Trump wants to REPEAL Jones Act for Puerto Rico permanently!

Depends on what is “obsolete”. Any Ro/Ro is hardly obsolete even if built in the 1970’s since they are quite able to carry what the DoD needs to ship. These RRF ships are maintained with small crews on them at different readiness levels. The Ro/Ro vessels are at the highest level followed by the lesser types such as LASH, SEABEE and Crane ships.

study the RRF fleet and you will see all the ships in it. the fleet includes a good number of Ro/Ros plus a number of cellular self unloading container ships as well as a few LASH and SEABEE barge carriers. the Ro/Ro ships kept at the highest readiness level are supposed to be available in 5days and occasionally, they are “broken out” to test this ability. Other ships are on 10 and 30 day readiness. These ships do get drydocked and otherwise are kept maintained for use if the need arises.

Other ships in the mothball fleet such as breakbulk carriers, tankers as well as ex USN and USNS vessels are ice cold and could not be make available without a long shipyard period. They are mostly being scrapped now since the DoD’s planning is for a come as you are war instead of a long drawn out conflict giving time such any such expensive and time consuming activations.

yes but just not too many

mariners just have to do longer rotations to spread the pool out. I was doing more than 3 months on and only 3 weeks off during 1990-1991. I loved it because I was making bank and even to this day am enjoying benefits for putting $100k in the bank during that very good year of work when I was still only in my 20’s.

The deep-sea lines are starting to look for alternatives - from todays LL:

Supply chains hit by US intermodal bottlenecks

21 Mar 2018

News

Written by

by Will Waters

Carriers introduce emergency intermodal surcharges and cargo owners seek logistics alternatives due to delays at North American ports

Savanah is among the US ports where CMA CGM has imposed a $300 per teu surcharge

SUPPLY chains to and from the US are being disrupted by various intermodal challenges and bottlenecks, with lines introducing emergency intermodal surcharges and some shippers seeking emergency logistics alternatives due to cargo delays at US ports.

Driver shortages, strong consumer demand, and new regulations have created a perfect storm of rising supply chain challenges that could get worse from April and shippers and carriers can expect steep hikes in US trucking freight rates this year.

Trucking capacity shortages exacerbated delays last month at several US ports including the Port of New York and New Jersey, Charleston, Jacksonville, Norfolk, Savannah, Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, Memphis and Houston.

Logistics specialists report that a combination of factors have continued to put the region’s logistics and intermodal infrastructure under pressure.

Container line CMA CGM has reported that for several weeks the situation with trucking in the US had continued to deteriorate to an unsustainable level.

“In many markets, we are facing significant issues in locating draymen to execute our work orders, resulting in delayed pick-ups and deliveries, as well as significant cost increases,” CMA CGM said.

In a note to customers, the French carrier explained that the primary challenges it was dealing with were new regulations requiring commercial trucks to be equipped with electronic logging devices; severe winter weather in specific markets that had been slowing down deliveries and further reducing the inventory of drivers and truck capacity; and fewer drivers in the market.

“The reduced availability of drivers impacts our ability to take care of all of the work orders we have to manage on a daily basis,” the company said.

As a result, the line has implemented an Emergency Intermodal Surcharge (EIS) of US$300 per container where CMA CGM is nominated to provide carrier haulage services, on certain key markets, effective from March 16. This charge is being applied to intermodal shipments via Chicago, Houston, Savannah, Memphis and Columbus, although the line said it reserved the right to implement this charge in additional locations “as the situation warrants”.

Other lines have also reportedly begun introducing similar fees.

“This additional charge will allow us to manage escalating costs and help us to continue to provide a proper level of service,” CMA CGM said. It will not apply to those moves where a shipper’s nominated trucker has been engaged to provide services.”

Emergency logistics specialist Evolution Time Critical said this week that it had been working with automotive manufacturers and their suppliers to move vital components from Europe and China as a result of cargo being delayed at US ports. It highlighted a similar list of factors “combining to put the region’s infrastructure under increasing pressure”, including continued recovery from natural disasters and poor weather, the new EDL mandate, “and shortage of available trucks and drivers has led to a threat of critically short supply to some suppliers”.

