Crew Available: Crew Contributions aka $$$

[Catamoron]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I think you are mixing up crew and passengers

By definition crew , crew. They are expected to play “ some” part in the running of the vessel. By definition passengers do none of this and as a result pay for the privilege .

I beg to differ - check out Pangaea and see just how much the charge for the privilege to "crew" on their sailboat. And best I can remember, even the "crew" on Delos used to pay a nominal fee to help keep the boat operational - even Brady was expected to donate (as best I can remember, and forgive me if I'm wrong.)

[Catamoron]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

As for the absurd suggestion that someone waltz onto your boat and get a private cabin and enjoy everything that you have worked your entire life for without paying for the apparent privilege of being on board is the height of arrogance.

What is even more arrogant is to think you can live on my boat, enjoying everything I worked for, and not contribute anything other than a couple of basic chores. Find me that gig where I don't have to pay for any upkeep, maintenance, insurance, slip fees, storage fees and all I have to do is cook dinner, clean the kitchen, and man the helm...I'll sell my boat tomorrow.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Catamoron

I was being sarcastic about living on my boat and in my home for free because you do a couple of basic chores....neither is happening.

Catamoron, seemingly something like Poe's Law arose. They missed your sarcasm. Add an emoji to clarify.

Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of the views being parodied.

Can happen even when you are the author and the paradier.

[Montanan]

Catamoron.

Can I come aboard if I agree to hold your beer? That is a crew position aboard my boat.

Albeit, mind you I might drink your beer when asked to hold it.

[Catamoron]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Catamoron, seemingly something like Poe's Law arose. They missed your sarcasm. Add an emoji to clarify.

Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of the views being parodied.

Can happen even when you are the author and the paradier.

LOL...the fact that someone could even think I was contradicting myself is in and of itself, entertaining.

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by Catamoron

I beg to differ - check out Pangaea and see just how much the charge for the privilege to "crew" on their sailboat. And best I can remember, even the "crew" on Delos used to pay a nominal fee to help keep the boat operational - even Brady was expected to donate (as best I can remember, and forgive me if I'm wrong.)

That’s because those folks are making a living off of their boats, so they charge. Their choices.

For the rest of us who aren’t trying to make money from our boats by monetising videos or selling the experience, it’s a bit more nuanced.

With your land home, do you charge friends, acquaintances, or random guests, for the privilege of sitting on your couch, watching your tv, playing your card or board games, using your toilet paper, etc? If not, what’s the difference about inviting friends/guests onto your boat and not charging them?

When inviting people on board to crew on a passage, you are effectively asking them to provide a service for you. Hence passage crew are generally not charged for on-boat costs (on boats trying to make money from the sailing).

It’s gets murky when friends are hanging out with you for more than a weekend, but I guess that’s where the saying “house guests and fish both get smelly after a few days”.

It is after all your choice to invite or not invite or invite with payment anyone you want for whatever terms you agree.

[Catamoron]

Originally Posted by fxykty

That’s because those folks are making a living off of their boats, so they charge. Their choices.

For the rest of us who aren’t trying to make money from our boats by monetising videos or selling the experience, it’s a bit more nuanced.

With your land home, do you charge friends, acquaintances, or random guests, for the privilege of sitting on your couch, watching your tv, playing your card or board games, using your toilet paper, etc? If not, what’s the difference about inviting friends/guests onto your boat and not charging them?

When inviting people on board to crew on a passage, you are effectively asking them to provide a service for you. Hence passage crew are generally not charged for on-boat costs (on boats trying to make money from the sailing).

It’s gets murky when friends are hanging out with you for more than a weekend, but I guess that’s where the saying “house guests and fish both get smelly after a few days”.

It is after all your choice to invite or not invite or invite with payment anyone you want for whatever terms you agree.

Well, I don't have random guests in my land home, so I'm not sure I would charge them or not. And when I have friends and family on my boat, I will not charge any of them just like I wouldn't at home.

