What's a skipper's obligation to voluntary crew?

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

So I take his to mean that you don't have an all inclusive list of medical conditions.

I would feel upset with myself for not sharing the condition up front and then leaving the captain short handed.

You're absolutely right.

Fred is a quadriplegic, but he thought no one would ever notice.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Hoofsmit

...
home forms of heart surgery
...
Sent from my iPad.......i apologise for the auto corrects !!!

Good job you put in the disclaimer. That one conjured up immediate visions of dining tables and carving knives.

[Muckle Flugga]

Ultimately this case shows and highlights the necessity for caution, trust, and openness on both sides. I have on several occasions disqualified crew for quite the opposite reasons than those highlighted in this thread: the crew were in the cases I am thinking of disqualified for total lack of curiosity about their fate. Whenever I meet ingenuous young dockjumpers, I ask them not only what they want, but what they will demand of a skipper. The equation, as Ann rightly points out, is both ways: trust must be from the skipper to the crew and from the crew to the skipper, both ways. A crew who jumps aboard with insufficient questioning of a skipper is, in my view, careless of their fate and their circumstances, and therefore less likely to be careful of the boat, and those aboard it. [This does not apply to the OP and is general]. A good skipper will not only not mind a prospective crew's interrogation of their preparedness, qualifications, experience etc etc, but will be only too happy to talk about it! A poor skipper will be defensive and will not like to be questioned. Likewise the other way. Both must be as upfront as possible. Being locked up in a tiny apartment with no immediate possibiity of exit or rescue or outside help for days or several weeks at a time is a position which most happy couples would find trying, let alone strangers. Time at sea does odd things to people and veneers which are easily maintained for the purposes of common discourse rapidly fade. It is for this latter reason that those who have repeatedly lambasted the skipper here for insufficient questioning are rather suspect in my view. They haven't been aboard with someone they have thoroughly and satisfactorily interviewed, who subsequently turns out to be a very different character than what was previously disclosed… Don't forget that out in the deep ocean you are alone… with whomsoever you choose to take aboard!

[Rustic Charm]

Well, overnight ive missed a lot, so this morning ive caught up just by reading the last page which included Ann's very sensible and thought out reply

Im suspecting Fred has gone running and wont be back. Im conscious we have still not been filled in on what this mysterious medical/health condition is. But i just want to respond to the harshness of those jumping to the conclusion that the OP lied or was in anyway dishonest. We dont know thats the case at all.

We can all expext that a potential crewperson would divulge any health/medical conditions relevant to the trip, but 'relevant' is the emphasis. And who decides what is relevant?

If its a disability then surely the skipper has a right to know before the crew are accepted.

If its a current medical condition, then the crew person needs to consider whether to inform the skipper or not, and if it comes out prior to leaving like in this case then, you cant blame the skipper if the decision is made that jts too risky to take you. In which case no compensation should be expected. You took the risk with the decision not to pass it on.

There are health conditions such are being HIV and Epilespy that require specific medications but otherwise have no impact on the trip if there is zero history of impact. I wouldnt expect the OP to divulge those things, but then im not sure why you would divulge them when arriving and prior to the trip. Unless it happened with an unexpected need to advice/record what medications are on the boat.

If the OP has a health condition to which the skipper is being unrealistically over cautious with, or blatently bias like with An irrelevant condition or disease, then the skipper should fully reimburse the expensese spent in good faith. But, as Ann emphasised the ultimate decision should remain with the skipper.

I suspect this will draw further discussion because there are those who believe the crews entire medical history should be divulged.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Dave22q

I am no lawyer but it seems to me that you had a valid contract. Backing out does not permit him to evade the obligation to at least cover your expenses. However, as he will most likely lie in court yor chances for recovery are minimal. Next time put everything in an E-mail so you are clear and have a record. I would also post this deadbeat's identity on the place you found the opening. Good luck on your next gig.

Failing to disclose a medical condition violated said contract. At that point any obligation (which wasn't there unless specifically agreed to in advance), goes out the window. The Captain had a valid reason to deny passage.

Given the fact the OP omitted key information from the original post and then danced around the subject when he was called out...my tendency would be to take the opposite tack.

Captain asked about medical issues. Was told there was none. Then the guy shows up with an obvious medical issue.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Dave22q

If you make an offer and somebody accepts it and spends air fare and hotel to report you are responsible. Either you believe this poster is both lying and and an idiot to fly in without a clear understanding or you believe him. I see no reason for his post to be a lie. Of course, the captain is free to change his mind and withdraw the offer. That is his absolute right. My point was that he owes full reimburse of travel expences to the rejected crewman unless the prospect lied on the phone about something material like age, physical condition, having a passport, etc. If the guy has prison tats or just looked shady reject him, sure. But leave him financially whole.

The OP admitted in a follow up post that there was a medical condition that he did not disclose when asked about health issues before traveling.

I won't call him an idiot but the mistake he made was assuming he got to decide for the Captain if the medical condition was relevant to his ability to be part of the crew. He found out the hard way that the Captain makes that decision.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

You're absolutely right.

