I was under the impression Ms Holly was not CG, but a civil service employee, as my neighbor employed in the USCG office was down the road a bit. Never saw Ms Holly in a uniform, Nor my neighbor.
They also had and still have a lot of vessels less than 100 tons, so helping guys get up into the major leagues was helpful.
The reason that they would not build any more unlimited hulls is because they had such a hard time manning that one ship. So helping mariners out under the table was in their interest.
GS ratings are civil service pay grades. The pay is not great but you have some job security, decent benefits and a pension. GS 7 folks are underpaid for the qualifications required in my opinion. GS 12 is just getting into “middle class” income range and most positions in the grade require advanced degrees or extensive experience. The overwhelming majority of GS employees I have dealt with do a good job, I cannot say the same for some of the contract employees that have replaced them,
My pop was a 30 year retiree from the navy. Went to work after that as a GS something inspecting missle systems and doing sea trials on subs. He was quite alright with his pay and gave a shit about his work. I don’t know what GS level Ms Holly was, but was very professional and left you with no doubt she meant business, in a very polite way.
1 Like
Yeah. For time to count as mate you need to be OICNW and there is only one person in charge on watch at a time.
1 Like
There is no requirement to be on a vessel requiring a First Assistant Engineer. That was just NMC internal policy, not an actual regulation. They aren’t allowed to “regulate by policy” and were eventually forced to actually follow the regulations by someone complaining to the right people.
Requirements for Chief Engineer Unlimited:
Most likely GS-9. If they are civilians, the chief of the REC is GS-12, the assistant GS-11, and GS-10 largely doesn’t exist, I’ve never seen one.
There is a rough correlation used in military agencies for military rank to GS pay levels.
From 46 CFR 10.107:
First assistant engineer means the engineer officer next in rank to the chief engineer and upon whom the responsibility for the mechanical propulsion and the operation and maintenance of the mechanical and electrical installations of the vessel will fall in the event of the incapacity of the chief engineer.
Chief mate means the deck officer next in rank to the master and upon whom the command of the vessel will fall in the event of incapacity of the master.
I’m confused about what you think you’re adding to the conversation.
I was responding with a reg cite in support of “There is no requirement to be on a vessel requiring a First Assistant Engineer.”
2 Likes
Gotcha. It looked like you were saying I was wrong about it not being an actual regulation by citing a regulation. I didn’t know how to respond because I don’t know what your reply meant.
Wow, you must be way over paid if you think GS12 is the start of middle class, $45k a year actually defines the start of middle class.
A lot of benefits come with a good GS rating. Some that may be overlooked unless you have to pay out of pocket for them. Wherever I worked, looked at the total package. Pay always first and foremost, but what comes with it is just as if not more than important. Told both my sons, It ain’t what you make, it’s what you keep. Look at the total package. Got off subject but someone left the door open. I am appalled at this fake license shit. As the Clint Eastwood movie title says “Hang em High”. Too many mariners worked for it. Piss on the cheaters.
I’m aware of that and the quality of second engineers, first engineers as well as chief engineers declined after that point. When the policy was followed the second engineers worked hard to be chosen as the next first engineer position of which there was only one or two on board as this was a prerequisite for becoming chief. Once that policy was not followed a second engineer had to do nothing more exceptional other than show up for work to accumulate sea time and pass the combined 1st/chief exam. Once he/she had the 1st license they would be automatically given a chief license once they accumulated sea time. No experience or responsibility beyond that of working as a second engineer required. The chief license became a participation trophy.
That’s incorrect. There’s still a requirement to sail as First Assistant, that never went away. Unless the company is falsifying legal documents there’s no way around that.
Which is the point of my original comment. Sailing as first assistant is not the same as holding a job AS first assistant on a vessel that is required to have a first assistant in their manning requirements. I know lots of chief engineers that got signed off by their captains because they had a first engineer license but never held the position of first engineer. The semantics of the requirements once the NMC policy stating a “vessel requiring a first engineer” was removed lowered standards. I know guys working as third engineers but held a first license who got signed off as “sailing as first engineer.” They were sailing as first engineer as surely as their name was Smith or Jones but did the sea time letter state they were the acting first engineer? No, not required. I personally know of ships who had 3 licensed chief engineers on board, none of whom had ever worked in the position of first engineer some had only been out of school 4 years. When the NMC policy was followed it was easy to keep up with. Vessel requires one first engineer on the COI? Check. Two crews equals 2 first engineers. Not possible to give first engineer credit to 4 engineers .
From this definition, is it fair to conclude that the position title 1A/E and chief mate may be given (and written on the discharge) to ANY engineer or mate that is “next in line” from the chief or master? [edit: added txt)
For example: a tug or OSV has a chief engineer and a licensed engineer (master and one mate). In this case the engineer is “next in rank” to the chief…is it legal to grant him a 1A/E discharge?
Same would follow for the assistant mate; only the master and one mate, so is this mate by default the “chief mate”???
Nowhere do I see requirement for 1A/E or chief mate to be listed on the COI.
1 Like
No, you claimed that you had to sail as First Assistant on a vessel requiring a First Assistant and that’s not correct. The requirement is only to sail as First Assistant, that does NOT require the vessel COI to require a First Assistant Engineer.
Correct.
AFAIK, that was never in the CFR but was always just an NMC/REC internal policy. If it ever was in the CFR, it hasn’t been in the CFR for the last 15-20 years and was enforced illegally until a few years ago.