory shot out a flare and we turned around to go search for him.  We stayed in the approximate area for close to four hours looking for him until the coast guard and Carnival reps released our ship.  Crew members told my husband that it was a maintenance worker working on the back of the ship when his harness let loose and he fell in.

Chief may correct me but I don't believe crew work off the sides of any ship when it is moving.

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, Elaine5715 said:

Chief may correct me but I don't believe crew work off the sides of any ship when it is moving.

They can, it's a "controlled" operation that requires special permits and briefings to accomplish.  Things covered in the permits and briefings include the need to inform the bridge when the person is actually over the side, having additional personnel as "lookouts", radio communication with the bridge, and the type of safety equipment needed.  Each person involved in the task has to sign the permit acknowledging that they understand all the risks and all the measures to mitigate those risks.  Their supervisor has to sign off, and the Captain as well.

[Emmabelle]

8 hours ago, Elaine5715 said:

Chief may correct me but I don't believe crew work off the sides of any ship when it is moving.

 

 

I mean it does sound terribly risky.  It's what a bartender told my husband.  I wouldn't believe it if a guest had told him, but I do put a little more trust in the word of someone who works on the ship.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Emmabelle said:

 

 

I mean it does sound terribly risky.  It's what a bartender told my husband.  I wouldn't believe it if a guest had told him, but I do put a little more trust in the word of someone who works on the ship.

As I say, it is an acknowledge job (say repairing the after radar antenna that hangs over the stern), and it does carry risk, the ISM code does everything it can to mitigate that risk as much as possible.  But, from my time on cruise ships, 90% of what crew in the hotel departments tell guests about technical aspects of a ship are incorrect, and sometimes wildy, humorously, incorrect.

[Tinknock50]

I hope when we finally hear the whole story, we will look back on the accuracy of reports from the ship.  A bartender is just as susceptible to hearsay as anyone else.

[KmomChicago]

Just posted:

 

https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/brother-of-missing-carnival-victory-crew-member-speaks-out/

[Tinknock50]

 

 

1 minute ago, KmomChicago said:

Just posted:

 

https://wsvn.com/news/us-world/brother-of-missing-carnival-victory-crew-member-speaks-out/

Thanks for the latest. Still no solid news on what happened. 

 

Just ship gossip so far on Cruise Critic.

[Tinknock50]

Sadly the search has been called off.  😞

 

Still no details on how this happened.

 

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-carnival-victory-crew-member-20190707-pqhkmpywwrahzpqs4pqulp6o2u-story.html

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Tinknock50 said:

Sadly the search has been called off.  😞

 

Still no details on how this happened.

 

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-carnival-victory-crew-member-20190707-pqhkmpywwrahzpqs4pqulp6o2u-story.html

How this happened is no one's business other than the person involved, his family, Carnival, and possibly law enforcement.

[Don'tNeedAName]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

How this happened is no one's business other than the person involved, his family, Carnival, and possibly law enforcement.

I wholeheartedly agree with respect to the privacy of the individual and his or her family.  No specifics are needed in that regard.  It is terrible that this happened, and I can only wish the family strength in this time.

 

If I may push back slightly regarding the general circumstances, I think there is a matter of public interest to report on the "how" of the occurrence.  As your posts already address, some jobs cannot be done in a totally safe manner; employers and employees can only hope to minimize risk.  While it is essential the parties directly affected by this understand what went wrong and consider if/how additional measures may be implemented in the future, I believe there is still value to keeping corporations under the public eye, especially with respect to major employers like Carnival Corp.  This can be difficult in such a sensitive situation, and could be exacerbated by the fact that the general public of non-mariners will lack the background to fully appreciate the risks and operations.

 

Still, I think I personally err on the side of more "sunlight" being shed on events involving employee danger, even if it may attract some crowd that is only after the morbid details.  Note, I am absolutely not saying that something nefarious must have happened here; rather, only stating why there may be importance to reporting these situations.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Don'tNeedAName said:

I wholeheartedly agree with respect to the privacy of the individual and his or her family.  No specifics are needed in that regard.  It is terrible that this happened, and I can only wish the family strength in this time.

 

If I may push back slightly regarding the general circumstances, I think there is a matter of public interest to report on the "how" of the occurrence.  As your posts already address, some jobs cannot be done in a totally safe manner; employers and employees can only hope to minimize risk.  While it is essential the parties directly affected by this understand what went wrong and consider if/how additional measures may be implemented in the future, I believe there is still value to keeping corporations under the public eye, especially with respect to major employers like Carnival Corp.  This can be difficult in such a sensitive situation, and could be exacerbated by the fact that the general public of non-mariners will lack the background to fully appreciate the risks and operations.

