In response to some discussion being had in the earlier “ATB Quandry” thread, here is a new thread dedicated to where the line is drawn between Limited and Unlimited mariners. We all know that quantifiably the line is drawn right at 1,600 Gross Registered Tons, but what about the less quantifiable factors? The path over that line still exists but it has become more grown-over and harder to follow in recent years. Should it be easier to cross from 1,600 GRT into an unlimited license, or was the Coast Guard right in making that a much more difficult journey for the common American Merchant Mariner?
Since ATBs are designed to bypass the very licensing and manning requirements that some are now requesting to be exempted from, where does one propose the CG redraw the lines? For example, between a pin boat married to a barge (combined gt > 1600) and a wire boat splitting its time between comparable towing and assist work? Tow configuration? Type of connection? Point is, the design of the ATB is made to accommodate companies’ hiring limited licenses. And who, really, would go from sailing as a 1600 ton master to a lowly third mate? Is this argument not mostly about ego? There is always the deep sea route if you really want that big ticket.
Curious how many hawsepipers out there have sailed from OS all the way up to Master Unlimited Any Oceans. Wonder how long it took and if anyone starting as an ordinary today could even pull it off.
[QUOTE=flotsam;99352]Since ATBs are designed to bypass the very licensing and manning requirements that some are now requesting to be exempted from, where does one propose the CG redraw the lines? For example, between a pin boat married to a barge (combined gt > 1600) and a wire boat splitting its time between comparable towing and assist work? Tow configuration? Type of connection? Point is, the design of the ATB is made to accommodate companies’ hiring limited licenses. And who, really, would go from sailing as a 1600 ton master to a lowly third mate? Is this argument not mostly about ego? There is always the deep sea route if you really want that big ticket.
Curious how many hawsepipers out there have sailed from OS all the way up to Master Unlimited Any Oceans. Wonder how long it took and if anyone starting as an ordinary today could even pull it off.[/QUOTE]
I can’t quote any statistics but just from shop-talk around the industry I have a feeling it’s quite common to spend your career going from OS to Unlimited Master. There was a time when that would have been the only way to do it, or at least the most common way by far. Ego or no ego, shouldn’t a man who works hard in the industry have the right to climb as high as his skills will allow, whatever path he choses to get there?
I am not meaning to be disparaging with the ego comment; I would love to upgrade as well. But I think the license probably should be commensurate with the liability. As we all know from living in a litigious society, the difference in liability between sailing as an officer on a panamax coastwise tanker and an ATB with a third of the capacity is substantial. This is rightly recognized in the licensing structure.
As a 1,600 master, if I had the time for a 3rds I’d get it. It would open up opportunities on unlimited offshore construction vessels (us tonnage another issue), DPO positions, or even the chance to jump on a box ship or tanker if the position presented itself. I’ve done support for Norwegian offshore construction vessels and could see myself being challenged in a different way on something like that. I think I could do a pretty good job but who knows. This would be to mix things up, why the hell not? Currently the option isn’t there for me so ill stay out sailing on what I do.
With all due respect, the option is technically there for you. Whether you’re willing to leave the wheelhouse and jump through a whole new set of hoops is another issue.
[QUOTE=z-drive;99359]As a 1,600 master, if I had the time for a 3rds I’d get it. It would open up opportunities on unlimited offshore construction vessels (us tonnage another issue), DPO positions, or even the chance to jump on a box ship or tanker if the position presented itself. I’ve done support for Norwegian offshore construction vessels and could see myself being challenged in a different way on something like that. I think I could do a pretty good job but who knows. This would be to mix things up, why the hell not? Currently the option isn’t there for me so ill stay out sailing on what I do.[/QUOTE]
The reason it’s gotten harder to cross over to the unlimited license is that 50% of your time needs to be over 1600-tons, which is hard to do when you only have a 1600-ton license. However, what you can still do is have all your sea-time as close as possible to 1600-tons and the USCG will grant you a restricted unlimited license of 150% of the tonnage that 50% or more of your sea-time is on.
