The company that chartered the cargo ship that destroyed the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore was recently sanctioned by regulators for blocking its employees from directly reporting safety concerns to the U.S. Coast Guard — in violation of a seaman whistleblower protection law, according to regulatory filings reviewed by The Lever.

Eight months before a Maersk Line Limited-chartered cargo ship crashed into the Baltimore bridge, likely killing six people and injuring others, the Labor Department sanctioned the shipping conglomerate for retaliating against an employee who reported unsafe working conditions aboard a Maersk-operated boat. In its order, the department found that Maersk had “a policy that requires employees to first report their concerns to [Maersk]… prior to reporting it to the [Coast Guard] or other authorities.”

    • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s givesomefucks so while they are wrong 99.999% of the time, this time, they are right.

      You realize that Maersk is one of the largest shipping companies in the world, right?

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        69
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        There’s 100% going to be a serious civil and criminal investigation into this. Both of those are going to take a long time. Meanwhile Biden pledging to rebuild the bridge as fast as possible is absolutely the right thing to do. Givesomefucks cynically claiming “Biden bad” for this incident that happened yesterday is just not based in reality

        • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          It’s a cynical hot-take but history has shown that the Whitehouse [GOP and neolibs alike] usually does bail out the multi billion dollar conglomerates so historically speaking, they are probably right.

          • protist@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            26
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            But there isn’t even any reason to think Maersk needs a bailout right now. We have no idea what went wrong with the ship that sent it adrift. And Maersk has insurance that is likely going to be paying a pretty penny in damages to the families of the people who died, the State of Maryland, and other injured parties, and even after that they have incredibly deep pockets

            • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              The “bailout” will come when the bill for the bridge needs to be paid. Mark my words, I’ll consume a shoe if taxpayers pay nothing.

              • protist@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                8 months ago

                Maersk is not going to literally pay the bill for rebuilding this bridge because that’s not how this works. The government will recoup the money through fines and lawsuits. Maersk isn’t even a US company; while it’s an important company in global trade, there’s not going to be an appetite to not hold them accountable for this, and they have plenty money to pay whatever fines or damages may be coming down the pipe.

                Bailouts have only happened when a company is nearing insolvency, and Maersk is nowhere near insolvency. If it were to at some point in the future, which is unlikely, the EU would be responsible for any intervention, not the US

              • MagicShel@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                8 months ago

                Maersk will, of course, be fine. Their “independently owned” subsidiary responsible for maintenance might have to shutter until they can file the paperwork to recreate it with a new name and the same “standard” policies and “experienced” people.

                I don’t know if this resembles their cooperate structure, but one thing I do know is that the company and it’s shareholders will not suffer any significant inconvience.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        How exactly is the DOJ supposed to hold them accountable without using taxpayer money to conduct the investigation and prosecute the case? It’s not like they can take their money first and then do those things.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            No, they come from taxpayer money. Which was what the person above was implying shouldn’t be spent investigating and prosecuting this case. And salaries are not the only thing necessary for that. Courts aren’t free.

            • Aniki 🌱🌿@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Yeah, its givesomefucks, they are a crayon eating moron, but that’s not the point I am making, which is a bit more nuanced and has to do with the fact that at the end of the day, tax payers will make a new bridge and Maersk and a team of lawyers will appeal any and all monetary violation down the a mere fraction of the total cost the whole thing will end up costing. Indeed, court costs will be astronomical, and you bet your fucking dick hole that it won’t be the corporation paying for any of it.