Fred is a quadriplegic, but he thought no one would ever notice.

Nice attempt to dodge the question...of course, by the OP's standard for being qualified (hasn't missed work in X yrs but gives us no clue what the condition is or what his work is), he very well could be.

But back to the question: Do you or do you not have an all inclusive list of medical questions for up and coming Captains to use?

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Nice attempt to dodge the question...of course, by the OP's standard for being qualified (hasn't missed work in X yrs but gives us no clue what the condition is or what his work is), he very well could be.

But back to the question: Do you or do you not have an all inclusive list of medical questions for up and coming Captains to use?

Steven Hawkins very rarely takes a day off..

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The OP admitted in a follow up post that there was a medical condition that he did not disclose when asked about health issues before traveling.

I won't call him an idiot but the mistake he made was assuming he got to decide for the Captain if the medical condition was relevant to his ability to be part of the crew. He found out the hard way that the Captain makes that decision.

You keep claiming that he withheld information, but he posted that he answered the captain's questions fully and honestly in the phone interviews before he flew out. For some strange reason, you and others keep omitting that part of the story. It makes me think you're untrustworthy.

Please explain why no other captain had ever excluded him from a delivery for this alleged condition.

If you had owned 3 boats and had crewed for others several times in the past, you would (correctly) assume that your condition doesn't affect your ability to crew. That's the position Fred was in. So if it had made no difference in the past, why should it make a difference now?


Because some broke ass captain who couldn't afford to pay for his return trip decided it did?? Fortunately, that decision might have saved Fred's life.

Perhaps we'll hear of the crew's safe arrival, hopefully. I personally wouldn't crew for someone that strapped.

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Nice attempt to dodge the question...of course, by the OP's standard for being qualified (hasn't missed work in X yrs but gives us no clue what the condition is or what his work is), he very well could be.

But back to the question: Do you or do you not have an all inclusive list of medical questions for up and coming Captains to use?

Sure.


"Do you have ANY medical condition that has ever been noted in any examination or that you have ever been treated for? Do not assume they do not matter, I'm requesting that you divulge your entire medical history to me, no matter how trivial, PRIOR to you boarding the plane."


"More importantly, what is your political affiliation?"

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Failing to disclose a medical condition violated said contract. At that point any obligation (which wasn't there unless specifically agreed to in advance), goes out the window. The Captain had a valid reason to deny passage.

Given the fact the OP omitted key information from the original post and then danced around the subject when he was called out...my tendency would be to take the opposite tack.

Captain asked about medical issues. Was told there was none. Then the guy shows up with an obvious medical issue.

This is all conjecture

[monte]

Interesting some of the thoughts about obligations. I wonder what happens if a crew member lets a skipper down, like that would ever happen.... I guess they would be responsible for skippers expenses as well.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

I personally wouldn't crew for someone that strapped.

PHEW..........!!!

[CarinaPDX]

Wow - long thread in a short time.

Mostly we don't know the facts, and we are hearing one side. So take it all with a grain of salt.

The skipper did contribute money for the return trip. Given that he apparently had made no commitment for that eventuality I consider that at least to be an attempt at generosity. Without knowing more I see no basis in fact for criticizing him.

We don't know why he turned down the crew. We know that the crew told us that it was relating to his medical condition. It would not surprise me at all if the skipper had other reasons and chose that as a way of avoiding offending the OP (imagine that, as an example, the OP had horrible hygiene - better to use the medical condition than be offensive). Or he could have felt that the OP had manipulated the situation by not disclosing the condition, and didn't trust him as a result so opted to blame the condition rather than character. The answer is that we don't have any idea what was going on in the skipper's head.

I have taken on many crew over the years: a good many were wonderful, and a few were awful. In truth I could say the same thing for the skippers out there. The bad ones are usually manipulative and dishonest - or they would be easy to spot. So any hint of either trait and run for the exits! As was stated earlier, character is far more important than experience.

On the medical side, never forget that international treaty obligates the skipper to pay for all necessary medical expenses. Taking on crew with any condition that could result in hospitalization is a huge liability. For the same reason taking aboard crew who are clumsy or reckless is a very bad idea.

I too had an issue with the use of the word "equals" in the crew contract. That is misleading and legally wrong. I point out to potential crew that it is my sacred, and legal, obligation to see the vessel and all aboard safely to the next harbor, and it is their obligation to obey my lawful orders. If there is any reluctance to agree - they are beached. I also point out that the boat is my (only) home, that I am their host and they are my house guests. I will try to make their stay enjoyable. While aboard they should respect my property and way of doing things - or leave. It is amazing how many people don't get that.

The whole issue of crewing and taking on crew is fraught, and could fill a book.

Greg

[StuM]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

Sure.


"Do you have ANY medical condition that has ever been noted in any examination or that you have ever been treated for? Do not assume they do not matter, I'm requesting that you divulge your entire medical history to me, no matter how trivial, PRIOR to you boarding the plane."


"More importantly, what is your political affiliation?"

And what's your stance on "climate change"