And to anchorman: I ‘HOPE’ this won’t come to pass, and I ‘HOPE’ that some more intelligent people will read, heed, and lead to a more equitable position for US. That does NOT mean that I don’t ‘see’, or don’t ‘get it’ as you perceive it to be. But I know that this will take away US citizen mariners jobs, livelihoods and homes. You and I may not agree, and that’s OK, I wish you well when you see the foreign guy coming down the dock to relieve you. But by then it will be too late to try to change it.[/QUOTE]
The part that I don’t get is not being smart enough as mariners to become STCW compliant while protecting US jobs at the same time - not that everything that you guys say is wrong, but I do believe some of the sentiment is misplaced for that reason. Yes, that does mean a USCG’d issued CEC would be in the mix. Please, I’m not worried about a foreign guy taking my job, and I KNOW I have a lifelong job where I’m at, I just spent a month in Norway on a new build construction vessel that would put the HOS Achiever and Iron Horse to shame, for the purpose of bringing back and crewing with US Mariners.
Ok. Now that you have stated your proud belief that your job/career/livelihood is safe; how about the upcoming young bloods that you have stated you “regularly help”?
How many more of them do you think you will be able to help? Do you speak filipino? How about UNology? Is this what we should expect for our industry?
[QUOTE=cappy208;43142]Ok. Now that you have stated your proud belief that your job/career/livelihood is safe; how about the upcoming young bloods that you have stated you “regularly help”?
How many more of them do you think you will be able to help? Do you speak filipino? How about UNology? Is this what we should expect for our industry?[/QUOTE]
how about the upcoming young bloods that you have stated you “regularly help”? That will continue, we have over 30 US flagged new builds coming down the pipe that this ruling will not effect whatsoever.
How many more of them do you think you will be able to help? 1 - 1000…somewhere in there.
Do you speak filipino? Nope.
How about UNology? Nope.
Is this what we should expect for our industry? English is the maritime language, but I have a few friends trying to learn Portuguese with Rosetta Stone since their US flagged vessel are under long term contract in Brazil, but I believe that is more for doing things while off the vessel.
[QUOTE=Steamer;43121]It doesn’t matter how much they massage the wording, it is still the same knife in our backs. The Notice is riddled with the terms; policies, procedures, proposed, and the real clincher - “anticipation of the regulatory changes.” They don’t give a damn about our advice, they are just doing market research, they want to know who is willing to buy this product, how much they will pay, and what kind of resistance they might encounter.
The only thing missing is the term NPRM but the address for comments is “Federal Rulemaking Portal” so trying to hide this behind the smokescreen that it is just a polite request for advice is disingenuous to say the least.
If they cared about advice, they would have presented this to MERPAC, the one organization that was established to provide advice on just this sort of issue. I suspect that the MERPAC meeting was cancelled because they really didn’t want to go face to face with the one group that would have given them some advice.
My advice to the USCG is to stand up for the flag and the American mariner. Stand up for the taxpayer who just funded your existence. Stand up for the security a strong American merchant marine brings this country. How about just stand up rather than bending over for every politician and businessman with a handful of money and promises.[/QUOTE]
regardless of what you say which is most likely completely accurate, have you filed your comments to the “fact finding”?..NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK THE OUTCOME WILL BE, WE MUST BE ON RECORD IN SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS PROTESTING THE POTENTIAL OF MAJOR JOB LOSSES BY AMERICAN TO FOREIGN MARINERS IF THIS HAPPENS WITHOUT OUR LEGAL PROTECTIONS BEING ENFORCED! I thought that the Unions would be all over this one like flies on shit, but they are too busy counting their money or shaking down the rank and file for more green (a shoutout to the AMO!) rather than taking a principled stand and fighting for their members and American mariners in general. Forget them and their filthy corruption…it is up to us as individual US citizen professional mariners to make our voices heard.
To everybody here who hasn’t filed your comments on this “fact finding proposal” yet…PLEASE DO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE! There is only a week till the cut off.
[quote=seadawg;43131]
as far as associations/unions are concerned: Neither have been very successful in the “recent past”…the gcma(nma)/gom unionization debacle some years back and mtva/“toar 30 day wonder” come to mind…“associations” tend to be always “too little too late”!!
…we’re gonna fucking die"!!may the us mariner rip!![/quote]
precisely why a “real” association of all professional mariners regardless of industry sector or certificate grade is needed not just right now, but in the future. What the hell would be wrong with having one i ask?
