Section 905(b) Vessel-Negligence Claims by Longshore Workers
The Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act pays benefits to injured harbor workers. Those benefits do not always end the case. Section 905(b) lets a longshore worker sue a vessel owner for negligence. The claim is separate from compensation against the employer.
Congress closed the old unseaworthiness action for longshore workers. In its place, it left a narrower negligence remedy against the vessel. The worker must therefore prove fault. A dangerous ship, standing alone, is not enough.
The Supreme Court’s Scindia framework still guides these cases. It sets three main vessel duties. The first is the turnover duty. The owner must turn the ship over in a reasonably safe condition. It must also warn of hidden hazards that the owner knows, or should know, and that the stevedore may not find.
The second duty arises when the vessel remains in active control. If the crew keeps control of an area or an appliance, the owner must use reasonable care there. Cargo operations do not automatically shift every risk to the stevedore.
The third duty is the duty to intervene.
It applies after turnover. The owner may have to act if it knows the stevedore is working in an unreasonably dangerous way. The danger must be one the owner cannot reasonably expect the stevedore to fix.
These duties are limited on purpose. Longshore work is skilled and often independent. Courts therefore hesitate to make the shipowner a general supervisor of cargo operations. Open and obvious hazards usually belong to the stevedore. Hidden traps and vessel-controlled gear are different.
Typical 905(b) facts include defective hatch covers, unsafe access, oil on vessel decks, and poorly maintained cranes or winches owned by the ship. Lighting, lashing gear, and defective ladders also appear often. The key question is who controlled the hazard and who should have discovered it.
Proof is practical. Photographs, turn-over surveys, toolbox talks, and witness statements matter. So do cargo plans and vessel logs. Experts in stevedoring practice and marine operations often explain custom. Comparative fault can still reduce the award.
The employer’s role stays in the background. The stevedore-employer generally cannot be sued in tort. Compensation remains the worker’s remedy against that employer. The 905(b) suit targets the vessel, not the payroll employer.
Procedure often lands in federal court.
Admiralty jurisdiction is common. Some cases proceed in state court under the saving-to-suitors clause. Timing still matters. Notice, medical proof, and early inspection of the ship can decide the claim.
Section 905(b) therefore gives longshore workers a path beyond statutory benefits. It is not a strict-liability rule. The worker must fit the hazard into a Scindia duty. When the vessel created or ignored a danger outside the stevedore’s fair control, the claim can succeed.