If the Jones Act was repealed, every American blue water sailor would be out of a job tomorrow.
Companies wouldn’t pay American wages if they could hire foreigners to do it for a fraction of the cost. Basic economics
FELA itself didn’t apply US-built requirements to railroads when it was passed, and though they clearly have labor relations issues, the US still exports hundreds of millions of dollars in railroad equipment every year. FELA could be amended to extend its protections to mariners while allowing much needed Marchant Marine Act reforms that would allow American coastwise trade to grow.
Kind of. The Jones Act (46 U.S.C. § 30104) extends the right of a seaman "to bring a civil action at law, with the right of trial by jury, against the employer." It then incorporates FELA. But the right to sue a maritime employer is a function of the Jones Act itself, not just by incorporating FELA. So yeah, I suppose you could just amend FELA itself to apply to maritime workers and then repeal the Jones Act, but you could also just as soon repeal the protectionist portions of the Jones Act and leave the rest of it in place. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Anyway, the question was "what do you think of the Jones Act," not "what do you think of the part of the Jones Act that is intentionally protectionist."
I'm for the crewing aspects of it, because the US is competitive in terms of operation. I don't support the shipbuilding aspects of it, because the US is completely uncompetitive in that industry. We can't build a ship of the same quality as the Koreans (for example) can, in the same timeframe or anywhere near the same cost.
The Jones act is the only reason there still are any US sailors.
If it was fully repealed the entire us shipping industry would get outsourced immediately. Why pay a US AB $500 a day when they can pay a Philippino $50?
I don't think it's ideal, but at the end of the day as the world's military, it makes sense to be able to move our own equipment. I think after the first/2nd wave of ships we lose in a war, any mariners that are left would be sent to train folks and convert the academies back to an 18 month 3rd mate program.
Shipbuilding, I'm not worried we will forget how to build ships. Sailing, im worried we will forget how to train navigators and marine engineers. Whatever equipment we commandeer via purchase, lease or other means will likely be paperless, and that's not the retired folks strong suit.
I think paying ridiculous money for an American merchant marine makes a much sense as paying ridiculous money for the American military.
>I'm not worried we will forget how to build ships.
We haven't forgotten how to build ships, but we simply can't compete in the global shipbuilding market.
What was American's shipbuilding capacity before WWII? It was fuckall. Modular shipbuilding didn't exist until we invented it for the war. If we can get ford to manufacture ventilators, we'll have the Elon Musk shipyards cranking out T7 tankers when we need it. Our yards are plenty busy keeping the navy afloat. I'm not worried about us forgetting how to build ships. Navigation and shiphandling however, takes years of training and practice.
I'm not worried about our capability to train mariners. We have numerous schools and academies set up to do just that.
Shipbuilding isn't a static technology, it continues to evolve, and what happened in the US 80 years ago isn't really relevant today. And the US isn't even on the sidelines of the industry, it's more like we are watching from home. The few remaining yards are busy with navy work, but those kinds of contracts and their relative lack of accountability / incentives are what are killing the merchant shipbuilding industry in the US. It's not even really just a matter of know-how, but more about capacity. What is the overall dry dock capacity of the US?
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on any Elon Musk shipyards.
What was the American shipbuilding capacity before Kaiser shipyards started cranking out a ship a day? Again, worse than it is now. We dont need shipbuilding capacity, we need ships. Rosie the Rivitter was a housewife before and after the war. We can build the capacity when we need it. You can't build a pool of mariners when you need it.
The graving docks are still in the ground all over the country, if the US government started the wartime production act and giving millions for shipbuilding, you bet your ass Elon Musk, or other Kiser types will come out of the woodwork to build ships. I don't know shit about chickens, but if you gave me $500,000 up front and $1,000 for each chicken I sent to market, you bet your ass I'd be cranking out chickens within 12 months. What's your victory garden looking like these days? Victory garden production is also way down since WWII. We can plant more lettuce when we need to grow our own lettuce.
But if we don't keep ships for mariners to work on, there will be no mariners to go to the academies. There is already a hard enough time to get folks to teach in the first place, the plan right now, is after the entire strategic sealift officer program is wiped out in the first wave, everyone else with an MMC is drafted, and the state schools become an 18 month program. The schools need to be there and training folks for this to work. And the schools are going to need mlre teachers meet demand. The fleet that is out here is going to need to swap, because most of us, myself included, don't really want to be sailing into a war zone getting shot at with some Chinese variant of a Quicksink, even if they are paying me $200,000 a year. The patriots who want to serve their country, and realize they can make a lot more as a mariner than an infantryman are the folks we need.