[QUOTE=c.captain;43150]precisely why a “real” association of all professional mariners regardless of industry sector or certificate grade is needed not just right now, but in the future. What the hell would be wrong with having one i ask?[/QUOTE]
the last time I visited these sites??
OMSA: issue referenced on their site/made comment on docket
MTVA: no mention of this issue/no comment on docket
NMA: no mention /no comment
based on this observation…if I was going to pursue the issue I would direct my concerns at OMSA…not contribute to the confusion by adding another “association” to the “pot”…but be assured that their are those out there willing to “buy into your membership”…to quote P. T. Barnum “there is a sucker born every minute…this way to the egress”??
wish you luck attempting to get “our gang” together!!
[QUOTE=c.captain;43150]precisely why a “real” association of all professional mariners regardless of industry sector or certificate grade is needed not just right now, but in the future. What the hell would be wrong with having one i ask?[/QUOTE]
Make a thread soliciting membership - talking about it is talking about it.
[QUOTE=seadawg;43153]the last time I visited these sites??
OMSA: issue referenced on their site/made comment on docket
MTVA: no mention of this issue/no comment on docket
NMA: no mention /no comment
based on this observation…if I was going to pursue the issue I would direct my concerns at OMSA…not contribute to the confusion by adding another “association” to the “pot”…but be assured that their are those out there willing to “buy into your membership”…to quote P. T. Barnum “there is a sucker born every minute…this way to the egress”??
wish you luck attempting to get “our gang” together!![/QUOTE]
Seadawg
OMSA is in no way a representative of the US mariner. They represent the Louisiana based Offshore Vessel Operators and their comment listed in the Docket on this issue is strongly in favor of it being implemented. They want more foreign mariners with US endorsements.
Concerning the other associations you listed, they both have a relatively small footprint but at least they do have a footprint and that is commendable. I’ve spoken to Richard Block previously about some of the issues I have raised here and found him to be genuinely concerned about the situation but not able to offer much in the way of action in Washington. I would want nothing more that for both of them to become much more of a truly national association with a stronger voice with the USCG and in Congress. Since both are primarily focussed on the small vessel maritime industry mainly towing vessels it makes neither a true national organization with broad industry scope. Doesn’t mean that they aren’t good organizations doing valuable work on behalf of US mariners. I am genuinely sorry that neither organization has yet commented on the notice in the Federal Register and hope that they will.
As far as a new association being a way to sucker mariners to fork over money…I am truly sorry that you feel that way, but with the history of the US maritime industry using and abusing mariners, I see why you would be cynical. I think an excellent version of a strong combined mariners association & trade union is Nautilus Internationalin Europe. If you take away the trade union part and just look at the association part, I think that they have an impressive organization which would be a very good model to follow.
[QUOTE=anchorman;43154]Make a thread soliciting membership - talking about it is talking about it.[/QUOTE]
I wished it was just that simple as putting out a post asking who wants in but forming such an association will have only one shot at getting established so it takes planning before just putting out a shingle. You know as well as I that there would be considerable opposition from both the unions and the vessel owners as they will see an association as a threat. No matter how much one could say about trying to convince the other parties that the association’s charter would not in any way be for collective bargaining and only for representing mariner interest in Washington, it will not be believed by these groups. The chances of fighting and beating both OMSA and the unions makes getting such an association on its feet difficult at best. I am a realist and recognize that getting an association formed and becoming a going concern would more than likely not make it hence why we do not have such an association today.
Yes, talking is just talking but it doesn’t hurt to express an opinion that not having a broad based association for US mariners is genuinely unfortunate because there is no voice for us in Washington and everyone of us with a license or MMD are in the end coming out on the losing end of the deal time after time.
[QUOTE=CaptAndrew;43178]How many days does it take to appear. I made my comment, got a confirmation days ago and I still don’t see it. Are they censoring the comments?[/QUOTE]
Assuming you have made sure to check the “public submissions” box on the search page ( and you must do that each time you visit the page) you will see all the submissions.
[QUOTE=c.captain;43177]OMSA is in no way a representative of the US mariner. They represent the Louisiana based Offshore Vessel Operators and their comment listed in the Docket on this issue is strongly in favor of it being implemented.[/QUOTE]
yaah recon…maybe that is why they were first to comment…just maybe they might be a guiding force on how this is being presented??
will reiterate.if I was going to pursue the issue I would direct my concerns [B][U]AT[/U][/B] OMSA!!
on a personal note…further as to associations…I am missing the joiner gene from my DNA…this “ole dawg” climbed out the “puppy box” a very long time ago and never looked back!!
