• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

I want to sue a cruise ship company

MyNameIsAlex

Active Member
Messages
37
Location
Brasov, Romania
Type of diabetes
Type 1
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
I want to sue a cruise ship company because of a discrimination case. I had the interview in October, last year, I got the job and a few weeks ago I've received my embarkation. The problem is they don't want to accept me anymore, because I've just told them I am diabetic. It is very frustrating, I feel like I want to scream and to kick some asses. I work 15 hours a day and diabetes doesn't seem to be a problem, I've never had troubles because of my condition. Until now. It seems like I have to work for my entire live in this ****** country.

What are the chances to win the process against this company? It's one of the biggest cruising company, but this doesn't scare me. I am very motivated. I've already talked with a few lawyers and they told me that I have some chances to win the process especially because when I heard I got a job on a cruise ship, I quit my job, I spent some money to some "mandatory taxes" required by the official cruise recruiter, I did my passport, which by the way, costs a lot of money because I live in a ****** country, where salaries are very low and taxes are very high.
I really want to win this process, not for money, but for my dignity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is this employment case based in the US?

If you have already talked to lawyers it might be best to seek their advice on the process and prospects of success. I have absolutely no idea about any employment law in the us & you might struggle to find any applicable advice on a uk forum.
 
MyNameIsAlex said:
Yes, in US.
Click to expand...
Your profile says you are in Romania! Perhaps there is a health issue regarding being able to keep hospital appointments and check ups due to the ships schedule? Then again I have to ask why didn't you tell the company at the interview you had diabetes, if you had then perhaps the situation would have been explained to you, suspect also the company would class you as dishonest for not telling them in the first place.
 
I always believed cruise ship working was off limits to insulin users.... I know I looked at that choiceof work 25 years ago and couldn't find any liner company to take interest.

I have always declared my diabetes upfront to avoid situations like this.

Sorry, can't help as I only know UK employment lawas not US or Romania..
 
MyNameIsAlex said:
Yes, in US.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that. I hope you have deep pockets.

Personally, I would be very nervous of fighting a US employer in the US courts, as a non-US national. I imagine, although I could be very wrong, is that you failed to disclose a material fact which would have influenced their offer in the first place.

It may not be their attitude that stops them having you. It could be their own insurers and their ability to keep you safe in their care.

Good luck with it all.
 
No problem, American is the land of no win, no fee litigation.
 
SunnyExpat said:
No problem, American is the land of no win, no fee litigation.
Click to expand...

Pro bono often involves some sort of up front fee, in my observation. But, as always, I could be very, very wrong.
 
MyNameIsAlex said:
The problem is they don't want to accept me anymore, because I've just told them I am diabetic
Click to expand...

Bit late now but I would have asked them their policies regarding health conditions during the interview process (without disclosing what you have as at that point, it could well have been viewed as a general enquiry SHOULD you have been diagnosed AFTER you secured the position) That way, you would have known ahead of the appointment, unless of course, they informed you of issues beforehand and prior to the offer what may have disqualified you.

Agree with @AndBreathe .... unfair though it may be, you need to document what was said, when and what might have been given to you that prompted your disclosure
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AndBreathe said:
Pro bono often involves some sort of up front fee, in my observation. But, as always, I could be very, very wrong.
Click to expand...
'Pro bono' ?
You may find 'Pro bono' and 'no fee, no win' are not the same thing.
 
AndBreathe said:
Pro bono often involves some sort of up front fee, in my observation. But, as always, I could be very, very wrong.
Click to expand...

"No win no fee" does not equal pro bono.

"No win no fee" = funding by conditional fee agreement (CFA) / damages based agreement wherein the agreement is: if you lose, we don't charge you and if you win, we will recover our fee from the other side. In litigation, the rule is the losing party pays, so if you lose you will be liable for the costs of successful defendant. This is why when you sign a CFA you usually also take out an insurance policy to cover the costs of the other side should you lose. CFAs are a gamble for the claimant's solicitor because if they lose, they will not recover their costs. However, because of this gamble, they will be allowed to charge a success fee if they win (in the uk) this can be up to 100% of the fee, so, say there was an amazingly cheap litigation where the claimant was funded by CFA and won with costs of £10,000 +100% success fee = defendant would pay £20,000 in claimant costs.

Pro bono = no fee is charged. It is essentially charity. If no fee is charged, no fee can be recoverable against a losing defendant (although pro bono costs might be recoverable). There may be some instances where someone is privately funding a lawyer but can no longer afford to pay so the lawyer agrees to do any further work pro bono, out of the goodness of their heart. But that would be unusual in litigation because of the availability of CFAs.
 
I don't see how you can sue the company. They haven't done anything wrong. It is you who tried to mislead them by not disclosing that you were diabetic right at the start. That's dishonest. Why would anyone want to employ someone who is dishonest? My sons are both asthmatic, they always disclose this when applying for a job. Then they go on to list the various sporting activities they do, 10k runs etc which prove that the asthma isn't a problem for them or for their prospective employer.

If I were you I would let this one drop and start looking for another job. Even if you won, what would you actually gain in reality?

Good luck.
 

Hi, on the application form did it mention medical conditions or do you have a/any medical conditions that the company should be aware of ?[/QUOTE]
 

Thank you both. I stand corrected.
 
A few days late, but in the US, you aren't necessarily required to disclose that you have a disability (in this case diabetes). However, you are required to answer the ADA question with either "Yes," "No," or "I do not wish to answer."

Had Alex been a US citizen, he would have been covered under the ADA. Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to non-US citizens (hence the acronym AMERICANS with Disabilities Act). Even still, a cruise ship seems like it would be a gray-area situation given the circumstances of having only limited access to health services.

A very unfortunate situation indeed and it's a shame to hear this didn't workout.
 
I believe there was a preceding case, but it's more than a grey area.

The case here is for a foreign national, applying for a job, possibly not applying in America, but with a foreign agent, who may or may not be a different national company, to work on a ship in international waters, and subject to maritime law as well as international law, and local laws, and perhaps sailing under a flag of convenience, and perhaps not even owned by the American company. Or it may be simpler.

But, it's definitely worth seeing if anyone would be interested in pursuing the claim. America would be my choice, simply because it's nominally an American company, and also as payouts are normally bigger.
The op has already indicated there is interest in the case.
 
I would agree and in terms of a court case, there's little chance of it getting anywhere.

I did find a few similar past rulings here in the U.S. where non-US citizens had challenged to be covered under the ADA. Even in those cases (which were more cut and dry) the results were unfavorable.

I should have been more specific in calling it a "Gray area" as I was specifically referring to some of the wording within the ADA which discusses situations where the act would not apply in situations where the situation could become dangerous (one could argue a cruise ship being one of them) or the situation would cause a substantial "undue hardship." It would be difficult to explain to 2000 passengers that the cruise ship needed to be turned around because a crew member had a severe hypo and needed medical treatment.
 

I believe there was a case where foreign nationals were awarded the same rights as offshore Americans, and it may well have been on a cruise ship, so I wouldn't give up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…