Why are all the ships registered out of the U.S.?

[Gathina]

Google for the article "Sweatships, Flags of Convenience"...the biggest reason is to avoid US Labor Laws and other issues such as envrionmental laws, etc.

 

Why are all the ships registered out of the U.S.? I've heard some of the various reasons, but I'd like some input from everyone.

[ehfl]

Nearly a century ago, Congress enacted protectionist legislation. The goal was to protect US ship building companies. However, as with most attempts by Congress, it backfired, and had the exact opposite effect.

 

It's not financially feasible to operate a US flagged ship. Therefore, nearly all cruise ships are built, flagged, and crewed by foreigners.

 

Congress could easily remove these restrictions, and many attempt have been made, but they just never repealed this outdated legislation.

 

We could see a huge boom in the cruise industry if they allowed cruises within the US. But it's not going to happen unless we toss out the members of Congress, and put in those that support freedom, rather than protectionism.

[G'ma]

"taxes" ;)

 

 

and U.S. Labor Laws. If they were flagged US, they'd have to obey all employee minimum wage and employee laws, OSHA, workday limitations, overtime, pay payroll taxes, etc.

[G'ma]

Would there be any benefit to having a US registered ship in either a passenger or freight vessel? I know about not transporting people from one port to another without visiting a distant foreign port first, but what else is there?

 

No benefits at all for the cruise/ship companies to being US flagged.

[McGarrett]

I suggest everyone read the book "Devils on the Deep Blue Sea: The Dreams, Schemes and Showdowns That Built America's Cruise-Ship Empires ". It talks about a few issues and one of them is the "flags of convenience" topics. Another interesting part is what the cruise lines do to control docking fees in the different Caribbean ports and how most ports didn't have a choice but to listen. It was a great book!

 

Someone just recommended that book! They said to read it "after' my cruise. Reading it before would just open my eyes too much. It's more relaxing with your eyes closed sometimes. ;)

[McGarrett]

One more extremely good reason not to flag a cruise ship in the USA:

 

Every US Flag cruise ship in the past 50 years has either gone bankrupt, been re-flagged, or just moved to international service (minus the American crew).

 

Many fingers have been pointed and plenty blame assigned. Some people fault the now defunct American Maritime Unions for making their members unaffordable. Others blame the high operating costs and high American Taxes. Many blame the work ethics of the American sailors. Having worked on several American Flag ships, I suspect that it is a combination of all three - and then some.

 

The Pride of America is the last remaining US Flag ocean-going cruise vessel. There are many rumours circulating as to how much longer she will remain with an American Flag.

 

After the American shipyard that was trying to build her was bankrupted by the process, NCL tried to have another American shipyard finish her. Not a single American shipyard was even willing to bid on the job. It's far easier - and more profitable - for them to build US military ships with huge cost overruns. NCL was forced to tow the unfinished hull to Germany to get it completed.

 

Until last year it appeared that there was going to be a big resurgence in American Dry Dock jobs for the international cruise ships. This would have been a huge financial boost for cities like San Francisco, Seattle, Mobile, Charleston, and a few others. Then the US Immigration people changed the regulations for foreign engineers who are needed to supervise the dry dock jobs. They can no longer work in a US ship yard.

So all the cruise lines were forced to take their millions to Canada, Mexico and the Bahamas to get their dry docks completed.

 

So once again the Unions and or high taxes are making it costly to 'Buy American' And yet we aim straight for rapids with our new "Change". Lovely. :cool:

[BruceMuzz]

Nearly a century ago, Congress enacted protectionist legislation. The goal was to protect US ship building companies. However, as with most attempts by Congress, it backfired, and had the exact opposite effect.

 

It's not financially feasible to operate a US flagged ship. Therefore, nearly all cruise ships are built, flagged, and crewed by foreigners.

 

Congress could easily remove these restrictions, and many attempt have been made, but they just never repealed this outdated legislation.

 

We could see a huge boom in the cruise industry if they allowed cruises within the US. But it's not going to happen unless we toss out the members of Congress, and put in those that support freedom, rather than protectionism.

 

This protectionist legislation also is connected to the airlines. The only thing that keeps the major US Airlines out of bankruptcy is the cabotage legislation (PVSA) that prevents foreign airlines from taking over US airspace. I doubt that any US President or Congressman will be willing to vote to bankrupt the entire US Airline industry.