[QUOTE=seadawg;43189]yaah recon…maybe that is why they were first to comment…just maybe they might be a guiding force on how this is being presented??
will reiterate.if I was going to pursue the issue I would direct my concerns [B][U]AT[/U][/B] OMSA!![/QUOTE]
Sorry seadawg but if you agree that they don’t give a shit about US mariners then why ask anything of them? They look out for the interests of their members only and those are the OCS service vessel owners. If they are “a guiding force” behind this then it shows how utterly corrupt the system is and why it needs to be fought by the mariners.
This email was just sent moments ago to the NMA asking for comment:
Dear Captains Block & Dady
I wish to ask if your organization knows about this in the Federal Register? If not, I urge you to read it carefully because I believe that it “gives away the store” for the US citizen mariner. If you agree, I hope that NMA will comment for the Docket before the Oct. 27 deadline in opposition of this being implemented without strong language to protect the American mariner.
"The Coast Guard has published a notice and request for comments on development of a policy for recognition of foreign STCW certificates.
The notice appears in the September 27, 2010 Federal Register (75 FR 59281) and is available at:
sorry c.captain…your missing “it”…"I would direct my cocerns [B][U]AT-NOT-TO[/U][/B] OMSA…after all who was formost to comment and stands to potentially gain in this…why was the waiver process addressed while there is no mention of safe guarding US mariners jobs…kind of like “rubbing our noses in it”??
Ok, I see the difference between at and to, but my comment to the Notice calls out the likelihood of owner/operators of US flagged vessels finding ways of using the newly USCG approved and certified foreign mariners in place of U.S. mariners and OMSA represents a good many of those companies who clearly stand to gain. I just didn’t call out OMSA per se since they aren’t a vessel owner/operator, but I am with you when you say that they are “rubbing our noses in it”!
[QUOTE=SaltySailor;42970]I also don’t thibk this is going to change much. The Jones Act still applies and as MOST US vessels are in fact engaged in Jones Act trade those jobs (the vast majority) are “safe”. I dunno about those deep-sea MSP ships, but they are all union manned vessels as far as I l know, so those jobs are also “safe”.
As I read the proposed changes, it seems this is something that would mostly apply in cases such as using a US flagged OSV in foreign waters (Brazil, Africa, Asia) and while the master (perhaps the CE as well?) might be American the seamen might be local nationals while the vessel is on charter overseas. I have in fact heard of several such arrangements from having worked a bit down in the GOM myself.
The upside to this is that foreign equivalency for USCG issued MMC’s should also be much easier for any US mariners that would like to have foreign endorsements (Panama anybody?).
I sure hope more mariners do indeed post comments to these proposed changes, as it’s our right to do so. But the same can also be said about voting and look at how many US Merchant Mariners actually supported and voted for Mr. Mc Cain who’s the same guy that has been gunning for the Jones Act for years and that (the repeal of the Jones Act) would be a far swifter death to the US Merchant Marine than these proposed rule changes by the USCG in regards to US endorsement of foreign STCW certs (I just want to make sure I can now get Panamanian, Liberian and Bahamian endorsements as well).[/QUOTE]
The problem is one of mission creep. If we allow foreign mariners on our A,erican flagged OSV’s working in foreign oilfields it will just be a matter of time before they are working here.
Very similar to right after Katrina/Rita when they allowed dozens of foreign vessels into the GoM to do repair work and then they never left. Never mistake any corporation to choose a moral path over a profitable one…it just ain’t the way business in the US is done!
Also need to mention that there is less than a week to file comments on this issue so doing it online is probably best now. To do it:
[QUOTE=c.captain;43201]but my comment to the Notice calls out the likelihood of owner/operators of US flagged vessels finding ways of using the newly USCG approved and certified foreign mariners in place of U.S. mariners and OMSA represents a good many of those companies who clearly stand to gain. I just didn’t call out OMSA per se since they aren’t a vessel owner/operator[/QUOTE]
you are correct in your assessment of OMSA…OMSA is an [B][U]“ASSOCIATION”[/U][/B] of vessel owner/operators…a very effective one I might add!!one has to wonder from where and how they derived such influence;);)??
