AMO's opinion of TransAtlantic Lines

**NewEngr** · February 14th, 2012, 07:23 AM

TransAtlantic Lines: Unsafe at Any Speed

By Captain Mike Murphy
National Vice President, Government Relations

TransAtlantic Lines, LLC, owner and operator of three ships under U.S. Government contract, lost their Document of Compliance to operate vessels in December of last year. This was as a result of flagrant violations of proper safety procedures and poor ship maintenance. All of their vessels were immediately sent to port where they remain today. TAL's loss of their Document of Compliance is only the second time that a company's gross mismanagement has resulted in a removal since the International Safety Management Code went into effect in 1996.

The International Safety Management Code requires every operating company to hold a Document of Compliance. This document is a certification by a classification society, such as American Bureau of Shipping, and the U.S. Coast Guard that a company has a Safety Management System in place to competently operate ships under all conditions and to properly maintain their ships. The classification society, with oversight from the U.S. Coast Guard, in addition to auditing the company, also inspects and audits each of the company's ships to ensure that the company's Safety Management System is implemented and the vessel is being properly maintained. Each successfully inspected vessel then receives a Safety Management Certificate, which allows it to operate under the International Safety Management Code.

As soon as TAL lost their document, Military Sealift Command cancelled their contract to deliver petroleum to U.S. bases in the western Pacific since they were no longer a valid ship operator.

However, the U.S. Transportation Command's Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, which has contracts with TAL to service the Azores and Ascension did not follow suit. They have allowed TAL to charter other U.S. flag vessels to meet their contract commitments. The fact that TAL still retains a contract with SDDC, even though they do not qualify as a ship operating company, has brought complaints from legitimate operators who can meet all terms of the contracts.

TransAtlantic Lines is owned by Gudmundur Kjaernested, an Icelandic citizen, and Brandon C. Rose, a U.S. citizen. The company is located in Greenwich, Connecticut. Mr. Kjaernested is also president of an Icelandic shipping company. TAL's owners have been rigorously non-union throughout its history. Their low wages, coupled with little or no benefit contributions, allow them to underbid all companies employing union seafarers on government contracts.

American Maritime Officers, through its Washington, D.C. office has been pursuing the names of officers serving on TAL's vessels through various agencies and using the Freedom of Information Act. Our rationale is that there are a limited number of unlimited licensed senior officers with an STCW endorsement and we know where nearly all of them work. Therefore, we believe they must be using officers either "moonlighting" or retired from one of the three officer unions. If TAL is able to use our active or retired members who are drawing benefits from their respective union, it is tantamount to the unions subsidizing a non-union company.

The three unions are actively reviewing all names obtained and any active or retired member caught working with TAL will be dealt with severely. American Maritime Officers has already expelled a member who was discovered working for TAL while on vacation.

TransAtlantic Lines has been operating a substandard shipping company and this fact has finally been reinforced by the actions of the American Bureau of Shipping and the U.S. Coast Guard. This should be a wake up call to companies that want to run a shoddy operation and exploit seafarers.

*****

Not that I disagree with them about the condition of TAL's ships and working conditions, but AMO seems to be a bit high on their horse assuming there are a "limited number of unlimited licensed senior officers with an STCW endorsement." The fact that they can look up people's names and where they work seems a bit far-fetched to me. Scare tactics?...

**ryanwood86** · February 14th, 2012, 10:59 AM

That's a load of crap that the unions are doin that! If shipping is down, what are we suppose to do? Go broke? Glad I'm no longer union

**c.captain** · February 14th, 2012, 11:10 AM

I thought I'd never say that but as bad as the AMO is...TAL is worse by several orders of magnitude! If there ever were a company that should be unionized it's them.

TAL is the worst US flag ship operating company I have ever encountered and that's saying alot because I've been around 30 years in this sorry industry and have run across more than my share of shitty assed companies!

Eat shit and die Gudmundor you snivelling puke...

**ryanwood86** · February 14th, 2012, 11:54 AM

Trust me, I know how bad that company is... but if not for that rust bucket, I would have lost my bacon. What you do on your off time should have nothing to do with the unions

**Skoidat69** · February 14th, 2012, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by ryanwood86

Trust me, I know how bad that company is... but if not for that rust bucket, I would have lost my bacon. What you do on your off time should have nothing to do with the unions

I understand that when you needed a source of income, you could get a job. But when i worked for AMO, I was made aware that they were my employer in the maritime industry. If I wanted to work in the industry on the side during my vacation, I had to get their blessing or suffer possible repercussions. Granted if the guy that they kicked out had made a "donation" to the political action fund, he might have skated by...

**emxer** · February 14th, 2012, 07:40 PM

Hey, that "voluntary" $400 "donation" paid for some very important political trips to Hawaii for the McKay brothers.

**Jolly Tar** · February 15th, 2012, 04:10 AM

Same TAL that tow the 'Guantanamo Bay Express' to and from JAX with tug SPENCE?

**ryanwood86** · February 15th, 2012, 05:22 AM

Yes, its the same one.

