Closing U.S. Courts to Foreign Seamen: The Judicial Excision of the FAA Seamen's Arbitration Exemption from the New York Convention Act

By Nickson, Matthew | Texas International Law Journal, Winter 2006 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Closing U.S. Courts to Foreign Seamen: The Judicial Excision of the FAA Seamen's Arbitration Exemption from the New York Convention Act


Nickson, Matthew, Texas International Law Journal


ABSTRACT

In the recent Francisco and Bautista decisions, the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeals compelled arbitration of Jones Act tort claims brought by Filipino seamen whose employment contracts included mandatory arbitration clauses falling under the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and its implementing Act. Matthew Nickson's note argues that the decisions are flawed because they distort statutory plain meaning and legislative history. It also examines why the decisions run counter to fundamental principles of U.S. admiralty law and the broad remedial policies of the Jones Act, as well as Supreme Court labor law and Federal Employers' Liability Act jurisprudence. The note concludes that both cases work an injustice to foreign seamen and should be overturned.

I. INTRODUCTION

In 2002 in Francisco v. Stolt Achievement MT1 and again last year in Bautista v. Star Cruises,2 panels of the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeals compelled arbitration of tort claims brought by plaintiff seamen whose employment contracts contained covenants to arbitrate falling under the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention or Convention)3 and its implementing Act (the Convention Act).4 Francisco involved a Filipino seaman, Ernesto Francisco, who sued his employer for negligence under the Jones Act5 after sustaining injuries aboard a chemical tanker ship navigating the Mississippi River. Bautista involved consolidated Jones Act negligence and wrongful death claims surrounding a tragic boiler explosion that occurred in the Port of Miami aboard the famous S.S. Norway.

To justify their holdings, both the Francisco and Bautista panels relied upon the ever expanding Supreme Court policy favoring arbitration and forum-selection clauses. The courts discussed Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)6 and Convention Act cases compelling arbitration in the international business context so as to deny the incorporation into the Convention Act of the seamen's arbitration exemption found in FAA section 1.7

The decisions are problematic for two important reasons. The first reason is that they interpret the interaction of the FAA and the Convention Act as producing a result that seems unnatural. Arguably, a unified reading of the two acts provides that the seamen's arbitration exemption is applicable to the Convention Act. At the very least, for a variety of reasons to be explored below, this applicability is ambiguous. It is befuddling that both courts determined so peremptorily that the plain meaning of the Convention Act does not incorporate the exemption.

The second key problem with Francisco and Bautista is their dismissal of legislative history that is favorable to the plaintiffs. The courts discount testimony given before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by Richard Kearney, a State Department official and the Convention Act's drafter. The decisions also ignore evidence-apparent from questions posed to Mr. Kearney by Senator J. William Fulbright, the Act's principal legislative sponsor-about the Act's intended scope. The impressions that both men had of the Convention Act help to clarify any uncertainty vis-à-vis its interaction with the FAA.

What's more, Francisco and Bautista are hostile to fundamental principles of U.S. admiralty law. Among other things, these holdings violate FAA policy by paving the way for arbitration of U.S. seamen's tort claims; circumvent the liberal policies of the Jones Act and of the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA);8 and contravene Supreme Court labor law jurisprudence and especially U.S. Bulk Carriers, Inc. v. Arguelles.9

There can be no doubt that Francisco and Bautista implicate an ongoing debate about the role of human beings in global economic development. To improve the Philippine economy by securing jobs overseas for Filipino citizens and thereby attracting remittances, Philippine law mandates that contracts of employment of seamen be arbitrable.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Closing U.S. Courts to Foreign Seamen: The Judicial Excision of the FAA Seamen's Arbitration Exemption from the New York Convention Act
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?