So let’s say you’re a mate on a Crowley 750-ATB (I know they’re only taking unlimited licenses on those, but just go with me for a second). At 1595 tons if you got enough sea time to upgrade to your 3rd Mate unlimited you would get the unlimited license restricted to 2392 tons, which would then allow you to get time over 1600-tons and upgrade to a 2nd mate, fully unlimited. The path is a winding one, but a path nonetheless. What I would like to see is a requirement of sea-time over 1000 tons or something like that, so that it’s more easily accomplished, but only for 1600-ton licenses.
It absolutely is. I move barges well over 1,600 tons. The idea is make a pathway for thoroughly experienced mariners easier. This could be in concert with elimination some of the trade restricted licenses and getting done with the GRT system.
I started about six years ago, as an os and I have no doubt that I will hold an unlimited master one day no matter what the path is. Im 24 and enjoy the challenging license structure that forces people outside their comfort zone by going back on deck. Half of 1080 days on deck of an unlimited vessel doesnt really sound that horrible but it is what you make it I suppose. I think my goal is to end up on a construction vessel or drillship and like the tugs I work on now, I would rather spend time on deck to learn the operation.
My proposal is simple (in keeping with the KISS principal). Measure all vessels for I.T.C. tonnage within two years, and only use I.T.C. tonnage for licensing purposes. Domestic GRT tonnage may continue to be used for inspection and manning requirements on Jones Act vessels only. There should be only three levels of Master, the same as for licensing and STCW everywhere else in the world:
Master 500 / Mate 3000, Coastwise (includes Great Lakes, but no Oceans available at the 500 ton level. Coastwise is limited to within 200 miles of the US Coast.);
Master 3000 / Third Mate Unlimited, Oceans (no Coastwise or Great Lakes at this level);
Master Unlimited.
Master / Mate, Inland (stays the same as it is now, but with some reasonable path to upgrade to Coastwise or Oceans).
No restrictions or endorsements for OSV, Large OSV. Super large OSV, towing, DP, sail, etc. (No one else in the world has these kinds of license endorsements or restrictions).
Combined tug and barge tonnage may be used 100% toward any limited tonnage license and Third Mate Unlimited, 50% toward upgrade to Second Mate, 25% toward upgrade to Chief Mate, 0% toward upgrade toward Master Unlimited.
Simulator courses may be used to enhance lower tonnage seatime for up to 25% of the time required any unlimited license.
I hope I’m not beating a dead horse but this issue is important to me and I want to understand it more fully. As I understand it, it is still possible to work your way up the ladder but the trouble is getting over that unlimited/restricted 3rd mate’s ticket because there are so few vessels that fall into that category (between 1,600 and ~2,400 GRT). So let’s say for a minute that I’ve just gone from 1600-ton master to unlimited 3rd mate, restricted to 2,400 GRT. What are my options for a 3rd Mate’s job in that tonnage range? I read in another thread that most ships that size are in the gulf, construction vessels, etc. but I want to know what else is out there for the poor American new 3rd mate looking for a hitch.
this is all abit convoluted to say the least… i wish there was some way to simplify or at least make things more understandable…i have a 1600 NC masters ticket and am not at all opposed to working as an AB on a ship over 1600tons to get my 3rd mates ticket in afew years.i wonder if my work as an AB in any capacity aboard a vessel over 1600 tons counts or if i have to be in some capacity involved as OICNW. also,are there any OSV s that are that large?or is it only drill ships or blue water boats? is there any one place that lays out all these regs that effect us all so much,the CFR s are not the way to go i think… please excuse my newguyness. i like this forum alot and have learned alot here.im looking fwd to making a midlife industry change and will be old and grey before i understamd all this stuff… and i did use the search feature so spare me the dreaded pointy stick please:cool:
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;99978]I hope I’m not beating a dead horse but this issue is important to me and I want to understand it more fully. As I understand it, it is still possible to work your way up the ladder but the trouble is getting over that unlimited/restricted 3rd mate’s ticket because there are so few vessels that fall into that category (between 1,600 and ~2,400 GRT). So let’s say for a minute that I’ve just gone from 1600-ton master to unlimited 3rd mate, restricted to 2,400 GRT. What are my options for a 3rd Mate’s job in that tonnage range? I read in another thread that most ships that size are in the gulf, construction vessels, etc. but I want to know what else is out there for the poor American new 3rd mate looking for a hitch.[/QUOTE]
The USCG only issues Third Mate in increments of 1000, so the smallest 3/m license is 2000 tons, and the next increment would be 3000.
