You guys and all your “cheap labor” comments.
Do you know what a SIU Apprentice makes? They can make OT which helps, but their day rate is about the same as a cadet. Nobody’s complaining about them.
Cheap labor? You make it sound like the American fleet couldn’t possibly survive without the cadets and their ability to…stand a watch? Chip and paint? Scrub toilets? Just what is it that the cadets contribute to the maintenance and running of a vessel that make them so key to the operation?
Maybe this is a dumb question - if the female cadets can’t sail without being molested, won’t the various perverts involved just wait until they show up after graduation and then molest them?
I think its actually an issue for both men and women if you are following the MLAA blog. I personally never experienced that, but I do believe the victims on that blog.
But to your point getting those predatory individuals out of the maritime ecosystem should be the goal. How to do that and create a durable system of safeguards to protect everyone; not just female cadets, should be our aspiration…
Excellent point! Let’s consider this.
Back in the day a commercial cadet cost wages, food, a berth and other expenses. A commercial cadet’s labor, amusement, future employment, or greasing the wheels was his value. A cadet was worth having when the employer got more in value than was his cost. We know that the value provided by the sum of all cadets was worth more than the sum of their costs otherwise the commercial cadet would have gone away as a burdensome expense.
Let’s look at today’s costs and values. A commercial cadet today has similar costs as before with the additional risk of the cost of legal defense/prosecutions/fines, reputational damage/repair, business losses to angered customers, arrests against a ship, job losses by management ashore, and other risk costs.
What additional value is provided by today’s commercial cadet? Anyone?
So the question is: Are cadets worth the expense of having? If their costs have increased but their value has remained the same then at what point do cadets go away? We may be at that point today.
Yes. But then it won’t be the schools and the administrators and the congressmen who look bad. It’ll be the company and they’ll blame the master.
I don’t think the problem with cadets getting assaulted is due to cadet shipping. It is a problem of dirt bag predators on these ships. The focus should be on identifying these dirt bags, arresting, trying and locking them up.
It is the responsibility of all the share holders, the school, the companies, the senior officers on the ships, and the entire crew to ensure an environment is put in place that anyone who is assaulted feels safe to report it. That they are confident their complaint will be investigated fully, and if merited, arrests made.
If it is proved that any of the share holders responsible for these cadets does not provide for that environment, or worse, ignore, disregard, or attempt to sweep under the carpet any of these allegations, they should be immediately dismissed.
The federal government either through MARAD or the US Coast Guard can, and should, establish a hot line where these complaints can be made if the injured party feel uncomfortable with the school or company or captain.
This is not a victim problem, this is a dirt bag problem.
How about the recognition that the future of the industry is going to (eventually) be placed in that cadet’s hands? May not fit nicely in some bean counter’s spreadsheet for “cost effectiveness” but training the next generation of people in our industry is a very important responsibility of today’s mariners. Otherwise, be prepared to accept a new officer that has purely school experience and nothing else. I don’t want that.
100% on point
For the company? With your argument, maybe not.
But for the cadet, it’s invaluable. I could go on and on as to reasons why, but as somebody from Schuyler, who did 2 training cruises and 1 cadet observer, it is absolutely worthwhile for the cadet. And I didn’t even get a job with the company I worked for. Who happens to be the same company Midshipman X worked for.
In my opinion, the best training regimen would be what I did - a mix of training ship and cadet ship. But not everyone feels that way.
The few pricks onboard causing this need a royal ass beating. Good programs by all the schools are compromised by these few. Your days are numbered
I sailed as second mate and as junior mate in a company training ship, an 85,000 Dwt tanker in normal trade. Back then the company, like many others of the period were training for the future.
We carried 6 deck and 6 engineering cadets, two extra officers, one deck and one engineer. The master held an extra-master certificate and a second class engineer ticket (steam). Cadets assembled in the study room for oral examination every Sunday afternoon by the master when at sea. We called the chief mate, master without portfolio.
Other companies like British India, once you had obtained second mate you were let go with a promise of rehire when you obtained a masters certificate and you rejoined as third mate.
Contemporaries of mine were indentured where mostly parents paid the shipping company for the right for their child to labour onboard.
An extra-master qualification involved a year study after master unlimited and was a prerequisite for any position in a Maritime School and has now been superseded by university degrees.
A 2nd class steam is required for 1st Assistant Engineer unlimited.
There was a short pre-sea course before cadets joined for their first trip.
Exactly this. That was always my view and the reason I kept an interest in the program at my former school…I had a vested interest in the product they put out, because that is the hiring pool. If I’m hiring a new 3rd, high likelihood they just graduated from an academy and I hope they were properly trained.
