4 ms·
That will only lead to areas close enough to land, but within international waters where these uninsured junks will just anchor and wait it out. https://www.th
by Simon_ORourke 2y ago
That will only lead to areas close enough to land, but within international waters where these uninsured junks will just anchor and wait it out.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/apr/12/abandoned-at-sea-the-crews-cast-adrift-without-food-fuel-or-pay https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/apr/12/a...
- diebeforei485 2y agoThis is still arguably better. These crew aren't going to be paid by these irresponsible owners anyway. Let them abandon ship in international waters after a couple of missed paychecks.
- ghiculescu 2y agoWhy is that better?
- diebeforei485 2y agoIt's better for the workers who can find a different job as soon as the paychecks stop coming, instead of being strung along indefinitely. It's not too hard to get a small boat to rescue them and be shepherded to the airport. The Saudis aren't doing it because they are owed port fees. Negligent boat owners should lose their property just like negligent land (real property) owners do.
- Simon_ORourke 2y agoThe only way that would be better would be from the port authority's perspective. I'm sure the guys stuck on a ship 100 miles off any shore would not find it too pleasant.
- diebeforei485 2y agoCrew rescue isn't too difficult to arrange. The coast guard can do this, and auction off the ship to recoup the costs. But at least the crew aren't wasting their time.
- will5421 2y agoBut would you even start a journey towards a port that requires insurance if you don't have it? You're not going to get the benefit of docking at that port (unloading the ship and getting paid for the cargo).