Obligations and prohibited acts

Employers are prohibited from retaliating against any seaman for certain protected safety-related actions listed in the rule. See the overall Obligations and prohibited acts in 1986.102 for the full list of protected activities.

• The rule defines a range of protected activities in 1986.102(a). It also explains what "retaliation" includes in 1986.102(b).

Yes—under 1986.102(a)(1) a seaman who in good faith reported or was about to report to the Coast Guard or another appropriate Federal agency that they believed a maritime safety law or regulation violation occurred is protected from retaliation.

• Protection applies when the report is made in good faith and concerns a belief that a safety law or regulation has been violated.

A seaman is protected if they refused to perform duties because they had a reasonable apprehension that performing the duties would result in serious injury to themselves, other seamen, or the public. See 1986.102(a)(2).

• The circumstances must be such that a reasonable person in similar circumstances would conclude there was a real danger of injury or serious impairment of health (see 1986.102(c)).
• The seaman must have sought correction of the unsafe condition from the employer and been unable to obtain it; the request itself is also protected (see 1986.102(c)).

Yes—a seaman must have sought correction from the employer and been unable to obtain correction to qualify for protection for refusing duties under [1986.102(a)(2)]. See 1986.102(c).

• The rule also states that any seaman who requested such a correction is protected against retaliation because of that request.

Yes—giving testimony in a proceeding brought to enforce a maritime safety law or regulation is a protected activity under 1986.102(a)(3), and the seaman cannot be retaliated against for doing so.

Yes—1986.102(a)(4) protects seamen who notified, or attempted to notify, the vessel owner or the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard was operating about a work-related personal injury or illness from retaliation by their employer.

• Both successful notifications and attempted notifications are covered.

Yes—cooperating with a safety investigation conducted by the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard was operating or the National Transportation Safety Board is protected under 1986.102(a)(5).

Yes—furnishing information to the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard was operating, the National Transportation Safety Board, or any other public official about facts relating to a marine casualty that caused injury, death, or property damage is protected by 1986.102(a)(6).

Yes—accurately reporting hours of duty under part A of subtitle II of title 46 of the United States Code is a protected activity under 1986.102(a)(7), and seamen cannot be retaliated against for doing so.

Retaliation includes discrimination against a seaman and specifically lists examples such as discharging, demoting, suspending, harassing, intimidating, threatening, restraining, coercing, blacklisting, or disciplining a seaman under 1986.102(b).

• The provision also makes clear this list is not exhaustive ("including, but not limited to"), so other adverse acts that discriminate against a seaman for protected activity can also qualify as retaliation.

The rule requires that the circumstances causing the seaman's apprehension must be such that a reasonable person, under similar circumstances, would conclude there was a real danger of injury or serious impairment of health from performing the ordered duties, as stated in 1986.102(c).

• In short, protection depends on an objective standard: would another reasonable person in the same situation perceive a real danger?

The protections in this section apply to seamen, as the rule implements the Employee Protection Provision of the Seaman's Protection Act; the title and language consistently refer to protections for "seaman" in 1986.102.

• Each listed protected activity in 1986.102(a) specifies actions by a seaman that are protected from employer retaliation.

Yes—1986.102(a)(1) explicitly protects seamen who either reported or were about to report in good faith to the Coast Guard or another appropriate Federal agency a belief that a maritime safety law or regulation was violated.

Yes—1986.102(c) states that any seaman who requested correction of an unsafe condition is protected against retaliation because of that request, regardless of whether they later refused duties.