Another subtle attack on Jones Act?


#21

understood, so the only solution is $, treating employees well. What the hell else would increase the number of available mariners?


#22

[QUOTE=z-drive;181882]understood, so the only solution is $, treating employees well. What the hell else would increase the number of available mariners?[/QUOTE]

well keeping RRF ships operating globally carrying DOD cargo as well as being used as training platforms for new mariners would go a very long way indeed


#23

In August 2014 they did a turbo activation of 13 ships. Just one week turn out do anchoring and speed trial and back to the dock. They were scrambling to find people like crazy. I was aboard the SS Regulus and it seemed like 75% of the crew other than the permanent ROS crew were retirees from MM&P or MEBA, or they were like me on vacation from their normal jobs. We had guys showing up an hour before we headed out to sea. If they had to crew those things up in a big time activation they would be screwed. Not to mention how many problems they end up finding when they do turbo activations. Ships like that do not like sitting for so long. Yes they maybe able to crew it up and be ready to load cargo in 96 hours, but good luck loading cargo and heading to the Middle East with a plugged up condenser and whatever other problems surface. If it wasn’t for the extremely generous overtime for turbo activations most wouldn’t even consider doing the activations.


#24

The DOD doesn’t want RRF ships to carry their cargo, that’s why Walenius/Wilhelmsen ships are on the MSP role. There was frequent breakdown, equipment malfunctions, and a number of vessels that were not suited for the Army needs so they decided to charter out. Secondly, right now there simply isn’t enough cargo at any one time to justify the ships. Sure, there’s cargo all over the place, but without commercial augmentation the ships would only run at 30% capacity at any given time, if that.


#25

[QUOTE=lm1883;181891]The DOD doesn’t want RRF ships to carry their cargo, that’s why Walenius/Wilhelmsen ships are on the MSP role. There was frequent breakdown, equipment malfunctions, and a number of vessels that were not suited for the Army needs so they decided to charter out. Secondly, right now there simply isn’t enough cargo at any one time to justify the ships. Sure, there’s cargo all over the place, but without commercial augmentation the ships would only run at 30% capacity at any given time, if that.[/QUOTE]

what a crock of BULLSHIT! If there isn’t enough DoD cargo to fill all the RRF ro/ro’s then only run enough ships so they are filled but STOP using foreign manned ships for the work when there are US mariners who the GOOBERMINT knows they need for an emergency sealift!


#26

[QUOTE=c.captain;181892]what a crock of BULLSHIT! If there isn’t enough DoD cargo to fill all the RRF ro/ro’s then only run enough ships so they are filled but STOP using foreign manned ships for the work when there are US mariners who the GOOBERMINT knows they need for an emergency sealift![/QUOTE]

Is this really going on? I was under the impression that to carry DoD cargo, it had to be on U.S. flagged ships, that were U.S. crewed and that even the company had to be a U.S. based company, which was why Maersk was not able to manage a few of the MaRaD ships they had anymore? They even got rid of the port engineer on one of the MaRad ships I used to work on because he was Brittish.


#27

The Jones Act is not even on congress radar except the repeal thereof. When they recently approved the export of US oil which was previously supposed to be kept in the USA to lower gas prices and make products cheaper for US citizens there was NO provision as to what ships carry it. Considering the under employment in the USA and the loss of US O&G jobs you would think they would have insisted that at least a percentage of US oil being exported would have to leave on US ships but it never crossed their minds. I asked my congressmen and they said the US did not have the capability which is BS. Voting to export US oil was a gift to the people congress work for, not us, and had nothing to do with working folks.
Vote NO incumbent or get used to the screwing.


#28

[QUOTE=tengineer1;181898]Vote NO incumbent or get used to the screwing.[/QUOTE]

the problem is not the people it is the system that gets them elected…as soon as you throw out one bum, the one who takes his place is beholden to the same BIG MONEY which financed his campaign. DEMAND ELECTION FINANCE REFORM!

      • Updated - - -

[QUOTE=cajaya;181896]Is this really going on? I was under the impression that to carry DoD cargo, it had to be on U.S. flagged ships,[/QUOTE]

Steamer…can you do me a favor and answer this please? I am suffering a severe cerebral aneurysm at the moment.


#29

They rarely use Foreign labor to transport their cargo, mostly it will go in MSP bottoms. There were frequent problems with RRF vessels accomplishing their “missions” in required time frames, for example, one RRF vessel sat for days because it’s stern ramp could not be lowered. The cargo was for the 101st Airborne and happened to be time sensitive. Another major complaint was that the ramps were insufficient with regard to the weight of an M1 tank (65t)or if it was, it could not simultaneously sustain a deadline M1 and the vehicle to tow it (M88 if I remember right). Typically you would then LOLO but the cranes on some the ramped vessels couldn’t handle the load.

As far as the current cargo situation maybe Kennebec Captain (or anyone with Waterman or ARC) could chime in as this seems to be his field of operations. In the briefings I attended,the army postulated that it was easier and cheaper for them to use space available on a regular liner service than charter ships that they felt did not meet their operational or budgetary needs.

For the record I do agree that they should be utilized at the rate of two or three a year on a rotational basis, but unfortunately, they will use the money helmets for the F35.