[footzz]

Why are all the ships registered out of the U.S.? I've heard some of the various reasons, but I'd like some input from everyone.

 

The cruise industry earns literally billions each year in profits, and pays less than one percent in U. S. taxes by registering their vessels in Liberia, Panama or other foreign nations.

[AltarEgo]

The cruise industry earns literally billions each year in profits, and pays less than one percent in U. S. taxes by registering their vessels in Liberia, Panama or other foreign nations.

 

Avoiding paying taxes is one valid reason cruise lines are "flagged" in foreign nations.

 

The International Maritime Organization (IMO), to which the United States is a member, requires all ships engaged in international trade to have a country of registry in order to sail in international waters. A ship is considered the territory of the country in which it is registered, thus making them subject to that country’s laws and regulations.

 

By opting to flag a ship in Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas, a vessel owner becomes subject to the safety, labor, and environmental codes of that nation. The nations of Panama, Liberia and the Bahamas have become the most popular place to register a ship because they tend have the most lax labor, safety, and environmental codes.

[ohioNCLcruiser]

This protectionist legislation also is connected to the airlines. The only thing that keeps the major US Airlines out of bankruptcy is the cabotage legislation (PVSA) that prevents foreign airlines from taking over US airspace. I doubt that any US President or Congressman will be willing to vote to bankrupt the entire US Airline industry.

 

I was just coming here to post how its the same with the airlines but you beat me to it! If Singapore Airlines for example was allowed to fly NYC-LAX then their service would run any US airline on that route out of business. These are good laws to have.

[ohioNCLcruiser]

Someone just recommended that book! They said to read it "after' my cruise. Reading it before would just open my eyes too much. It's more relaxing with your eyes closed sometimes. ;)

 

I read it while I was on a cruise! It was a good ship book lol.

[peterv]

I was just coming here to post how its the same with the airlines but you beat me to it! If Singapore Airlines for example was allowed to fly NYC-LAX then their service would run any US airline on that route out of business. These are good laws to have.

 

Not quite sure I follow that thinking.

 

I can think of nothing better than to have the US airlines challenged. Just about any other carrier would show them up considering they have poor service, a poor product and could not care any less about the cattle, er, I mean people they transport.

 

Cheers,

Peter

[ehfl]

I don't see a problem with high-cost/low-quality providers going out of business. We all live on the same planet.

[Fredr]

Not quite sure I follow that thinking.

 

I can think of nothing better than to have the US airlines challenged. Just about any other carrier would show them up considering they have poor service, a poor product and could not care any less about the cattle, er, I mean people they transport.

 

Cheers,

Peter

 

Peter, it has already started. Sir Richard Branson's Virgin America has begun operations here across the pond. Please remember though that we Americans are just as innovative, creative, and hard working as we have been since we said good bye to George III. The main problem in America, is that the business schools have taught at least one generation of corporation types that only two things matter...keep costs as low as possible and then some, and the share price. American Airlines used to have a crew of 4 persons unload their aircraft (a crew chief and three handlers). Today ,no matter how big the plane...it is two handlers and a crew chief).

 

But all airlines are having their troubles...if Japan Airlines does not receive an infusion of financial support it will go bankrupt even though it is an exceptionally well run airline.

[scottbee]

Why are all the ships registered out of the U.S.? I've heard some of the various reasons, but I'd like some input from everyone.

 

This article covers it nicely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience

[ohioNCLcruiser]

US airlines have made very bad choices but running one of them is a lot different then running an airline like Cathay Pacific.

 

Yes you're correct one of Richard's baby airlines is now in the States but its still different then Emirates Airlines flying Cleveland-Chicago routes.

 

The big problem coming up for the large Asian airlines (Singapore, Cathay etc) is the sharp drop in paid Business and First class passengers.

[smeyer418]

My point is relevant to the discussion. The lack of domestic content in the construction of ships used primarily by US citizens is a result of regulation whose benefits were miscalculated and did exactly the opposite of what was intended, i.e. destroy the industry they were designed to protect.

