PERSONAL INJURY | 2026-09-30
Injured at Sea: The Jones Act, Maintenance and Cure, and Unseaworthiness
Maritime workers who qualify as “seamen” have special federal remedies that ordinary employees do not — including a negligence claim against the employer and no-fault maintenance and cure.
Workers injured on the job are usually limited to workers’ compensation. But <strong>maritime workers</strong> who qualify as <strong>“seamen”</strong> have a distinct — and often more favorable — set of federal remedies. Under the <strong>Jones Act</strong> and general maritime law, an injured seam
Maritime injury law is its own world, with remedies unavailable to land-based workers.
Who Is a “Seaman”?
The special remedies apply only to a seaman. Although the term is not exhaustively defined by statute, the Supreme Court (in Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis) established that a seaman generally must: (1) contribute to the function of a vessel or the accomplishment of its mission, and (2) have a connection to a vessel in navigation (or a fleet) that is substantial in both duration and nature — often described as spending a significant portion of work time (frequently cited as around 30%) aboard. Workers who do not meet this test may instead be covered by other regimes, such as the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. Determining seaman status is the essential threshold question.
The Jones Act Negligence Claim
The Jones Act (46 U.S.C. § 30104) gives a seaman a claim against their employer for injuries caused by the employer’s negligence — including the negligence of the vessel’s officers and crew. Critically, the Jones Act applies a relaxed, “featherweight” causation standard: the seaman need only show that the employer’s negligence played any part, however slight, in producing the injury. This standard is far more favorable to the injured worker than the ordinary proximate-cause standard in a typical negligence case, making the Jones Act claim powerful.
Maintenance and Cure — A No-Fault Remedy
Independent of any negligence, general maritime law entitles an injured or ill seaman to maintenance and cure:
- Maintenance — a daily allowance covering the seaman’s reasonable cost of food and lodging while recovering ashore; and
- Cure — payment of medical expenses.
Maintenance and cure is a no-fault obligation: it is owed regardless of who was at fault for the injury or illness, so long as the seaman fell ill or was injured in the service of the vessel. It continues until the seaman reaches maximum medical improvement (“maximum cure”). An employer that unreasonably denies or delays maintenance and cure can face additional liability, including compensatory damages and, in egregious cases, punitive damages.
Unseaworthiness
General maritime law also provides a claim for unseaworthiness against the vessel’s owner. A vessel is unseaworthy if it — or its equipment, gear, or crew — is not reasonably fit for its intended purpose. Unseaworthiness is a form of liability that does not depend on negligence; if an unseaworthy condition caused the injury, the owner can be liable. This gives the injured seaman a second, distinct theory alongside the Jones Act negligence claim.
How Maritime Remedies Differ From Workers’ Compensation
The contrast with ordinary workers’ compensation is stark:
- Fault-based recovery available. Unlike the no-fault, limited workers’ compensation system, a seaman can sue the employer for negligence and recover a fuller range of damages.
- Multiple theories. The seaman may combine the Jones Act claim, maintenance and cure, and unseaworthiness.
- Favorable standards. The featherweight causation standard and the no-fault maintenance-and-cure obligation heavily favor the injured worker.
These differences make the correct classification of the worker — and the vessel connection — decisive.
Why It Matters
For an injured maritime worker, the difference between being treated as a land-based employee and as a seaman can be enormous. Seaman status unlocks the Jones Act’s favorable negligence claim, the no-fault maintenance-and-cure remedy, and the unseaworthiness theory. Because these remedies differ so sharply from ordinary workers’ compensation, an injured maritime worker should have the nature of their work and vessel connection carefully evaluated.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who qualifies as a seaman?
Generally a worker who contributes to a vessel’s function and has a connection to a vessel in navigation that is substantial in duration and nature, under the Chandris test.
What is the Jones Act claim?
A claim against the employer for injuries caused by its negligence, with a relaxed “featherweight” causation standard favorable to the seaman.
What is maintenance and cure?
A no-fault remedy: maintenance (daily living allowance) and cure (medical expenses) owed to a seaman injured or ill in the service of the vessel until maximum medical improvement.
What is unseaworthiness?
A claim against the vessel owner where the vessel or its equipment or crew was not reasonably fit for its purpose, independent of negligence.
How is this different from workers’ compensation?
Seamen can sue for negligence and unseaworthiness and recover fuller damages, unlike the limited, no-fault workers’ compensation system for land-based employees.
What if the employer refuses maintenance and cure?
An unreasonable denial can expose the employer to additional compensatory and, in egregious cases, punitive damages.
Related Personal Injury Guides
Talk to a California Maritime Injury Attorney
If you were injured working on or around a vessel, the Jones Act and maritime law may provide remedies far beyond workers’ compensation. Trembach Law Firm can evaluate your claim. Call (818) 514-7680.
Contact Trembach Law Firm at (818) 514-7680 for a confidential consultation.
Trembach Law Firm | 27001 Agoura Road, Suite 350, Calabasas, CA 91301