Bye.bye, Red Ensign on the Queens.

The American Owners can call the ships what they like , They can register them where they like , until they and many other cruise operators pay their seamen a decent living wage , I will stick to holidays ashore . When your tips become your wages , or rather a proportion of your tips , no matter how small , then the 26 years prior to 1807 that William Wilberforce fought to abolish slavery was in vain . I would be ashamed to support a ship being under the Red Ensign that in these times paid any Steward , Deckhand , or Motorman less than the £6.08 per hour UK Minimum wage . That in Monthly terms means the lowest paid man is on £1700 a month . I wonder if that is the case .

I also noted the comment that the communication was in English , I refer back to the Guardian Article that I quoted earlier , They don't have a knowledge of English , just the rudimentary aspects . I worked with crews from India , Bangladesh , Pakistan , and Zulus . Communication limited to Tea no sugar !, Polish here ! and Nay !! worked with a variety of hand signals . When the odd heartbeat stopper happened , hell broke loose . There were more men then , the ships were slower and smaller . The Pride that I perceive we had was that we were manning some of the safest ships afloat . Despite Bill's protests , I am sure that some of the FOC ships , and I am very familiar with Ludwig vessels from my days with Gulf Oil , are the best that you can get , I just worry about some of the others

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robpage

The American Owners . I wonder if that is the case .

---

I have no experience of the cruise ship industry other than what I have heard. If what you say is true I think this is a wholly unacceptable practice which is even more distasteful when you hear it appears to have the endorsement of the ITF.

I can only speak from experience and say that all the crews I sailed with received good wages in line with their national union. For example If you were a Filipino then AMOSUP (Greg Oca et al) prevailed and would have negotiated the agreement and the respective Blue Card Issued. When I finished ABs were on about USD 1300.00 per month base and Ch.Mates inxs of USD 4000.00 per month base. There were no complaints

Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robpage

I also noted are the best that you can get , I just worry about some of the others

---

I can assure you Rob that I do not recognise the picture you draw. Sure, I have heard the stories and there are many about but, I learnt as early as 68 that the 'blanket condemnation' of FOC was not worth listening to.

You say ' There were more men then , the ships were slower and smaller' . Lets take a look at that. In 68 the Bantry Class were commenced. These were the worlds first ULCCs. Frank Hornby was Master of the 'Ireland' and a couple of years later mentored me. We had inxs of50 men onboard. 26 on deck. They were pristine. Before that, Universe throughout the 60s, always had the largest ships afloat. Well manned, well paid.
I mention above because you have knowledge of Ludwigs albeit hearsay.

In conclusion, we all worried about some of the others.

Brgds

Bill

Hi Shipmates,

I have followed this thread with great interest and have been greatly impressed by the wealth of knowledge and experience expressed therein. Lacking sufficient knowledge on the subject I've had enough sense to withhold making comment and only do so now to express my appreciation to all who have taken part in this 'debate'. Although my sympathies lie with the views offered by Ivan, Tony, Brian and others, Captain Bill does make a strong case regarding the perceived relevance of the R.E. in today's
shipping world. Clearly, it's all a question of perspective.

Whilst I can add nothing to the points already raised, my heart would surely support any move towards regaining for the R.E. some of the respect it once commanded in maritime affairs across the globe.

Again, my thanks to all who have contributed to an excellent thread.

...............Roger

Thanks Roger. A good summation of an interesting thread.

Brgds

Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger DYER

Hi Shipmates,


Again, my thanks to all who have contributed to an excellent thread.

...............Roger

---

Agree with Bill, a good summation Roger of the situation we find ourselves in.

Whilst Bill and I appear not to agree eye to eye on the Red Duster's relevance, I do bow to his experience of having sailed under a F O C for many years. My own experience of F O C was mixed but mostly good. Having said that I will continue my quest in trying to get "Our flag" recognised for what it should be. It may have no or little relevance in this mixed modern world, where no one really knows who owns what, but I feel we owe to all those who perished whilst sailing under it that the flag is not dead and buried into obscurity. Also I would like to feel that by retaining shipping under the Red Duster then at least some employment for British nationals may ensue and the country may benefit from some taxes rather than them disappearing offshore. Perhaps I am a naive sentimentalist but someone has to be!and I do respect other peoples opinions and their right to have them.

The problem in the world today is globalisation. No one realy knows who owns what anymore, and very few I would hazzard to say even care. For the crew on many ships the wage they recieve is far in excess of anything they would earn in their own country. The falg was, and still is, a reflection of the country or other that it represents. The Red Duster represented the British Merchant navy. That is now almost gone and so in theory there is little or no need for it. But then there is the memory of those who made the ultimate sacrifice while sailing under it. As long as their memory is preserved, and as long as a Red Duster flies at any cenotaph or war memorial then it will forever live in the hearts of man. We as ex MN are proud of it but to the average man in the street it means little or nothing. To the corporates any flag that will bring in maximum profit is all that is required. As to wages, I wrote a long article on thia at the bgining of the year in the cruise ship section. If the information is correct, and i see no reason why it is not, then wages are not as bad as many think.

John you have hit the nail on the head with your thread. And beggers me to ask the question, in the event of anouther WAR,( and I feel there will be one at some point) Who will be able to count on who. For example if the UK wished to comandeer Troop Ships etc where do the Government go, Perhaps the SS Waverly will come out of retirement
George in Southampton

R235941 Ref.my 74 Have today observed an article on Cunard flagging out in the Mail on Sunday and the first two thirds of the artical is on the allowing weddings on Red Ensign ships and the last paragraph is relative to the EU proposed labour laws; as I stated in my 74 I think that this is the main reason for flagging out but I do not expect a shipping company to admit to it, owners have not change from my days.Go back to 1903 when Cunard needed the government to back their building of the Mauretania and Lusitania; the then government stated that no foreigner should act as a director nor principal officer of the company nor any shares to be held by same.The pirncipal officers included masters,officers and engineers in charge of a watch on board of any of the company's ships.It was also agreed that all officers and three quarters of the crew be British subjects and that a larger percentage of the be naval reservists. Without that assistance Cunard would never had survived the competiton from the German liners.
Today the British tax payer will still have to finance a small Royal Navy which would have to defend the current Queens.