Whatever.
Yawn.
Just curious…What company/site did you go through to land this?
more like…this guy wears his “tighty whities” with the tops pulled up to around his arm pits!!
I have a sneaking suspicion that he’s one o’ them snipes who wears bright white coveralls and they’re never dirty. :eek:
there were several entities bidding on this delivery…would be surprised if it was awarded that quickly??
**suspect the inquiries made here regarding employment for this delivery were more about crewing costs and biding the contract than the actual positions…hope I’m wrong??
So, what’s the problem boys? Short attention span? Can’t remember your reasons for claiming this job is illegal? Can’t find anything to back up your claim that anyone taking the job is putting his license at risk? MSC laughed when you told them the job is illegal? What did your CG buddies say when you told them about this threat to maritime security and safety? Too bad you can’t stick to the subject but the reasons are becoming very clear for everyone to see.
With the wealth of knowledge that led you to state how the job is illegal and your ability to find CFRs I would have thought you would have posted links to EU or IMO regs that the MSC and US Army missed.
If all you can do to support your statements is make jokes and attack me then that pretty much describes the value of anything you have to contribute. I am glad there are a few readers here who see blustering and ignorance for what it is, they may get a job out of it.
Whatever, snipe.
Yawn.
Why are you so interested in "EU or “IMO” regulations? The point is that U.S. documented seamen need to adhere to U.S. regulations - CFRs and U.S. Code. I commented that a two watch system does not receive a warm welcome (or a port clearance to leave said foreign port) based on experience - let alone whether or not it is acceptable to U.S. authorities.
Steamer - if you were involved in actual debate, backed up by some factual evidence - other than the original RFQ - there are many who would actively engage you. It might even be fun! Blindly shooting down all that oppose your train of thought does not make an interesting or effective debate.
BTW - what class were you out of KP?
Perhaps because the nations along the route of passage are not in the business of enforcing the US CFRs. Port state control enforces their own and international regs … perhaps because if you are operating a vessel in foreign waters you should (as a professional mariner) have at least an inkling that their laws apply.
“I commented that a two watch system does not receive a warm welcome (or a port clearance to leave said foreign port) based on experience - let alone whether or not it is acceptable to U.S. authorities.”
Gee, you mean the foreign maritime authorities use their own regs and don’t pay attention to the US CFRs? Maybe they use IMO and EU Maritime regulations … what a concept. Did you even read what you just wrote?
Have you contacted the CG and MSC yet to let them know you believe this contract is illegal and will lead to what, US mariners having their licenses revoked by Spain or Egypt? So educate me, tell me and everyone else which authorities are going to do what to whom for taking this boat to Kuwait. You guys are blowing a lot of smoke, let’s see some fire.
I am not the one who claimed that the job is illegal and will put someone’s license at risk, so it is up to you and others who did to explain why this is the case. It’s your job to prove your contention. Good luck.
Stop picking your nose so much and you might not be tired all the time.
Holy crap I’ve left my web cam on again.
Nice attempt at humor, snipe. Keep it up, it comes with practice.
I am glad there are a few readers here who see blustering and ignorance for what it is, they may get a job out of it.
Could this mean that the Chief is finally seeing himself as we do? This is the start of a positive and self cleansing introspection…I applaud you Chief…steady as you are…you are on a course to clarity and true brotherhood of the sea…
Your response seems to confirm that you can’t backup your claims that this trip somehow puts a US license at risk and/or is somehow illegal.
To me, it isn’t primarily a question of risk or illegality. It is simply another example of an American company (the government, no less) exploiting US merchant seamen by requiring them to work under conditions that the rest of the world finds so ludicrous they won’t allow a two-watch US vessel into their ports.
It is a crock of shit, and for us to suffer your wrath for simply pointing out that fact is puzzling. But you’re absolutely entitled (and holding firmly) to your opinion. So please, bang away at us all you like. You’re not winning the debate as far as I can tell, but you’re persistent.
I’m homeless so legal or not, I need a job and if I get selected I will be going on this voyage.
[QUOTE=dougpine;22235] You’re not winning the debate as far as I can tell, but you’re persistent.[/QUOTE]
He might be, not that I’ve learned anything from his posts, but I feel like the intelligence is getting sucked out my head as I read…that’s got to be worth a few points.
Now there’s a course correction! What happened to:
“If it’s a tug you’re going to need people who hold Master or Mate of Towing Oceans endorsements.”
“It is simply another example of an American company (the government, no less) exploiting US merchant seamen by requiring them to work under conditions that the rest of the world finds so ludicrous they won’t allow a two-watch US vessel into their ports.”
It sounds like you have read all the Paris MOU reports. Would you care to tell us about those vessels that are banned, or to make it easier, tell us about the circumstances and deficiencies that led to the detentions you guys are worried about. Which boats got busted for two-watch systems, which ones got busted for not having a MSMD? Which ones got busted for not having certificated crew or had crew that lacked the correct STCW endorsements? And while you are at it … list the consequences to the licenses involved that lead you to believe they are “at risk.”
