Does anyone remember the name of that small general-cargo ship some tug company here in the U.S. bought about 6 months or a year ago? I remember it had an orange hull with a white super structure, it was between 200 and 300 feet long and I’m pretty sure it was under 1600-GRT. I think I remember hearing it got a contract to bring some heavy deck cargo through the panama canal to California or something like that, but that was a while ago. It sounded like an interesting little operation, especially since it was a unique take on short sea shipping here in the U.S., and I wanted to check up on her and see what she’s been up to. I can’t do that if I don’t even remember what she’s called!
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;108489]Does anyone remember the name of that small general-cargo ship some tug company here in the U.S. bought about 6 months or a year ago? I remember it had an orange hull with a white super structure, it was between 200 and 300 feet long and I’m pretty sure it was under 1600-GRT. I think I remember hearing it got a contract to bring some heavy deck cargo through the panama canal to California or something like that, but that was a while ago. It sounded like an interesting little operation, especially since it was a unique take on short sea shipping here in the U.S., and I wanted to check up on her and see what she’s been up to. I can’t do that if I don’t even remember what she’s called![/QUOTE]
I think this is what you’re looking for Paddy
[QUOTE=rshrew;102382]Not true exactly, look up Stevens towing they bought a ship called the COASTAL VENTURE from Coastal (Transportation) in Seattle. She is a pocket freighter that tramp ships for them they may be in need of people to man her. I have had the pleasure of meeting the owners and they are a good group.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=c.captain;108497]I think this is what you’re looking for Paddy[/QUOTE]
I believe you are correct, Sir. I am in your debt.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;108498]I believe you are correct, Sir. I am in your debt.[/QUOTE]
no problem paisano…fuhgedaboudit!
Hey just for the record, American Feeder Line was trying like hell to get service running from Boston-Portland-Halifax, and didn’t do crap. They ran for maybe 6 months. Had all kinds of big successful European short sea shipping executives running it and still crapped their pants. Container barge service between NY-BOS-PORTLAND has ended again in the last few years as well.
Last week I would have agreed with you but this week I meet with a few large container shipping executives and this topic was discussed in length… and… the problems are not the same as we think:
You are wrong about the first point. It is true that the ILA and, to a lesser extent, the teamsters are the second biggest challenge (behind general consumer, media & government apathy) but not because of cost… In fact a few shipping companies have told me they are willing to pay more in port fees if… the biggest problem is productivity! Short sea shipping along with port automation and inviting larger ships require speed and new equipment… both things the ILA has fought tooth and nail. As a result American crane operators are the best paid AND the SLOWEST in the world. The shipping companies are ok with the high pay but not with the speed of discharge.
You are correct about the second point but most states and cities don’t have the power to fight the teamsters… Those that do have the power like Mayor Bloomberg have shown no interest in doing so. Why? I don’t know he either doesn’t understand the problem or it’s because he’s liberal and pro union.
Your 3rd point is good but it’s not enough for individual ports to fund short sea shipping… we also need feeder ports and railroad lines to the new, smaller, ports.
You’re 5th point is invalid because, again, it’s not about the money but the speed of moving the boxes in and out of port and the location of feeder terminals.
I think you are wrong about the last point. Walmart has been happy to go along with, for example, Maersk’s reduced sailing schedules (due to their utilizing larger ships), slow downs and opting to avoid the Panama Canal fee… all of which reduces their delivery time. Walmart agrees because they care about reduced costs and reliable service much more than they do about speed.
The bottom line is that the shipping companies are very much for the idea (they talked about it at length in my meeting) but they refuse to support the idea until the ILA starts moving boxes faster. Until that happens they want their boxes on trucks/trains, and out of the hands of the ILA as quick as possible.
So, to answer your question:
THE reason this isn’t happening is the same reason that MMP members have to drive down the the F’n union hall each day rather than checking the board from their computers at home… A few dozen senile members at the union refuse to embrace new technology/automation that will benefit everyone (including themselves!). And because of this millions of people have to suffer with congested highways, higher prices at the store and poor air quality.
Again it’s not the cost of longshoremen but the fact they move boxes slower than any other country in the world.
Shipping companies don’t send a 14,000+ teu container ship not because of the extra port fees alone but because it would take the ILA a week to offload the thing.
As one shipping exec told me “In the US getting containers off our ships is like sucking molasses through a straw”… and Short sea shipping requires 2 additional crane lifts per box! So there is no way the shipping CEO’s will ever support this (despite the fact they really do like the idea) and without their support nothing is going to change.
Despite being rough around the edges sometimes both you and c.captain are two of the most knowledgable member we have on gCaptain and, as such, I value your contribution. But even you two are wrong sometimes… And this is clearly one of those times!
I don’t mean to beat a dead horse on this but we need to focus on the problem… it’s not about the salaries or anything else except the fact these guys are too slow and resistant to change!
TRUE! And so are the highways! And so are the size of the cranes! And so is the lack of automation in the port! And so is the productivity of the Longshoreman!
