The drilling contractors were great at having extra “chiefs” on board. Why? Many drillships had MODU chiefs in the position of CE. They could not be chief engineer underway so they needed some licensed unlimited chiefs onboard to move the vessel from one location to another, not to mention moving the vessel from Korea or Singapore to the USA, Brazil, Africa etc. In one case I know of a semi sub was transited from Singapore to Mexico, The Chief had only a MODU license so the company on transit papers listed the first engineer who had a CE Untld license as CE. The first found this out after the fact and after some controversy was compensated. In most cases the vessels moved with MODU chiefs simply didn’t tell the first engineers with an unlimited chiefs license they were the chief if the shit hit the fan. The few that knew figured they had to go along to get along and stay employed.
The other common sea time letter BS by drilling contractors is writing letters by license, as you indicated. I know many guys who worked as Mechanics or Subsea who told the company to put 1st Engineer on their letters. Pissed me off that guys who haven’t seen an engine room or a class inspector since graduation have CE tickets they didn’t earn.
Pisses everyone off who came up the old school way. But there is nothing that can be done about it. Roughly 10 years ago I had an informal conversation with a high ranking USCG official about this while discussing the Horizon incident. He said he knew companies skirted the rules on sea time letters and ended up with people in positions they should not occupy and he added the OSD industry had managed to get special allowances for their licensing requirements but the USCG doesn’t have the marine licensing part of their mission high on the list of priorities. They cannot verify the veracity of every sea time letter. Funding is limited. At the end of the day if a company wants to disobey the rules, have congress pass rules that allow minimally qualified people to have jobs in high risk occupations and t risk the liability their clients and insurers can do more damage to that company than the USCG can even if the USCG had the resources. He said off the record, “Like so many other agencies we put the approved regulations out there but we don’t have the police to enforce them.”
Made sense to me
The old “old school” way (pre-1987) did not require time as 1st AE. You could get Chief with just 2nd AE time (discounted at 2:1).
Thank you. Did not know that bit of trivia.
With the new-school way guys don’t even have to be employed as an engineer…just be on a ship, hold a license, get a sea time letter.
Doesn’t work on large vessels that use certificates of discharge (copies are sent to the Coast Guard and recorded in a database).
It’s been a while, they still issue the green discharges? I wrote hundreds if not thousands of them. Last job of the trip before payroll and airline tickets/reservations.
The form has changed.
Makes sense. This was foreign flag in the GOM. (I haven’t seen a certificate of discharge since 2005)
The form has changed but the antiquated process has not. It still amazes me that the form in triplicate that you hope made it in the mail and then filed in the proper place is the best thing that has been come up with to verify sea time…
Always seems kind of funny to me how a guy that worked on “that type” of vessel doesn’t know “how to work on my type”. Deep sea cargo guys say drill ship/supply vessel guys don’t know anything. Cruise ships say deep sea cargo guys don’t know anything. Tug guys actually drive their boats, so ship guys don’t know anything. Oil patch has DP, the deep sea guys pick up a pilot.
None of the others have slow speed diesel experience (so they are useless), even though a drill ship and cruise ship is 1000x more complicated in systems. Guys that come to a drill ship or cruise ship from a container ship can’t handle all the automation…and on and on and on.
When talking to the average sailor, it’s amazing to learn how difficult and specialized his job is–insomuch as nobody else could possibly be qualified.
My employer does not verify licenses to my knowledge, and I have warned them about this shit. I mean come on, they used to forge Z-cards what makes anyone think they don’t forge lil red books.
The ship/company can email them instead of mailing them to the NMC.
They can, but in my experience most don’t. It gets put in an envelope to the office and from there who knows where it goes…
NS 5 payroll program can automatically fill out the discharge when the data for sign-off is entered. I print out a copy, sign it and give to the crew member signing off.
Who on the DWH was not qualified to be in their position?
I’m not sure if you were disagreeing with what I said or misinterpreting? I agree there’s lots of that mentality out there. Sure you might not be comfortable the first day on a different vessel type, but if you are a competent, experienced, and well trained mariner you’ll get there just fine.
What I meant was that you can’t tell me that some guy who graduated with 3rd’s licenses, worked strictly as a hydraulic valve mechanic for four years, never stepped foot below deck, and never held a position onboard as an engineering officer, is qualified to be a Chief Engineer of any type of vessel just because the company provided sea time letters that said Engineer.
TWIC reader? What a joke!
If you work for a US government agency that agency doesn’t come under OSHA, USCG regulations per se. Rather they promise to attempt to abide by or develop their own parallel regulations.
A US government vessel whether MSC, NOAA or USACE can get by with a lot more than a commercial vessel can.