MARAD Predicts More U.S. Flag Fleet Losses

Maritime News
1

helluva job you’re doin Chippy…

[B]MARAD Predicts More U.S. Flag Fleet Losses
[/B]
By MarEx 2015-03-10 17:00:38

The APL Pearl will be flagged out in Italy on April 20, APL said this week. They will replace the tonnage with the APL Belgium in the Maritime Security Program (MSP). MARAD Administrator Chip Jaenichen told the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Committee that the agency expects more ships to exit the program as a consequence in the decline in Defense Department cargoes. Cargo preference for U.S. flagged ships has dropped by more than 80% recently with the drawdown of U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Jaenichen told members of the subcommittee that since 2009, MSP carriers have moved over 90% of the ocean-borne cargo needed to support U.S. military operations and rebuilding programs in the Middle East. He added MSP provides critical employment for 2,400 U.S. merchant mariners, which allows the government to maintain a pool of professional mariners capable of supporting its sealift ships. MSP currently operates 60 U.S.-flag vessels in program with each ship receiveing a $2.7 million annual subsidy to maintain their U.S. registry.

Jaenichen also touched on Administration-proposed changes to the PL 480 Title II food aid program, which plans to pay merchant ship operators $25 million in 2016 to counter a reduction in the amount of food aid cargoes transported on U.S.-flag vessels. Jaenichen said an additional $25 million in the Administration’s budget “would mitigate the impact that such reforms could have on mariner jobs,” and that the vast majority of food aid would continue to be sourced and shipped from the United States.

Statistics compiled by the U.S. Maritime Administration put the number of US flagged vessels currently operating internationally at 93, down significantly from the 1072 that operated in 1955. The downward trend of U.S. flagged vessels has caused ripples through the maritime community as an estimated 2,200 US mariner jobs have been lost since 2012. APL, the world’s seventh largest container transportation and shipping company, currently operates 10 U.S.-flag ships, nine of which are under the MSP.

Congressmen Duncan Hunter (R-CA) has been a strong opponent to the food aid program changes stating that there would be a “one-time payoff” for U.S. mariner jobs. Hunter and John Garamendi (D-CA) have been maintaining efforts to ensure that 50% of U.S. food aid move via cargo preference laws, which require the shipments be made on U.S. vessels.

ripple? more like a seismic tsunami!

2

Jaenichen also touched on Administration-proposed changes to the PL 480 Title II food aid program, which plans to pay merchant ship operators $25 million in 2016 to counter a reduction in the amount of food aid cargoes transported on U.S.-flag vessels. Jaenichen said an additional $25 million in the Administration’s budget “would mitigate the impact that such reforms could have on mariner jobs,” and that the vast majority of food aid would continue to be sourced and shipped from the United States.

Let me guess… Joe Boss will get that money and use it for whatever bullshit they want, NOT mariners.

3

"Jaenichen said an additional $25 million in the Administration’s budget “would mitigate the impact that such reforms could have on mariner jobs …”

I think that is parasite speak for mitigating the impact it might have on his own job security. It might also enhance the number or ship models they can put in the hallways and maybe pay for some more sea story recordings.

The best thing that MARAD could do for the American merchant marine and the American mariner is to purge the nest of all former military personnel and political appointees. They should cut funding for KP and suggest to Congress that if there is a legitimate purpose for KP, it should be funded through military budgets. Make holding or having held a management level license with seagoing experience a prerequisite for all future employees except secretarial staff and janitors.

The MARAD administrator should be forced to stand in front of Congress and demand that all US government cargoes transported by ship are carried on American bottoms - no exceptions. MARAD should be required to comply with every point of its charter. Reparing ship models and recording employee sea stories is not among the reasons for MARAD’s existence.

4

Basically MARAD is just a shell agency to employ cronies, this becomes apparent the more I read into it.

5

Can anyone explain why typing s e c r e t a r i a l gets turned into secret"luxi-sans-1"?

6

[QUOTE=Steamer;156787]Can anyone explain why typing s e c r e t a r i a l gets turned into secret"luxi-sans-1"?[/QUOTE]

maybe it has to do with the fact that MarAd is one great San-E-Kan run by Chippy Jan-E-Kan?

anyway, I suddenly am struck with the absolutely hideous realization that ol’ Chippy is doing an even more pathetic job that his predecessor who went on to built great fortune in the food and beverage industry!