It seems you are missing the entire point, purpose, and mandate of academies: to produce officers ready for work. If they wanted to start unlicensed they could have skipped the academy (and doubled the time commitment).
Thinking back, cadet shipping provided a lot of “firsts” for me and I doubt I’m alone. First time traveling by myself, first time to that part of the country, first time pulling a cylinder head on an engine that wasn’t located in a building, first time troubleshooting a steam boiler issue that wasn’t purely academic, etc.
All these experiences were vital, and none of them could have happened surrounded by 100 classmates on a training ship.
Oh, and about those toilets…on my cadet ship I did have to fix the Captains toilet, but I was working right alongside the 1stA/E because he gave a shit and was a good mentor.
But anyway, I agree with @texastanker : its not a Cadet problem, its an asshole and asshole enabler problem. Send me a Cadet any day. I’ll gladly train them.
“Other companies like British India, once you had obtained second mate you were let go with a promise of rehire when you obtained a masters certificate and you rejoined as third mate.”
So the second mate quits, goes someplace else, gets a master’s cert, and gets rehired as the third mate?
I am not sure that makes sense…
Well said shipengr.
I went to an academy that provided all the required sea time on their training ship I was fortunate to be able to voluntarily supplement that time with 3 weeks on a tanker over Christmas break. The ship I went to already had a deck and engine cadet from USMMA At their expense, the company sent the USMMA cadets home so they could have the holidays with their families, and flew us cross country to take their place. Three weeks later they did the opposite, at their expense. Theyvappreciated the value of investing in the next generation. Unfortunately, that company (Marine Transport Lines) is now defunct
Been thinking about this a lot and the thing that really gets to me is that when the system is working properly the cadet arrangement is mutually beneficial. I pretty much realized on my first cadet ship that whatever I had been taught in school hadn’t stuck too well or been too relevant and those guys got me up to speed enough that I haven’t felt uncomfortable on a diesel ship sense. Some of them were dicks or crazy but no worse than in any job and they all taught me something. Wet ship, plenty of drinking and carousing ashore, etc., no issues. Typical stuff similar to my field internships in a previous career. It’s super fucked that all this pervert rapist shit has deprived future cadets of this educational opportunity, I didn’t learn a thing hardly on the training ship where I went.
I was chatting with a licensed unlimited master last night and this topic came up. He said that when the company eventually asks him how many cadets he wants he will say (I’m paraphrasing):
“Zero. Zilch. Not a single cadet, ever. Should I risk my job, my family, my kid’s educations, my future, because a senior officer can’t keep his dick in his pants? Not worth it.”
He then asked rhetorically if his license insurance covers civil fines against him in the event a cadet is molested on his ship by a crew member.
That right there is what masters will have to weigh. That is the same for crewing managers ashore, company and union officers, school administrators. Heck, maybe the insurance companies get involved. It’s all risk and cost.
The rest of the arguments that it’s good for the development of the students, that it’s harming the victims… completely true. But weighed against the risk and cost? Bye-bye cadet shipping.
I’ve found that cadets add a great deal to our operation, managed properly they can ease the workload on the ship’s officers, especially on a busy coast-wise.
I certainly would not assign cadets any job solely for the purpose of humiliating them, they should be treated with dignity and respect and made to feel like part of the crew, same as any other crewmember.
Should I risk my job, my family, my kid’s educations, my future, because a senior officer can’t keep his dick in his pants?
Yes he fu&@ing should because that’s his damn job as Master.
No offense, but that captain sounds like he is exactly 100% a part of the problem.
If he afraid that having an cadet will cause his officers to break the law under his command, and refuses to enforce regulations or hold his officers accountable, then he has no business in a management role, never mind being in command of a ship.
Sounds like his efforts should be concentrated on getting rid of the scumbags on his crew and not about stifling the education of future mariners. That whole statement says more about his ship and crew than it does about cadet shipping. Would a “senior officer who can’t keep his dick in his pants” be okay around a female 3M/3AE fresh out of school, or is it only the (barely younger) cadets that he’s attracted to?
I sail master myself, though on towing vessels so never get cadets, but my cadet shipping experience was the most valuable part of my four years at the academy. I was fortunate enough to sail on ships with officers who were eager to teach so long as I had a good attitude (which I did).
Some of the most hypocritical (whiny) officers I’ve sailed with were the ones that hated cadets… yet also constantly complained that the academies were turning out new 3rds that didn’t have any practical experience. Sometimes the light bulb would light up after they put two and two together…
100 pct