It’s often said on here that the cause of a marine incident is “commercial pressure” or that a captain yielded to commercial pressure. That’s not really a very useful way of thinking about it.
There’s some skill involved in evaluating and choosing how to mitigate risk. Ultimately it’s always going to be a trade off. There’s going to be a risk budget so to speak.
And one can view risk as a tax that you pay in money (mitigation steps) or blood (casualties). The problem is that if you choose to pay in money the expenditure is certain but if you choose to pay in blood the expenditure is a matter of chance. Hence the pressure to roll the dice, especially if the blood is not yours.
Invariably the decision to take risk is reduced to those lowest on the totem pole. They have to make a decision whether to say no and lose their job or the next new ship so say they yes and keep rolling the dice Sadly the ones that put the pressure on the dice rollers never suffer the consequences if the rollers crap out.
Agreed. Throughout today’s society moral hazard has moved from being a pathology to being a business model.
The stories I could tell. . . . .
Throughout today’s society moral hazard has moved from being a pathology to being a business model.
It’s an indication of late stage capitalism. If past is prologue the next 10 years or so should be interesting.