But the question is should "crew" be charged to live and experience of the sailing life even though they are "helping out" around the boat doing odds and ends? And even though I hate to make this argument I'm going to because it really is the best example - when Brian on Delos first started out, he didn't make his living off YouTube or Patreon...he financed it himself. Even after a couple of years, he wasn't making a living off YouTube yet - of course he was making some money because anybody that posts monetized videos on YouTube is making money. But that's really not the point. The point is this - yes, he had "crew" come aboard, and yes, they helped out in every aspect of sailing and living on a boat. And yes, they contributed to the upkeep and maintenance of the boat. Now the question is this - did Brian really need the crew there to help move is boat? No, he didn't - he was fully capable of sailing his own boat. Does it help when others are on board to move a boat? Yes. But to live on a boat, to experience all it has to offer, and to help with maintenance, storage, etc. why would the people on board not be expected to help monetarily?

And as I write this, I can't help but think this has got to be the dumbest thing to actually have to be explaining. Seriously....do people let complete strangers live in their house without paying anything?? Of course not...so why is this even a discussion?

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by Catamoron

Well, I don't have random guests in my land home, so I'm not sure I would charge them or not. And when I have friends and family on my boat, I will not charge any of them just like I wouldn't at home.



But the question is should "crew" be charged to live and experience of the sailing life even though they are "helping out" around the boat doing odds and ends? And even though I hate to make this argument I'm going to because it really is the best example - when Brian on Delos first started out, he didn't make his living off YouTube or Patreon...he financed it himself. Even after a couple of years, he wasn't making a living off YouTube yet - of course he was making some money because anybody that posts monetized videos on YouTube is making money. But that's really not the point. The point is this - yes, he had "crew" come aboard, and yes, they helped out in every aspect of sailing and living on a boat. And yes, they contributed to the upkeep and maintenance of the boat. Now the question is this - did Brian really need the crew there to help move is boat? No, he didn't - he was fully capable of sailing his own boat. Does it help when others are on board to move a boat? Yes. But to live on a boat, to experience all it has to offer, and to help with maintenance, storage, etc. why would the people on board not be expected to help monetarily?



And as I write this, I can't help but think this has got to be the dumbest thing to actually have to be explaining. Seriously....do people let complete strangers live in their house without paying anything?? Of course not...so why is this even a discussion?

Ahh, you nailed it. Temporary and short term for a particular purpose (friends for the weekend, pick up crew for a passage) versus living on the boat for medium to long term (who are not necessarily family or friends, but even then).

The first, you’d have to be pretty mercenary to charge. We do ask day and weekend guests to bring their provisions, particularly alcohol, as we don’t feel we should subsidise them. But we certainly don’t ask for fuel, berthing, or amortised operational and capital costs, mostly because we would be going out anyway. Pretty much the same for passage crew.

But the latter case is very different. You could argue that until you turn into a full fledged charter or tour boat, only operational costs should be shared. Seems fair enough to me, as long as it’s clear from the beginning. Charging for capital costs seems a bit risky to me, as you are starting to provide a way for a payer to claim part ownership. And legal ambiguity if you’re not a commercial operation.

Once you’re a charter operation, or sailing school, or whatever business, charge for whatever the market will bear.

This thread is about all sorts of crew, not just long term cruising crew.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by Catamoron

Well, I don't have random guests in my land home, so I'm not sure I would charge them or not. And when I have friends and family on my boat, I will not charge any of them just like I wouldn't at home.

But the question is should "crew" be charged to live and experience of the sailing life even though they are "helping out" around the boat doing odds and ends? And even though I hate to make this argument I'm going to because it really is the best example - when Brian on Delos first started out, he didn't make his living off YouTube or Patreon...he financed it himself. Even after a couple of years, he wasn't making a living off YouTube yet - of course he was making some money because anybody that posts monetized videos on YouTube is making money. But that's really not the point. The point is this - yes, he had "crew" come aboard, and yes, they helped out in every aspect of sailing and living on a boat. And yes, they contributed to the upkeep and maintenance of the boat. Now the question is this - did Brian really need the crew there to help move is boat? No, he didn't - he was fully capable of sailing his own boat. Does it help when others are on board to move a boat? Yes. But to live on a boat, to experience all it has to offer, and to help with maintenance, storage, etc. why would the people on board not be expected to help monetarily?

