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
    arrow-down
    40
    ·
    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          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

          • sadreality@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Maersk has major presence within US and they drive major revenue from within US.

            If feds want to punish them, they have the ability.

            They won’t though because corporations are not people unless it is for purposes of “free” speach

            • protist
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The investigation hasn’t even begun yet, this happened yesterday. None of us know what happened on that ship. Why do you think they need to be punished so severely with absolutely no information to go on?

    • Jaysyn@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      8 months ago

      I guarantee you that we’ll see bankruptcies & a billion dollar fine over this.

        • MagicShel@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          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.