INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

which no claim was made, but which were deserving of recompense.
There were a considerable number of injuries for which seamen would
have been recompensed had claims been filed. This indicates a lack
of knowledge on the part of seamen as to their rights when injured,
or a feeling of the futility of trying to prosecute a claim because of
inexperience in these matters.

Hypothetic Application of Compensation Law

An estimate was also made of the total amount which would
probably have been recovered had the same accident cases been
adjudicated according to the provisions of a compensation law such
as the longshoremen’s and harbor workers’ compensation act, retaining,
 however, the seaman’s present right to maintenance and cure,
and wages to the end of the voyage.
The longshoremen’s act was made the basis of comparison because
the original bill (S. 3170) included seamen and hence is suppositionally
the kind of instrument which would cover seamen if they were made
subject to such legislation; and, moreover, because longshoremen and
seamen often work side by side, and in some cases longshoremen and
seamen are injured in the same accident.
In estimating the probable amount payable to seamen under a
compensation law, the compensation allowed longshoremen for comparable
 disabilities was applied, as nearly as practicable, to each of
the 1,195 cases of injured seamen.

Comparative Summary

Table 1 shows averages for all cases studied (including 29 cases in
which the injury was not followed by an incapacitating disability) as
well as for those cases in which the injury was followed by disability
as defined by the longshoremen’s compensation act, viz, ‘incapacity
because of injury to earn the wages which the employee was receiving
at the time of the injury in the same or any other employment.”
Another subdivision is made of the latter class for those cases in which
the disability continued beyond the duration of the seaman’s contract
(articles).
The cases in each division are classified according to whether or
not their settlement involved the payment of legal fees.
Of the 29 cases included in the first division which were followed
by no technical disability, the injuries in 14 were not severe enough
for the seaman to leave his duties except for first-aid treatment; 8
caused the seaman to be relieved from duty for a short time as, for
example, the remainder of the watch; and 7 of the injuries were more
severe, but because of the nature of their duties the seamen were able
to stand regular watch. In one instance a radio operator sprained
his knee, while in another a second engineer was bruised and scalded
about the head and face. None of these cases would have received
any consideration under a compensation law because there was no
Incapacity to earn wages.