There are a few fishing boats in this range, maybe a couple of NYC sewage tankers (inland routes), a few ferries (inland routes), and an increasing number of OSV’s, and some yachts (foreign flag under 3000 I.T.C. tonnage). With the exception of the oil patch, there is a very strong regulatory incentive to keep the vessels under 1600. Probably some other vessels too.
GLDD has two US flag hopper dredges that are around 2400 GRT and the USACE hopper dredge Yaquina is 1960 GRT.
[QUOTE=flotsam;99358]I am not meaning to be disparaging with the ego comment; I would love to upgrade as well. But I think the license probably should be commensurate with the liability. As we all know from living in a litigious society, the difference in liability between sailing as an officer on a panamax coastwise tanker and an ATB with a third of the capacity is substantial. This is rightly recognized in the licensing structure.[/QUOTE]
Licenses should be commensurate with ABILITY.
This grt/itc system that we have now is rediculous. With my 100 ton license I have operated vessels up to 1950itc. The vessels were only 93grt. Now that I am back in the gulf I am finishing up my upgrade for larger osv’s. Truth is that the vessels I will be operating now are far easier to handle and have smaller dimensions than ones I have operated in the past. The kicker is that there is no way to use the older vessels itc tonnages for upgrades even though most newer osv’s only have an itc now. Getting more and more crazy with time. There needs to be a streamlining of this system and standardizing of tonnages!
That’s true about the dredges as far as tonnage goes. USACE only hires unlimited tonnage ocean mates- think academy types. I have a third mate any gross tons NC (as well as a 1600/3000 Master). I sailed AB for a year on a large Corps hopper and was excluded from an open Thirds position because of the ships COI. I’m going to think its the same for GLDD and the others. The CORPS does have small hopper dredges working out of the Wilmington, NC District that hires limited license folks.
[QUOTE=captaint76;100007]This grt/itc system that we have now is rediculous. With my 100 ton license I have operated vessels up to 1950itc. The vessels were only 93grt. Now that I am back in the gulf I am finishing up my upgrade for larger osv’s. Truth is that the vessels I will be operating now are far easier to handle and have smaller dimensions than ones I have operated in the past. The kicker is that there is no way to use the older vessels itc tonnages for upgrades even though most newer osv’s only have an itc now. Getting more and more crazy with time. There needs to be a streamlining of this system and standardizing of tonnages![/QUOTE]
I see this as a worker rights issue. The system is rigged so that companies can avoid regulations. The mariner gets screwed.
Its an issue of granting licenses to qualified mariners based upon logic, demonstrated ability, and competence.
The domestic GRT tonnage system has been perverted by overly generous tonnage exemptions and rule beater vessels to the point that it no longer bears any functional relationship to the actual size of vessels, or the skills required to serve on them.
USCG tonnage experience requirements are much much more restrictive than STCW requirements for licenses in other countries. For example, the USCG will not count any seatime at all under 200 tons toward an unlimited license, but Canada and the UK will both count seatime as low as 25 tons toward an unlimited license.
If anyone thinks that command experience on a 199 ton tug handling 5,000 ton barges contributes nothing toward developing the skills necessary to serve a licensed officer on a vessel over 1600 tons, but that experience as an OS on a 201 ton vessel is more valuable, a person who thinks that is completely clueless.
A big issue I have is having my boat get remeasured and suddenly all the ATBs are over 1600. They would need to find a way to keep the guys who have been running them for years in the wheelhouse. I’m pretty much locked in right now. My boat is under 200t so I can’t use the time to upgrade. I’m worried about my job getting taken away and given to guys with no practical experience but possessing a large UL license that I’m prevented from getting. Then if they do keep us on after we the boat is remeasured now none of our recency trips will count. We’ll need to take pilotage tests for every port or pilotage waters that our boat transits. That is a massive load that would be nearly impossible to achieve in a timely manner.