Quitting when foreign or in a U.S. port

Leaving stuff behind might be evidence of an intent to return, but it’s only that, it’s not dispositive. That the crew has discussed deserting the vessel is evidence to the contrary (possible exclusion as hearsay notwithstanding). A finding of intent would be made on a preponderance of all evidence, both culpatory and exculpatory. (And if something is left behind, it should probably be something of tangible value, not the usual worn-out gear, etc. that is usually left behind after getting relieved…)

6 Likes

Man there’s a lot of big words in there. Good thing somebody is a lawyer!

1 Like

This is kind of where I am at with it after doing some more research and not being able to find anything for certain.

The coast guard can pull a Mariners document if the mariner was negligent or conducted so act of gross misconduct.

Is quiting a job while the ship is in port and you are off watch negligent? I personally don’t believe so but maybe the case could be made?

So with that being said I don’t see the coast guard doing anything to someone as long as the vessel can still safely sit at the dock. Now if a Mate is on watch just says “peace out” and walks down the gangway that is a problem. But if someone is off watch then decides to quit I don’t think the coast guard would have a case to do anything in that regard so long as the ship can still safely and legally cover watches. Maybe failure to provide a proper turnover? But how many times have we all had bad turnovers…

Maybe the ship can’t sail, maybe deck or engine work that was planned won’t get done done. But safety wise it has no ill effect.

Now if its foreign or stateside? I think the only difference is that the company is responsible for getting you back stateside. If your vessel is stateside they can say “well you quit so travel is on you.”

Crap. You’re on to us. Big words is how we hide that we have no idea what we are talking about.

7 Likes

They don’t have to win to cause you pain. You can spend a lot of $$ defending yourself. But if you trust your research and the opinions of anonymous sea lawyers, good luck with that.

2 Likes

Your advice reminds me of the recent MCPON address to USS GEORGE WASHINGTON to suck it up after seven recent suicides. Or the infamous SECNAV address to USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT on Guam during COVID.

You’re basically telling this guy to bend over and take it. “But if you trust your research and the opinions of anonymous sea lawyers, good luck with that.” Your advice is usually spot-on which makes this tone-deaf reply so unexpected.

2 Likes

I don’t think ruining lives has ever stopped the CG from doing what they want to do. Viz. Bouchard happily barbecuing their tankermen every now and again for so many years without consequence.

Had it come to it, the 13th amendment is still a thing, I suppose but no one wanted to ruin their life as the price to just getting in front of a judge to make that argument. I suspect the CG is also happy no one called their bluff either.

Be careful claiming mental illness, U.S. Coast Guard can come after your credentials then based on a psychological evaluation.

1 Like

Two Things ;
First, Getting off an unruly vessel. How come so one sided ? If people on a ship take issue with someone they will send him off the ship whether 30days on a 90 day article or not. By the same taken if a mariner takes issue with a vessel’s command, then the mariner should be just as obliged to leave. Too often people who should’nt be sailing in key level positions end up in those positions and abuse their authority. If a company had to pay for travel for mariner after mariner then the company would get tired of paying the travel and look into the matter properly.
Secondly ; Often the case when a mariner boards a ship, the mariner is given a time period to be on that ship. Whether it is 30 days, 60days, 90 days,…Working longer than what you signed on for, has become a bit common. However what is reasonable ? Is it 30 days longer than what you signed on for, 60 days , or… At some point shore support has to be accountable too !
There is way to much accountability being placed on the shoulders of mariners, when compared to the accountability of shore support. There should be a monetary benefit to working over. Example; the agreement was for a mariner to work for say 70days, if there were articles then the articles were for 70days. At 70days, if there is not a relief then a set reasonability period say 14days or next port call. After that point if that mariner cannot be relieved properly then that mariner receives double wages. The next port after that if still no relief than the mariner receives three times normal wages…I would venture to guess, that put a monetary amount on it and crew changes will happen on time.