And as I write this, I can't help but think this has got to be the dumbest thing to actually have to be explaining. Seriously....do people let complete strangers live in their house without paying anything?? Of course not...so why is this even a discussion?

I'm guessing that when your high end land house need some work done you charge the provider for the experience of working on it??

[NaClyDog]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

I'm guessing that when your high end land house need some work done you charge the provider for the experience of working on it??

Before this pandemic started, our cleaning service paid us weekly for the honour of coming over to clean up after us. /s

[Dsanduril]

Here's an interesting wrinkle for the USians amongst us - what if you consider that the crew are paying you to learn sailing and get sea time? There are a couple of US Customs rulings on this subject, do you get a pass if rather than asking for a contribution toward supplies you couch the request as an instruction fee? Let the legal wrangling begin.

In its administration of 46 U.S.C. App. 289, the Customs Service has ruled that the carriage of passengers entirely within territorial waters, even though the passengers disembark at their point of embarkation and the vessel touches no other coastwise point, is considered coastwise trade subject to coastwise laws. However, the transportation of passengers to the high seas (i.e., beyond U.S. territorial waters) and back to the point of embarkation, assuming the passengers do not go ashore, even temporarily, at another United States point, often called a "voyage to nowhere", is not considered coastwise trade. It should be noted that the carriage of fishing parties for hire, even if the vessel proceeds beyond territorial waters and returns to the point of the passenger's embarkation, is considered coastwise trade (TD 55193(2)).

In interpreting the coastwise laws, Customs has ruled that a point in United States territorial waters is considered a point embraced within the coastwise laws. The coastwise laws generally apply to points in the territorial sea, defined as the belt, three (3) nautical miles wide, seaward of the territorial sea baseline, and to points located in internal waters, landward of the territorial sea baseline, in cases where the baseline and the coastline differ.

Given the foregoing definition of "passenger", the Customs Service has held that a person being trained or receiving instruction in the handling or navigation of a vessel, and whose presence on board the vessel is necessarily required in order to receive such training or instruction, is not a "passenger" within the meaning of the coastwise laws. Accordingly, if the subject vessels are used only for such training it would not be required to have a license to engage in the coastwise trade (see Customs Letter Rulings 109850, dated December 27, 1988 and 109287, dated February 24, 1988).

We have consistently held that vessel equipment and stores are not considered "merchandise" for purposes of section 883 when transported in the vessel by which they are used (see Customs letter rulings 106910, dated July 9, 1984, and 108223, dated March 13, 1986).

Therefore, the sole use of a non-coastwise-qualified sailing vessel in connection with a bona fide instructional course in sailing and navigation does not constitute coastwise trade within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. App. 289.

However, all persons being carried in the vessel must be involved with the operation, navigation, or business of the vessel. A person who is carried on board a vessel for recreational purposes and who pays a fee for such carriage would be considered a "passenger" and his carriage between places in the United States or entirely within U.S. waters would be in violation of the coastwise laws.

HOLDING:

The sole use of a non-coastwise-qualified sailing vessel in connection with a bona fide instructional course in sailing and navigation does not constitute coastwise trade within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. App. 289.

And another:

Therefore, the sole use of a sailing vessel in connection with a bona fide instructional course in sailing and navigation with class or other instruction, as opposed to an outing, does not constitute coastwise trade within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. App. 289. We stress that all persons being carried in the vessel must be involved with the operation, navigation, or business of the vessel. Persons who are carried on board a vessel for recreational purposes, whether or not they pay a fee, would be considered "passengers," and their carriage between places in the United States or entirely within United States waters would be in violation of the coastwise laws.

If the "crew" are not "passengers" then that also means that the instructor/captain does not need to be licensed - a license is required for carrying passengers....

