Be your own Boss! Good hours! Great money!

Things are a little quiet on the forums nowadays, so here is a little red meat thrown into the ring:
For the 32 years I have been in the industry I have watched the U.S. merchant marine drop from about 400 vessels to less than 80. All those 32 years I have heard the same wailing, moaning and posturing you read in these forums, announcing the impending death of the U.S. Merchant Marine. Heard it in the ‘80’s. Heard it in the ‘90’s. Heard it in the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century. Same outrage, same gnashing of teeth, same arguments. To no avail.
The deep-sea U.S. merchant marine is a herd of slowly rotting zombies stumbling from one meal of government-furnished, government -protected brains to another. New ships are being built, but not enough to make a difference. The past is usually prelude to future. Therefore the the US deep-sea merchant marine will continue to dwindle, and Gcaptain forums will increasingly be a sort of digital Elks Club on a Thursday night, filled with opinionated, red-faced duffers shouting at CNN playing on the TV over the bar.
So perhaps a new idea is needed, at the grass roots level, where things happen quickly.
Why don’t U.S. unions band together and operate their own ships? If ship owners are venal devils, if corporations are criminal cabals, then why don’t the hardworking, decent union workers band their money together, charter some ships and chart their own futures? Because, plainly, nothing has changed in 32 years and really, does anyone expect anything to change? The same annual proclamations about the importance of the dwindling merchant marine. The same white papers written by MM academy wonks, and wannabe heads of the Department of Transportation, filled with vague claptrap about how to prevent it. Here’s a simple American adage I hear all the time[I]: if you want to be rich, be the boss, not the worker. [/I]Employee-owned corporations do exist. Given the sage advice I read in these forums, from thoughtful and educated people, whose shrewd acumen exceeds that of any MBA I’ve ever heard, surely running a profitable shipping company would be easy. Unions have access to a motivated workforce, who would profit from their own hard work. They have the expertise. What is the impediment to them chartering their own ships, foreign or domestic, putting their own people to work, and growing American shipping?
A lot of red meat there. Interesting to see who bites, and how hard…

An Owner’s Co-op. I’d buy in. The hard part is the Contract/Charter game, in that it’s not always controlled in the strictest sense by market forces.

[QUOTE=freighterman;185003]Here’s a simple American adage I hear all the time: if you want to be rich, be the boss, not the worker. [/QUOTE]

and what’s yer pernt?

.

[QUOTE=c.captain;185005]and what’s yer pernt?[/QUOTE]
Not making a “pernt”. Asking a question. As in “Why?” As in, "[I]Why[/I] don’t maritime unions band together, charter their own ships, in domestic and/or foreign trades, and thereby increase their ranks, and possibly personal wealth?
(Psychological observation: Few words have as many interpretations as the interrogative “Why”. To some persons “Why?” is a call to intellectual discourse. To others “Why?” is an instant affront and call to battle. To others yet, “WHY?” is a stimulus for automatic and pathological apology. And, to a few, discussion of the word “Why” is an excellent way to bloviate, sit back, and watch the resulting fun).

Heh. Clearly, the people who repeat that adage have never been the boss. But I digress…

[QUOTE=freighterman;185006]Not making a “pernt”. Asking a question. As in “Why?” As in, "[I]Why[/I] don’t maritime unions band together, charter their own ships, in domestic and/or foreign trades, and thereby increase their ranks, and possibly personal wealth?[/QUOTE]

a wonderful idea in theory but terrible in practice. For any union to enter the game as a ship operator, they need capital which is not easy to raise in the market and they are prohibited to use the pension funds on any speculative venture no matter now well intentioned. Back in the 1980’s the MMP was the owner of the ex Matson liner MONTEREY which sat on the San Francisco waterfront for many years until some company called Aloha Pacific Cruises came along and tried to operate her in Hawaii service. Was an abysmal failure and I believe the union lost a huge pile of money on that doomed venture. Who else remembers that one?

