3 ms·

if you stick to a rulebook you can be covered for indemnity and if you divert from a rulebook you are on your own I think a solution to this "flaw" could be fo

by geph2021 3y ago

if you stick to a rulebook you can be covered for indemnity and if you divert from a rulebook you are on your own I think a solution to this "flaw" could be for government/officials to have a version of the business judgement rule[1] to shield them from liability, especially when operating under emergency situations. 1 - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/business_judgment_rule https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/business_judgment_rule

SoftTalker 3y ago
Similar to aircraft and ship captains. They operate under a litany of rules, but in an emergency they are recognized as the person in control and they may deviate from rules as necessary based on their experienced and professional judgement.
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  It’s even codified. Rule number 2 in the colregs (ship right of way rules: collision regulations) is that nothing in the rule book exonerates you from responsibility to avoid la collision if you can. In other words, if breaking the rules is the prudent thing to do, you aren’t just empowered to break the rules, you are required to. There is no such thing as stand your ground rules at sea.
- derekp7 3y ago
  But is the captain shielded from liability if they make the wrong judgement call when deviating from the rule book in an emergency, and protected when following the rules? Or are they judged for making the wrong decision regardless if they were following the rules or not? Or third option, if in an emergency they are protected no matter what decision they make, as long as the decision could be considered reasonable based on information available, even if not optimal based on hindsight? Of those I like 2 and 3 the best. For 2, it can help influence them to make better decisions (i.e., seek more training ahead of time). For 3, it seems to be the most fair to the person in charge.
  - kgilpin 3y ago
    Pilot in command can deviate from regulations to the degree necessary to address the emergency. It’s very well established, drilled into every pilot and there truly won’t be any trouble for invoking this.
    - ahahahahah 3y ago
      The question isn't about whether you can get in trouble for invoking it. The question is about whether or not invoking it indemnifies you from the consequences of the deviation from regulations. I.e., sure you can imagine it and not be punished for violating regulations, but if what you do that violates them is reckless, wrong, unnecessarily dangerous, are you still protected from punishment.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    It’s usually 3, at least for pilots. It’s helped by making a mistake usually doesn’t leave someone alive to yell at.
- bombcar 3y ago
  The “you can do whatever necessary to save the ship, but you might have to explain it” rule. It’s a good one to live by.

SoftTalker 3y ago

Similar to aircraft and ship captains. They operate under a litany of rules, but in an emergency they are recognized as the person in control and they may deviate from rules as necessary based on their experienced and professional judgement.

dghlsakjg 3y ago
It’s even codified. Rule number 2 in the colregs (ship right of way rules: collision regulations) is that nothing in the rule book exonerates you from responsibility to avoid la collision if you can. In other words, if breaking the rules is the prudent thing to do, you aren’t just empowered to break the rules, you are required to. There is no such thing as stand your ground rules at sea.
derekp7 3y ago
But is the captain shielded from liability if they make the wrong judgement call when deviating from the rule book in an emergency, and protected when following the rules? Or are they judged for making the wrong decision regardless if they were following the rules or not? Or third option, if in an emergency they are protected no matter what decision they make, as long as the decision could be considered reasonable based on information available, even if not optimal based on hindsight? Of those I like 2 and 3 the best. For 2, it can help influence them to make better decisions (i.e., seek more training ahead of time). For 3, it seems to be the most fair to the person in charge.
- kgilpin 3y ago
  Pilot in command can deviate from regulations to the degree necessary to address the emergency. It’s very well established, drilled into every pilot and there truly won’t be any trouble for invoking this.
  - ahahahahah 3y ago
    The question isn't about whether you can get in trouble for invoking it. The question is about whether or not invoking it indemnifies you from the consequences of the deviation from regulations. I.e., sure you can imagine it and not be punished for violating regulations, but if what you do that violates them is reckless, wrong, unnecessarily dangerous, are you still protected from punishment.
- bombcar 3y ago
  It’s usually 3, at least for pilots. It’s helped by making a mistake usually doesn’t leave someone alive to yell at.
bombcar 3y ago
The “you can do whatever necessary to save the ship, but you might have to explain it” rule. It’s a good one to live by.