Most countries have laws like the US where vessels exclusively working in their waters must carry their citizens as crew. For example, if a US flag OSV works in Nigeria it has Nigerian crew.
What? We’re exclusively discussing US flag vessels in this thread.
That’s pertinent to the discussion though.
No one is claiming otherwise.
If the union can’t provide a properly licensed individual they get permission to hire a foreign licensed person for that trip.
This is the bullshit part. I don’t know about AMO but MEBA has people… Just not at those wages/benefits/working conditions (i.e., Liberty).
Notice Matson, APL, and Maersk aren’t applying for any waivers.
In fairness, I’ve heard the wages at Liberty came way up when they FINALLY signed their current contact (after like 8 years of no increases).
Granting these waivers is like feeding the stray cats… It only encourages more strays to come around.
AMO currently has pages and pages of unfilled open jobs on the board.
Right… At what wages? I know you probably can’t answer that specifically, but AMOs shitty contracts are well known. And now they reap what they sow.
Why in the world their (and SIUs for that matter) membership put up with their union signing those terrible contracts is something I’ll never understand.
IF they’ll use it, I’d say the fact foreigners had to fill the jobs would be a powerful pro-labor position if they’ll push the employers to arbitration at the next contract reopener.
This is an exclusivity which is outside the purview of STCW enforcement thro’ any PSC. This is when a waiver thro’ lobbying and campaign contribs and business connections is exercised. If any of these boats go to Accra or Lome, the jurisdiction would be different. We also know the PSC regime on the West coast of Africa. Nigerians a very corrupt flag state/PSC inspections.
Yes we are talking US flag here and the enforcement to be compliant under STCW.
I was thinking NOR flag provided exemptions in the patch. I have seen Polar Tankers have a Norwegian application process for their jobs too which leads me to believe they accept NOR credentials on US flag. Is there a waiver there too or do they have NIS ships.
It sure is pertinent but unions can cause a distraction and not address the root cause. Everyone loves a pay raise. There are plenty of threads that discuss that. The union contracts may be a big issue but lacks enforcement thro’ manning laws - the USC and CFR. Non union it is a contract between the seafarer and the operator - breach is a civil case. That is not the discussion and please do not go by my choice of words.
If you think operators and business aren’t cheap, we all know that. Unions provide leverage and back door deals too but laws are for everyone coz of our tax contrib (in theory).
Who gives the operator the permission - the USCG? Thro’ a waiver? The union provides permission to avoid breach of union contract and takes their pound. Seafarer Union dues is the least in the chunk of the collection per seafarer - think pension funds.
MY POINT - the STCW flag state requirements are being breached. For the grain ships on usaid, there could be PSC in the Suez canal, Djibouti, Gibraltar(bunkering). For the car carriers - Japan, Korea, Canada.
If something should happen, and a POR is required (think the worst - oil pollution), the diplomatic row will be grave. Nothing that money cannot buy but the FLAG STATE (USCG) is still responsible for the fall out.
Foreign flag is mortally afraid of USCG PSC when coming into a US port - Why? FINES , FINES FINES.
The purpose is to identify the oversight in law, levy heavy fines and create a precedent.
The easy way out - a floating labor force. No NMC requirements, something FOC’s and International registers are great for.
My focus is to identify this and have letters written to your congressman and senator.
Uphold the law or change it.
The CFR needs to changes the requirements so that I as an AMERICAN am allowed a union job with a foreign cred. Buy one from Ukk rain and then join the union. Would like to see the board for that and the back door deals.
Would like to know if this is illegal.
Yes Liberty is doing it - worst contracts with AMO/SIU
It is worth finding out. I don’t see a Philips getting 130k.
Any source that this is available at for verification.
@Louisd75, @Hawespiper @Sailor51 @DamnYankee @lm1883 @Jemplayer @Sailor51 @Rustee @McGourthyClone et all.
Anyone seen the Liberty waiver or any other deep sea waiver . Not the OSV waivers for which USC has a special carve out.
Anyone know the cred of the foreign AB/officer serving.
Any info and some proof will be useful.
Your information is old for AMO’s contract. Just like MEBA, recent negotiations saw significant increases.
Already answered above, they get paid the working base, no vacation base.
Reach out to CBP. I don’t deal with crewing or that paperwork as CE. I will say that 2 out of the 3 Filipino engine officers that I’ve worked with have been more than capable. The third one filled the position but not much more.
Anything is possible but I would like to see an article with an actual byline that recounted ship name’s, ports where foreign officers were embarked/disembarked, some comment (or even “no comment”) from USCG, etc.
Is there a public notification requirement? What vessel? What operating company? What ports? Time frame? Some evidence? Can the secretary do this in secrecy?
And again, there is no shortage of US mariners. 100% false. It’s a pay shortage. I’d work over to take these jobs if they paid me appropriately. The only situation in which there could be a shortage of Mariners is if there is a shortage of people holding a license, or AB/QMED ticket. Which we don’t have! Just look at the number of academy grads that don’t sail!
And of course it’s physically impossible to run out of OS/wipers because hundreds of millions of people are immediately eligeble to get an MMC endorsed as such.
Can you find out from the Master what the COI manning says.
How many OICEW and engineers are needed for safe manning per the USCG?
This is the minimum required to sail to comply under national and STCW and need to be credentialed by the flag state.
BTW it is the responsibility of the Master to comply with safe manning.
Appreciate the info.
CBP does not control manning and safety… just that a valid travel document and/or visa is required for everyone entering the USA. In China, they call it a face check.
If the CBP finds you a flight risk, they will not let you get off the gangway no matter what but cannot prevent you from working on the ship. That may all be changing with the New open border policy. Let alone enforcing the right to work.
There is something more. A waiver of some sorts has to given.
QUOTE
Yemeni seafarers on lakers (US waters - so not deep sea)
**It all started in the 60’s under I-134 guarantee of work. Very secretive arrangement with **
an SIU official. Money changed hands. This corrupt secretive arrangement blew up after 911.
END QUOTE
I agree there may not be a shortage of license holders, but not many willing to sign up with the unions and one of the causes may be negotiated contracts.
The USCG does not issue/accept COE’s, sailing with crew credentialed by another nation is not acceptable on a US flag ship without a waiver. NIS/GIS/FIS/DIS got over this requirement with the International registry. We are not an international registry…yet.
Not providing seafarers, does not give the union the authority to permit foreign seafarers credentialed outside the USA from serving on US flag ships under any federal authority. It is solely the USCG that has been directed by Congress to administer.
How is the DPA, the operator allowing this oversight.
Who will start in an industry when its clear the gov allows you to get replaced by foreign cheap labour at the stroke of a pen. ( and a brown paper bag)
Is there any other profession in the USA where thats possible?
I wouldnt start in accounting either but thats going to shrink to nothing due to Ai
Times have changed the new tech will replace white collar workers
A post was split to a new topic: Foreigner can serve on both NOR and NIS registered ships,
Probably the beginnings of the “European Model”of seafaring arriving on out shore.
The Filipino officers were filling positions required by the COI, they were not supernumeraries. No need to pester the captain, every ship I’ve sailed on has the COI posted, have you ever sailed on a ship where it wasn’t?
This does not apply to deep sea - (c) see continental shelf. The premise is understandably - my backyard, my rules. Deep sea deals with nations and world trade.
We cannot be looking at a hand book especially from 1944. The US merchant marine was 5,777 ships then. Now you can count them…
I believe what K.C. was trying to point out in referencing 46 CFR 15.720, along with citations from the 1944 and 1965 Merchant Marine Officer’s Handbook, is that this is nothing new…at least in the deep-sea world.
