View
219
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Large Personal Injury Claims by Accident Type (Number)
FALL (OTHER)
SLIP AND FALL
STRUCK BY FALLING/FLYINGSTRAIN BY LIFTING
FALL FROM LADDER OR SCAFF
PASSENGER CASUALTY
CAUGHT IN MACHINERY
FALL/SLIP FROM GANGWAY
STRAIN BY PULLING OR PUSH
EXPLOSION
CRUISE CANCELLATION
BURNS BY STEAM OR FLUIDS
STRAIN BY HOLDING OR CARR
STRUCK BY MOTOR VEHICLE
CHEMICAL EXPOSUREBURNS
DROWNING (04)
MOORING INCIDENT(06)
81 claims value 34.65$m
7th highest in frequency
Large Personal Injury Claims by Accident Type (Value)
FALL (OTHER)
STRUCK BY FALLING/FLYING
SLIP AND FALL
PASSENGER CASUALTYCRUISE CANCELLATION
FALL FROM LADDER OR SCAFF
STRAIN BY LIFTING
EXPLOSION
FALL/SLIP FROM GANGWAY
CAUGHT IN MACHINERY
BURNS BY STEAM OR FLUIDS
STRAIN BY PULLING OR PUSH
CHEMICAL EXPOSURE
STRAIN BY HOLDING OR CARR
MOORING INCIDENT
81 claims value 34.65$m
7th highest in overall cost
Large Personal Injury Claims by Accident Type (Av Value)
FALL (OTHER)
STRUCK BY FALLING/FLYING
SLIP AND FALL
PASSENGER CASUALTY
CRUISE CANCELLATION
FALL FROM LADDER OR SCAFF
STRAIN BY LIFTING
EXPLOSION
FALL/SLIP FROM GANGWAY
CAUGHT IN MACHINERY
BURNS BY STEAM OR FLUIDS
STRAIN BY PULLING OR PUSH
CHEMICAL EXPOSURE
STRAIN BY HOLDING OR CARR
CRUISE CANCELLATION/COMPENSATION
(00)
INJURED BY POWER TOOL
SLIP (NO FALL)
BURNS
SEXUAL ASSAULTFALL FROM BOSUN'S CHAIR
INJURED BY NON-POWER TOOLINJURED IN FIGHT /00
DROWNING (04)STRAIN BY REACHINGSUFFOCATION (04)
OVERCOME BY FUMES
N/ASTRAIN FROM USING TOOL/MC
EXPOSURE TO HEAT OR COLD
COLLISION
FIRE
VESSEL SANK
STRUCK BY SLIDING OBJECT
RAPE
VESSEL CAPSIZED
COLLISION WITH PIER
SEAMAN WAS ILL
ELECTRICAL
ILLNESS - DIED HEART FAILURE - DEATH
MOORING INCIDENT
81 claims value 34.65$m 3rd most expensive claim by av value
Large Mooring Incidents Trend
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1987
1988
1990
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
%
Number % Value %
Ex 1 large claim 10.23 $m 2002
Large Mooring Incident Claims by Tradeband
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
TANKER
BULK
CARRIER
TUG &
BAR
GE
PASSEN
GER
CON
TAIN
ERDRY CAR
GO
RO/RO
PARCEL CA
RRIER
DEBITIN
G SH
IPSRIG
& SU
PPLY
%
Number % Value %
Large Mooring Incident Claims by Cause
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
CREW
ERROR
EQUIPM
ENT FAILU
RE
DECK O
FFICER ERR
OR
SEE BRIEF D
ESCRIPTIO
N
UNDER
INVESTIG
ATION
MED
ICAL
PILOT ER
ROR
SHORE PERSO
N. ER
ROR
%
Number % Value %
Causes in detail
Equipment Failure5%
Hit by -Parted Ropes/Wires
53%
Hit by - NON Parted Ropes/Wires
42%
Caught up in ropes/wires
20%
Mooring General60%
Slipped off/jammed on
equipment20%
Equipment misuse/failure
6%
Weather related 10%
Mooring General58%Tug operation
related13%
Wash10% Ship to Ship
3%
Type of Injury From Mooring Incidents
Leg23%
Death14%
Back14%
Multiple Injury11%
Head7%
Arm7%
Shoulder3%
Chest3%
Foot1%
Eye1%
Hand3%
Pelvis2%
Face3%
Thigh1% Ankle
1% Wrist1%
Knee3%
Large Mooring Incident Claims by Age of Person Injured
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
19 21 23 25 26 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 38 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 48 49 50 51 52 53 55 57 60 64
%
Number Claims
Experienced as well as inexperienced ?
What is the condition of ropes/mooring links/wires?
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Below Standard
Very Poor
Mooring Study Preliminary Findings Sample: 94 Vessels inspected between February and June 2009 Key Issues Raised: • 43% of vessels use non deck crew during mooring operations
• Controls • Training - are non deck crew aware of risks ?
• A small number of vessels admitted to only using two seafarers for mooring operations. • Controls
Recommended