Crossroads at USCG: Reader Response Gives Rare Look From the Inside
Last week’s OPED piece entitled, “Crossroads: A Tale of Two Coast Guards,” (Click here to read article) provided readers with some real-life personal experiences of this writer, some of which, I think, illustrate well the path of the Coast Guard’s licensing and documentation group. It is my contention that, if there was a downward spiral in service and competence there, then the Coast Guard is on its way to righting the ship. It is clearly a work in progress, however. Other readers, better placed than I, perhaps, had other opinions.
The final two letters address another hot issue: the neglect of mariners. We published another OPED piece just two weeks ago, and those letters are continuing to arrive, as well.
Read on to see what MarEx readers think:
Joe,
Bravo on your article. I am a maritime academy graduate who took a commission in the Coast Guard at graduation and am currently serving as a XXXXXXXXX. I have had a great career serving in the Coast Guard's Marine Safety program, however I can verify that your concerns and the current complaints are well founded. While the Coast Guard has conducted an internal review of the marine safety program, nothing has actually changed. The industry needs to continue to question the status of the marine safety program and the direction the marine safety program is going - especially post 9-11. DHS does not support non-marine safety missions. The status of several marine safety rulemaking projects is prime example of that.
With every industry transaction, I always try to deliver the same kind of customer service that you mention in your article regarding your license transaction at the REC in Houston in the early 80's. That used to be the Coast Guard of yesterday and still mine today. I used to wonder why more Coast Guard officers did not take the time to do the same, however I don't anymore. Unfortunately, the typical Coast Guard officer who specializes in law enforcement, operations afloat or aviation despises the marine safety program and shies away from trying to even understand the basic fundamentals of honoring the mariner. Serving in the marine safety program or executing any of these missions is seen by them as a basic duty, no different than standing gate guard or basic sentry watch. It is a duty for them, but they have no professional interest in it. When I discuss complex regulatory issues with them and the needed solutions, their eyes glaze over and they don't want to talk to me anymore and sometimes get rather angry. It is like we are talking two different languages and we are. One side of the CG is focused on itself and how to better support its OPS and LE missions and one side is focused on serving the maritime industry. How can Coast Guard Academy graduates even pretend to understand anything about the maritime industry if they major in government at CGA? CGA barely has a marine engineering program anymore (too difficult for their students - the problems with Deepwater are directly linked to this) and they have nothing that resembles a marine transportation degree program. In recent years the Coast Guard has stripped as many talented competent people out of the marine safety program to tackle problems with Deepwater, standing up the Deployable Operations Group, and other LE-OPS initiatives. What is left are flight school drop outs, passed over LTs and LCDRs who should not even be in the service anymore and others who could not hack it at sea. For years the marine safety program and especially the RECs have been seen as a place to put the rest of the CG. There are no barriers to entry for the marine safety program - give me your incompetent, your medically not qualified to be on a ship and your career is going nowhere personnel to fill the necessary billets. There should be barriers erected as minimum qualifications to serve in this program and holding a merchant mariner's license is a good start. What most people, congress included, does not see is that the marine safety program has been even more watered down by the recent Coast Guard Headquarters reorganization. Marine Safety now means, antiterrorism, search and rescue, security and a host of other LE & OPS activities that have never traditionally been managed under the marine safety program. What this means is that for now, there is a "traditional" marine safety Coast Guard Admiral (Brian Salerno) overseeing the CG's marine safety program and ensuring that we are saying and doing the right things to deliver quality service to the maritime industry. In the future, the most senior marine safety officer in the Coast Guard at HQ will probably be a CG Captain as all Flag officers will come from other, non-marine safety career disciplines. Their current effort is to civilianize as many of the marine safety billets as they can because they know that as an officer corps, they cannot grow the marine safety officers they need from CGA. This will only mean more problems for the marine safety program, because future CG officers will have no professional interest in marine safety issues. Its just a basic duty for them and they lack the depth, experience and relationships to address these issues. It is hard for me to imagine staying in the CG past 20 years because of the lack of support and professional interest for the marine safety program. I feel like I could do more good for the maritime industry by getting out and attacking the Coast Guard from the outside. Fortunately, I'm not alone. There are a contingent of maritime academy graduates and merchant mariners in the CG serving in almost every CG office that oversees marine safety missions. Without these people, the Coast Guard would be sunk. The solution is to increase these numbers, not decrease them.
So, from someone on the inside, I say keep up the fight and make the Coast Guard accountable for its actions or non-actions with regard to the betterment of the U.S. maritime industry and U.S. merchant mariners.
I request that you keep my e-mail address and identity confidential from whatever you can discern from my e-mail address. I appreciate it. Please feel free to contact me if I can provide you with a better understanding of these issues.
Keep up the great work!
Editor’s Note: I sanitized this individual’s rank and gender from this particular letter. There isn’t much that I could add from the outside, looking in, but no doubt there are other opinions from within the Coast Guard that would refute these comments. The letter alludes to many things, however, that were brought up in this summer’s very public tongue-lashing received by the Coast Guard at the hands of the industry and Congress alike. The next letter is from another person who worked from both inside a Coast Guard REC and was also a customer.
Dear Joe,
I liked the article. I think it clearly illustrates how the MLD program’s perception can be so completely different based on the simple fact of who you encountered while conducting business at the REC. Whether Houston, Charleston or any of the 17 other RECs, the experience can be effected by many factors. In my 9 years of experience running the Boston REC, I found that those factors often started with the issues that the mariners brought in to the lobby. Whether they let their license go beyond the grace period or had any number of medical or character issues, often determined the tone of how that interaction went. However, what I always tried to do in Boston (and was not always successful), was to instill a culture that would try to help the mariner reach their goal, without compromising marine safety. Often government officials (and I saw this clearly when I was a mariner and when I first took over the REC) become blind to the big picture and become tainted. The “culture” shifts from one of helpfulness to one of obstinacy. I will never forget when I first started working in the REC, a CG officer who had been in the licensing program for years was working on an application and showing me what he was doing. At the end, he looked up and sighed, “I guess we have to give it to him”. He almost seemed disappointed that nothing was wrong with the application package. I made it my one mission to wipe that type of attitude out from anyone who worked for me in Boston and if I witnessed that type of behavior, I would do everything in my power to make that person correct that.
There is no doubt that the RECs have historically been understaffed and overworked. That alone makes it difficult to work in a manner that promotes a culture of helpfulness. It is a thankless job that never ends as the applications keep rolling in and each evaluator’s desk is piled high with the stories of mariner’s lives. As the Coast Guard moves forward with this plan, I hope that they understand that not all applications and mariners fit into a process that can be streamlined. While some parts can be streamlined for efficiency others need to remain subjective to deal with the individual needs of the mariner. I can recall several mariners over the years who needed our help in a manner that didn’t fit the process. Whether it was a mariner flying in to receive a duplicate MMD because it was lost and needed it ASAP to catch a ship he had just been called back to. Or a small passenger vessel owner who needed their credential to start operating in the small window of the New England summer season.
The Coast Guard must learn to take into account the need for the credential and prioritize those applications that are crucial to the livelihood of the individual. I recall visiting a school where there were 15 people attending a course that substituted for Master 100 ton license exam. While I was talking to the students, I simply asked them all who would be working under the authority of their license, once they received it. Of the 15 in the class only two raised their hand. The rest were not planning on using the license but simply wanted to get it for their own professional reason or to complete a course that would help them become better recreational boaters. Not to mention lowering their boat insurance. I found this trend in what has become a huge market of lower level exam courses from the OUPV (Six Pack) to the Master 100 near coastal. “Get your Captains’ license” the ad will say. I have absolutely no problem with people taking courses to better themselves in this field. But what needs to be understood is that some RECs are clogged with more applications from “non working” mariners than those that truly need their credential. They must design a way to filter those out and make it clear that those whose job depends on the holding of a valid credential, must come first. Ironically, it would be the retired banker, lawyer, or doctor who owns a 42’ Blackfin and thought it would be fun to get a license so he can show his buddies, that would complain the loudest about how long it took to issue their license.
There is no doubt that many working professional mariners do let their credentials go too long before starting the process. However, one has to remember that when you only deal with the REC once every five years, you don’t remember how long it took nor is there a mechanism in place to remind the mariner when to apply. There’s no way to know how long it will take until you apply. And on top of that, what exactly is the expectation of the industry on just how long it should take? Obviously there is no one answer, but you still have to consider these factors before blaming the mariner that waits till the last minute. For many years in Boston mariners renewing a license could walk in with their application and walk out with the new license that visit. 9/11 changed all that, but several thousand mariners thought that’s how long it took until the next time they came in and were told it would be several weeks!
I commend the Coast Guard for their effort on fixing a program that, as a whole, needs help. But as you stated correctly, you shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Contrary to the national perception, there have always been a few RECs that tried to maintain a high level of customer service. Mariners know which ones those were. Hopefully that will be the trend at the NMC!!
Hope you are well and sorry to ‘drone on’!!
Best regards,
Andy Hammond - Executive Director
Boston Harbor Pilot Association, LLC
Editor’s Note: Andy gave his permission to use his well-reasoned piece online, and to also include his name. He is a trusted source for MarEx and has participated in other articles that I have written in the past about this very issue. Andy is a Coast Guard REC veteran, a licensed mariner, a maritime academy graduate, a maritime executive and, perhaps most importantly, a Coast Guard customer. He deserves to be heard and his advice heeded.
Hello Joe,
I read your recent article regarding the above subject and I have a few comments.
On October 2, 2007 I submitted my application for license renewal and the application fee at the Baltimore REC. In the "old days" the renewal process based on my personal experience took about 15 or 20 minutes, if the application was completed correctly. Futhermore, there was no outrageous fee. The customer service aspect was always first rate.
My experience on October 2, 2007 was favorable and expedient. Of course as you well know the new MMD and license are not handed over to you when you are finished there. And you have to make the mandatory appearance for being finger printed. Until recently it required a second personal visit to the REC to retrieve the new license and MMD. Now that extra task has been entrusted to the U.S. postal service. There is a reason I chose to return to the Baltimore REC even though I now live much closer to Charleston.
At present only the Baltimore and New Orleans REC are set up to be the "store front" type operation you describe in your article. They check your application, take your money and finger print you. The application is then entrusted to the U.S. postal service for delivery to the current, temporary NMC location in Kearneysville, West Virginia (about 20 miles from Martinsburg). The total time to issue the new license and MMD is three to four weeks.
Charleston has a "split operation". The renewal process is partially completed there and the remainder completed at NMC in West Virginia. That setup in my opinion had the potential for something to get screwed up. Therefore, I opted instead for the Baltimore REC.
NMC now has a toll free number with dedicated customer service personnel who are very polite and for the most part knowledgeable regarding the application process. They also have extended hours of operation beyond the normal 8 hour government work day. That is quite an improvement from either the unanswered telephone numbers and/or voice mail calls which seemed never to result in any returned telephone call from the Baltimore REC.
Name Withheld Upon Request
Editor’s Note: A marine weighs in and confirms a lot of the information that you will see in the article which will come out in the next print issue of The Maritime Executive. I wasn’t aware of the “split” Charleston setup. I simply signed in and when they barked my name, I went in, got my fingerprints taken, handed over my documents and left. It was pretty easy for me. I will say this: in advance of my renewal, and when I had my files sent from Houston to Charleston, I got a plethora of e-mail advice from Charleston advising me of the file’s arrival, deadline dates, helpful hints and all the rest of it. I never waited more than eight hours for an answer to a question. You would have had to be a moron not to get it right the first time. Wait a minute: I forgot the pictures they told me (three times) to bring. Never mind.
Mr. Keefe,
While your article has many good points, I disagree with your conclusions. Marine Inspection and Licensing should not be included in the military climate of Coast Guard under DHS. The military aspects of DHS are the very reason that both programs are failing --they don’t understand the concerns of civilian personnel and commercial shipping. While Admiral Allen and Capt Stalfort are working to correct the problem, their solution is still within the military framework, which is the root of the problem. If transferred, many of the Coast Guard’s personnel would work well under MARAD with civilian leadership and a non-military promotion path.
I sailed as unlimited master for 13 years, spent 20 years in the Navy Reserve with reserve assignments to MARAD and am currently working as a licensed pilot.
Sidelights, the quarterly magazine of the Council of American Master Mariners, quoted me on this subject in two recent publications.
Respectfully,
Capt. Dan Jordan
Editor’s Note: A vote for transferring mariner documentation responsibilities to MARAD. Captain Jordan has had a long and varied career --he deserves to be heard, as well. Read on to hear more…
To the Editor:
I can relate with your comments on renewal. I remember my original license ordeal at CG station NYC compared with my last renewal. Night and day... when I sat for the original with the NY CG personnel, it was a exercise in frustration and took all my patience to complete it. The personnel were rude, condescending and generally not interested in making the process seamless.
Name withheld (U.S. Licensed Master Mariner)
Editor’s Note: Recent experience from a licensed mariner in the port of New York.
The Next Two Letters Are in Response to our OPED Piece entitled, “Long-Term Neglect of Mariners Continues to Haunt Maritime Employers.” You can read that piece, originally published on October 25, online here.
Mr. Keefe,
I thoroughly enjoyed your article of 25 October 2007 on Long-Term Neglect of Mariners Continues to Haunt Maritime Employers.
It is certainly true conditions have improved since I started sailing after graduating from CMA in 1970. No more peeling paint hanging from the asbestos covered piping in the overheads. However, the responsibilities of the Master and the Officers have increased substantially. Often the Master is required to cover the Radio Operators duties as well as being the Purser in addition to being an EMT. As you pointed out we spend six months at sea running an $80-million vessel, carrying cargo that is worth far more than that, more often than not carrying a hefty load of HAZ, running the regulatory gauntlet in all ports, foreign and domestic, and are separated from family for long stretches at a time. The Chief Engineer and Engineering staff are required to be well versed in all aspects of engineering (diesel, steam, sanitation, water making, fuel systems, automation, etc.) as well as being computer expert. In addition now mariners now must be well versed in ship security and need to keep the maritime lawyers telephone number close at hand in case of a shipboard mishap or pollution issue, whether not the mishap is one beyond his control.
The mariner is on call 24/7 should the need arise. The quick port turnaround of most merchant vessels today, the minimum crews, the intermittent long hours accompanying the calling on of multiple ports, raise the stress level beyond the levels of most land jobs. That being said, the Master is in danger of being jailed as guilty until proven innocent should a mishap occur. Even being prudent doesn't always protect one from stupidity or a mechanical breakdown and the first people the regulatory bodies go after is the mariner (innocent or not). They should be paying the mariner twice as much for this level of responsibility and decision making. The correct decision can avert a disaster of epic proportions and that is what we are paid for, to make that correct decision at the correct time.
Some readily apparent examples of the wage disparity in today's society are: When a longshoreman is paid more than the mariner, and the longshoreman gets to go home every night, something is definitely wrong. I don't mean to knock the longshoremen, by any means, but the level of skill and training are so dissimilar that the inequality of the wages shouts to be heard. How about the California Prison System where CO's are paid in excess of $100,000/year (no education beyond proof of a GED), a Prison Dentist I am acquainted with admits to showing up to work 3 days a week with maybe 3 patients/day and a$24,000/month wage. Longshoremen and prison jobs both have full benefits and get to go home on a regular basis.
Presently, the trend is toward union breaking, but without unions the mariners' wages, not to mention shipboard living conditions, would certainly be different.
I decided to retire at 59 due to a variety of reasons, none of which is overshadowed by the current views held by the courts and attitude held by the shipping companies of today's mariner. Perhaps, it is time the mariner should be viewed as other than a second class citizen and viewed as the highly trained expert he has become in the complex world of Maritime Commerce and be paid accordingly.
As an after thought one more observation can be readily seen in today's merchant marine. The Maritime Academies are about the only method one can go to sea as an officer today, the officers that have "come-up through the hawse" are becoming fewer and fewer due to regulation and required education. These Hawse-Pipers, I always found were, by and large, an asset to the working of a ship. The Hawse-Pipers hard earned practical knowledge mixed with the Academy Grad text book knowledge made the ship a well rounded work place where the answer to a problem was generally found between the two groups of men. It's a shame that today this mix of expertise is being lost.
Regards,
Captain M.D. Buzzard
Editor’s Note: Captain Buzzard gave his permission to use his name in conjunction with this letter. I liked his remarks, especially where they applied to the “hawse-pipers."
Joe,
I am chipping in my two cents regarding your article "Neglect of Mariners...". I have been going to sea for 15 years after graduating from a maritime academy.
I've observed our US fleet comprised of aging junk and, at best, second-hand ships. The European nations operate modern and technologically advanced ships, many with the amenities of home for the crew. This includes unrestricted e-mail, satellite TV and radio, and acceptable accommodations. This is very sad, considering the status of our country in this world relating to maritime and economic power. First rate country running third rate junk.
The quantity of jobs should be proportionate to the manpower base, with ships in good repair, and some respectable amenities of home. We have very few ships in commercial trade. Advancement to the highest positions is far too slow and political. We have too many talented officers with too few positions. It turns the worst out of our people and creates adversity, not competition. Officers and crew fired for incompetence show up on other ships and the cycle of madness continues as someone else's problem. Camaraderie becomes secondary and the work/living environment stinks.
The mentality is "keep your mouth shut and be happy you have a job". To some extent that is true. I keep my mouth shut and happy to keep a roof over my head. But then, what's the point of working in that kind of environment? It should be professional and cordial. US ship owners and management take that ball and run with it, while the unions kowtow and let things run off like they have. The pay scales are an abomination and opportunity is at it's lowest. This isn't sour grapes. It's reality.
US ship owners and operators can get over themselves by making things right, instead of being incessantly cheap and arrogant. Just interview a few and ask for the daily food rates per seaman in their budgets. You will be shocked. And oh by the way, ask them if they would feed themselves for $3-$8 a day like they budget their shipboard personnel.
I've told cadets to sail foreign-flag. Seek opportunity elsewhere. After all, it's an international industry.
Most of your responses have had "Name withheld" at the end. Case in point.
Name and e-mail address withheld.
Editor’s Note: Not much I can add to this, but it is an opinion that appears to stem from personal experience over a long time spent at sea.