Does anyone know what’s up at Hornbeck? There is a new name on the building at HOS Port and the only boat I have seen move in Fourchon is the HOS Dakota, and it was flying the Mexican flag.
While I personally witnessed the desruction of their towing side, I was just wondering if they hired people to destroy the supply boat side as well?
I agree that they have almost singlehandedly killed the towing end. From losing contracts, to having boats (2) run out if fuel, to not having 2 working VHFs on a tug! Sounds pretty piss poor all the way around!
To boot they have their four mega boats tied up not working. HOS must be at least $300M into the quartet. Can you imagine the payments that HOS has to shell out each month to service $300M without $1 coming in? I always believed that the two ex sulphur tankers were a ridiculous idea and was proved right I believe. Two two Dutch built vessels are nice shipa which should have the work except for all the foreign owned ships who have invaded the GoM and have taken the work from all the US vessel owners! HOS should be in Washington screaming at the USCG to get those lousy Norwegians to leave the Gulf and turn all that work over to US owned ships. Perhaps HOS can’t affort the lobbyists…who the hell knows?
News Flash… The HOS Thunderfoot just departed Fourchon. Could this mean a upswing in the upstreaam market? ROTFLMAO …Wait don’t answer that. One of the mighty MPSVs, the HOS Centerline just left Fourchon as well. What do you want to bet that she will be tied back up by evening.
I heard through the grapevine that Iron Horse and Achiever are going to Brazil, it could be bs.
Isn’t this the biggest bunch of BS you’ve ever heard? US owned vessels have to leave the Gulf to work foreign while foreign owned vessels are taking the jobs in the Gulf! As an example Oceaneering just renewed the charter with Island Offshore for the OCEAN INTERVENTION III. Why in the hell weren’t they made to charter a US owned vessel like the HOS ACHIEVER instead? Even though foreign built, the US owned ships have US officers and crews while the foreign owned vessels are manned by Norwegians and Phillipinos.
THIS IS NOT RIGHT!
What I want to know is how in the hell those companies continue to get waivers so they can use foreign crew! There is no way they can say they can;t find enough US workers at this point when there are so many of us laid off and looking for work (luckily I have a job but still keeping my eyes open)! Most of the time the waivers even ask for (and get) galley hands, etc who don;t even need to have MMDs! No way are there shortages of those kinds of people but yet the companies are still getting thier waviers! Its pretty sad that the USCG will not do anything but just keep on giving them out. I have applied a few times to companies like Veolia, knowing I was plenty qualified for the jobs but they never even answered thier phones. Impossible to reach anyone there. So, right, they can;t find any qualified US crew. Of course not, if they make it impossible to contact them! They are just one example. Oceaneering is another with the OI III and the other big new boat. They had plenty of US crew for those boats but refused to put any over there.
It seems I have started a thread that has turned into another "Oh my god there are foreigners in them there international waters"
Can someone tell me why there is a new name on the building at HOS Port?
[QUOTE=tugboat146;49043]It seems I have started a thread that has turned into another “Oh my god there are foreigners in them there international waters”[/QUOTE]
Let me get this straight…you like having foreign mariners taking jobs from US citizens many of whom have been out of work for more than a year now?
Also, the waters of the GoM belong to the USA under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 (43 USC subchapter III)
My suggestion to you sir is that before you shoot off your big bazoo here, do your research first and get your facts right. Can’t find anything much more pathetic than some yabo beating his gums and being WRONG!
There are alot of HOS boat not working because there not coming down on there day rate for the boats.Makeing some money is better than none.And most of the jobs there boats are getting is all over seas than they change the flag state of the boat so there not keeping US guys on them.But they are doing good in brazil for now .I think they still own HOS port but they lease it out thats what i here any way.
Makes alot of sense to reflag their vessel. Boy am I glad I decided not to work for them! Marty was enough for me to see what kind of outfit they run! I feel bad for their employees. Hopefully things will turn around for everyone!
C.captain, after carefull reveiw I can find no reference to my opinion on whether there should or not be foreigners in US waters. My original post was a question concerning the current stability of HOS not having anything to do with the tirades that you have posted. While you may find an audience here that supports your thinking, it just goes to show why some employers choose to abandon the US mariner. Sad dude, very sad.
Last year I had a conversation with the head of a company that provided crews to foriegn companies overseas. That company was also the first to put US licensed DP operators on MODUs and drillships breaking the $1200.00 a day mark. I was told by this person that he wished he never go involved with US seamen because of the constant bitching. No matter how good it was some spoiled brat wanted to find a way to ruin it for everybody else.
I am beginning to understand.
As to the rest Thank You, I wondered why there is a EPS sign where the HOS sign was.
[QUOTE=tugboat146;49064] That company was also the first to put US licensed DP operators on MODUs and drillships breaking the $1200.00 a day mark. I was told by this person that he wished he never go involved with US seamen because of the constant bitching. No matter how good it was some spoiled brat wanted to find a way to ruin it for everybody else.[/QUOTE]
Who ever that guy is he is mistaken. Foreign crews often make more than US crews because of labor or union laws. Brazilians for example get 13 months of pay (equal to US DPO’s) for 12 months of work. AND if you have to let one go for any reason that employee gets 2 years severance pay. It is not just the Brazilians either. You might want to check out the day rate for a Norwegian, Polish or British DPO. People have a misconception that these POOR foreigners work for less. That is not the case. A lot of them have it a whole lot better than we do.