7

[QUOTE=Steamer;156785]"Jaenichen said an additional $25 million in the Administration’s budget “would mitigate the impact that such reforms could have on mariner jobs …”

I think that is parasite speak for mitigating the impact it might have on his own job security. It might also enhance the number or ship models they can put in the hallways and maybe pay for some more sea story recordings.

The best thing that MARAD could do for the American merchant marine and the American mariner is to purge the nest of all former military personnel and political appointees. They should cut funding for KP and suggest to Congress that if there is a legitimate purpose for KP, it should be funded through military budgets. Make holding or having held a management level license with seagoing experience a prerequisite for all future employees except secret"luxi-sans-1" staff and janitors.

The MARAD administrator should be forced to stand in front of Congress and demand that all US government cargoes transported by ship are carried on American bottoms - no exceptions. MARAD should be required to comply with every point of its charter. Reparing ship models and recording employee sea stories is not among the reasons for MARAD’s existence.[/QUOTE]

Did you ever consider that maybe the best thing MARAD could do for the USMM (shipping) is to actually have a director who is / was in fact a career Mariner??? Chip is Navy, not USMM, and his prior right hand man Szabat was Army. I agree with you 100% going forward concerning MARAD employees/officials, but it has to start at the top.

Chip could could be the nicest guy in the world. But, at the end of the day, he is not one of us. For all we know, he is the founder of the American Mariners Professional Association.

MARAD funding… reduce or slash across the board, EVERYWHERE.

However, anyone who thought we would be forever bringing stuff over to ME and then subsequently back from ME for an eternity is delusional. It may pale in comparison to GOM wages over last few years, but US commercial shipping between box boats and car carriers to and from that region has been great for many, many years. Excluding the 2008-2009 financial collapse that left many poor car carrier SOBs MODLOCing for months at a time with no Japanese cars to bring back to USA after their ME discharge, USA deep sea mariners have benefited from a decade plus of war and whatever else we are calling our Iraq and Afghanistan missions, plus the removal of chemical weapons from Syria.

Union wages clearly didn’t skyrocket like the GOM, but the principle should be the same… save those pennies for a rainy day. We are bound to lose a few ships, but I’ll wager it won’t be as bad as what some guys in GOM will be dealing with. If in June 2015, the big 3 of OPEC stick to their guns on maintaining market share, losing a few US flag box boats or car carriers (more likely box boats) may very well make the GOM scenario look downright scary by comparison.

8

[QUOTE=Johnny Canal;156791]Did you ever consider that maybe the best thing MARAD could do for the USMM (shipping) is to actually have a director who is / was in fact a career Mariner??? Chip is Navy, not USMM, and his prior right hand man Szabat was Army. I agree with you 100% going forward concerning MARAD employees/officials, but it has to start at the top.[/QUOTE]

when was the last time we has a head at MarAd who had been a seafarer for at least a part of their career? Many speak highly of Sean Connaughton who was a KP grad but went to the USCG after he started his career. Here is the list of MarAd heads going back to Reagan

Harold E. Shear Maritime Administrator October 19, 1981 – May 31, 1985
John A. Gaughan Maritime Administrator November 26, 1985 – March 26, 1989
Warren G. Leback Maritime Administrator October 11, 1989 – January 20, 1993
Albert J. Herberger Maritime Administrator September 14, 1993 – June 30, 1997
Clyde J. Hart, Jr. Maritime Administrator August 6, 1998 - December 2000
William G. Schubert Maritime Administrator December 6, 2001 – February 11, 2005
Sean T. Connaughton Maritime Administrator September 6, 2006 – January 2009
David T. Matsuda Maritime Administrator September 6, 2009– June 2013
Paul Jaenichen, Maritime Administrator, June 2013 - present

I believe Schubert was a master…what about the others on the list?

9

Leback was a good one.