Short sea shipping IS NEEDED and the ILA is preventing it!
The crazy thing is that, with the extra people needed to make 2 extra lifts per box (on and off the feeder vessel) the people who would benefit the most from short sea shipping IS the ILA… yet time and again they insist on shooting themselves in the foot.
And one more thing…
The second biggest problem after the ILA are the shipyards. Jones Act ships are simply too expensive.
But this is just the other side of the same problem… productivity, not salaries! I’m currently in Korea and the shipyard workers here have even more militant unions than we do and they get more vacation time than Americans and, are you ready for this, they make nearly as much money!
So if you are paying workers the same amount to build a ship in Korea as in the US why are US ships so much more expensive to build? Lack of productivity and willingness to accept technology and automation.
[QUOTE=john;108522]
You are correct about the second point but most states and cities don’t have the power to fight the teamsters… Those that do have the power like Mayor Bloomberg have shown no interest in doing so. Why? I don’t know he either doesn’t understand the problem or it’s because he’s liberal and pro union.
.[/QUOTE]
I can answer part of that question, the teamsters will never go along with short sea shipping because that takes money away from them, they make money everytime a box gets put on a trailor, they get paid by the mile, so every mile they can move boxes= more money for them. They also have some very well paid for politicans in there pocket to make sure they get what they want.
The government makes alot of money off highway fuel taxes. All this money goes into the highway trust fund, which in turn is supposed to go back into mainting and building our highways. The highway trust fund makes money, alot of money, probably one of the few things the government actually does make money at. In fact it makes so much money they have been robing money out of the highway trust fund to put other places for years. So if you start taking trucks off the highway they will loose money. Ships and boats don’t pay highway fuel taxes. So who do you think will win this argument? Below is a list of the gas and diesel tax’s per gallon for every state. Now consider the amount of traffic on I-95, and that most tractor tralers only get 6 to 7 MPG at best. That is alot of money just in fuel taxes, Will all those port state fees make up for the lost fuel tax revenue?
U.S. Gas Taxes (cents per gallon)
State
Gas Taxes/Fees (cpg)
Diesel Taxes/Fees (cpg)
Alabama
39.3
46.3
Alaska
26.4
32.4
Arizona
37.4
43.4
Arkansas
40.2
47.2
California
69
79.5
Colorado
40.4
44.9
Connecticut
64.4
70.6
Delaware
41.4
46.4
District of Columbia
41.9
47.9
Florida
53.4
54.9
Georgia
47.8
56.3
Hawaii
68
75.2
Idaho
43.4
49.4
Illinois
62.8
70.1
Indiana
61.4
76.2
Iowa
40.4
47.9
Kansas
43.4
51.4
Kentucky
46.2
43.9
Louisiana
38.4
44.4
Maine
49.9
57.1
Maryland
41.9
48.7
Massachusetts
41.9
47.9
Michigan
61.3
64.4
Minnesota
46.5
52
Mississippi
37.2
43.2
Missouri
35.7
41.7
Montana
46.2
53
Nebraska
46
51.4
Nevada
51.5
53
New Hampshire
38
44
New Jersey
32.9
41.9
New Mexico
37.3
47.2
New York
69.6
75.1
North Carolina
57.6
63.6
North Dakota
41.4
47.4
Ohio
46.4
52.4
Oklahoma
35.4
38.4
Oregon
49.4
54.7
Pennsylvania
50.7
63.6
Rhode Island
51.4
57.4
South Carolina
35.2
41.2
South Dakota
42.4
48.4
Tennessee
39.8
42.8
Texas
38.4
44.4
Utah
42.9
48.9
Vermont
43.9
53.4
Virginia
38.6
44.7
Washington
55.9
61.9
West Virginia
51.8
56.5
Wisconsin
51.3
57.3
Wyoming
32.4
38.4
- We offer no guarantees as to the accuracy of these numbers. They are presented here for informational and educational purposes only. Please consult official government figures to validate these numbers. Last Updated May 2012
You are correct about Mexico but not about the canal. Maersk has stopped using the canal entirely and says it will not use the new canal… the other container companies are planning to follow suit.
The future, according to Maersk and others, is no longer about speed or directness… it’s about operating larger ships at slower speeds.
(One side note you are also missing the point that big trucks do significant long-term damage to roads and bridges. The fuel tax is suppose to pay for this long term maintenance but instead it’s used to solve short term budget problems while the roads are being neglected… and if we continue down this road then roads and bridges will, in 10-20 years, star failing at startling rates.)
Thanks for all of that writing John, some good points for digestion.
The biggest point is that the faster and more efficient ILA can handle boxes the more money they will make… But alas it’s the same idea again and again, and its pretty much one generation that just doesn’t get it.
Imagine a whacky terminal arrangement where the box would only need to be picked up once and dropped from that same crane onto the feeder ship? Technology could keep it organized.
[QUOTE=john;108528]And one more thing…
The second biggest problem after the ILA are the shipyards. Jones Act ships are simply too expensive.
