End of the red ensign???

[Tom Abernethy]

hi roger,
i think you are quite right about the procedure of dipping the flag to naval vessels. i have done this myself many times,it is a form of salute. i wonder if it is a dying tradition or still widely in use today ?......
as for the doing away with the red ensign...it will be an insult to all hands who have been proud to serve under it, also a insult to all who have given there lives in the merchant service.what are they after, all to be under the euro flag. LEAVE OUR FLAG ALONE......these stupid people make me so mad!!!!! my flag will still fly proudly at my home. any petition going put my name to it....
TOM ABERNETHY ( R721582 )

[Keith at Tregenna]

THE HEADLINES MAYBE: End of the red ensign???

This is to do with conditions and pay etc, yes some may go further towards flags of convenience but in reality the jack will stay. originally thought they may do away with the flag, that can never be the case, the debate is more about who or whom may still sail under her. The flag ain't for moving.

Depending on Brussels the changes, may or may not occur, The flag will continue.

K.

[happy daze john in oz]

Getting rid of flags or changing them for no real reason appears to be a growing trend. Here in Oz we have a group who wish to get rid of the current flag and replace it with, well they cannot decide on that yet, as they say the current flag with the Union flag in the corner is not right for us. They argue that we are no longer tied to U.K. so the flag should go. The majority wish the flag to stay saying quite rightly that men, and women, died defending it. Those opposed to it think that if the Union flag is removed it will wipe out part of our past. You may change, or even ban a flag, but you cannot change history. No matter what the Red Duster will still remain in some place though it may not fly from British ships. There are I take it still such things?

[Ivan Cloherty]

THE HEADLINES MAYBE: End of the red ensign???

This is to do with conditions and pay etc, yes some may go further towards flags of convenience but in reality the jack will stay. originally thought they may do away with the flag, that can never be the case, the debate is more about who or whom may still sail under her. The flag ain't for moving.

Depending on Brussels the changes, may or may not occur, The flag will continue.

K.

The Red ensign will always be flown at my house, regardless of any changes made by Brussels or any other body.

Regretfully this flagging out is not a new thing and has been going on for decades. Anyone who has a greater interest in this should read

Volume five of " A History of the British Merchant Navy" by Richard Woodman
ISBN 978-0-7524-4822-0 but it is not a cheap book

The volume is called "The Great Sqaundering 1921 - 2010" a volume of some + 470 pages but the first 50 pages will give a good insight into the contraction of our fleets, it makes interesting but sad reading, but no one event whether owner or union or seafarer can take the blame for the demise of our industry, two world wars and protectionism and a change in world order had their part to play, but I do commend this tome for those who wish a greater insight.

Suffice to say those of us who sailed under the Red Duster will always hold it in our hearts to love and respect the flag and it will continue to fly at my place, even if as someone mentioned earlier that Mr and Mrs Average even in port cities have no idea what it is, but what matters is that we know what it did and does stand for.

I shall continue to bombard the local and national press about the role of the Merchant Navy in the past and present in our countries survival, as most of our population forget we live on an Island and are fully dependent on sea transport.

Ivan

[Ivan Cloherty]

As some will be aware I have been on a mission trying to have the Red Ensign re-instated on the Queen Elizabeth. Queen Mary 2 and Queen Victoria for this Jubilee Year and have written to HRH The Prince of Wales, Lord Prescott and others, I have had replies from Prescott and HRH Office, but cannot find the right thread to insert these comments even using the search button. My letter to HRH has been forwarded to The Defence Secretary and apparently also to Department of Transport from whom I received a reply at the weekend.

I will not type the whole letter but just extracts of it

Para 2 reads "I should start by saying that Cunard has never been owned by the nation, but always a privately owned company albeit with strong links to the UK. However I can assure you that the Shipping Minister is very disappointed that Cunard took the decision to remove its cruise ships from the UK Ships Register"

Para 3 "Since you wrote your letter it has been clear that recently adopted legislation on seafarer pay was one of the primary reasons prompting Cunard's decision to leave the UK Registry"

Paras 4,5 and 6 Deal with relevant parts of European Law relating to shipping and can be summmarised (my words) in stating that it was not unlawful for seafarers to be paid different rates of pay on the basis of their nationality if they were recruited outside of Great Britain, this has been changed to unlawful outside European Economic Area (EEA) or designated States.

Para 7 reads "The Government is currently looking into legislation on marriage to see whether changes could be made to allow marriages to take place at sea"


I have of course replied to this letter advising the author of it, that we seamen were and are fully aware that Cunard was and is not owned by this State Nation. Also that we were writing on the behalf of the circa 35,000 British seamen who sailed under the Red Ensign in WWII who will be turning in their unmarked graves at the thought of these British icons (the "Q"'s) are sailing under a foreign flag.

Also that we are not naive enough to think that the Almighty Dollar does not rule the waves and the none-availability of legislation for allowing marriage at sea on British ships was just an excuse to move to cheaper labour. If legislation is enacted to allow marriages to be performed then another reason will be found to employ cheap non-professional labour with a subsequent disaster waiting to happen as it inevitably will.