My name is Captain Warren G. Leback and I am pleased to submit this brief in support of HR 23 Merchant Mariners.
I am a Merchant Marine Combat Veteran of World War II and a graduate of the United States Merchant Marine Academy, Kings Point, NY. I joined the Liberty Ship “Joseph McKenna” in June 1942 as a Cadet Midshipman. During my time in her we participated in the support of Guadalcanal and Palau in the Caroline Islands. I was awarded a Merchant Marine Combat Medal for services at Guadalcanal. I continued my war service through November 1945 when as Chief Mate of Grace Line’s “Santa Ana” the ship was returned by the War Shipping Administration to Grace Line, it’s owners. I continued to sail including Master until I joined Grace Line management. I have held senior management positions in Grace Line, Central Gulf Lines, SeaLand Service, El Paso LNG Company and most recently as President, First American Bulk Carrier Corporation completing 65 years in the Maritime Industry. I served as Deputy Maritime Administrator under President Reagan and Maritime Administrator under President George H.W. Bush. I hold United States Coast Guard Merchant Marine Master’s License Any Ocean Any Tonnage 13th Issue having earned my first Master’s License in 1947.

10

[QUOTE=c.captain;156800]when was the last time we has a head at MarAd who had been a seafarer for at least a part of their career? Many speak highly of Sean Connaughton who was a KP grad but went to the USCG after he started his career. Here is the list of MarAd heads going back to Reagan

Harold E. Shear Maritime Administrator October 19, 1981 – May 31, 1985
John A. Gaughan Maritime Administrator November 26, 1985 – March 26, 1989
Warren G. Leback Maritime Administrator October 11, 1989 – January 20, 1993
Albert J. Herberger Maritime Administrator September 14, 1993 – June 30, 1997
Clyde J. Hart, Jr. Maritime Administrator August 6, 1998 - December 2000
William G. Schubert Maritime Administrator December 6, 2001 – February 11, 2005
Sean T. Connaughton Maritime Administrator September 6, 2006 – January 2009
David T. Matsuda Maritime Administrator September 6, 2009– June 2013
Paul Jaenichen, Maritime Administrator, June 2013 - present

I believe Schubert was a master…what about the others on the list?[/QUOTE]

Connaughton was a joke. His idea of MARAD service obligation compliance was "if it floats, it counts.’

11

[QUOTE=Old Sailor;156832]Leback was a good one.[/QUOTE]

That is the kind of mariner we need in that nest of parasites.

The only problem is that type of person will either die laughing at the sycophants and political toadies who roam the halls looking at ship models when they aren’t looking for a microphone or ways to gut the USMM, or they would die from a stroke brought on by having to deal with morons and wannabe political toadies.

Peoole like Leback are feared by the kind of people who advance in appointed political positions and who determine who will be appointed.

12

[QUOTE=Old Sailor;156832]Leback was a good one.[/QUOTE]

I agree because he was a mariner however I must say that he did serve at MarAd at the time when Ronald Reagan ended the ODS and CDS which in my mind began the great precipitous decline in the US foreign going fleet that we have witnessed now over the past 30+ years. I have seen it all happen step by step.

What did a mariner like Leback think of what transpired there during his tenure?

13

Well, not quite, ccapt. ODS was terminated in 1997 during the Clinton administration and the good Admiral was the maritime administrator. It was followed, of course, immediately by the MSP program.

While this is not an ODS string, I will say that ODS was quite good for the commercial companies as the differential paid was calculated on the difference in crew costs between each U.S. company’s ship crew and the foreign company(s) ship crew(s) that were on the same designated trade route. In the Pacific, this was a dramatic difference as generally the competition was Japanese, Chinese and Korean and on whose ships many of the crew was from the Philippines. On some routes the differential would come close to 75 to 80%. So good for company but pretty expensive for the government. The MSP program changed into a flat yearly payment, the same for any ship enrolled in MSP.

Herberger was a Navy Admiral and Hart was a lawyer, with 3 or 4 years service in the Air Force.

14

[QUOTE=Old Sailor;156861]Well, not quite, ccapt. ODS was terminated in 1997 during the Clinton administration and the good Admiral was the maritime administrator. It was followed, of course, immediately by the MSP program.[/QUOTE]

the last existing 25 year ODS subsidies ended in 1997 but the program effectively ended during Reagan’s presidency when new ODS agreements were no longer signed. CDS stopped immediately during Reagan’s presidency and with it US built ships for foreign trade ceased being built. I witnessed every year of decline during the 80’s and through the 90’s as more and more American liner carriers ceased to exist. I blame the ending of the subsidies as the the push that caused the US flagged liner shipping industry to crash and burn to cinders.