But this is just the other side of the same problem… productivity, not salaries! I’m currently in Korea and the shipyard workers here have even more militant unions than we do and they get more vacation time than Americans and, are you ready for this, they make nearly as much money!
So if you are paying workers the same amount to build a ship in Korea as in the US why are US ships so much more expensive to build? Lack of productivity and willingness to accept technology and automation.[/QUOTE]
Why are they afraid of productivity and technology costing them work? The last Korean shipyard I was at was overflowing with productivity and technology. They also employed over 40,000 workers!
As a captain once told me “The only reward for good work is more work.” I guess this is a lesson the shipyards workers and longshoreman never learned.
[QUOTE=z-drive;108535]Thanks for all of that writing John, some good points for digestion.
The biggest point is that the faster and more efficient ILA can handle boxes the more money they will make… But alas it’s the same idea again and again, and its pretty much one generation that just doesn’t get it.
Imagine a whacky terminal arrangement where the box would only need to be picked up once and dropped from that same crane onto the feeder ship? Technology could keep it organized.[/QUOTE]
What bothers me is that a few dozen west coast crane operators being dumb and lazy is costing us mariners hundreds of potential jobs, is costing shipyards thousands of potential jobs and is costing millions of Americans a brighter future.
[QUOTE=cmjeff;108537]What bothers me is that a few dozen west coast crane operators being dumb and lazy is costing us mariners hundreds of potential jobs, is costing shipyards thousands of potential jobs and is costing millions of Americans a brighter future.[/QUOTE]
Kind of like a few hundred lazy folks in Washington costing us jobs and money. . . . .
[QUOTE=cmakin;108538]Kind of like a few hundred lazy folks in Washington costing us jobs and money. . . . .[/QUOTE]
Bbbbbbbbingo!
I say we dig up those anti-union signs you use to see in Fourchon and start picketing ILA and MARAD headquarters :eek:
[QUOTE=john;108522]Short sea shipping along with port automation and inviting larger ships require speed and new equipment… both things the ILA has fought tooth and nail. As a result American crane operators are the best paid AND the SLOWEST in the world. The shipping companies are ok with the high pay but not with the speed of discharge. You are correct about the second point but most states and cities don’t have the power to fight the teamsters… Those that do have the power like Mayor Bloomberg have shown no interest in doing so. Why? I don’t know he either doesn’t understand the problem or it’s because he’s liberal and pro union.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=john;108528]The second biggest problem after the ILA are the shipyards. Jones Act ships are simply too expensive.
But this is just the other side of the same problem… productivity, not salaries! I’m currently in Korea and the shipyard workers here have even more militant unions than we do and they get more vacation time than Americans and, are you ready for this, they make nearly as much money!
So if you are paying workers the same amount to build a ship in Korea as in the US why are US ships so much more expensive to build? Lack of productivity and willingness to accept technology and automation.[/QUOTE]
These are both points that I have tried to drive home in other similar threads but because they both have to do with unions, and how they’re tightening the noose on our industry every day, I just end up sounding like I want the proletarian masses to remain crushed under the wheel of corporate oppression. This is, of course, not true, but I failed to make my case as eloquently as you did. Ugly or eloquent the truth still remains: the main problem is the unions, whether it be the teamsters, the ILA, or the shipyards.
Do I believe that American workers should make a livable wage? Yes. Do I believe that the unions help achieve that for them? Yes. But if you were to ask me if the unions were interested in the productivity, efficiency, international competitiveness, and over all success of the American work force then the answer is most definitely NO. This country can work for a livable wage and still be competitive internationally, we might even have the capacity to get a massive project like short sea shipping and national marine highways off the ground, but none of that will ever happen as long as there are unions to hinder progress and keep this country in the dark ages.
Maritime Highway vessels should be modern, fast LNG powered Ro/Ro’s and not cellular containerships plus they should carry the tractors and drivers along with the trailers. This is very common in Europe especially in cross Baltic, North Sea and Med routes.
Drive on one end, run up/down coast, dock and drive off other end as soon as ramp is down. The whole name of the game in this kind of trade is speed of service. 2 hours at a dock is too long! Eliminate the crane operators and all the other ILA stevedore slugs. The terminals should also all be brand new and designed for easy and fast marshalling. Northbound for Boston over there, southbound for Jax over there, etc… Just line up and wait for the next ship to arrive in 12 hours which is about the schedule you would need…2 ships a day in each direction. Locate these terminals not in the traditional port areas but on an outskirts with all new direct connections to the freeways in the area. Yes, the docks will be unionized but the positions on them will not be paid like the container docks. Too bad if the ILA doesn’t like that but welcome to the new 21st century you land crawling gastopods. Remember, new docks new contracts!
In the end it is really a ferry service we are talking about and streamlining is what would be critical for any such service to be a success.
This system would answer most of the problems john raised and we might even get the teamsters on board with this one (since they still get to drive). The only hitch would be the ILA but they can’t exactly tell shipping companies what kind of ships to build or how to use them, can they?