I am out of date on IBU pay scales, particularly in the Bay or LA. I’m also out of date on which companies are vertical IBU, MMP, SIU, or whatever combination.
$400 a day (about $30 an hour plus overtime) for a deckhand on a day boat sounds like too much, but is it in a place where average home prices are over $1 million, basic apartment rents are $3000, there is a 10%+ state income tax, 10% sales tax, and other high local taxes?
How much an hour do truck drivers and construction laborers make in SF or LA? Uber drivers? longshoremen?
The real problem is that a fully credentialed and experienced tugboat Captain should be worth a lot more than a double what a green deckhand is paid, and a lot more than half what a longshoreman gets too.
I would like to see maritime union pay scales from around the country posted here. They are not a secret. The unions should be proud to see them posted. I can’t really see what valid objection a union employer could have either.
What do they have to gain? High wages prove unions are corrupt and low wages prove unions are corrupt. Wages that are perfect just prove two wrongs don’t make a right.
PBGC is a federal agency created by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to protect pension benefits in private-sector defined benefit plans - the kind that typically pay a set monthly amount at retirement. If your plan ends (this is called “plan termination”) without sufficient money to pay all benefits, PBGC’s insurance program will pay you the benefit provided by your pension plan up to the limits set by law. (Most people receive the full benefit they had earned before the plan terminated.) Our financing comes from insurance premiums paid by companies whose plans we protect, from our investments, from the assets of pension plans that we take over as trustee, and from recoveries from the companies formerly responsible for the plans, but not from taxes. Your plan is insured even if your employer fails to pay the required premiums.
From your posts I read it as you are anti union. if you have a problem with what a union member makes because you feel that wage is not deserved based on your personal experience on what a more skilled worker should earn is just that a personal problem.
I sail union shipping as a senior management position that is also covered by a collective bargaining agreement. My medical and dental, are no free. they were included in the total cost of labor agreement.
Unions are there to protect the jobs under their contract first and foremost. without the jobs there are no plans and without the plans there would not be a membership.
It takes a while to see were the difference is. But once you have been a member and see how the system works it becomes clear.
Yes, all unions have room to improve. it’s up to the members to be involved to make sure that their collective interests are representative of the elected officials in the union.
Yesterday I was curious about PBGC & read several pages from 4 sites about it. Wikipedia, PBGC, Forbes & CNBC. Roughly 4500 pensions have been covered by PBGC since 1974. The ones that have failed haved been both company & union controlled. So thinking your pension is guaranteed because its controlled by a union is dead wrong. The PBGC site said most pensions stay at 100% after failure but other sites said pensioners receive 20-90% of what they were promised after a bankruptcy. All the sites claimed 2025-2027 will be the year when things get bad & Congress/Taxpayers will need to step in. According to Forbes (anti-Union propaganda magazine IMO) pensioners could see a 90% decrease if the government doesn’t step in to save the day.
I think pensions are great things. But I’m not stupid enough to bank on that money because some company HR people or Union Officials tell me they’ll have it for me in 20 years. And I definitely don’t want to get paid less now with a promise from a Union Official or HR guy that the difference will be settled up 20 years from now. I don’t want some make-a-wish pension to be a part of my pay. As a bonus, okay, but give me all of my salary now, I don’t trust people. I don’t want a bunch of knuckleheads negotiating for me unless it’s absolutely required by law either.
I had some GOM mariners come through after the oil patch crashed. I had one crew member with a 1600 ton license sailing as 8x12 watchstander AB.
First time I talked to him he said he was surprised how professional and hard working the crew was. Said he didn’t expect that from a union crew.
Later in the trip I came up to the wheelhouse one morning and he was lecturing the third mate on the evils of the union. Just as I came up he was explaining that the union was essentially an employment agency. I asked him “what about the contract?” He asked “what contract?”
Congress stepping in to save the day means Congress who decides about the insurance premiums companies must pay to keep the PGBC solvent must increase the premiums, currently about $80 per pension participant. Congress makes that decision. The companies could care less if the PGBC is solvent as they don’t like pensions. They have the lobbyists that control Congress so it is unlikely Congress will increase the premiums. Involving the taxpayer into the PGBC is not possible as the taxpayer is not liable for the expenses of the PGBC unless the law changes . I remember when the PGBC was established and it was established because companies promised pensions as part of their wage agreement with employees but then would gamble with the pension money and lose it or declare bankruptcy to get out of paying, form another company and keep on operating. The PGBC made it clear that those that offer pensions must keep their promise and also pay into an insurance fund in case they did go bankrupt. Companies HATE this. They can’t gamble with pension money AND have to pay into an insurance fund? The horror !! So they have lobbied for years to keep insurance premiums low, if the PGBC goes broke? It disappears which would be a wonderful thing in their way of thinking. The taxpayer isn’t on the hook for anything.
The unions could demonstrate to mariners that membership is worthwhile by showing that they have good contracts.
Why wouldn’t a union want to show what they do for their members? The only reason not to show wages is if they are embarrassingly low.
Regardless of what the union might want to do, or not do, hundreds of union members here on gcaptain have copies of their union contracts. It would be simple enough for them to post wages
For example: the IBU contract with Foss in LA/LB pays these amounts -——
A typical IBU member in LA probably knows what the wage scales are at every local union company.
Why would they want to do that? The union “customers” are the members, not the general public.
That’s the same mistake non-union mariners make calling the hall or asking the dispatcher questions. That person behind the desk is not there to serve the public. They are working for the members.
If you are right then the retirees who depend on PBGC are screwed. But that’s a lot of people & the AARP is one of the largest lobbying groups in DC. Also, the old people demographic votes more than others so there might be hope for these old timers?
The unions have failed to market themselves. Instead of growing their job base and membership, they are an insular private club that is fading into oblivion for lack of interest.
‘Defined benefit’ pension plans, except for government employees, are a thing of the past. Private enterprise has been shifting to “defined contribution” plans (e.g., 401(k)’s as fast as it can.
When was the last time a company created a new defined benefit plan? Back in the 70’s?
Can’t expand membership without more jobs. Probably the main reason for the decline in membership is that the unions are mostly in sectors that are in decline, such as manufacturing.
The R’s fight unions tooth and nail because they cut into profits The D’s don’t like them because they want people to depend on the government instead of private organizations.
I’d say the D’s don’t like them for the same reason the R’s don’t. They are both bought and paid for once they get into office. There is precious little practical difference between the two parties now, it’s just a matter of degree. Clinton deregulated the financial industry, Bush watched them run wild almost crashing the economy of the planet and then Obama bailed them out.
Deep sea jobs, which are almost exclusively union are in very steep decline. The unions lost many of the existing deep sea jobs to the pseudo union AMO. (I can certainly understand why AMO would be too embarrassed to publish its wage scale).
The number of tugboat jobs is growing. However, the number of union tugboat jobs is shrinking.
The unions could have gotten into the oil patch during the boom, but they were not smart enough or ambitious enough. When the oil patch recovers at a smaller scale, the unions will miss the boat again.
The real reason that unions are not growing, is that existing union management can continue to prosper until their own retirement without expending any effort. Union managers do not take pay cuts as the union job base disappears.
I remember when the maritime unions set a higher standard that lifted wages for non union mariners. That is no longer the case. It hasn’t been for sometime. Now low union wages have become an excuse for employers to keep non union wages from rising. How many times have I heard an employer say: “we pay top union wages, without the hassle of the union.”
The current maritime unions exist to provide employment to an office full of staffers and a coterie of fat cats who have been pulling down big salaries and haven’t sailed in 40 years.