I am not shitting on Leback but just saying that he was there when the end game began and wondered what his thoughts were at the time?

.

15

[QUOTE=c.captain;156845]What did a mariner like Leback think of what transpired there during his tenure?[/QUOTE]

Probably not much … in 1989 he was forced by Bush to reject Reagan’s call to spend $13 billion to build and operate new USMM vessels. What an irony, Ronny Raygun wanted to support the USMM and Bush gutted it with his sealift policy document that (like the “patriot act”) created exactly the opposite of what the title proclaimed. It introduced the acceptance of “effective US control” which meant the government was free to use FoC ships whenever it was convenient or suited some special interest group.

I wish Leback had resigned rather than follow Bush’s policy. I think he knew how the system works and believe he thought he could do more good from within than outside. Unfortunately campaign funding is more important to the parasites who make the laws than the health and security of the nation and we have seen maritime policy based on the silent and incremental destruction of the American maritime industry.

Follow the money … the folks who want to end government food exports on US ships are the same people who received $30 billion when Bush stopped the American merchant shipbuilding program Ronnie wanted.

16

[QUOTE=Steamer;156885]Probably not much … in 1989 he was forced by Bush to reject Reagan’s call to spend $13 billion to build and operate new USMM vessels. What an irony, Ronny Raygun wanted to support the USMM and Bush gutted it with his sealift policy document that (like the “patriot act”) created exactly the opposite of what the title proclaimed. It introduced the acceptance of “effective US control” which meant the government was free to use FoC ships whenever it was convenient or suited some special interest group.

I wish Leback had resigned rather than follow Bush’s policy. I think he knew how the system works and believe he thought he could do more good from within than outside. Unfortunately campaign funding is more important to the parasites who make the laws than the health and security of the nation and we have seen maritime policy based on the silent and incremental destruction of the American maritime industry.

Follow the money … the folks who want to end government food exports on US ships are the same people who received $30 billion when Bush stopped the American merchant shipbuilding program Ronnie wanted.[/QUOTE]

Steamer…you cut me to the quick here. I am a man who has closely followed the plight of the US Merchant fleet ever since the late 70’s and vividly recall the ending of all the subsidies provided for in the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 by none other than the Reagan Administration yet know nothing of this supposed desire to correct the harm caused by those actions by building a new fleet also by Reagan? Please elaborate for us who thirst for knowledge?

17

[QUOTE=c.captain;156903]Steamer…you cut me to the quick here. I am a man who has closely followed the plight of the US Merchant fleet ever since the late 70’s and vividly recall the ending of all the subsidies provided for in the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 by none other than the Reagan Administration yet know nothing of this supposed desire to correct the harm caused by those actions by building a new fleet also by Reagan? Please elaborate for us who thirst for knowledge?[/QUOTE]

am going through my history looking for the webpage I took that from, so far can’t find it again but it was an editorial saying that Leback did the right thing in cutting the Reagan plan to add $13 billion for merchant ships to his 600 ship Navy fantasy. Leback evidently did this just after he was appointed by Bush. The one reference I have found so far is here: http://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/19/us/us-panel-warns-of-transport-ship-shortage.html

It read as if the Reagan administration supported (OK’d?) funding for building merchant ships but Bush cut it and focus on using the fantasy of “effectively US controlled ships” instead of American ships. I will keep looking for the article.

18

[QUOTE=Steamer;156907]It read as if the Reagan administration supported (OK’d?) funding for building merchant ships but Bush cut it and focus on using the fantasy of “effectively US controlled ships” instead of American ships. I will keep looking for the article.[/QUOTE]

I’d know if there ever had been such a plan by Reagan…if there even was such a plan and it was somehow tied to the 600ship Navee, then the ships would all have been painted gray with stripes of shame on their stacks. Are MSC ships really “the US Merchant Marine” when they are owned by the government to serve the military only? I mean “Merchant” is a derivation of “Mercantile” which equates to “Commerce”. The serving the military is not furthering US national commerce imo.