 

Still, I think I personally err on the side of more "sunlight" being shed on events involving employee danger, even if it may attract some crowd that is only after the morbid details.  Note, I am absolutely not saying that something nefarious must have happened here; rather, only stating why there may be importance to reporting these situations.

Incidents like this are looked at both as incidents, and for possible "non-conformities" within the structure of the shipowner's ISM plan, which all shipowners must generate and operate under.  These ISM plans must meet requirements set by the IMO, and are audited on an annual basis by third party auditors (typically the class societies), with regard to corrective actions that were taken in improving the ISM in light of the incident, so there is "spotlight" by qualified subject matter experts to see that lessons were learned, and policies and practices were changed, without needing to inform the general public.  Even if they did disclose details of how this incident happened, would you expect a press release 3 months from now stating what new remediation practices were put in place to prevent it from happening again?  I don't know of any industry that does that.

 

And, this is only if it were in fact an industrial accident, and not some other form of personal incident that had nothing to do with Carnival or its operational practices.

[Tinknock50]

1 hour ago, Don'tNeedAName said:

I wholeheartedly agree with respect to the privacy of the individual and his or her family.  No specifics are needed in that regard.  It is terrible that this happened, and I can only wish the family strength in this time.

 

If I may push back slightly regarding the general circumstances, I think there is a matter of public interest to report on the "how" of the occurrence.  As your posts already address, some jobs cannot be done in a totally safe manner; employers and employees can only hope to minimize risk.  While it is essential the parties directly affected by this understand what went wrong and consider if/how additional measures may be implemented in the future, I believe there is still value to keeping corporations under the public eye, especially with respect to major employers like Carnival Corp.  This can be difficult in such a sensitive situation, and could be exacerbated by the fact that the general public of non-mariners will lack the background to fully appreciate the risks and operations.

 

Still, I think I personally err on the side of more "sunlight" being shed on events involving employee danger, even if it may attract some crowd that is only after the morbid details.  Note, I am absolutely not saying that something nefarious must have happened here; rather, only stating why there may be importance to reporting these situations.

Couldn't agree more.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Tinknock50 said:

Couldn't agree more.

And as I said, unless you expect them to post the root cause analysis, and the corrective action report, how is this of any use to the general public, or even to an industry expert, in "keeping corporations under the public eye"?

[Organized Chaos]

While it's true that it's, technically, the business of those who are directly involved as to how it happened, it's still a newsworthy story. There's nothing wrong with discussing it on a cruise forum. The only thing I oppose is any hearsay that gets tossed around posing as reliable information. Whether I hear it from a passenger or a bartender, it's all hearsay to me until something more concrete is released. So far, I've read several different articles since Thursday and not a single one of them has even hinted that the crew member was working and his safety harness failed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if this was what actually happened, that information would've been released by now.

[rattanchair]

20 minutes ago, Organized Chaos said:

While it's true that it's, technically, the business of those who are directly involved as to how it happened, it's still a newsworthy story. There's nothing wrong with discussing it on a cruise forum. The only thing I oppose is any hearsay that gets tossed around posing as reliable information. Whether I hear it from a passenger or a bartender, it's all hearsay to me until something more concrete is released. So far, I've read several different articles since Thursday and not a single one of them has even hinted that the crew member was working and his safety harness failed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if this was what actually happened, that information would've been released by now.

Dear OC, Brett Archibald tread water for 29 hours being lost at sea in the Indian Ocean. Don't you think a crew member would have some sort of floatation device attached while hanging over a ship? P.S.  Everything I posted was rumor and hearsay coming from the ship as it was occuring.

Edited July 8, 2019 by rattanchair
additional info

[Organized Chaos]

9 minutes ago, rattanchair said:

Dear OC, Brett Archibald tread water for 29 hours being lost at sea in the Indian Ocean. Don't you think a crew member would have some sort of floatation device attached while hanging over a ship?

 

I'm no expert on ship operations, but I'd say a crew member working in those conditions would most certainly be wearing a flotation device. It's just my take on the situation, but if it was safety equipment failure (a harness, for example) that caused the crew member to fall in, I would've thought that information would've been released by now.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, rattanchair said:

Dear OC, Brett Archibald tread water for 29 hours being lost at sea in the Indian Ocean. Don't you think a crew member would have some sort of floatation device attached while hanging over a ship?

Falling off a charter boat and falling off a minimum 6 story high deck on a cruise ship are two very different acts.  From 60 feet up, you risk serious injury or death, just from contact with the water, ask cliff and platform divers.

