Wonder if the US unions will follow suit??
Ask Sam Norton.
You think it’s the unions preventing that from happening?
Simply put, yes.
It was Danish unions that negotiated with Danish shipping companies for this Red Sea pay.
If US unions are not asking, pushing, negotiating, and at the end of the day flat out requiring the same from US shipping companies, then yes it is 100% the weak leadership of the US unions preventing US mariners from due hazard pay.
If Maersk in Denmark is paying a special Red Sea supplement but Maersk Line Limited in the US is not (or are they?) then who should be rectifying that….Hint: it’s the Unions.
We have a contract. If it’s not reopener or renewal time, the union can’t “require” the company to do anything.
I get a kick out of all the non-union guys on here bad mouthing the unions and chiming in about all the things unions should be doing and all. If you’re that interested, then go pay your dues and attend a fucking meeting.
Your point is well taken.
However the article I posted points out that in other seafaring nations, their unions seem equipped to say there is a war right now, causing a hazard right now, requiring compensation right now, regardless of the war inconveniently falling outside a contract renegotiation window.
To me that seems exactly like the sort of out-of-contract issue US unions, in concert with each other, should engage. And perhaps if they were more willing to do so, then more of us former-union guys would be more willing to start paying dues again.
Here’s the area where the extra pay kick in:
From here (the rest is not in English)
Don’t know if this was ad hoc or something already in a clause in the contract given certain conditions are met.
The contracts I’m familiar with have hazard pay in defined areas under certain conditions. Be surprised if there were going to be negotiations on a case by case basis.
It’s only about two days of extra pay per voyage. That’s trivial.
Yeah, on second thought double pay might still not be enough…
But in all seriousness, what’s the deal with these “missiles”? All the ships I’ve seen reportedly hit seem to generally be shrugging them off, no serious damage. Is this not their intended use? Do the Houthis just have crappy missiles? Or are the ships hit so far just very lucky?
I think it’s just the nature of a cargo ship and size of the missiles: lots of space without critical stuff going through it. It’s not like a warship crammed full of crew, systems and weapons. I think most cargo ships can shrug off hits above the waterline and away from the house without too much fanfare provided a big fire isn’t started. How much aiming is being done? Is there a man in the loop or is this just sending a weapon into the general area with fingers crossed?
The ship off of India that got hit in the stern will probably need a new steering gear but that was likely compounded by the habit of storing buckets of lube oil and chemicals in that space.
“Ballistic” sounds scary but really only means that the missle is powered for only a short portion of the flight - same as an ICBM or toy rocket. I haven’t seen any reporting on a payload.
I’ve no insight into this but a quick google search turns this possibly one type being used:
The missile has an operating range of 300 kilometres (190 mi). It is a single-stage, solid-fuel-propelled vehicle, and is equipped with a 650-kilogram (1,430 lb) explosive warhead that uses a combination of guidance systems to prevent interception. The Persian Gulf has an advanced electronic system that allows the missile to discover and navigate to the target. The missile relies on its own internal navigation system, allowing it to travel without radio interference
From here:
The Houthis have fired long range missiles at Israel which is over 1000 miles away.
An Iranian drone struck a ship 200 miles off the coast of India.
Where are these Iranian made drones and missiles going to show up next? Venezuela? Cuba? Nicaragua? Haiti? Mexico?
We should have taken out Iran’s nuclear, missile, and drone programs a decade ago. Is it too late now?
The Red Sea is only about 200 miles wide, Bab el-Mandeb about 20 miles wide.
The Popular Mechanics article does mention that Iran has other missiles with longer range.
What’s new is non-state actors interfering with commercial shipping.
Egypt will join the BRICS because it is facing a debt crisis and desperately needs the external investment that will come with its membership.
The BRICS will bail out Egypt because it is crucial to the Belt Road Initiative.
Responding to these attacks by the Houthis as a political outgrowth of the Israel/Hamas conflict is misguided. It’s an attack on freedom of navigation and should be solved by the immediate destruction of the launch sites.
The French made missiles that our French “allies” provided for Iraq to use against us.
I’d call the Houthi’s “state actors”. They are one side in a civil war that governs half of a country, including the capital city.
Of course the Houthi’s are also Islamic terrorists. Most of the countries in the Mideast are Islamic terrorists, and/or financiers and supporters of Islamic terrorism. Certainly, the Houthis are proxies for Iran.
I never imagined that I would miss George Bush.