Union vs. Non-Union (Towboat jobs thread from Maritime Employment Forum)

Direct benefit/cost from 333? None. Each port is it’s own company, on paper. Representation would be for the New York port only, any contract negotiated would only affect guys employed by the New York port. As far as indirect benefit/cost? That’s even more vague…

If the union can just help give some job security to us so we dont worry about getting laid off every other day it would make it nice. It seems like everytime we get comfortable they swing the sickle once again.

In the current economy, no one can provide job security. No company, no union. I will admit, some have experienced a higher level of comfortability on the subject, Moran has quite simply done an amazing job, but is that because of the union or the company?

[QUOTE=cappy208;48242]Spoken and put into true sailors lingo. Good choice of words. At least we’re all paying attention now!

What was the rest of your post about???[/QUOTE]

Not trying to be picky Cappy,but normal is not a word I have often heard with or about sailors,and they seem to be much fonder of and frequently use a word that means the same as intercourse…

Great forum

[QUOTE=Cal;48245] No company, no union. I will admit, some have experienced a higher level of comfortability on the subject, Moran has quite simply done an amazing job, but is that because of the union or the company?[/QUOTE]

Moran also treats their employees better, you aren’t treated like a slave & that goes to show by the way the boats look & the way their fleet is in much better shape. Do you ever wonder why Mac can’t keep a contract for towing?? If you can’t see that you are wearing blinders. You seem to have missed the point on why there are different pay scales & how they change daily.

Didn’t I acknowledge that? Describing anything as amazing is usually a good thing.

Do you ever wonder why Mac can’t keep a contract for towing??

If you think it has anything do to with how they treat their employees you’re mistaken. Business is business. The company that hires them could care less, they merely want the job done for the lowest price The only part of the question, “You get what you pay for” that applies here is can they accomplish the task? Your Port Captain came to McAllister from the previous company that held the container barge contract between Norfolk & Philly/Baltimore. He had previously changed jobs for the same reason, he followed that run. Point being, contracts change, it has to do with money, who the lowest bidder is, not how well the crew is treated or how pretty the boat looks.

You seem to have missed the point on why there are different pay scales & how they change daily.

You assume I missed it because I didn’t say anything. How many things in this thread have been said by someone that hasn’t been acknowledged by someone else?

Different pay for different people? Each to his ability. You’ve got an AB working out of the Norfolk office with a number of years with the company that shouldn’t have a job, let alone get paid what anyone else gets paid. As the Mate I was up when we were breaking tow, he was struggling with the process, the ENTIRE process, and the Captain asked me to go down and help. This irritated him because, “I know what I’m doing”. Yet he didn’t know how to use a stopper line, didn’t know how to deal with the retrieving line appropriately, and came out with a rubber mallet to remove the pin from the shackle. I would have stopped to laugh my ass off if conditions would have allowed such a thing.

Are different rates appropriate? In my opinion yes. Should it be based on who’s ass you’re kissing in the office, no. Changing daily rates, not knowing what you’re making from one day to the next, nope, don’t agree with that either. Could union representation help with that? Sure, probably. You might merely exchange one problem for another though. Instead of changing your daily rate they may decide they can’t bid low enough to take a job and just lay you off.

How much of what is going on right now is the economy and how much of it is greedy companies?

Speaking to SIU only as I don’t know how other unions do it, but if a company doesn’t want a particular mariner that company has the right to refuse.

For example, should a mariner throw in for a job and beat out several other guys one of the steps in the process is the union will contact the company and inform the company of who they intend to send out. At that point the company can say yea or nay. If the company rejects the applicant he is given his card back and waits for the next job call. The second place applicant then starts the process, including sending his name to the company for approval.

So it’s not as if some jackass slacking bum can keep his job and a company has to just take it. In my experience a jackass keeps his job because the master is indifferent or doesn’t care to do the leg work to dump someone. I know this because I’ve seen masters get rid of people when it was important to them. Maybe it’s different in other unions?

