The
Supreme Court recently issued an opinion that may have the effect of permitting
more injured workers to fall within the realm of the Longshore and HarborWorkers Compensation Act (the “ Longshore Act”) but excluding them from the
Jones Act. In Lozman v. City of RivieraBeach, the Court further addressed the issue of whether or not a particular
structure is a “vessel.”
The
opinion involved a houseboat that had no independent source of electricity, no
steering mechanism and had French doors and ordinary windows (as opposed to
watertight portholes). The Court stated
“in our view a structure does not fall within the scope of this statutory
phrase unless a reasonable observer, looking to the home’s physical
characteristics and activities, would consider it designed to a practical
degree for carrying people or things over water.” The Court, therefore, found the home not to
be a vessel.
The
issue in Lozman was whether admiralty
jurisdiction was proper. Therefore, the decision may impact whether a worker is
covered under the Longshore Act. If a
worker is not a Jones Act “seaman,” he or she is likely protected under the Longshore
Act. If, because of this case, certain
workers are not Jones Act seaman because the structures they work on are not “vessels,”
the Longshore Act will expand to cover those workers.
This
case acts to limit what constitutes a vessel, which could take some workers out
of Jones Act coverage. The Court stated
that if the structure in question, is used to transport people or things over
water, it is a vessel. The “reasonable
observer” test stated in Lozman creates
a practical approach to look at borderline cases and does away with the
“anything that floats is a vessel” approach taken by some jurisdictions. At present, the case may only directly affect
those workers on house boats or floating restaurants or businesses. However, it remains to be seen how individual
jurisdictions will use the Lozman case’s
definition of “vessel” to—perhaps unintentionally—include more workers under
the Longshore Act.
By Tim Boykin, Attorney