“It is a crock of shit, and for us to suffer your wrath for simply pointing out that fact is puzzling.”
It is isn’t wrath, it is a measured and polite response to what I see as a lot of rabble rousing and fear mongering posing as legal advice. I have read a lot of opinions, a lot of childish jokes, and a lot of BS masquerading as knowledge of the regulations (much of it contradictory in the same post) but so far there haven’t been many facts “pointed out” to support the following statements concerning this contract and job offer:
“You’re absolutely right, any voyage over 600 nm needs a three watch sytem in place; and try entering a foreign port on an American two-watch system boat. Busted!”
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]“…would you risk your hard earned license by … type of voyage clearly calls for three separate watches of 8 hrs…”[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana][COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]“If you want to encourage a young mariner to compromise his career …” [/FONT][/COLOR]
<?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:p></O:p><O:p></O:p>[/FONT][/COLOR]“If it’s a tug you’re going to need people who hold Master or Mate of Towing Oceans endorsements.”
And then there is this gem of hypocrisy and ignorance:
“I don’t think the information is too creditable from someone who has an OUPV licenses hanging up in their office cubicle.”
I just love that one … trashing the guy who posted the job and provided the only facts that are relevent to this discussion. If you don’t like 12 and 12, don’t apply for the job. If you think the US Government is exploitiing seamen, complain to the government, start an anti-USCG/MARAD/MSC thread if you like.
You didn’t hesitate to call in the Feds on your little fishboat adventure, have you called them to report the MSC and Army for abusing seamen and forcing them to put their licenses at “risk”?
Trying to pass off your personal dislikes and opinions as legal reasons an applicant will risk his license or documents by taking this job is out and out ignorant bullshit. You can have all the opinions you like but when you publish them as “facts” and misinform others on the legality of a job they might want to take then you have stepped over the line and you have to expect to be called on it.
someone care to explain why if MSC is involved that they are “shoping out” this delivery instead of providing for the vessel manning “in house”??
Utimately the COI will dictate the number and class of Mariners necessary to the voyage of the vessel. If a Master closely observes the dictates of the COI he/she should persevere if Flag/State questions arise upon arrival.
If the vessel comes under SOLAS Class there may be other regultions to which the Master and vessel must comply. Part of his/her job when taking command of the vessel is to discover- under what regulations the vessel has obligations and liabilities.
Most likely the vessel will not be SOLAS class as it is a Military Vessel. But you don’t know till you walk onboard and do the research. That is the Master’s job. But another of his jobs is to guarantee the safety and comfort of his crew.
Chief, times have changed. The days of the ‘Wooden Ships and Iron Men’ mentality is long gone and that mentality was extremely prevalent when I started out in 1969. Enter Exxon Valdez…In these times it seems that some seagoing personnel or official persons will take any opportunity to take away your life’s work and all your money by lawsuits or official actions. In the case of lawsuits there is seldom a clear winner except maybe the lawyer. But the defendents always lose one way or another. Think about it. Nine times out to ten the Master is named as a defendent in Marine Lawsuits. How many Chief Engineers, though most of them claim to be second in Command on a vessel? Compartively…not many.
That is why we as the Masters have to question everything and dot all our I’s and cross all T’s. If not for the safety and comfort of our crews, (which will sound hokey to those that have not a clue), then as self preservation. Lets call a spade a spade.
Most of the response posts that you have been getting have been from Masters. Why is that? Because they are ultimately responsible for all occurrences onboard the vessel even when they are sleeping. That may not always be true in an official forum under the Regulations, but try telling a Civil Court Judge in a lawsuit that you were sleeping at the time. A Master has to do his/her homework. If they don’t do their homework and don’t continue to stay on top on things everyday no matter how nit picky it appears to others…one day when they least expect it, a big chunk comes out of their ass and nobody feels that bite worse the the Master.
Nobody said that the JOB in question in of itself is illegal, they are just exchanging ideas as to how the job should be approached and executed.
I for one admire your knowledge and experiences as you seem to have dedicted your seagoing career to not just going on the job and coming back home. We should all do what we can for our industry but lets not engage ouselves in a Hatfieds and McCoys style potshotting war over it. I am willing to cease and desist…how about you?
We should continue to add positive insights to any and all forums, threads, and posts but not at the expense of our ability to help one another and respect one another.:)
How about a group hug…:eek:
There is not enough information to get anything out of this debate, really. There has been many articles in Professional Mariner Magazine that has backed-up dougpine’s concerns with port state authorities, but what isn’t known is if those concerns are applicable to this particular vessel. The license requirements of the people they seek to hire, say that is the case, but I can tell you, I don’t know, and don’t care to know.
I don’t think it would be that hard for a gov’t vessel to get an SMD exemption or reduction if the vessel is over 200 GRT…if it’s even required for an Army tug (which I doubt).
I worked on tugs for years on international voyages hauling grain barges with a two-watch system. It’s not done anymore for the most part, and for good reason.
I will say this to whoever is going. Only do what is needed to get the vessel delivered safely. If someone gets hurt, you’re pretty much screwed to get any type rest.