Managing director Brad Brennan said: “Sea freight is a vital aspect of the automotive supply chain, but due to lean inventory or stock availability there is often minimal margin for error. Customers are currently telling us that they are experiencing delays of weeks caused by this perfect storm of events, resulting in the need to secure new parts from the origin suppliers and bring them in as fast as possible.”

and what on earth would be the incentive for a shipowner to use such a register unless it involved some form of subsidy by the US government either in the form of tax incentives or direct cash like with the MSP? and to use foreign nationals to man them deprives the nation of the seamen for any mobilization.

Nobody say you can allow regulations or manning below IMO standard.
In fact, you already have weaker regulations for your domestic fleet and having problems when US flag ships are operating in international trade because your regulations are not fully compliant with IMO and ILO requirements.

But yes, if you want to operate a competitive fleet in international trade foreign built ships are required, as long as US shipyards are unable to compete with foreign yards.
Foreign crews may also be required, at least at the unlicensed level, but that is the same for all other developed countries.

This way the US would be able to build up a fleet of modern ships in international trade that would be available to serve in a crisis situation, be it war or natural disaster.

I’m not the one that is confused, I proposed this exactly because that would enable the domestic fleet to keep the Jones Act, or at least a Cabotage Law, to ensure US Mariners on ships in domestic trade.

All this BS about “there will be 3rd world villagers on the brown water fleet” is just that, BS.
Nobody in their right mind actually believe that. I have not heard or seen any sensible person suggesting it, nor would it be possible.

there are plenty of other ways the US can have more and more modern ships trading internationally such as enforcing the already existing cargo preference laws which for the past four decades have been increasingly ignored. addition ways would be to enact accelerated depreciation for owners of foreign flag ships if they reflag them US or expanding the MSP.

the issue with this thread has completely gone askew though as it was supposed to be about Puerto Rico. Do you advocate PR be served by foreign built ships flying the true US flag or ships of some second US register using both foreign built hulls and partially foreign manning? either way there will be losers in the equation…

Make no mistake, most of our “brown water” employers would love to replace as many of us as possible with “third world villagers”. It’s very common now to have recent immigrants as crew. Some speak practically no English. Some of them actually still live in Mexico, Honduras, and the Phillipines, and just pretend to live in the US.

2 Likes

If Puerto Rico does not want to be under the Jones Act, then Puerto Rican’s do not want to be Americans.

Puerto Rico and Puerto Rican’s benefit enormously from its privileged position as a US territory with US citizenship by birth in Puerto Rico. Most of the people are on American welfare benefits of one form or another. Everyone with a Puerto Rico government job is being mostly supported by US mainland taxpayers. All the business on in Puerto Rico is either American tourists or American companies who are there for special tax breaks.

Puerto Rican’s need to decide whether they want to be Americans or not. I don’t care either way. But they cannot take all the benefits of being Americans withou accepting some of the burdens.

Opposing the Jones Act is extremely selfish and Un-American. In the case of Puerto Rico, it’s also biting the hand that feeds them.

2 Likes

Obviously this guy has never visited an American shipyard, construction site, slaughter house or industrial type farm. I love our country but our type of capitalism is a race to the bottom. Whomever is willing to do it the cheapest is best for the bottom line.

Are there anything stopping Puerto Rico from establishing a Ship Register to fly their own flag:
image
A few modern vessels of the right type and size would be able to carry all the cargo now going by US flag ships and barges to/from PR.

There must be enough Puerto Ricans to man them at all levels, now serving on US and foreign flag ships and shipping companies that would be able and willing to put ships under such flag, if they are given cabotage protection, or some other incentive.

If patriotism and the pride of flying your national flag, without loosing a bunch of money is not enough, then I recond that some form of subsidies would be required.
That is fine, as long as it is within OECD, WTO and whatever trade agreement rules you are signatory to.