**cmakin** · February 15th, 2012, 06:29 AM

In reading the notice by Capt. Murphy, he does not seem to understand just how Class Societies work. While I am not personally aware of the condition of any of the vessels referenced, my guess is that the Union wants to be the sole exploiter of merchant seamen.

**ryanwood86** · February 15th, 2012, 09:17 AM

That's job security for the shore side people in the unions! Funny how the donations are supposed to help the unions with shipping and contracts ... yet the unions are not doing so hot.

**WaveRunner** · February 16th, 2012, 10:24 AM

"Therefore, we believe they must be using officers either "moonlighting" or retired from one of the three officer unions. If TAL is able to use our active or retired members who are drawing benefits from their respective union, it is tantamount to the unions subsidizing a non-union company."

ok I have a problem with this statement! I agree active members should not be moonlighting, but including retired menbers in this is way off base!

AMO pensioners retiring after 20 years can only take a monthly pension now, and cannot work on any AMO vessel as of the retire date, unlike all the 'retirees" who got million dollar buyouts and continue to work on AMO contracted ships. So, you are now upset that a monthly pensioner is trying to make ends meet working for a non AMO company? Am I wrong here that AMO wants it both ways? Opinions?

**seadog6608** · February 18th, 2012, 10:44 PM

TAL pays less than an AMO company my ass. I took a tagos job in late 1999, the only amo job I've ever done, Third Mate wages were $80.00 per day. Weekend watch pay was less than regular overtime. AMO, the mckays and the siu and saccoshit can kiss my fuzzy American ass.

**salt'n steel** · February 19th, 2012, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by seadog6608

TAL pays less than an AMO company my ass. I took a tagos job in late 1999, the only amo job I've ever done, Third Mate wages were $80.00 per day. Weekend watch pay was less than regular overtime. AMO, the mckays and the siu and saccoshit can kiss my fuzzy American ass.

Yep- I worked for us marine management in '92 on TAGOS ships out of Glasgow and Yokohama. AMO applicant status got me nowhere. Sailed mostly non-union ever since.

**CarolynNaborsc** · February 21st, 2012, 12:20 AM

That's a load of crap that the unions are doin that

**seadog6608** · February 23rd, 2012, 07:41 AM

Salt n Steel, I'm not knocking unions in general. I AM knocking temporary hire services that pretend to be unions.

**capt steve** · June 13th, 2012, 04:52 AM

"The three unions are actively reviewing all names obtained and any active or retired member caught working with TAL will be dealt with severely. American Maritime Officers has already expelled a member who was discovered working for TAL while on vacation."--AMO

While Active members of a union MAY be subject to union discipline for alleged bylaw infractions, retiree's are not accountable to union bylaws. Since a retiree is no longer an employee of a company under union contract, he/she is no longer represented by his/her former union or subject to LEGAL union discipline.

A word of caution; we all know of cases of illegal but difficult to prove union discipline. (i.e. "blackballing") so realize that there are no "Labor Cops" to report illegal union activities to. YOU, the mariner, have to serve that function and bring your complaint to the regional NLRB office yourself. It may be a good idea to have a lawyer assist you with your case.

**Jeffrox** · June 14th, 2012, 02:50 AM

They warned the members and now they've warned the employers. There, everybody has been warned!!
Employers on notice: act responsibly to defy shortage of officers

The only thing more disturbing than a growing industry-wide shortage of qualified U.S. merchant marine officers and its potential impact on our union is the failure of some American Maritime Officers employers to first acknowledge this shortage and then to address it in responsible ways.

This shortage of officers in traditional trades is driven primarily by the lure of seagoing employment in Gulf of Mexico offshore energy markets, where companies offer generous bonuses and high wages, but where jobs often come and go with the rise or fall of the price of crude oil and other supply-and-demand considerations.

Unfortunately, the crewing personnel, port engineers and port captains of the AMO employers I referred to above overlook or ignore the harmful effect this migratory labor pattern has had on the U.S. licensed seagoing labor pool over the last five years. These individuals appear to believe that there is an infinite number of qualified marine engineers and deck officers standing by for jobs, and they are much too quick to turn down the skilled, dependable men and women referred to them by the AMO dispatch desk.

As national president of American Maritime Officers, I can no longer be patient with these company representatives, and I am putting all AMO employers on notice: it is time to end the practices of withholding job requests, hiring officers without notice to and approval by AMO, choosing officers by criteria other than their qualifications for the jobs at hand and denying work to individuals without legitimate cause. AMO employers do not have the right of selection of junior officers. AMO employers who fail to accept individuals referred by AMO dispatch risk running their fleets shorthanded.

As the U.S. merchant marine officers' union with the greatest number of existing and forthcoming jobs, American Maritime Officers must pay the greatest attention to the steep and growing shortage of U.S. marine engineers and deck officers. We have the people with the licenses, the skills, the endorsements and the experience needed to do any deep-sea, Great Lakes or inland waters job - AMO represents the world's finest licensed seagoing professionals, and quantity is right up there with quality as a distinguishing characteristic of our union.

But any potential crewing crisis could be averted more easily and more effectively - especially during the summer season, when demand for officers is at its peak - if the companies we have under contract would just open their eyes and look objectively at the world in which they operate.

Tom Bethel
National President