I’m not sure what a Maritime Administrator can do the way things are structured, nor what a fair standard to judge them would look like.
For a second I thought I had one idea but then remembered USCG is in DHS not DoT like it used to be.
Maybe the Administrator could work with appropriate persons in DoD and DHS on some restructuring. Get safety and design/equipment approvals out of Homeland Security. Get Sealift into DoD. Figure out where Corps of Engineers infrastructure work really belongs.
I think one of the main reasons “Maritime” suffers is because it’s scattered all over the government. Even if no metal got cut or sand dredged in the next four years getting things organized for future success would be a big win.
Well I don’t trust MARAD is going to buy quality ships. The 5 they bought so far are in bad shape, really bad. They are going to end up spending more money fixing and repairing these vessels.
Better option would be to choose one design that is commercially and militarily viable and build it in US yards. I’m thinking they have one design for 40ish ships of the same roro with an open deck and for containers. Then build 10 of the same design for a heavy lift craned containership.
Then to save money bareboat charter the ships out for 1 dollar a day to private companies to run the the ship as a US vessel in the commercial trade. The company would basically be getting a MSP subsidy by not having to pay for the vessels charter rate/ loan and the gov would save money as the maintenance, crew costs, and docking, shipyards would be placed on the company.
The ARC ships they bought were awful. They were advised against buying them but did so anyways which makes no sense until you look at who’s got connections where.
The orange Italian ones they’re flagging in are in better shape but yeah not great.
Whoever does lifecycle planning obviously fucked up because the whole US built fleet is coming to the end of their (many times extended) service lives and there’s no way they’ll build 40 new ships.
That’s exactly the reason. The mariners can make more money without costing the companies more money, this allowing the companies to be not competitive internationally and maybe more willing to be US flag with US crew.
Maybe US could do as several other countries with “overseas territories”, establish a second register that fly the Stars and Stripes.
Here are the UK registers that fly the Red Ensign:
PS> Those, other than UK are commonly known as “Spoiled Red Dusters”
Other nations that have a similar arrangement are;
The Netherlands: Dutch Antilles, Curacao and Aruba
France: French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Wallis and Futuna
French Southern and Antarctic Lands (TAAF) Register, also known as the Kerguelen Islands Register. (Besides France also have the International French Register (RIF))
Second Registers, like DIS, NIS, RIF etc. are also an option that doesn’t necessarily make the flag become a FOC.
The rules and regulations governing who can register ships, manning rules etc. can be set by the flag state. (Within limitation of IMO, incl. STCW)
“If at first you don’t succeed, try again”. (Unless it is sky diving)
Maybe a bit of changes here and there to make it more realistic, suitable and attractive to all parties will do the trick?
Getting rid Kings point is a terrible idea. It’s probably our best source of advocacy. Lots of high ups in military and even some in Congress went there and actually know our industry exists because of it.
Get rid of Kings point and I guarantee in a generation they will outsource the last of us.
I’ve never had a strong opinion on keeping Kings Point open or closing. I just thought they should do more to require graduates to go to sea. There’s a crap load of open MSC jobs, mariners there who can’t get reliefs & even talk of laying up 17 ships. But the point you make about the alumni being spokespersons for the Merchant Marines is a valid point imo. I never considered that before.
Close king’s point and use the money saved every year to expand the TSP program.
For the MSC ships that are being laid up, bid their operation and management out to private companies and have the union mariners will be able to crew them.
There should be zero waivers for new KP grads to work on land.
You either go active duty or you sail on your license for the required time you signed for. With the need for mariners especially with MSC, there’s no reason anyone should be exempt.
But they won’t, and KP grads will continue to go work on land without facing any repercussions.
I would go farther than that. I’ve worked with scores of recent grads in the GoM & NY Harbor that worked as AB Tankerman or QMED/assistant engineer. Make them do that if they can’t find a mate or licensed AE spot. That would probably change the f-up’ed unlicensed culture at MSC in about 10 yrs. SIU would probably have a problem with it but screw 'em.
Take a LOT longer than that to straighten out the “before the mast” hands at MSC. Everything I hear from people I know there is the announced layups of ships has created an even worse problem…the feeling is the unlicensed will be out of jobs and don’t give a f∆¢k (if it is possible to have less than before).
Evidently, the grasp of fewer hulls to man=scheduled vacation is beyond the understanding of some people. Not my cup of tea.
I feel like these threads are just like screaming into a void. Specific admin shouldnt matter, and frankly, isnt going to make a difference.
We are industry governed by a military institution, with modt of us working for another military institution. Ive always felt theres very little input from the folks actually out there.
Amd thats a cultural problem, and i think its just magnified in our industry from historical lineage. And, unfortunately, im doubtful anything will ever change.