 

Historically, the US has not been able to compete on an international scale in the civilian shipping industry. Even J P Morgan eventually failed at his attempt to monopolize shipping.

but and my point was- which you pretty much confirm that this had nothing to do with Unions. When the predecessor of the PSVA was passed in the 1880's- Unions were illegal(as a restraint of trade). JP Morgan failure had nothing to do with Unions and the decision to pass up construction of the cruise ships completion was not made by any Union.

I know this is off topic but Unions get blamed for lots of things they had little control of.

GM is a good example. Management floated those financial paper-not the Unions(and Wall street is largely UnUnionized) and the reason that US cars are not competitive has more to do with the fact that in every other major car manufacturer the cost of health insurance(which now costs most US car manufacturers more then steel peer car) is not an amount the foreign car companies have to pay. ALL the foreign car companies are Unionized in countries that are much more socialist than the US will ever be.

I know its a knee jerk reaction to blame the big bad Unions(which have some real problems) but most of the problems are caused by big bad overpaid management forgetting there was a social compact even at non Unionized companies for the management not to be pigs.100 million to run anything is outrageous especially so when the company is losing money.

[McGarrett]

These laws have been around for a century......and not likely to change. These laws exist in almost every country of the world.

 

It is NOT a political thing nor a union thing.

 

Keep your political opinions to yourself and find a forum for them...this is a cruise forum........

 

Oh please. :rolleyes:

[McGarrett]

None the less' date=' this is not a political forum....and not a place to air your political views. I'm not the police......but I also don't like to report anyone.......

 

But, I will......

 

Social and political discussions are NOT cruise related...and can get a thread pulled by the moderators.

 

Just sayin'............[/quote']

 

Politics make the world go round. The cruise industry is no different. If the mods interfere, it would only be another example of how this site and forum are useless and biased. Let us vent and debate with civility. Everyone take note now.

[Fredr]

Hello,

 

I will pay close attention to and follow each and every rule that I must follow in order to post on these boards.

 

Respectfully, I believe that the question presented by the OP is a valid one. As consumers in a free society we have the right to choose which cruise line gets our money. And as such don't we have the right to also consider why cruise lines are building their ships outside our beloved USA?

 

It is so simple... blame unions and government for everything. And who is Ross Perot going to blame for the sorry state of things in Commie Socialist America...Perot Systems has been purchased by Dell Computers for $3.9 Billion dollars. Sure does not appear that Dell is worried about a Socialist take over of the USA by Obama. And Perot sure hasn't been disadvantaged by the Commie pinkos who supposedly run America, and have ruined America's ship building businesses.

[smeyer418]

US shipyards are generally very busy. In fact its hard to get a dry dock time when its needed. Its estimated in the NY area that we need 7-8 new docks which can be kept busy full time. Its mostly the military shipyards that closed. They are kept busy with US ships and local barges etc....it is in fact a growth industry! the thing that put the company that was building the Prides out was the cruise ships they tried to build!

But the US was never big on cruise ship building. It never maintained the expertise that is all over seas - in Union shipyards in more socialist than the US countries. France Italy and Finland to name a few...

[McGarrett]

Obviously the American cruise ship industry has reason's for doing business with countries other than it's own when it comes to labor, building, registering, taxes... It's just like here in California. When you make it hard to MAKE MONEY, the businesses get up and leave.

 

It sure would be nice to see more american crew members and be proud that the ship we were sailing on was BUILT IN AMERICA and had a home port name like NEW YORK - NEW YORK or SEATTLE - WASHINGTON. Love to see a ex-US NAVY capt. at the helm also. Are all these guy's Greek? :D

[BruceMuzz]

An American Captain on an ocean-going cruise ship earns between US$250,000 and US$300,000 per year. That is stipulated by the US Maritime Unions.

 

A cruise ship captain from nearly any other country (there are a few exceptions) earns around US$125,000 per year.

 

If you own a cruise line, which ones are you going to hire?

[Cactuscruise]

To be registered in the US, you have to be built in the US, or get a special dispensation from Congress, as NCL did for two of the NCLA ships (whose hulls were constructed here). EM

 

 

This is not true.

[Philip217]

This is not true.

 

That's odd. When I was working at NCL America, the US Government told us it was true.

 

Somebody has been mis-informed. If it was NCL, they wasted many millions of dollars on mis-information.