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

Here's an interesting wrinkle for the USians amongst us - what if you consider that the crew are paying you to learn sailing and get sea time? There are a couple of US Customs rulings on this subject, do you get a pass if rather than asking for a contribution toward supplies you couch the request as an instruction fee? Let the legal wrangling begin.



And another:



If the "crew" are not "passengers" then that also means that the instructor/captain does not need to be licensed - a license is required for carrying passengers....

Does all that mean that if we enter US waters and decide to host some friends for a week with us in the San Juans, for no payment to us other than to bring their own provisions, they would be considered passengers and we would be breaking the rules? That seems totally crazy.

Edit: Do these rules mean that in the US you Americans can’t have guests on board your boats just for fun? That is double insane if true.

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by fxykty

Does all that mean that if we enter US waters and decide to host some friends for a week with us in the San Juans, for no payment to us other than to bring their own provisions, they would be considered passengers and we would be breaking the rules? That seems totally crazy.

Edit: Do these rules mean that in the US you Americans can’t have guests on board your boats just for fun? That is double insane if true.

If you require "consideration" in advance, as a condition of carriage then, yes, you are breaking the rules. If you tell your guest to bring all the beer (for both them and you) then you are receiving consideration. However, if it is BYOB (so you tell the guest that have to bring for themselves, but do not require enough for you) or if your guest shows with a slab of beer, unasked by you, and shares it with you then all is good.

If, at the end of the trip the guest offers to pay for fuel, but such arrangements were not made in advance then that too is OK - it was not a condition of carriage, the carriage is already done. Even if you stop at the fuel dock on the way out, as long as the guest's offer is voluntary there is no "condition of carriage."

Passenger-for-hire means a passenger, for whom consideration is contributed as a condition of carriage on the vessel, whether directly or indirectly, flowing to the owner, charterer, operator, agent, or any other person having an interest in the vessel.

If they bring their own provisions, and none for you (or your co-owner/captain/mate) then you have received no consideration. This is where the $$$ for crewing runs into a very grey area - if the $$$ someone charges crew can be shown to be a method of provisioning together, and is a reasonable charge for the food then you may be able to get away with it in the US - you're welcome to cross the Atlantic with us, here's a bunk, we don't provide any food or drink, bring your own - may be technically OK - it is probably technically OK if they don't crew and are just along for the ride - if they work as crew is that "consideration" in that the boat owner received free labor?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Catamoron

What is even more arrogant is to think you can live on my boat, enjoying everything I worked for, and not contribute anything other than a couple of basic chores. Find me that gig where I don't have to pay for any upkeep, maintenance, insurance, slip fees, storage fees and all I have to do is cook dinner, clean the kitchen, and man the helm...I'll sell my boat tomorrow.

I can tell you there are thousands of opportunity to crew where get yourself to the boat and after that you either help sail it , or cool or clean it etc.

In fact if you look good in a t-shirt some will pay you 60k a year. ( and more )

I’ve sailed thousands of sea miles in my younger days crewing for boat owners who were short handed. I got myself to the boat , they paid the expenses after that ( ie food etc )many owners covered the air fare too

You’ll be selling your boat I think

[muttnik]

Originally Posted by Catamoron

The fact that someone thinks they can just waltz onto my boat, get a private cabin, enjoy everything that I've worked my entire life to afford, and bear no cost in any of it, is beyond me.

I don't believe this thread is about being forced to accept passengers. The OP was making a point about transparency of fee expectations in crew wanted advertisements. Others of us have pointed out that charging people beyond very basic cost sharing (which doesn't extend to the cost of paying for your boat) may, according to your country, carry with it additional legal obligations such as regular commercial safety inspections and associated safety equipment requirements. I don't watch youtube sailors so I have no idea if your Delos people were breaking US law or whether they had the required certification to be charging people.

It's pretty simple: No-one's forcing you to take anyone on board as crew. If your boat is flagged in the UK, US or likely most other developed countries, money you can ask for taking people on board "non-commercially" will be covered by regulations. Want to ignore that without getting the required commercial certification? Well that's between you, the authorities and the lawyers of the families of your "crew" should anything happen to them.