#30

[QUOTE=tengineer1;181898]The Jones Act is not even on congress radar except the repeal thereof. When they recently approved the export of US oil which was previously supposed to be kept in the USA to lower gas prices and make products cheaper for US citizens there was NO provision as to what ships carry it. Considering the under employment in the USA and the loss of US O&G jobs you would think they would have insisted that at least a percentage of US oil being exported would have to leave on US ships but it never crossed their minds. I asked my congressmen and they said the US did not have the capability which is BS. Voting to export US oil was a gift to the people congress work for, not us, and had nothing to do with working folks.
Vote NO incumbent or get used to the screwing.[/QUOTE]

Which congressperson was this? Just curious. I happen to like my congressperson, never wrote to them for anything but I read up on how they vote and I didnt see anything that looked disturbing.


#31

[QUOTE=cajaya;181902]Which congressperson was this? Just curious. I happen to like my congressperson, never wrote to them for anything but I read up on how they vote and I didnt see anything that looked disturbing.[/QUOTE]

This export of US crude oil is going on now to other countries on foreign flag bottoms. This news is not new to those that turn off the TV news.
Write your congressman and ask why no US shipping jobs were written in to the bill. They could have done it with one sentence.


#32

[QUOTE=tengineer1;181905]http://www.wsj.com/articles/congressional-leaders-agree-to-lift-40-year-ban-on-oil-exports-1450242995

This export of US crude oil is going on now to other countries on foreign flag bottoms. This news is not new to those that turn off the TV news.
Write your congressman and ask why no US shipping jobs were written in to the bill. They could have done it with one sentence.[/QUOTE]

I have a congresswoman. Maybe because nobody asked? Can’t those bills be ammended/changed whatever or a new bill be written if enough people ask


#33

[QUOTE=cajaya;181907]I have a congresswoman. Maybe because nobody asked? Can’t those bills be ammended/changed whatever or a new bill be written if enough people ask[/QUOTE]

Congress critter, whatever. Maybe because US jobs are not a priority? Yes, let us know when your congress critter says she’ll propose such.


#34

[QUOTE=cajaya;181907]I have a congresswoman.[/QUOTE]

Is she a human or a huwoman?


#35

[QUOTE=c.captain;181899]
Steamer…can you do me a favor and answer this please?[/QUOTE]

Here ya go … http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfars/html/current/247_5.htm

Way back before defense contractors owned Congress the law said 100 percent had to be carried on privately owned US flagged ships. Ironically, after Eisenhower warned us about the threat those contractors posed to a free and healthy society, the law was amended to require only 50 percent. Now there is a separate law called the [I]Military[/I] Cargo Preference Act which has enough loopholes in it pass a FoC RoRo full of campaign contributions.

We have those patriotic seafarers walking the model lined halls of MARAD to thank for their support of the US Merchant Marine.


#36

[QUOTE=tengineer1;181917]Congress critter, whatever. Maybe because US jobs are not a priority? Yes, let us know when your congress critter says she’ll propose such.[/QUOTE]
I try to be realistic about things. The ones pushing for it were obviously the companies who really don’t care about the Jones Act. They were the ones putting their two cents in with the politicians. I mean, did any of the unions or companies that operate U.S. flagged tankers try to pitch in at all? I don’t really pay attention to these things but I assume the companies that have U.S. flagged tankers also have foreign ones so it wouldn’t be to their benefit, so obviously the unions didn’t try to use any of the union money or SPAD contributions that they extort from their members to do anything about it. I just see it as something that happened because there was no voice or input from the worker.

I can’t see my congresswoman caring about this since politicians are in it to get votes. Jones Act shipping and O&G are not big industries where I live and don’t employ many people. Most people didn’t even know what I was talking about when I said I worked “offshore”.

Yea, I would write to her if I cared more. But frankly, I don’t. I can be a letter writing pain in the ass if it’s something I’m peeved about.
The one tanker I worked on, the crew was all from Yemen (and they lived there) the officers where all white privileged academy grads (no hawsepipers), and there was one minority woman working as a cook.

DoD related jobs, that’s different. Companies usually don’t get a way as much with such B.S. when dealing directly with the government. I am not gonna write letters so the white privileged class or a bunch of union bosses can become even more privileged (or to fund any families in Yemen), sorry.


#37

[QUOTE=Steamer;181921]Here ya go … http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfars/html/current/247_5.htm

Now there is a separate law called the [I]Military[/I] Cargo Preference Act which has enough loopholes in it pass a FoC RoRo full of campaign contributions.
[/QUOTE]

What is FoC? Foreign owned company?


#38

[QUOTE=cajaya;181936]What is FoC? Foreign owned company?[/QUOTE]

Flag of Convenience


#39

You are right about that, it makes good sense. That’s probably why the govt hasn’t done it.

The Cape Rise and her ro/ro sisters could be kept busy moving vehicles back and forth to the ME for years probably. Let alone all of the other places the military has equipment.


#40

[QUOTE=cajaya;181931]Yea, I would write to her if I cared more. But frankly, I don’t. I can be a letter writing pain in the ass if it’s something I’m peeved about.[/QUOTE]

Well with this statement, I guess you will be more than happy to be making the same wages as Sailors from the Third World. Not sure where you live (or what rock you live under) but with an attitude like this I hope you can live on around a grand a month as there would be no reason for any company to pay more.

So, keep up with an attitude like this and you will have more to bitch about than not getting hit on.