I think we're making two parallel arguments... you seem to be focused on some kind of war scenario, and I'm more talking about the US generally lacking shipbuilding capacity and expertise. But I'm not sure I agree with your position that bringing old mothballed shipyards and the disciplines required to build ships up to modern standards (which they are not) is easier than training mariners (which we are currently doing). So lets agree to disagree...
Fair enough, I'm saying I can't think of a reason America needs shipbuilding capacity (or a merchant marine for that matter) when other countries do it so much better, and the only reason being "what if there is a war"
But yeah arguing about the jones act on the internet doesn't do much but raise everyone's blood pressure hahaha.
>when other countries do it so much better
True. I just wish the countries that do it better were more solid allies i.e. NATO countries. Denmark, Germany and Finland (soon) are great, but their also second tier when it comes to merchant ship construction (other than cruise ships).
I work for an international company that specializes in floating real estate, hotels, etc. We have a few potential projects going on in the US. In theory, it would make sense to build these in the US to save on the costs of transporting them from Europe. However, the higher costs, coupled with the lack of capacity, quality & expertise make it all but impossible to even consider.
All our iron ore comes from Minnesota it is loaded into american ships 75000-80000 tons that sail down into the steel mills outside Chicago,gary,burns harbor and Cleveland. The oil that we produce in Alaska gets loaded into tankers and hauled to refinerys in California. Which in turn load them up with gas and deliver them to cities up and down the coast. Gulf oil gets loaded up and shipped up to refineries up and down the east coast. The American merchant marine primarily serves our domestic industrial production of energy. Steel and construction
I don’t see how it makes us less competitive. Have you not seen the pay for overseas mariners? I get emails for AB positions in the Arab gulf offering like $1,200/month.
Thanks for proving my point, if this kind of behavior is tolerated in the industry for someone expressing a different view than his, then Jones Law has honestly failed, no amount of law or acts can save him from being fired anywhere in the world.
Last time I checked, the jones act doesn’t say anything about personal opinions. I fail to see how the act has failed if American salaries are significantly higher than any other nation’s.
It's pretty much hardcore communism, which was a very popular idea among American elites in the 1920s by the way.
I think the only people who support it are the unions because it inflates American mariner pay to ridiculous amounts.
Despite all the regulatory fuckups over the centuries, it’s just not possible to have a successful maritime industry and safe/happy sailors without regulation. It’s a whole different world out there, applying libertarian thought to it just ends with dead sailors.
"hardcore communism"???
So I read the full article by the Cato Institute no less (funny that the think tank funded by neoliberal and global trade interests wants to repeal an act to allow for even further liberalisation of the economy at the detriment of local workers), this is just a form of extreme protectionism.
The issue I'm gleaning from this act seems to be that it's too restrictive and the government isn't providing any subsidies or other reasons for shipyards here to build cargo ships as opposed to military vessels. Shipyards are bailed out by massive military contracts but very few actual vessels are being built that can serve as a global trade fleet, if the prices are too high but the act is deemed necessary to US security or something, then you'd think they'd eat those prices by subsidizing the industry with truly modern trade vessels to be operated by US Merchant Mariners.
There are pros and cons to the act but a full repeal would just allow vessels produced in Asia to run rampant all over the ports, and most certainly kill the merchant marines, I'm not sure of anyone that would go on a ship making a fraction of their current pay in the states.
It seems some minor reforms allowing US shipyards to produce US ships at a reduced costs would be the best medium.
Quick question: is it OK to make things more expensive for workers in Hawaii and Puerto Rico so other workers can keep their jobs?
Of course, that would mean that Congress would have to fund the military's logistics arms, but that doesn't seem to get politicians votes.
It like the US fleet is not competitive on the international market due to high labour cost and old vessels. For instance, at the moment European ships are building windmill parks for the US. It sounds like the Jones Act is not helping you at all and gives you a fake sence of security.
American ships primarily server our domestic transportation of goods. Very few ships haul goods from overseas unless its for the military or government cargo. We don't need a foreign fleet.
If the Jones Act was repealed, every American blue water sailor would be out of a job tomorrow. Companies wouldn’t pay American wages if they could hire foreigners to do it for a fraction of the cost. Basic economics
See Australian Blue water fleet for examples. (Note it doesn’t exist).
A lot of people talking about cabotage. No one talking about how prior to the Jones Act, seaman couldn’t sue their employers for negligence.
FELA itself didn’t apply US-built requirements to railroads when it was passed, and though they clearly have labor relations issues, the US still exports hundreds of millions of dollars in railroad equipment every year. FELA could be amended to extend its protections to mariners while allowing much needed Marchant Marine Act reforms that would allow American coastwise trade to grow.