7 Likes

Definitely agree. They could really ruin a mariners day if they wanted to.

I am not to familiar with Unions but in this case wouldn’t this be exactly where they are supposed to step in and help the mariner? Obviously if you are non-union you are on your own.

Disregarding that though… I would have to imagine mariners have been quitting while overdue for a long time. So far none of us here or that I have talked to on my vessel have recalled a time they knew of someone losing their credential because of it.

At the end of the day I am still in the boat of you shouldn’t just quit. You have other options to exhaust first.

1 Like

In the 1980s a guy I know was in port in the USA a few hundred miles from home. Used the pay phone outside the gate, came back to the ship, packed his bags and told the captain he quit. Captain asked why and the guy replied his wife said he had been gone too long (9 months) so she decided there was going to be some sex going on soon at home. If he wanted to be involved he should get home. Captain said he understood. He sailed until retirement, still married to the same woman too. Not a peep from the USCG.

6 Likes

If the unrelieved seafarer is Chinese the USCG might help.

Nice reply Ape. And you didn’t even use fancy words!!

When a crewmember is paid off the discharge will be IIRC “completed assignment”, “discharged for cause” , “quit” or “mutual consent”

If a ship is making, say 40 day trips U.S. to foreign and the union assignment is for 120 days, then if the crewmember gets paid-off after one trip that would be a “quit”, it’s routine with no involvement from the CG.

Making three trips and paying off would be “completed assignment”.

On the other hand if the crewmember walks off without being paid off that is not technically a “quit”

EDIT: Can’t take a crewmember foreign if they don’t agree. Regardless if the crewmember has only 40 days of the 120 day assignment they have to be paid off if they want to get off. They have to agree to the ship’s articles to make another trip foreign no matter the union assignment.

EDIT 2: In the case where a ship pays off stateside and a crew member with a 120 assignment has less than that, say 115 days, that crew member is entitled to make another trip by (for example the SIU) union contract.

But if they agree to make another 40 days trip they are obligated to make the whole trip, 40 days foreign and back to the U.S. for a total of 155 days.

This is where some inexperience crewmembers get confused. If they come waltzing into the captain’s office on day 120 and demand to be paid off in the next (foreign) port because “their time is up” there’s no obligation on the ship’s part to pay them off until return to U.S. or when the articles are otherwise broken.

5 Likes

Everything you added makes sense. Especially the second edit, seems a lot of people I have met don’t always agree with that one.

But… How would you handle someone on a US flagged ship permanently overseas only going to foreign ports? Example: MSC, Pre Positioned, and GOCOs. Some of those ship’s aren’t ever going back to the U.S. unless its for decommissioning usually.

1 Like

I cited an incident related to that above. The Master was telling the Chief Mate that the longest they could keep a mariner overdue for relief (he eventually got one, and overdue only a week) was one year before he could leave without penalty.

I can’t seem to find any law specifically stating that though.

I heard a guy at MSC was way overdue and was about to miss his wedding. So he took a hammer to the hand, got unfit, and finally got home.

2 Likes

Apples and oranges.

MSC CIVMARs are not merchant mariners. They are permanent, full-time, federal employees. They sign no articles. They are not subject to the same benefits and obligations as a US merchant mariner. MSC CIVMARs can quit - with company approval - at any time.

1 Like

Good point they don’t sign articles. So what about the MSC contract guys that are vessels that stay overseas. The guys and girls who work for companies like Tote, Crowley, Maersk, and OSI employees that do sign articles?

I find it had to believe as McGavin was saying he heard a Master was telling a Chief Mate the company can keep them for up to a year. That is ridiculous, even I’d quit at that point. We got lives outside of work haha.

I was overdue as 2Mate on an MSC ship and walked off. I had Naval Reserve training scheduled and would have jeopardized my reserve pension for missing it. MSC finally reimbursed me for my flight back to the states, gave me a written apology and back pay but it was a struggle .I got a series of low paying assignments for a while after that but retired as a chief mate.

1 Like