Some of the anti-union posters seem to think the worthless are guaranteed jobs if its union. At least in my experience that is untrue.

I hit the floor laughing at this post…Well said. Me, I have been in 333, SIU and MM&P. Words can not describe the disgust I feel for unions. I call it the “Free Market” effect…I love the math in some of the previous post…Yea I work 2 for 1 but I also make a great rate. And in the GOM, go figure. Been at Bouchard for 7 years, K-Sea for 2 more and I find that NON Union Gulf jobs are paying right up there with the Northeast.
Just my 2 cents

[QUOTE=tugboat146;48267]I hit the floor laughing at this post…Well said. Me, I have been in 333, SIU and MM&P. Words can not describe the disgust I feel for unions. I call it the “Free Market” effect…I love the math in some of the previous post…Yea I work 2 for 1 but I also make a great rate. And in the GOM, go figure. Been at Bouchard for 7 years, K-Sea for 2 more and I find that NON Union Gulf jobs are paying right up there with the Northeast.
Just my 2 cents[/QUOTE]

I don’t think it will ever happen again but the over-building of vessels, the issuance of “tear-sheet” licenses in the early '80s and the bottom dropping out of the oilfield sure brought a lot of “free market effect” to the 333 negotiations. It took a long time for wages and conditions to improve for all. (Not meaning to drag up another dead horse to thrash)

I don’t mind chest compressions, but someone else is going to have to handle mouth-to-mouth!

Your comment about the GOM wages is true (at the present time). I was down in the intersection. We pulled up to Stone. While there a AB from Chouest came over and chatted w my AB. I was surprised to learn that they both made within a couple dollars of each other. BUT, having heard all the info on the posts about layoffs, and changes in work volume, tie ups, oil patch changes, it all seems undependable. BUT, I know that 5 years ago the guys were flooding the northeast for work. Then, 20 years ago the scab strike wage in NY was high enough to attract the Oil patch crew, and that was 1/2 what was being made back then.

One of the industry mags ( I forget which one) has a regular column about rig usage and whether it is up of down. Coincidentally, the OSV, Tug, and crew boat work follows the rig usage too. The towing industry is NOT tied to this. So I am not sure that there is a direct correlation between the two wages. They each vary but independently of each other.

To get back to the topic of wages and Union influence.

When Crowley came over to the east coast a couple (5)? years ago all our wages got a huge boost. The word got out that Capts there got 800 a day. (and they were going to bring a dozen of the 300KBBL units over here) Remember when we heard the Bouchard rate of 600 a day seemed out of this world, and we doubted them? All of a sudden everyone on the east coast got a raise! I am getting conflicting info on which Unions represent Crowley, but it appears they are MMP on west coast and SIU on east coast. But the wages wouldn’t be what they are without the Union. Again, with pressure from a ‘nearby’ Union wage, it affected the whole east coast wage.

Others may doubt it. Some may not agree that the Union scale effects nearby wages. Some may loathe the Unions.
I personally SAW what happened when My company signed with the Union. My daily wage went UP by 18%. I started getting OT and Holidays, we stopped getting laid off when it slowed down for a day or two in the middle of the hitch. And the most amazing thing was the treatment of the crews by idiotic, lunatic, unprofessional captains almost entirely STOPPED!

Once the Union had an arbitration ‘say’ in disputes, all of a sudden we heard for the first time (for example)

‘Hey Cap, the next time someone leaves this boat, it will be YOU. 9 deckhands in 4 hitches is too many.’

All of a sudden the ‘stupid’ was eliminated and most (but unfortunately not all) Captains got a little more professional.

Now, with things tight, guys are desperate for work, anywhere. Things are cyclical, but traditionally the Northeast and West coast are where the highest wages have been set in the industry. Although I am guilty of it also, I wish guys could respond on here with facts, not the statement ‘Unions suck,’ or ‘I would never work for a Union company.’ The guys who HAVE worked at both companies have seen the pay and conditions. Those are the ones who should be piping up and commenting on here.