To go back to the days of protectionism in international shipping is definitely not a feasible way today. You are no longer in a position to dictate who others buy from, or who does the transport of your trade. All this about 25% or whatever of export/import on US keel is hogwash.
Unless you offer competitive rates and service that can attract shippers to use your ships it ain’t going to happen.

Yes. Puerto Rico is a US territory, not a nation state. Since it’s not a nation, it cannot establish a flag of convenience ship register.

Also, it’s subject to the Jones Act and all its trade with the US must be on Jones Act qualifies US ships.

I sail with a few Puerto Ricans currently in Jone’s Act runs. Next time I’m at work I’ll ask them how much of a pay cut they’d be willing to take to sail under a Puerto Rican flag. I have a hunch I already know the answer though

2 Likes

You have Isle of Man, Bermuda, Gibraltar and the Cayman Islands, all British territories and all with their own Ships Register. Can the US deny PR to do the same?

Whether they would still be subject (hostage??) to the Jones Act if they had their own fleet may be subject to debate, unless they become a State.

BTW; Virgin Island, Guam and American Samoa are all US Territories, but are they covered by the Jones Act??

Whether they would have to take a pay cut is not a certain outcome of flying a PR flag.
There is more to it than that. Taxation for one.

It should be no surprise the the U.K. has a different structure and legal relationship with its territories than the US does.

Depending on when, how, and why different US territories became such, there might be different legal relationships and requirements.

I dont happen to know for certain, but I think the Jones Act applies to all of them. The US Virgin Islands may have a partial waiver, at least I seem to recall hearing that.

Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands both have special tax status where US citizens file local tax returns and pay local taxes, but do not have to file or pay federal taxes, except on any US mainland source income. The tax deal is much more favorable in Puerto Rico. People that have moved to Puerto Rico in recent years are exempt from local income tax.

The legal US tax treatment in Puerto Rico is actually much more favorable than in foreign tax havens. It’s attracting tourism, pharmaceutical, and investment fund companies. It should be attractive to Jones Act trade shipping companies as well.

OK, I’ll answer that one:

FOR GOD’S SAKE MAN! of course it is NOT enough and in fact I doubt very seriously if any US based shipowner gives one rat’s ass for the flag their ship flies provided they make the maximum profits they can. those that do fly the US flag do so because they receive an unambiguous financial benefit for doing so such as access to a restricted trade (Jone’s Act), get a subsidy (MSP) or otherwise a contract they would not otherwise receive (cargo preference or MSC charter). Other than those, there is no benefit whatsoever for a shipowner to choose the US flag and they have received no such benefit now for going on forty odd years and thus the internationally trading US flag fleet is down to 60 or so ships from what once was many hundred back in the 1970’s. Hell, once upon a time in any given year Lykes Bros. had 70 vessels sailing under the US flag…you would encounter their ships all over the globe from Europe to Africa to the Far East (did Lykes serve South America in their day? I forget)

Shipowners MUST be given a financial incentive for any of them to choose the US flag when they otherwise are not required to fly one or they simply WON’T!

PRIDE MY ASS! You SIR are the ultimate RUBE!

1 Like

of course PR cannot have their own ship registry without the US Congress enacting legislation permitting them that right. whatever right the Isle of Man, Gibraltar or the Cayman Islands have to have their own registries was granted to them by Parliament

now if PR wants their own registry and to escape the Jones Act they had better gather a massive war chest to lobby Congress but rest assured that they would be fighting an uphill battle in Washington and be opposed by plenty of lobbying from TOTE, Crowley and every other Jones Act carrier who would lose should such legislation be passed.

@c.captain yes, Lykes Brothers did have US flag ships going to South America as well.

John McPhee’s Looking for a Ship was about a 2nd mate on a South American voyage on the Lykes Brothers freighter Stella Lykes.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/98/07/05/specials/mcphee-ship.html

WOW! they truly covered the entire planet once upon a time!

WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED?