Suspend the Jones Act...

[NavyCruiser]

1 minute ago, sparks1093 said:

Congress has bigger fish to fry.

 

Sure miss the fried fish in the MDR...

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

Easy.

KEEP ALL current laws for ALL of those vessels above.

NO new hires of ANY foreign workers for next few months.

 

SUSPEND those acts/laws just for cruise ships with over 1000+ passengers, so they can operate just for the next few months only.   

Get back to business, get back to cruising...

Not easy.  US law has no jurisdiction over the hiring of crew on foreign vessels.  So, if the Alaska Marine Highway, which is losing tons of money, and is in danger of going under, reflags all of its vessels to Panama, the US could not say one way or the other who they hire.

 

And, again, as soon as you say, "suspend it for ships over 1000 passengers", those same ferries mentioned above will say, "passenger vessels are any vessel over 12 passengers,  so how can you discriminate against us, making us operate at a financial hardship over these other ships?"  That court challenge would be upheld, and all passenger vessels in the US could go foreign flag.

[sparks1093]

1 minute ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

Sure miss the fried fish in the MDR...

I do too, but I'm not looking to cruise any time soon. Any US port that a cruise ship would visit I would just as soon visit by just traveling there on a plane or in a car.

[BlerkOne]

Safety is a tired argument used by drug companies/FDA, and likely more. OF course other countries care about the safety of human lives - all lives.

 

What was the last substantial sized cruise ship completed in the US?

 

The POA none the less required an Act of Congress and other special interests. NCL had to set up a special US based company as a condition for the Congressional waiver.

 

It's a protectionist act and about jobs, many of which no longer exist. The law remains - just in case.

[BlerkOne]

6 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Not easy.  US law has no jurisdiction over the hiring of crew on foreign vessels.  So, if the Alaska Marine Highway, which is losing tons of money, and is in danger of going under, reflags all of its vessels to Panama, the US could not say one way or the other who they hire.

 

 

 

Yep. It's about jobs and is a protectionist act.

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, BlerkOne said:

Safety is a tired argument used by drug companies/FDA, and likely more. OF course other countries care about the safety of human lives - all lives.

 

What was the last substantial sized cruise ship completed in the US?

 

The POA none the less required an Act of Congress and other special interests. NCL had to set up a special US based company as a condition for the Congressional waiver.

 

It's a protectionist act and about jobs, many of which no longer exist. The law remains - just in case.

So, additional safety requirements by the USCG are unnecessary and unwarranted invasions on free operation of ships?

 

What difference does it make whether a cruise ship has been built in the US?  The simple fact is that the US shipbuilding industry has priced itself out of viability due to high wages, environmental requirements, and the fact that no one wants to work in the industry now (average age is 55), but this was not caused by the PVSA or Jones Act, but by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, but I won't go into that for now.

 

So, NCL had to set up a US company to own the POA?  Earnings from all the other ships in NCL's fleet pay no US corporate taxes, while all of POA's earnings are taxed in the US.  This is a bad thing?

 

And, there have been other waivers of the PVSA in the past, when US Lines had a US built passenger ship that was PVSA compliant, but was subsequently reflagged to foreign, and when it was brought back to US flag, it required an act of Congress to reinstate the PVSA compliance.

 

And, what major maritime nation (other than the flags of convenience) that does not have a maritime cabotage law?

[chengkp75]

8 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

Yep. It's about jobs and is a protectionist act.

Yes, it is about jobs.  It is about trained and certified jobs.  Or would you prefer to have Korean ferry Captains commanding your jaunt across San Francisco Bay?

[xDisconnections]

49 minutes ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

Easy.

KEEP ALL current laws for ALL of those vessels above.

NO new hires of ANY foreign workers for next few months.

 

SUSPEND those acts/laws just for cruise ships with over 1000+ passengers, so they can operate just for the next few months only.   

Get back to business, get back to cruising...

What about the luxury cruise lines that have fewer than 1,000 passengers?

[Charles4515]

If you want to change the laws direct your attention to the US House and US Senate. And to the WH. Without support from the public the laws won’t change. Also direct your attention to the cruise lines to lobby for changes. The laws are not going to be changed because you want to cruise despite a pandemic.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[cruizergal70]

1 hour ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

Easy.

KEEP ALL current laws for ALL of those vessels above.

NO new hires of ANY foreign workers for next few months.

 

SUSPEND those acts/laws just for cruise ships with over 1000+ passengers, so they can operate just for the next few months only.   

Get back to business, get back to cruising...

What does any of that have to do with Covid-19? Aren't you assuming that every US port wants to have cruise ships dock in their cities?

[bmarnett]

3 hours ago, tattoos said:

NavyCruiser, I like your itinerary choices.  I have a B2B cruise booked for the last week of October/first week of November.  At this point, I would be happy if the Breeze just went around and around in circles and never visited a port.  If it stops at any port, please let it be a few nights tied up to Mallory Dock in Key West if they are open for cruise ship passengers.  There is enough to see and do in historic Key West to keep you busy for a couple of weeks and you still won't experience everything.

 

If the cruise lines are going to cancel cruises month by month....people are booking, then being cancelled, waiting for refund or re-booking, ad nauseam.  It's a PITA for the cruise lines and for all the booked passengers who are riding on this merry-go-round.  Just cancel all cruises for the remainder of 2020 and stop the craziness.

 

My wife and I are on the B2B on the Breeze at the same time.  We would be okay going in circles 🙂   We were originally going to be on another B2B around the same time that went to Cuba, Key West and Bahamas until all the Cuba cruises were cancelled.  Hopefully this one doesn't get cancelled too.

[ontheweb]

4 hours ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

Us too.

But current Jones Act (& whatever other laws) currently won't allow us to do that.

That's what this discussion is all about...

I don't think it's the PVSA that is stopping cruises to nowhere since they would go back to the same port. It is rather something to do with the type of work visa the crew would have to have. Chengkp75 has explained this on other threads and could give more detail.

[BlerkOne]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

So, additional safety requirements by the USCG are unnecessary and unwarranted invasions on free operation of ships?

 

Why are they even necessary? Because the ship owners value safety so little unless mandated? Kind of like FAA and airlines?

 

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

What difference does it make whether a cruise ship has been built in the US?  The simple fact is that the US shipbuilding industry has priced itself out of viability due to high wages, environmental requirements, and the fact that no one wants to work in the industry now (average age is 55), but this was not caused by the PVSA or Jones Act, but by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936, but I won't go into that for now.

 

As with other US manufacturing, I would bet on wages (and benefits) as number 1.

 

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

So, NCL had to set up a US company to own the POA?  Earnings from all the other ships in NCL's fleet pay no US corporate taxes, while all of POA's earnings are taxed in the US.  This is a bad thing?

 

Not necessarily. But POA wasn't the only ship NCLH operated in HI waters. They were up to four ships (3 US flagged) and supply was greater than demand. OR put another way, prices were too high due to higher operating costs. US employee turnover was high. Pride of America, Pride of Aloha, Pride of Hawaii (built for Hawaii and renamed Jade),  and NCL Sun. The cost of a US flag is too high.

 

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

And, there have been other waivers of the PVSA in the past, when US Lines had a US built passenger ship that was PVSA compliant, but was subsequently reflagged to foreign, and when it was brought back to US flag, it required an act of Congress to reinstate the PVSA compliance.

 

NCL reflagged some to foreign and hasn't looked back.

 

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

 

And, what major maritime nation (other than the flags of convenience) that does not have a maritime cabotage law?

 

Of course other countries try to protect their interests, sometimes as retaliation. Some might even subsidize their industry. But call it what it is.

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

Why are they even necessary? Because the ship owners value safety so little unless mandated? Kind of like FAA and airlines?

Is any industry going to do something that isn't required for the service or merchandise they provide unless it is mandated?  As noted, in my history of the PVSA, you are correct that shipowners didn't care about the safety of their passengers.  And, if you read any books on the flags of convenience, you will know that this continues to this day, which is why flags of convenience are so  popular.  Why are there ferries turning over in Korea, the Philippines, and Indonesia, when they supposedly meet the SOLAS and other international convention requirements?  Why have no US flag passenger vessels like ferries overturned with massive loss of life?

 

As with other US manufacturing, I would bet on wages (and benefits) as number 1.

Yes, but it has nothing to do with the PVSA or Jones Act.  While the US built clause has some merit in repealing, the rest of the requirements to be US flag would prevent anyone from meeting these requirements.

 

Not necessarily. But POA wasn't the only ship NCLH operated in HI waters. They were up to four ships (3 US flagged) and supply was greater than demand. OR put another way, prices were too high due to higher operating costs. US employee turnover was high. Pride of America, Pride of Aloha, Pride of Hawaii (built for Hawaii and renamed Jade),  and NCL Sun. The cost of a US flag is too high.

And, while the ships were US flagged, they were owned by the US subsidiary, and therefore subject to US taxes.  During the time that NCL had 3 US flag ships in Hawaii, the other cruise lines saw the prices NCL had to charge to cover expenses, and decided to increase capacity of foreign flag cruises to Hawaii by 500%.  This, along with the admitted overcapacity that NCL created, drove fares down to the point where they were  losing $174 million per year.  So, your feeling is that we should abandon domestic cruising to foreign flag, foreign crewed ships just because we are trying to pay our workers what is a minimum wage in our country?  Okay, then lets let unlimited foreigners into the US to take over all the low paying jobs, and see what that does for the economy.

 

NCL reflagged some to foreign and hasn't looked back.

And, your point here is?  Yes, they've reflagged, and in doing so lost their PVSA compliance waiver for all time.

 

Of course other countries try to protect their interests, sometimes as retaliation. Some might even subsidize their industry. But call it what it is.

So, I call it leveling the playing field.  If I can't operate a US flag ship in China, why should China operate a Chinese ship in the US?

[BlerkOne]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

So, I call it leveling the playing field.  If I can't operate a US flag ship in China, why should China operate a Chinese ship in the US?

 

Carnival and others are moving to building ships in China for the Chinese market. I bet a Chinese flag is cheaper than a US flag.

 

No need to abandon domestic cruising to foreign flagged ships. Domestic mass market cruise line(s) went bankrupt despite the protectionist laws. I am interested to see what happens with Viking and river cruises in America, but the ship looks like a big box and is huge compared with other riverboats. Once upon a time Viking was going to lease ships - not sure if that is still true. Perhaps they can build it into something more than river cruises.

 

 

[chengkp75]

44 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

Carnival and others are moving to building ships in China for the Chinese market. I bet a Chinese flag is cheaper than a US flag.

 

No need to abandon domestic cruising to foreign flagged ships. Domestic mass market cruise line(s) went bankrupt despite the protectionist laws. I am interested to see what happens with Viking and river cruises in America, but the ship looks like a big box and is huge compared with other riverboats. Once upon a time Viking was going to lease ships - not sure if that is still true. Perhaps they can build it into something more than river cruises.

 

 

Sure a Chinese flag is cheaper than a US flag, so what, what is the relative standard of living between the two countries, and what is the relative standard of maritime safety between the two countries.  And Carnival is building those Chinese ships to meet China's cabotage law, just like the PVSA.

 

"No need to abandon domestic cruising to foreign flag ships"?  What does that mean?  There never were any "domestic mass market cruise lines".  (Okay, I'll give you Hawaiian American cruises, who were anything but "mass market" cruises).  And yes, any that "might" have existed went bankrupt because of higher operating costs, so if you don't "abandon domestic cruising to foreign flag ships", how do you have US flag ships compete?  Oh, do you mean we should make US cruise ships that have foreign crew?  How do we regulate their training and competency?

 

Viking is not owning the Mississippi River boats, they are owned by Chouest, a US tug and offshore supply vessel company.  They are being built in the US by Chouest's shipyard.  But, do you think they are using non-US labor?  Do you think they are not meeting USCG regulations?  Not really following any logic in your statements.

Edited June 17, 2020 by chengkp75

[BlerkOne]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Sure a Chinese flag is cheaper than a US flag, so what, what is the relative standard of living between the two countries, and what is the relative standard of maritime safety between the two countries.  And Carnival is building those Chinese ships to meet China's cabotage law, just like the PVSA.

 

The relative standard of safety could be the same, and Made in China is still cheaper.

 

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 

"No need to abandon domestic cruising to foreign flag ships"?  What does that mean?  There never were any "domestic mass market cruise lines".  (Okay, I'll give you Hawaiian American cruises, who were anything but "mass market" cruises).  And yes, any that "might" have existed went bankrupt because of higher operating costs, so if you don't "abandon domestic cruising to foreign flag ships", how do you have US flag ships compete?  Oh, do you mean we should make US cruise ships that have foreign crew?  How do we regulate their training and competency?

 

No need to abandon, because they fail on their own. Okay, mass market was a stretch, but United States Line rolled over. What needs to be abandoned is an ancient obsolete law. Come up with a compromise. With foreign crew at least more US taxes are paid. How about fewer excuses on we can't and ways that we can.

 

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 

Viking is not owning the Mississippi River boats, they are owned by Chouest, a US tug and offshore supply vessel company.  They are being built in the US by Chouest's shipyard.  But, do you think they are using non-US labor?  Do you think they are not meeting USCG regulations?  Not really following any logic in your statements.

 

Viking has been trying to enter the market for years and now they have found a way. If their business model works and they can expand to ocean vessels in the US, that would be a good thing.

[NavyCruiser]

Looks like NCL is considering it:

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5399/

 

 Some excerpts:

(2:55 p.m. EDT) -- On June 16, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings (NCLH) suspended all sailings  on its three brands through September 30, 2020, with one notable exception: Norwegian Cruise Line voyages to Alaska departing in September.

Norwegian is working to have the cruises, which would depart from Seattle aboard Norwegian Bliss and Norwegian Joy, go ahead as scheduled, with port calls including Juneau, Icy Strait Point, Skagway, Ketchikan and Victoria, British Columbia.

 

"We are hopeful that through the support of the Alaska delegation and openness of mayors of Alaska port towns, we have the potential to resume voyages in September," said Norwegian Cruise Line in a statement.

 

Cruise Critic has also emailed the Alaska congressional delegation, which consists of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Sen. Dan Sullivan and Representative Don Young, to see if they support an exemption....

[Joe817]

Buy hasn't Canada closed all ports to the U.S. through all of 2020?  I'm not up to date on Canada's port closings to the U.S. 

[Illbcruzn4life]

37 minutes ago, NavyCruiser said:

Looks like NCL is considering it:

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5399/

 

 Some excerpts:

(2:55 p.m. EDT) -- On June 16, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings (NCLH) suspended all sailings  on its three brands through September 30, 2020, with one notable exception: Norwegian Cruise Line voyages to Alaska departing in September.

Norwegian is working to have the cruises, which would depart from Seattle aboard Norwegian Bliss and Norwegian Joy, go ahead as scheduled, with port calls including Juneau, Icy Strait Point, Skagway, Ketchikan and Victoria, British Columbia.

 

"We are hopeful that through the support of the Alaska delegation and openness of mayors of Alaska port towns, we have the potential to resume voyages in September," said Norwegian Cruise Line in a statement.

 

Cruise Critic has also emailed the Alaska congressional delegation, which consists of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Sen. Dan Sullivan and Representative Don Young, to see if they support an exemption....

 

The article also says this:

Because Norwegian Bliss and Norwegian Joy, like almost all of the world's large-ship cruise fleet, are foreign-flagged, they cannot operate closed-loop cruises roundtrip from a United States port without first stopping in a"distant foreign port" as mandated by the U.S. Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA).

 

A closed loop cruise doesn't have to stop a a "distant" foreign port, just a foreign port.

 

If it's a closed loop cruise from Seattle and stops in Victoria, BC what would you need an exemption for?

 

Granted it's late and it's been a long day. Maybe I'm just interpreting this incorrectly.

[Charles4515]

 
The article also says this:
Because Norwegian Bliss and Norwegian Joy, like almost all of the world's large-ship cruise fleet, are foreign-flagged, they cannot operate closed-loop cruises roundtrip from a United States port without first stopping in a"distant foreign port" as mandated by the U.S. Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA).
 
A closed loop cruise doesn't have to stop a a "distant" foreign port, just a foreign port.
 
If it's a closed loop cruise from Seattle and stops in Victoria, BC what would you need an exemption for?
 
Granted it's late and it's been a long day. Maybe I'm just interpreting this incorrectly.

They wouldn’t need an exemption if they stop in Victoria and passengers can get off. Perhaps they are hoping for an exemption to be allowed a token stop in Victoria where no passengers get off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[stobe1]

3 hours ago, NavyCruiser said:

Looks like NCL is considering it:

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5399/

 

 Some excerpts:

(2:55 p.m. EDT) -- On June 16, Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings (NCLH) suspended all sailings  on its three brands through September 30, 2020, with one notable exception: Norwegian Cruise Line voyages to Alaska departing in September.

Norwegian is working to have the cruises, which would depart from Seattle aboard Norwegian Bliss and Norwegian Joy, go ahead as scheduled, with port calls including Juneau, Icy Strait Point, Skagway, Ketchikan and Victoria, British Columbia.

 

"We are hopeful that through the support of the Alaska delegation and openness of mayors of Alaska port towns, we have the potential to resume voyages in September," said Norwegian Cruise Line in a statement.

 

Cruise Critic has also emailed the Alaska congressional delegation, which consists of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Sen. Dan Sullivan and Representative Don Young, to see if they support an exemption....

 

 

I disagree with your position completely but have you expended this much energy writing to your House District Representative and your two state Senators about the issue?  Those 3 people are the only ones that you can influence that can make any changes since it will literally take an act of both Houses of Congress and the signature of the President.  

Edited June 18, 2020 by stobe1

[chengkp75]

10 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

The relative standard of safety could be the same, and Made in China is still cheaper.

Still not completely sure what you are getting at?  Are you saying that Carnival is building ships in China to flag them in Panama, or that you could build a ship in China and flag it US?  The only reason Carnival is building ships in China is because China's cabotage laws require a ship that does domestic transportation to be built in the US?  Sound familiar?  Or, that you could build in China and flag to US to maintain the safety standards?  Sure, but to keep the same safety standards, you would need to follow the other requirements of US flag, meaning US crew.

 

No need to abandon, because they fail on their own. Okay, mass market was a stretch, but United States Line rolled over. What needs to be abandoned is an ancient obsolete law. Come up with a compromise. With foreign crew at least more US taxes are paid. How about fewer excuses on we can't and ways that we can.

Ah, so now we come to the heart of your argument.  You want to do away with US crew altogether.  So, we become another flag of convenience, especially in our domestic shipping.  You want to take away the over 80,000 US jobs directly on Jones Act and PVSA vessels, and reduce the over 500,000 jobs in the US directly attributable to the Jones Act (not counting the PVSA), and forego the $29 billion in labor compensation (wages) to US citizens.

 

Sure, there are ways that it can be done, but I don't see why it should be done, except to gratify a few people who want their vacation experience.  CLIA agrees with me, saying that they don't see any benefit to their members' bottom lines if there were a revision/repeal of the PVSA, a bottom line that is doing quite well in a $126 billion dollar industry while living with the PVSA (and cabotage laws in China, Japan, Brazil, and the EU).

10 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

 

Viking has been trying to enter the market for years and now they have found a way. If their business model works and they can expand to ocean vessels in the US, that would be a good thing.

"The way" Viking has "found" is to comply with the PVSA, having US built, US owned, US flagged, and US crewed vessels.  I agree that if they could take this business model and expand it to ocean vessels, it would be a good thing, but it would be the opposite of what you are wanting.

[chengkp75]

While there are certainly Korean Captains who are highly competent, my point is that since 1953, Korea has had 4 ferry sinkings totaling 1151 lives lost, all attributable to overloading of the vessel.  In the same time, the US had one ferry sinking, with 78 lives lost.

 

There have been numerous ferry incidents leading to fatalities in Asia, Africa, India, South America, and Europe.