I know that some will think I'm banging my head against a brick wall, but we need to make our feelings felt, because there are fewer and fewer of us remaining who sailed under a once great flag, that we were proud to serve under, we cannot let it disappear and I know some on this site who think it is now just another FOC, but for me it will never be a FOC.

Anyway thought I'd keep you updated Ivan

[Tony Wilding]

Cunard used that story of inability to perform marriages as an excuse to flag out, the real reason was far different. just a way of making more money. no seaman should be paid differently, we are rapidly going backwards, in this world fairness is a word that will be erased from dictionaries. companies rule now by methods that determine if you are poor, you stay poor. they create class distinctions, if a crewmember comes from the Philippines so what, he is paid to do a job, can only be one rate for all, they are an evil money grabbing bunch of bas///ds.

[Capt Bill Davies]

I know that some will think I'm banging my head against a brick wall, but we need to make our feelings felt, because there are fewer and fewer of us remaining who sailed under a once great flag, that we were proud to serve under, we cannot let it disappear and I know some on this site who think it is now just another FOC, but for me it will never be a FOC.

Anyway thought I'd keep you updated Ivan

Ivan,

You are obviously referring to me.

However, be assured of one thing and that is the Red Ensign is just a FOC and nothing more. The definition of FOC 'penned' by the ITF itself fits the British Flag requirements exactly.
Sentiments and nostalgia are all very well but you have to be realistic. The flag is not what you remember or sailed in during your short sea career.
You will get precious comfort from knowing that I am equally adamant in exposing what has happened to the Red Ensign as some are in trying to bring back something that is lost forever.

What annoys me is that when I went FOC the owner and ships I worked for and sailed in made no pretence in being anything else. Similarly I was in for the big money so we all did well.
Call that what you may but it is certainly not hypocrisy which is exactly what those (MCA) who are pushing the Red Ensign are guilty of.

Your efforts Ivan are best focussed elsewhere.


Brgds

Bill.

[Ivan Cloherty]

Ivan,

You are obviously referring to me.

No Bill I wasn't referring to you, it was a generalisation, but as my old mum used to say "If the cap fits, wear it"

The flag is not what you remember or sailed in during your short sea career. (Do I detect a hint of dismissive sarcasm in that remark)

Yes Bill, actually at sea, compared to some who stayed for one reason or another for thirty/forty years or more, I suppose my time at sea was short, but short enough to become a Marine Superintendent dealing with hundreds of seamen of all categories (and nationalities) including Masters and getting to know their feelings and loyalty towards the flag. Also my last 25 years was running my own company dealing with Ports, Dredging, Salvage and ships so my experience covers a large spectrum of the sea related industry and not just one aspect of it.

My efforts are channeled in other directions as well as the Red Ensign one, but someone has to chase the dragons, it's very easy to sit back and do nothing, but I wasn't built that way. It took me fourteen years of constant letter writing (and physical action) to get a pavement access for my village, but I got the access in the end, during that time I was chasing around the world on ship and port related projects. Doubt I've got fourteen years left now for the Red Ensign and other projects, but it's worth a try, sometimes it is better to be "A jack of all trades" than master of one (excuse the pun)

Brgds

Bill.

Regards

Ivan

[robpage]

British and Commonwealth had three main sources of crewing , the pool and UK contract men manned the Union Castle and King line ships , Some of the Clan/Springbok/Castle like the Clan Ross/SA Scientist/Kinnaird Castle retained a Zulu / Durban Indian Crew and the Clan Boats were Bangladeshi ( East Pakistan then ) and Indian . In my short time at sea I sailed with all three . There was a wage difference Uk being top , South African being next and Bangladeshis being at the bottom . There was a huge difference in manning too , the Bangladeshis had twice as meny crewmen as a British crew and the work output was less , the Zulu / Durban Indian crews were more numerous but not hugely , and the pay was lesser but again not that far apart .

What you pay for is what you got !! The lesser UK crews had a greater work output and a greater commitment than any foreign crew I sailed with . In 1966 the Bangladeshis were on around £20 a month and 2/6 (12.5 p) which would give them arounf £28 a month with overtime . As a Juniot Engineer I was on around £80.00 a month which I believe , but am open to correction is around what an AB would be on with overtime . It took at least two Bangladeshis to do the job of one British seaman . The " Clan Mac T " class originally needed a Doctor as there were over a hundred crew , this was reduced to 16 officers of all descriptions and around 16 catering 12 Engine room and 20 Deck POs and ratings making 64 total . I from memory would say the King Boats had half of this number , again open to correction . So the British Seafarer to my thinking was not that Overpriced .

[Capt Bill Davies]

So the British Seafarer to my thinking was not that Overpriced .

Was it money alone that drove the Shipowner? Reliability may have played a part. I can recall several occasions in the mid 60s when sailing as Ch.Mate when I had to drag the men out of the local to make a tide. One incident in particular was when I was in Ore Carriers and the Master, Second Mate and I (Ch.Mate) had to carry a few of the crowd back on board in the Bidston Dock, Wallasey.

I am sure there are many who can relate to this.

Bill