Here is a better idea, why not a union become a ship management company and bid on contracts to manage MSC owned ships like the T-AGS vessels? No capital required but rather only bodies and knowledge. Certainly this would be a great first step to a union owned operation but then there is the issue of profits…who gets them?

The pension fund? And possibly a dividend type payment to the membership based on seniority?

Just run it as non profit like everything else in this country… Like the NFL(was). You can get away with murder and pay your executives millions

MM&P tried that in the 80’s.
http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=669752. Check out page 3. Almost bankrupted the union.

[QUOTE=Oil_Is_Evil;185026]MM&P tried that in the 80’s.
http://digitalcollections.library.cmu.edu/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=669752. Check out page 3. Almost bankrupted the union.[/QUOTE]

Yes and I believe there was also a Dude Ranch and Porno TV channel involved in that slick 80’s investing as well.

So, from a particular point of view, you can say that the answer to “Why” is that 30 years ago a group of inept/venal union officials were stupid enough to bet their pension funds on a dodgy business venture, nearly lost the farm, and since then all unions have been terrified of trying anything else even remotely similar, and prefer to wring their hands and complain about their helplessness (or keep their mouths shut and enjoy the gravy of a great paid job with terrific benefits) . That’s a good, solid, honest answer.
Of course, you can keep asking “why?” As in, why use a pension fund? Why not simple investment? I mean, if you really want to stop the U.S. merchant marine from fading away, why not put your money where your mouth is? Just use brains to do it. Don’t buy ships. Too expensive. Charter ships. If the business venture goes south, turn the ship back in at the end of the charter. As to the Monterrey: where is it written that a business must succeed? 3 out of 4 restaurants close in their first year, so what, we all dine at home? Come on. Auto repair shops aren’t started by criminal international financiers. They are made by a mechanic or mechanics who hang a shingle, put their meager capital on the line, and go to work. If they fail, what, they never try again?
Why not a privately owned company? Say you have a union with 1,000 members. Float 10,000 private shares (only union members can own them), each worth $1,000, resulting in $10 million capital, used as collateral to borrow money. Same as nearly every other business out there.
The stock holders (union members) form a committee to write the company bylaws. Lots of checks and balances to prevent shenanigans (mostly how to prevent the accumulation of shares by any one person or small group). The committee hires a Board of Directors, who are experienced shipping businessmen , NOT union members. The BOD operates the company—the union stays out of it, except to vote BODs in or out at the end of their terms. The BOD hires a CEO to run the company on a daily basis. The CEO is a successful businessman from the field, NOT a union member. If the stockholders don’t like the CEO they can talk to the BOD at the end of the year and have them vote him or her out. The CEO knows this, so he or she is inclined to listen to the stockholders.
Every year dividends are paid out ([I]if[/I] there is a net profit). What would be a good dividend? 4%, looking at average stocks: $40 for the $1000 share. Or use the credit union model, which is quite attractive. No dividends, but all profits go into pension fund (though no pension funds are used for investment).
But a profit is perhaps not the selling point. The point is “A” you’re putting union people to work; “B” the union member has just diversified his or her stock portfolio with a stock that might acquire in value; “C” no more complaints about Jeaux Boss, greedy shareholders, evil CEOs, shortsighted business practices, and a dwindling merchant marine because the wise, shrewd, hardworking, virtuous fraternity of union members will be their own bosses.
I’m not suggesting this plan mind you. It just fascinates me “why” a similar plan isn’t done, if all the storm and furor on these forums is a representative example of how the rank and file truly feel about the state of the USMM.

all fine and good, go to the unions with this proposal and see who sits down with you?

I would rather see a mariner group pool their resources and start a small operation much like Schuyler Line did. My company, Vessel Resources, is open to mariner/investors who want to be a part of the operation. If we can get a good contract in hand with the DAUNTLESS, we can then look to up our game to a cargo vessel. Buy in is not big at all but I would want you to also work for very little compensation like myself…that is what entrepreneurs have to do. Long hours with low pay but a vision to build something successful.