 

As for a PFD, best industry practice is of course to wear one when working over the side, but because you are working, these are typically inflatable PFD's, and not self-inflating, so if the person is incapacitated, they wouldn't be able to inflate the PFD.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Organized Chaos said:

While it's true that it's, technically, the business of those who are directly involved as to how it happened, it's still a newsworthy story. There's nothing wrong with discussing it on a cruise forum. The only thing I oppose is any hearsay that gets tossed around posing as reliable information. Whether I hear it from a passenger or a bartender, it's all hearsay to me until something more concrete is released. So far, I've read several different articles since Thursday and not a single one of them has even hinted that the crew member was working and his safety harness failed. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if this was what actually happened, that information would've been released by now.

 

1 hour ago, Organized Chaos said:

 

I'm no expert on ship operations, but I'd say a crew member working in those conditions would most certainly be wearing a flotation device. It's just my take on the situation, but if it was safety equipment failure (a harness, for example) that caused the crew member to fall in, I would've thought that information would've been released by now.

Nothing at all wrong with discussing it, if you so wish, but to expect that details of how or why this happened to be disseminated to the general public isn't reasonable.  Now, if a passenger were able to do this, much like the NCL "plank", and an accident happened, then yes, you would expect some form of explanation as to what happened and what is being done, but it still wouldn't be a guarantee that information would be forthcoming.

[rattanchair]

7 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Falling off a charter boat and falling off a minimum 6 story high deck on a cruise ship are two very different acts.  From 60 feet up, you risk serious injury or death, just from contact with the water, ask cliff and platform divers.

 

As for a PFD, best industry practice is of course to wear one when working over the side, but because you are working, these are typically inflatable PFD's, and not self-inflating, so if the person is incapacitated, they wouldn't be able to inflate the PFD.

Dear Chen, Is it reasonable to have such typically inflatable PFD working 60 feet up, if such a person is liable to incapacitation  from the fall?

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, rattanchair said:

Dear Chen, Is it reasonable to have such typically inflatable PFD working 60 feet up, if such a person is liable to incapacitation  from the fall?

Yes, since a fixed flotation type of PFD would inhibit the range of motion needed to work, and would lead to more risk of injury from fighting the PFD.

[Don'tNeedAName]

16 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

Nothing at all wrong with discussing it, if you so wish, but to expect that details of how or why this happened to be disseminated to the general public isn't reasonable.  Now, if a passenger were able to do this, much like the NCL "plank", and an accident happened, then yes, you would expect some form of explanation as to what happened and what is being done, but it still wouldn't be a guarantee that information would be forthcoming.

 

I follow your viewpoint on this issue in the general sense, but I suspect we may agree to disagree on the position that it is unreasonable to expect certain details related to an incident involving an employee's death in the line of duty for his or her employer to be made public (if that is what happened here).  While there is nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree, if you'll humor me, I'll offer a couple other thoughts in response to the prior posts as to why I think additional reporting of this incident are of public interest.

 

I'd argue that just because the vast majority of laymen will not understand the full technical meaning behind a given set of information does not mean that such information necessarily should be excluded from the public record.  If that were the case, I fear we wouldn't have much reporting on anything.  Recognizing that we do not even know what happened, I agree with your point that, no--I would not expect a single press release 3 months from now to result in significant change.  Rather, I view reporting and making details public as part of an ongoing increase to the collective knowledge as more and more events occur.  To put it bluntly, the public doesn't have to understand the technical details to know that employee deaths are bad, and therefore raise a concern.  If those in control have done everything they can to mitigate certain risks, then they will be able to stand up to scrutiny.

 

Furthermore, having the proper regulatory agencies and experts in place is critical, but the general public is tasked with (a) electing legislators to pass laws and set budgets for these monitoring agencies and (b) electing the president to enforce those laws, appoint regulatory administrators to enact regulations under those laws, and--in certain cases, such as maritime law--enter into international conventions/treaties as necessary (with legislative consent).  Thus, I view reporting on dangerous working conditions, current applicable rules and regulations are, etc. as part of keeping an informed electorate (I recognize this is just one issue among countless others, and it may sound pie-in-the-sky, but I earnestly believe in the foundation of it all).

 

I also think back on a totally different situation with respect to tech manufacturer Foxconn that became infamous for the number of suicides occurring at its factories, especially in 2010.  Protests occurred not only in China, but in the US as well, aimed at Apple.  Although not perfect, Foxconn at least took some measures, including a reported raise of 66% to assembly line worker pay.  What many people may not have seen in the reporting was that, based on the extremely large workforce that Foxconn employs, the suicide rate among employees was actually lower than that of China as a whole.  Nonetheless, widespread knowledge of these events did appear to spark some level of change that resulted in an ever-so-slightly improved situation for otherwise low-powered workers.

 

Sorry for the wall of text, but that generally gets to why I think reporting on these matters is important, even though it is a complex and sensitive issue.