Front Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| By MICHAEL R. McKAY | |
|
American Maritime Officers this month is scheduled at long last to assume the licensed jobs on the large, medium-speed roll-on/roll-off sealift ships USNS Yano, USNS Seay and USNS Mendonca, which will be operated by American Overseas Marine Corp., or AMSEA, under Military Sealift Command charter.
These new AMO jobs followed those aboard two more of the big ships--USNS Gilliland and USNS Shughart, which are operated for MSC by 3PSC LLC and AMSEA, respectively. By June 2005, our union will be aboard six additional LMSRs--the USNS Gordon in the 3PSC fleet, and the USNS Bob Hope, USNS Fisher, USNS Benavidez, USNS Brittin and USNS Pililaau in the AMSEA fleet. All 11 LMSRs had been operated for MSC by Patriot Contract Services, which employs members of the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots and the Marine Engineers Beneficial Association. Meanwhile, we learned in March that Maersk Line Limited--which has collective bargaining agreements with AMO--will continue to operate six special mission vessels under Military Sealift Command charter. These vessels are the surveillance ships USNS Effective, USNS Impeccable, USNS Loyal and USNS Victorious and the instrumentation ships USNS Invincible and USNS Observation Island. But there is another side to the government charter ledger. Seven oceanographic survey vessels that had been operated for MSC for years by Dyn Marine Services--an AMO employer--were awarded recently to Horizon Lines, which employs the MM&P and MEBA in all licensed positions. In March, we learned that, later this year, our union will lose its jobs on the MPF(E) sealift support ships 1st Lt. Harry Martin and Gunnery Sgt. Fred Stockham under a new MSC charter awarded to a unit of Keystone, which does not employ AMO engine, deck or radio-electronics officers. Osprey Ship Management Inc. is the current operator of the Martin, and AMSEA is the current operator of the Stockham. This cycle of gain and loss results from keen competition, increasingly difficult bidding among private sector U.S.-flag shipping companies in response to complex RFPs from MSC and, to a lesser extent, the Maritime Administration. Seagoing unions do not bid for these charters, but they do what they can--and what they must--to help their employers make competitive offers and to keep and create jobs. When possible and practical, AMO, the MM&P and MEBA apply what is known commonly as the "tripartite agreement," under which the three ship officers' unions provide their employers with identical total labor costs with which to bid on government charters. The agreement--conceived and promoted by AMO--takes undue competitive pressure off of licensed labor and encourages cost savings on the management side of the equation. It also results in generally higher wages and better benefits for the engine, deck and radio-electronics officers who get the jobs. For example, total licensed labor costs submitted by companies competing for the new MPF(E) charter from Military Sealift Command were determined under the tripartite agreement. While the outcome was not in our union's favor, we at least have the satisfaction of knowing that AMO, the MM&P and MEBA were on equal economic terms. The MPF(E) charter award did not shake our union's faith in the tripartite accord. The unpleasant alternative was economic bloodletting among the officers' unions to strengthen their employers' relative bidding positions. The only saving grace in such circumstance is the 1965 Service Contract Act, which protects wages and benefits earned by private sector employees working under government contracts. The SCA prohibits wage and benefit reductions from one contract year to the next and between successive contracts. A government shipping charter--which apparently is as difficult to award as it is to anticipate--almost always raises questions, both in company offices and union halls. A charter is determined sometimes by cost and sometimes by what the contracting agency--MSC or MARAD--believes to be "best value." But there are times when no one can say with any certainty what swung a charter to one company over another. MSC and MARAD brief companies on why their bids were not successful, but even these sessions can be confounding. Under the law, companies that lose in competitive bidding for government ship operation and maintenance charters can file protests with the Government Accountability Office. Companies on the wrong end of a charter award can also sue the contracting agency in federal court. But both options require time, patience, money and lawyers--and, to my knowledge, no MSC or MARAD charter has ever been overturned as a result of action by the GAO or the courts. Seagoing unions, on the other hand, have no administrative recourse and no legal standing when charters are challenged. In the case of the AMSEA LMSR charter, Patriot Contract Services filed both a protest with the GAO and a lawsuit asking the court to either hand the nine ships back to Patriot or direct MSC to solicit new operating bids. Patriot also asked for a temporary restraining order to block the management transfer of the vessels. Patriot eventually withdrew its protest, but did not abandon its legal challenge--the case was pending as AMO boarded the USNS Gilliland and USNS Shughart and as AMO prepared to man the nine remaining 3PSC and AMSEA LMSRs under MSC's firm schedule. These things matter because government charters remain the principal source of new and certain business for U.S.-flag merchant ship operators and new jobs for civilian U.S. merchant marine officers and crews. And they matter because much remains at specific stake for our union--which, on balance, has done well with government charter work over many years. An MSC charter for the operation of four T-5 tankers--Paul Buck, Lawrence Giannella, Richard Matthiesen and Samuel Cobb--was imminent April 1. Our union has represented the engine, deck and radio-electronics officers on the ships and a fifth T-5, the Gus Warren Darnell, since the T-5 program began some 20 years ago. Ocean Ships Inc. is the current operator of the five tankers. Up ahead are a Military Sealift Command charter for the operation of the fast sealift roll-on/roll-off ships USNS Algol, USNS Altair, USNS Antares, USNS Bellatrix, USNS Capella, USNS Denebola and USNS Pollux, all operated currently by AMSEA, and a MARAD charter for the operation and maintenance of 54 Ready Reserve Force sealift ships. AMO now has a significant presence in the reserve fleet. In each case, the competition is fierce. In each case, the outcome is unpredictable. In each case, we will keep AMO members informed. |
|
|
|
Front Page
|
|