You should call my investment adviser Jack Hearn. He has an organization of like minded merchant seaman looking for good solid investment opportunities. He’s done nothing but lose me money so far. I’m thinking of going back to Wu Tang Financial. Their portfolio diversification strategies are top notch.

[QUOTE=Fraqrat;185076]You should call my investment adviser Jack Hearn. He has an organization of like minded merchant seaman looking for good solid investment opportunities. He’s done nothing but lose me money so far. I’m thinking of going back to Wu Tang Financial. Their portfolio diversification strategies are top notch.[/QUOTE]

I heard that Master Mariner Extraordinaire Captain Jack Hearns USM&M’S, KPS, FU2, etc, etc is beyond simply being the most accomplished mariner in history, he is also a hedge fund manager, maritime injury attorney better than Saul Goodman and a trained trauma surgeon who can sew a severed leg back on with a nail and length of 14guage wire. And these are just his non classified skills!

that ain’t shit compared to max hardberger

[QUOTE=c.captain;185017]a wonderful idea in theory but terrible in practice. For any union to enter the game as a ship operator, they need capital which is not easy to raise in the market and they are prohibited to use the pension funds on any speculative venture no matter now well intentioned. Back in the 1980’s the MMP was the owner of the ex Matson liner MONTEREY which sat on the San Francisco waterfront for many years until some company called Aloha Pacific Cruises came along and tried to operate her in Hawaii service. Was an abysmal failure and I believe the union lost a huge pile of money on that doomed venture. [B][U]Who else remembers that one[/U][/B]?

Here is a better idea, why not a union become a ship management company and bid on contracts to manage MSC owned ships like the T-AGS vessels? No capital required but rather only bodies and knowledge. Certainly this would be a great first step to a union owned operation but then there is the issue of profits…who gets them?[/QUOTE]

I’m sure Bob Lowen did…

[QUOTE=freighterman;185006]Not making a “pernt”. Asking a question. As in “Why?” As in, "[I]Why[/I] don’t maritime unions band together, charter their own ships, in domestic and/or foreign trades, and thereby increase their ranks, and possibly personal wealth?
[/QUOTE]

Because then they wouldn’t be unions any more. They’d be ship owners/charterers/whateverers.

See how simple that was?

By the way, my union rep is cooling his heels in a state prison for tax evasion. He’s the one I should trust with my investments?

[QUOTE=catherder;185090]Because then they wouldn’t be unions any more. They’d be ship owners.

See how simple that was?[/QUOTE]

Can’t fault that logic.

[QUOTE=freighterman;185091]Can’t fault that logic.[/QUOTE]

See my edit. Mo’ betta.

[QUOTE=c.captain;185017]a wonderful idea in theory but terrible in practice. For any union to enter the game as a ship operator, they need capital which is not easy to raise in the market and they are prohibited to use the pension funds on any speculative venture no matter now well intentioned. Back in the 1980’s the MMP was the owner of the ex Matson liner MONTEREY which sat on the San Francisco waterfront for many years until some company called Aloha Pacific Cruises came along and tried to operate her in Hawaii service. Was an abysmal failure and I believe the union lost a huge pile of money on that doomed venture. Who else remembers that one?

Here is a better idea, why not a union become a ship management company and bid on contracts to manage MSC owned ships like the T-AGS vessels? No capital required but rather only bodies and knowledge. Certainly this would be a great first step to a union owned operation but then there is the issue of profits…who gets them?[/QUOTE]

The Monterey is not the only ship the MMP Pension owned. They picked up the Gulf Oil tankers and ran them as American Heavy Lift (AHL) until 1989 or so when they sold it off. The MEBA used some of its pension money to form First American Bulk Carrier Corp. (FABC) and build 2 containerships.

It is a nice idea to use pension money to run ships that employ your own membership. Ideally it is a win-win assuming the ships are profitable and both the membership and pension make money. However the union has a fiduciary duty to serve its membership first and foremost which often runs counter to owning and operating ships.