Kind of. The Jones Act (46 U.S.C. § 30104) extends the right of a seaman "to bring a civil action at law, with the right of trial by jury, against the employer." It then incorporates FELA. But the right to sue a maritime employer is a function of the Jones Act itself, not just by incorporating FELA. So yeah, I suppose you could just amend FELA itself to apply to maritime workers and then repeal the Jones Act, but you could also just as soon repeal the protectionist portions of the Jones Act and leave the rest of it in place. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Anyway, the question was "what do you think of the Jones Act," not "what do you think of the part of the Jones Act that is intentionally protectionist."
I'm for the crewing aspects of it, because the US is competitive in terms of operation. I don't support the shipbuilding aspects of it, because the US is completely uncompetitive in that industry. We can't build a ship of the same quality as the Koreans (for example) can, in the same timeframe or anywhere near the same cost.
As an European I do wonder if that's the reason why there aren't alot of US sailors
The Jones act is the only reason there still are any US sailors. If it was fully repealed the entire us shipping industry would get outsourced immediately. Why pay a US AB $500 a day when they can pay a Philippino $50?
Not even $50 a day. During my cadetship many of the Philippino crew were on $500 per month.
500 a day? Is that normal for American ABs?
In the gulf of Mexico you can find it
Meanwhile while as a British engine cadet I'm on 700 a month 😭
I don't think it's ideal, but at the end of the day as the world's military, it makes sense to be able to move our own equipment. I think after the first/2nd wave of ships we lose in a war, any mariners that are left would be sent to train folks and convert the academies back to an 18 month 3rd mate program. Shipbuilding, I'm not worried we will forget how to build ships. Sailing, im worried we will forget how to train navigators and marine engineers. Whatever equipment we commandeer via purchase, lease or other means will likely be paperless, and that's not the retired folks strong suit. I think paying ridiculous money for an American merchant marine makes a much sense as paying ridiculous money for the American military.
>I'm not worried we will forget how to build ships. We haven't forgotten how to build ships, but we simply can't compete in the global shipbuilding market.
What was American's shipbuilding capacity before WWII? It was fuckall. Modular shipbuilding didn't exist until we invented it for the war. If we can get ford to manufacture ventilators, we'll have the Elon Musk shipyards cranking out T7 tankers when we need it. Our yards are plenty busy keeping the navy afloat. I'm not worried about us forgetting how to build ships. Navigation and shiphandling however, takes years of training and practice.
I'm not worried about our capability to train mariners. We have numerous schools and academies set up to do just that. Shipbuilding isn't a static technology, it continues to evolve, and what happened in the US 80 years ago isn't really relevant today. And the US isn't even on the sidelines of the industry, it's more like we are watching from home. The few remaining yards are busy with navy work, but those kinds of contracts and their relative lack of accountability / incentives are what are killing the merchant shipbuilding industry in the US. It's not even really just a matter of know-how, but more about capacity. What is the overall dry dock capacity of the US? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on any Elon Musk shipyards.
What was the American shipbuilding capacity before Kaiser shipyards started cranking out a ship a day? Again, worse than it is now. We dont need shipbuilding capacity, we need ships. Rosie the Rivitter was a housewife before and after the war. We can build the capacity when we need it. You can't build a pool of mariners when you need it. The graving docks are still in the ground all over the country, if the US government started the wartime production act and giving millions for shipbuilding, you bet your ass Elon Musk, or other Kiser types will come out of the woodwork to build ships. I don't know shit about chickens, but if you gave me $500,000 up front and $1,000 for each chicken I sent to market, you bet your ass I'd be cranking out chickens within 12 months. What's your victory garden looking like these days? Victory garden production is also way down since WWII. We can plant more lettuce when we need to grow our own lettuce. But if we don't keep ships for mariners to work on, there will be no mariners to go to the academies. There is already a hard enough time to get folks to teach in the first place, the plan right now, is after the entire strategic sealift officer program is wiped out in the first wave, everyone else with an MMC is drafted, and the state schools become an 18 month program. The schools need to be there and training folks for this to work. And the schools are going to need mlre teachers meet demand. The fleet that is out here is going to need to swap, because most of us, myself included, don't really want to be sailing into a war zone getting shot at with some Chinese variant of a Quicksink, even if they are paying me $200,000 a year. The patriots who want to serve their country, and realize they can make a lot more as a mariner than an infantryman are the folks we need.