An interesting premise about the ‘professionalism’ and competence of any employee being called into question. I would put the query back to you in like form. Anywhere you have worked, hasn’t there been a core of employees who are totally useless? Another core who are ‘average Joe’s’ (no offense to anyone named Joe) and another percentage who think their shit don’t stink (but in reality they are just full of shit, and don’t know it)? And the amazing thing is, this paragraph applies to all positions, and ranks! Just don’t tell the Captain and Chief!

IMHO, it is NO different at any company, whether Union or non union; asea, or ashore. I simply feel if someone is not worth promotion, they aren’t worth the raise in pay. If they aren’t qualified, then they shouldn’t be promoted. If a company is promoting ‘less than qualified’ employees, then I am suspect of the companies business practice.

In this business you are either qualified to stand a watch, or you are the ‘third mate’ and are a babysitter! .

There is no ‘levels’ of advancement on deck other than BR/steward, OS, AB, Lead AB (Bo’sun), 3rd Mate, 2nd Mate, Ch Mate, and Master. Ok, on tugs we only have, OS, AB, Mate, Capt. Unless I am missing something, there has never been a promotion to AB for less (or more) than ABs pay. Same with Mate and Capt. A ‘really good’ AB doesn’t get ‘really good AB’ pay, they get AB pay.

The reward for excellence and a job well done is promotion! Plain and simple. Your companies wage,reward and promotion policy goes against everything I have been brought up with on the water since I started when I was 11. I am thinking THIS is the issue we have been debating. Not so much Unions, as the use of ‘substandard’ employees in a two or three tier pay system to make up for their desperation to keep the billets filled at any cost!

[QUOTE=Tugted;48260] Do you ever wonder why Mac can’t keep a contract for towing?? If you can’t see that you are wearing blinders. You seem to have missed the point on why there are different pay scales & how they change daily.[/QUOTE]

We had a good thing going with some dead ship tows from San Francisco to Brownsville TX. We towed 4 ships around with few problems, but we lost the contract to Dann Ocean. The rumor was the condition of our boats was unacceptable to the surveyors…

[QUOTE=Cal;48262]
Different pay for different people? Each to his ability. You’ve got an AB working out of the Norfolk office with a number of years with the company that shouldn’t have a job, let alone get paid what anyone else gets paid. As the Mate I was up when we were breaking tow, he was struggling with the process, the ENTIRE process, and the Captain asked me to go down and help. This irritated him because, “I know what I’m doing”. Yet he didn’t know how to use a stopper line, didn’t know how to deal with the retrieving line appropriately, and came out with a rubber mallet to remove the pin from the shackle. I would have stopped to laugh my ass off if conditions would have allowed such a thing.

[QUOTE]

Yup there is a lot of that around here. Some of these guys are dedicated “harbor” ABs that refuse to go offshore when asked and they also seem to be the best payed. I dont know how they get to stay around, if I refused to go somewhere and did it more than once I would expect to get fired. Im curious to know who that person was, I have a few in mind.

Cal there is a lot of that here. Some guys just dont know what to do dispite years of being here. Im lucky to have come from a company that made sure you learned fast, with good ABs to teach me. There is a lot of deadwood that could be cut around here. Captains who “dont tow” ABs who never leave the harbor yet make the most money, and OS “engineers” who think they know it all.

Absolutely Agree 100%!

cappy, we have dickered wages specifically, if you look at total compensation there are marginal differences. Overall I make less, I’ve never argued otherwise, but I am close enough that I am comfortable. In comparing the costs vs benefits, then add the costs of making a change, it simply doesn’t make sense for me at this time.

Non-Union companies must keep their wages somewhat close to Union scale or they’ll experience “brain drain”. They may have a number of guys that simply won’t work for a union shop, then there are the rest.

