Agreed, looks like they only cheat the Government, However…
The Government may be a little irked.
Poor Mickey…
Part of me understand their stance that all ships need to offer assistance to others at sea and if this was a case of the U.S.C.G. just standing by in case they were to be needed so be it. My problem is the fact that they used the C.G. to ferry supplies from other ship to the broke down ship. This, IMHO, goes far beyond the mission of the U.S.C.G. and they should have to pay for that service. Plus they dragged their feet in deciding where to tow the ship. At first they talked about towing her to Mexico as they were closer to there at the time. They said they decided not to as some passengers did not have passports but I think the bean counters figured out how much it would have cost to fly everyone home and decided it was cheaper to tow her back to the states.
I have never been a big fan of these F.O.C. Cruise Ships and the way that they work around our laws using whatever loopholes they can. I am hopeful that with our government finally taking notice of their way of doing business might bring some changes for the good but I will not be holding my breath as we all know that money talks and these guys have plenty to throw around to make sure that they get their way.
Well I think the coast guard should have a look at the SAR policy. If commercial assistance is available and the situation is stable and an adequate responder can be found through the issuance of a Marine Asistance Request Broadcast by the coast guard or otherwise contacted and contracted by the disabled vessel the USCG is off the hook. Carnival contracted the tugs and could have easily found commercial assets to deliver anything they wanted to the casualty within 48hrs if they opened their check book. The way I see it the incident took place outside of the USCG area of operations and then it was towed in. The coast guard should have treated it like a dead ship move and required XYZ to be compleat before bringing the vessel in to Mobile. Then the all mariners are required to assist thing that’s simple all mariners are required to assist in saving lives not property. The easiest way to protect the lives of the passengers would have been to transfer the passengers to another vessel using the ships life boats. Then we have legal president in the US that says the CG and other government paid for first responders cannot collect on salvage but the Navy can. I know some people think salvage is a dirty word but thats what it is when you go tow in a dead ship at sea even in calm seas a low level salvage. So the way I see it the USCG got a case of let’s show off what we can do to help these poor people and this poor cruise ship company without looking at its own policy and some guys got a pat on the back from the congress for helping their constituents that were passengers and now that congress is looking at what it cost and is trying to recover their loses. Lets remember the CG is here to save lives not property. Salvage companies and other marine companies can become salvors if just for one day are here to save property.
Just my 2c
To the extent the CG responded to threats to lives and pollution I believe that’s their mission so no charges would apply. But, it has long been their policy to charge back for services “above and beyond” their mission. Need a pump? Fine. Need a five gallon can of gas or a parts run? Break out the checkbook. If they decide the bill is in accordance with their policies, watch the news when the vessel is arrested!
I agree with you Tom regarding how the tow should have been handled, but you had the added complication of passengers with cell phones who were calling relatives and the news media which made this a very public event. It turned into a media circus. Actually the pax were not really in any danger either. The ship wasn’t sinking or in danger of same. I think the only problem with the tow is the hawser parted at one point but all ended well, albeit with a lot of theatrics.
So riddle me this. We had an injury onboard and we had to transfer the guy to a CG small boat. They took him to an ambulance ashore. A few weeks later the CG sent a bill for the rescue which the company paid. How is that different from the carnival triumph?.
- That’s not how it should be
- Your company caved prematurely and should have fought it
- I’ve never heard of that happening to anyone else before
I see what you’re saying PW. I understand that Carnival has no legal obligation to reimburse the taxpayer but it would be a good gesture on their part considering. Especially on Tax Day as I write a check myself.
Carnival has agreed to reimburse the U.S. fyi, http://gcaptain.com/carnival-agrees-voluntarily-reimburse-us-for-triumph-and-splendor-response/
[QUOTE=BigGuy;105775]Carnival has agreed to reimburse the U.S. fyi, http://gcaptain.com/carnival-agrees-voluntarily-reimburse-us-for-triumph-and-splendor-response/[/QUOTE]
Good. It’s the least they can do.
Mario give his opinion on why Carnival should not pay and the U.S. should not accept. http://gcaptain.com/cost-rescue/
[QUOTE=Mikey;105882]Mario give his opinion on why Carnival should not pay and the U.S. should not accept. http://gcaptain.com/cost-rescue/[/QUOTE]
I wholly agree.
[QUOTE=Mikey;105882]Mario give his opinion on why Carnival should not pay and the U.S. should not accept. http://gcaptain.com/cost-rescue/[/QUOTE]
Excellent article.
Article makes good points. Setting bad precedent etc. So what to do about outfits like Carnival?
Anything? Nothing?
Well it wasn’t an unreasonable amount and my company is small an prefers to get along to get along.
[QUOTE=“catherder;105907”]Article makes good points. Setting bad precedent etc. So what to do about outfits like Carnival?
Anything? Nothing?[/QUOTE]
Figure out a way to make them pay U.S. corporate income tax, just like their competition (American resort industry) does.
Why don’t they just follow the existing law of salvage. Salvage of life unclaimable but all the other assistance is.
[QUOTE=fullbell;105941]Figure out a way to make them pay U.S. corporate income tax, just like their competition (American resort industry) does.[/QUOTE]
Read Mario’s responses to some of questions like this in the comments section of the post. He makes some more valid points.
More more trouble for Carnival…
I had probably 5 of those happen on cruise ships I worked on and all were very short and didn’t endanger anyone or anything. One even happened while in port in Hawaii. The thing is that NONE of them ever made the news. Carnival would make the news lately if the Captain farted too loud.