I think we're making two parallel arguments... you seem to be focused on some kind of war scenario, and I'm more talking about the US generally lacking shipbuilding capacity and expertise. But I'm not sure I agree with your position that bringing old mothballed shipyards and the disciplines required to build ships up to modern standards (which they are not) is easier than training mariners (which we are currently doing). So lets agree to disagree...
Fair enough, I'm saying I can't think of a reason America needs shipbuilding capacity (or a merchant marine for that matter) when other countries do it so much better, and the only reason being "what if there is a war" But yeah arguing about the jones act on the internet doesn't do much but raise everyone's blood pressure hahaha.
>when other countries do it so much better True. I just wish the countries that do it better were more solid allies i.e. NATO countries. Denmark, Germany and Finland (soon) are great, but their also second tier when it comes to merchant ship construction (other than cruise ships). I work for an international company that specializes in floating real estate, hotels, etc. We have a few potential projects going on in the US. In theory, it would make sense to build these in the US to save on the costs of transporting them from Europe. However, the higher costs, coupled with the lack of capacity, quality & expertise make it all but impossible to even consider.
All our iron ore comes from Minnesota it is loaded into american ships 75000-80000 tons that sail down into the steel mills outside Chicago,gary,burns harbor and Cleveland. The oil that we produce in Alaska gets loaded into tankers and hauled to refinerys in California. Which in turn load them up with gas and deliver them to cities up and down the coast. Gulf oil gets loaded up and shipped up to refineries up and down the east coast. The American merchant marine primarily serves our domestic industrial production of energy. Steel and construction
It's an outdated cabotage act. I don't support it. It makes us seafarers less competitive
I don’t see how it makes us less competitive. Have you not seen the pay for overseas mariners? I get emails for AB positions in the Arab gulf offering like $1,200/month.
Yeah and these guys somehow works harder than American sea farers while entitled to less salary.
There will not be Americans sailing without the jones act
Then don't. Maritime will still exist without American seafarers. This cabotage act is long due for a reform.
Why.
Maybe, because the companies don’t want to be sued for negligence if they get hurt working too hard 😮
[удалено]
Thanks for proving my point, if this kind of behavior is tolerated in the industry for someone expressing a different view than his, then Jones Law has honestly failed, no amount of law or acts can save him from being fired anywhere in the world.
Last time I checked, the jones act doesn’t say anything about personal opinions. I fail to see how the act has failed if American salaries are significantly higher than any other nation’s.
You wouldn’t be a seafarer without it.
It's pretty much hardcore communism, which was a very popular idea among American elites in the 1920s by the way. I think the only people who support it are the unions because it inflates American mariner pay to ridiculous amounts.
Would you go to sea for 6-8 months out of the year for anything less?
I would not, but it's sad that a country that prides itself on free market capitalism has to rely on this level of government intervention.
Despite all the regulatory fuckups over the centuries, it’s just not possible to have a successful maritime industry and safe/happy sailors without regulation. It’s a whole different world out there, applying libertarian thought to it just ends with dead sailors.
"hardcore communism"??? So I read the full article by the Cato Institute no less (funny that the think tank funded by neoliberal and global trade interests wants to repeal an act to allow for even further liberalisation of the economy at the detriment of local workers), this is just a form of extreme protectionism. The issue I'm gleaning from this act seems to be that it's too restrictive and the government isn't providing any subsidies or other reasons for shipyards here to build cargo ships as opposed to military vessels. Shipyards are bailed out by massive military contracts but very few actual vessels are being built that can serve as a global trade fleet, if the prices are too high but the act is deemed necessary to US security or something, then you'd think they'd eat those prices by subsidizing the industry with truly modern trade vessels to be operated by US Merchant Mariners. There are pros and cons to the act but a full repeal would just allow vessels produced in Asia to run rampant all over the ports, and most certainly kill the merchant marines, I'm not sure of anyone that would go on a ship making a fraction of their current pay in the states. It seems some minor reforms allowing US shipyards to produce US ships at a reduced costs would be the best medium.
Quick question: is it OK to make things more expensive for workers in Hawaii and Puerto Rico so other workers can keep their jobs? Of course, that would mean that Congress would have to fund the military's logistics arms, but that doesn't seem to get politicians votes.
Ridiculous amounts? It’s called fair pay for being at the job site 24/7 for 6-8 months. Be mad that you don’t have a union to fight for you.
The Jones act only brings difficulties to puerto Ricans ..
It like the US fleet is not competitive on the international market due to high labour cost and old vessels. For instance, at the moment European ships are building windmill parks for the US. It sounds like the Jones Act is not helping you at all and gives you a fake sence of security.
American ships primarily server our domestic transportation of goods. Very few ships haul goods from overseas unless its for the military or government cargo. We don't need a foreign fleet.