…I wish guys could respond on here with facts, not the statement ‘Unions suck,’ or ‘I would never work for a Union company.’ The guys who HAVE worked at both companies have seen the pay and conditions. Those are the ones who should be piping up and commenting on here.

Again, I agree 100%. You said it better than I did. While I am curious about people’s opinions, I am more interested in the WHY behind those opinions. Whether that opinion is “Unions Suck” or “Scab Companies Suck”.

Wages are usually top on the list in the discussion, then other aspects of total compensation. What about working conditions? These are the things that are most difficult to describe/understand and rarely get touched on before people start yelling at each other.

The reward for excellence and a job well done is promotion! Plain and simple. Your companies wage,reward and promotion policy goes against everything I have been brought up with on the water since I started when I was 11. I am thinking THIS is the issue we have been debating. Not so much Unions, as the use of ‘substandard’ employees in a two or three tier pay system to make up for their desperation to keep the billets filled at any cost!

Ok, so you acknowledge that every company has their dead weight. Why should those who are not dead weight have to rely solely upon advancement for additional pay? When they have to carry the dead weight why should they be paid the same? For your altruistic side should we just cast these undesirable’s aside?

Furthermore, while it was before my time, there were professional deckhands. A deckhand can make or break a Captain/Mate (or land them in jail with an oil barge). The focus is not on excelling in one’s job, the focus is on “improving” themselves and getting promoted. Last I heard of Reinauer’s hiring policy for deckhands was that they had to have a license, I asked what size, the reply was 1600. Holy crap! To me that means there is NO value placed on a good deckhand and we’re going to see a lot of college kids that are just passing through to the wheelhouse. (NOTE: While the subject of Hawsepiper vs Academy is a subject for a different thread, and such threads exist, since I raised the subject here I need to point out that I see a need for both and any bias I have is based on the individual, not where they came from).

I think there is a noticeable, though not exclusive, difference between working on the boats and shoreside jobs. I’ve heard of guys that could handle a boat like nobody’s business, but couldn’t pass the exams. Worthy of promotion, but unable to attain it.

It seems to me that the company would want to retain these people. If every company has substandard employees, why is compensating those who excel more generously in order to retain them an egregious error?

Cal - Somewhere you mentioned that you see the union as just another layer of bureaucracy. That’s like saying the road in front of your house and the path behind which winds thought your garden and into the forest is just another travel route. The company has a bean counter mentality, the union officials on the other hand tend to be more sympathetic and understanding towards the mariners point of view.

Another point, I can’t help but get a little frustrated when someone complains about licensing or maritime safety regulations and complains about unions at the same time. Companies can lobby for lowers standards (and wages) while also lobbying for stricter penalties and drug tests for mariners involved in incidents. You, as a mariner have a voice as well! You can call your representative and give them your views. However you voice would be far more effective if joined with the voices of other professional mariners. But…we know we shouldn’t do this because my TV is telling me how the all powerful unions are destroying America. At some point it becomes time to wake up and smell the coffee.

K.C.

[QUOTE=Cal;48297]
If every company has substandard employees, why is compensating those who excel more generously in order to retain them an egregious error?[/QUOTE]

IMHO, this is EXACTLY why the '88 strike happened. There were numerous boats with licensed deckhands, and hardly ANY of them wanted to move up. You previously (I think it was you?!) mentioned this. If it were not for the strike, I would never have gotten my foot in the door to NYC because of this deadwood. Now it is a different story entirely.

I have been doing this long enough to have seen how paying ‘a little extra’ encourages the guys to stay right where they are. Unless there is a REASON to move up, most won’t. Going back over this thread I see countless explanations about why people should be paid more for doing a good job. I have yet to see how to reward people to ‘MOVE UP.’ IMHO, this is what this industry needs. More UPward movement, not lateral shuffling along.