[QUOTE=tugboat146;49064]C.captain, after carefull reveiw I can find no reference to my opinion on whether there should or not be foreigners in US waters. I am beginning to understand.
[/QUOTE]
You understand nothing unless you have lost a job to a Norwegian working on a vessel out of Fourchon but I have…and btw, you were the one who made the snide remark about how this thread was turning into "another “Oh my god there are foreigners in them there international waters”. If you had just kept your mouth shut I would not have said a thing, but you wanted to make a petty little bitch to belittle me but you ended up being an ignorant bozo…PERIOD!
Now just go away or shut your yap about not being harmed with Norwegian mariners on Norwegian vessels working in the Gulf of Mexico which just happen to be US waters!
[QUOTE=Capt. Lee;49067]Who ever that guy is he is mistaken. Foreign crews often make more than US crews because of labor or union laws. Brazilians for example get 13 months of pay (equal to US DPO’s) for 12 months of work. AND if you have to let one go for any reason that employee gets 2 years severance pay. It is not just the Brazilians either. You might want to check out the day rate for a Norwegian, Polish or British DPO. People have a misconception that these POOR foreigners work for less. That is not the case. A lot of them have it a whole lot better than we do.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for your input. I do not recall making any statement about what foreign crews make. Nor was it my intention to do so. I realize now that I should have said "for US Licensed Officers holding a Unlimited DPO certificate"
But I digress, do you happen to know what is going on at HOS? That was the original question. I just don’t care about the other stuff right now. My thoughts on all the others issues are kept where I can best use them.
[QUOTE=tugboat146;49069]Thank you for your input. I do not recall making any statement about what foreign crews make. Nor was it my intention to do so. I realize now that I should have said "for US Licensed Officers holding a Unlimited DPO certificate"
But I digress, do you happen to know what is going on at HOS? That was the original question. I just don’t care about the other stuff right now. My thoughts on all the others issues are kept where I can best use them.[/QUOTE]
I understood completely that you were talking about US mariners, but it also implied that your “FRIEND” preferred foreign mariners because they were cheaper and complained less. You brought up the $1200 dollar a day number like it is some great amount and a negative statement about US DPO’s. I have no idea why you brought it up, but I wanted to comment on it. A good DPO is worth 1200 a day and more. Your comment implied that US mariners are paid more and are cry babies. [B]Not true. [/B] Just because someone tries to stand up for themselves does not make them a cry baby. We have to stand up for ourselves. No one else is going to do it for us. Don’t try to be passive aggressive now. HOS is hurting just like everyone else with OSV’s and will do what ever they have to do to survive right now.
It appears that HOS, both the oil patch and the tug and barge division are being managed by the same philosophy. This would appear the crux of the question and the issue.
Thank you ,cappy208.
That is what I was asking. I do hope they find the management to solve the issues that have been there for to long. Todd and Carl are good people. It is a shame to see what was once a great company to work for drop so low.
[B]Tugboat 146:[/B] The answer to your questions:
There is a new name on the building at HOS Port: [I][B]YES! That is true. Hornbeck has LEASED some of it’s North Yard warehouse to EPS Logistics. Similar to the same arrangement that Anadarko once had with Hornbeck to lease some of its property to hold/ maintain equipment. Nothing new. Since Fourchon is LIMITED in space it makes good business sense to diversify and make the most of the property there. [/B][/I]
… and the only boat I have seen move in Fourchon is the HOS Dakota, and it was flying the Mexican flag. [B][I]RIGHT AGAIN! The HOS Dakota just came out of a recertification period locally and is heading back to Mexico. No secret there. Hornbeck has had vessels working in Mexico for quite some time. [/I][/B]
Does anyone know what’s up at Hornbeck? [B][I]I can let you know that Hornbeck Offshore is making business decisions, some of them very hard, to remain in business and to be started about it in a down economy when smaller companies are going belly up and/ or being conglomerated with . All companies based in any in/with the GOM have had to make similar if not more drastic decisions. This country and the oil business as a whole is in a major slump - prior to the Macando incident. [/I][/B]
[B][I]Captain Lee: [/I][/B]You took over on a forum question and bent it to your agenda. Clearly you should have started a forum of your own and I am sure it would have attracted even MORE of a response under a different heading. Good points were brought up because of your “rant”.
[QUOTE=tugboat146;49064]
[B]Last year I had a conversation with the head of a company that provided crews to foriegn companies overseas. That company was also the first to put US licensed DP operators on MODUs and drillships breaking the $1200.00 a day mark. I was told by this person that he wished he never go involved with US seamen because of the constant bitching. No matter how good it was some spoiled brat wanted to find a way to ruin it for everybody else.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
I high lighted this for you captain Jazzfest. I commented on a misconception, not a rant that materialized in my bipolar mind. The comment was out of place and deserved some clarification.