Returning to the last topic, It would appear the Mac philosophy is to hire ‘anyone’ just to keep the boat moving. I know that at my company ( Union to boot… gasp) they are picky about who they hire. No, a 1600 ton license is NOT a prerequisite to a deckhands job, but a complete grasp of the english language, NOT having a DUI record, and a personal recommendation helps! Although I have seen all those three things overlooked, they seem to be a pretty good indicator of hireability. Some of the respondents to this thread assume that Union means slacker. NO. Slackers are found everywhere! Just here they are paid better!

I notice you are fixated on pay too. Since you have a contract, why not give some observations about the health care, short and long term disability, bereavement pay, ability to competitively bid on openings in the fleet, and company policy to promote from within compared to your place. It would be refreshing to see what others think. Especially from your unbiased point of view. (not being smart there, but you are an outsider looking in, versus Me looking out)

Since you have a better grasp of ‘this versus that’ why not complete the comparisons? Even if if is hard to do, as you earlier said, It would give a more thorough look at the industry as a whole. I am sure others (regardless of Union position or rank) would be able to get a better idea about how much THEY are worth too. Maybe, just maybe some would have any thoughts dispelled about what the ‘truth’ is wherever they work. That would be a truly altruistic thing to do. Don’t you agree?

Regarding the comments about not agreeing with the Union, since they ‘put money where you may not agree.’

I guess you are NOT aware that your companies ALL TO a MAN, are members in, support, pay towards, and benefit from AWO. American Waterways Operators is (strictly in my opinion) the WORST thing that has happened to tugboating EVER!

This organization is Company driven, Company oriented, and has ‘regulation control’ all over it. Anytime the USCG has tried to implement any constructive regulations, or have any oversight the AWO is the first group to howl in protest.

If any of you were around for the ‘Uninspected Towing Vessel’ Inspection Program (UTV) in its beginning you would know that I am telling the truth. When this program first came out the original idea was to have a USCG inspection of a towing vessel to ascertain its compliance. We all had to jump through hoops to qualify. Then the renewals (at AWO’s insistence and promise [RCP anyone?]) would be ‘self certified’ by the company management. Guess what happened! Doesn’t take too much imagination there were a WHOLE lot of stickers being thrown around without so much as ONE look from the office.

Recently the relaxing of the MTV program is another example of the AWO’s clout to change laws and regulations that were implemented because of earlier AWO license and professional recommendations that were somewhat less than spectacular. Movilla, Sunset LTD, Bay Titan, etc etc etc. For ANY ‘professional’ organization to assert that an inexperienced person can learn to acceptable performance levels how to stand their own watch in 30 days on a tug is… well… assinine. Especially after the previous mentioned incidents, which made the USCG enact stricter qualifications to remedy the problem. I wonder how many USCG retirees got cushy jobs at AWO after that decision? Another reason the USCG retirees should be barred from entering the same industry they spend the first 25 years regulating!

So the perception that the Union is paying for something you are against should be tempered with the way your company pays for something that is hurting all of us too! Not just wage wise, but safety wise.

Unions and other type of organization face a problem not faced by corporations. That is the problem of the free rider.

The ATV club that maintains a trail near my house can not prevent non club members from riding on the trail which they pay to maintain

Similarly unions can not prevent non-union workers from enjoying befits which they won. In a closed shop however they can prevent free riders. Any attempt to undermine unions will focus on the “unfairness” of unions efforts to avoid the free rider problem.

K.C.

[QUOTE=cappy208;48304] I wonder how many USCG retirees got cushy jobs at AWO after that decision? Another reason the USCG retirees should be barred from entering the same industry they spend the first 25 years regulating!
[/QUOTE]

It probably would not be hard to look up and see.

Besides, do you really think the USCG is going to stop their retirees from doing that? They can’t keep their own house in order, how are they going to control their retirees? It would be like barring retired congressman from becoming lobbyists. Both would take an act of congress and they can’t even agree on a budget let alone something like that.

The days of great leaders doing great things in government are gone. The days of great bureaucrats that work within the bureaucracy to preserve the bureaucracy is here. Welcome to the new normalcy.

[QUOTE=BMCSRetired;48310] Welcome to the new normalcy.[/QUOTE]

UGGGGH Truth rears its ugly head! I’m thinking Hemlock may be in order!

[QUOTE=cappy208;48304]So the perception that the Union is paying for something you are against should be tempered with the way your company pays for something that is hurting all of us too! Not just wage wise, but safety wise.[/QUOTE]

Understood. Believe me, I know that companies put more than their two cents into the mix. Most of the time they are contributing equally to opposing candidates just so they have some clout later, regardless of who wins.

It was mentioned by Bell that he would need to evaluate the political support that a union provides to candidates in deciding whether or not to work for a particular union. I tried to elaborate on that point by giving my perspective. While I may agree with the goal of such support, in this instance countering the damaging effects of misguided organizations like AWO (misguided simply because they are bought and paid for by the companies), I may still be unwilling to contribute to that effort.

When we were house hunting we had a couple of lists. Things the house must have, things we would like it to have, things we didn’t want, and things it absolutely could not have. These lists were prioritized, obviously some portions were more important than others. While there are political topics that are of great importance to me, I have one topic that trumps most others. It is not logical or rational, but emotional. It is a topic that has a potentially huge impact on one of my children. I typically do not lend my support to any candidate or organization that hinders or is opposed to my views on this one topic, regardless of what other topics I may agree with them on. I must have a job in order to provide for my family, I do not necessarily have to be a member of a union in order to accomplish the same.

1600 ton, just what I heard from a Capt there, not based on a discussion with Barbara.

Sounds like the companies have similar hiring practices depending on the market. When I was hired everyone one was short people and the primary prerequisite was that you had a pulse. How else would a guy that grew up in the desert and had never stepped foot on a boat before get a job?

I notice you are fixated on pay too. Since you have a contract, why not give some observations about the health care, short and long term disability, bereavement pay, ability to competitively bid on openings in the fleet, and company policy to promote from within compared to your place. It would be refreshing to see what others think. Especially from your unbiased point of view. (not being smart there, but you are an outsider looking in, versus Me looking out)

Okay, fair enough, but let’s drop the “fixation” on pay. I’m aware, not fixated. It’s the most common subject of any of these types of discussions so it’s prudent to be well informed if you’re going to have them. Additionally, the contracts I have are through 6/30/2010.

Health Care
[ul]
[li]McAllister - Employee; Employer Paid. Family;??, Family Buy-Up; $120/month. Cigna PPO; Health, Dental, Vision.
[/li][li]Reinauer - Employee; Employer Paid. Family; $120/month not to exceed $1,200 in a year. Cigna PPO; Health, ?, ? (not specified in contract)
[/li][li]K-Sea - Employee; $72/month, Family; $153/month (contract says monthly co-pay, I’m assuming it means premium). Any increase in premium of 5% or less to be covered solely by employer. Gradual elimination of employee paid premiums with time in service (5 & 10 years). Provider and coverages unknown.
[/li][/ul]

There are some differences in the Cigna coverage between McAllister and Reinauer with Reinauer having slightly better coverage. Such as $5 difference in copays for prescriptions and doctor visits. $400 individual & $800 family difference in maximum out-of-pocket expenses for those items with 10%/90% coverage. Neither one has deductibles in-network if I remember correctly (McAllister doesn’t).

Pension (401k)
[ul]
[li]McAllister - Employer Contribution of $1,000 plus a variable percentage of Employee Contributions (I personally have experienced from 25% to 50%). In good years it’s more than union, in poor years it’s less.
[/li][li]Reinauer - Employer Contribution varies with time in service, starts at 5% of Annual Gross Wage.
[/li][li]K-Sea - Contract states pension plan currently in place, I don’t have details.
[/li][/ul]

Compensation for Loss of Effects
[ul]
[li]McAllister - None
[/li][li]Reinauer - $1,000
[/li][li]K-Sea - $1,000
[/li][/ul]

Daddy duties call, will finish later…