Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc., Jacksonville, Florida, was one of the largest shipyards in the southern U.S., building and repairing military and commercial vessels for over a century. Finally closed in 1992, it became another casualty of the sharp decline of the U.S. shipbuilding industry post-1980.
In the heart of Washington D.C., where the political currents swirled with the potential to reshape the maritime industry, a gathering of Boilermakers and other unions echoed a resounding dissent against the maritime omnibus bill in the spring of 1980. The Boilermakers convened at the National Shipbuilders’ Conference, a two-day symposium that became the crucible for dissent and opposition.
As speaker after speaker took the stage, the dissatisfaction with the bill was palpable. The maritime omnibus bill, approved by the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, faced a barrage of criticism. At the forefront of this opposition was Boilermaker President Harold J. Buoy, a man who bellowed with conviction.
Buoy minced no words as he addressed the assembly. “I would be less than candid if I did not express the steadfast opposition of the Boilermakers to the bill. For us Boilermakers, one issue is central to all others—the bill, if enacted, will not build ships in U.S. yards.”
The bill's provisions, especially those allowing foreign-built vessels to qualify for the operating differential subsidy, and the potential phasing out of essential trade routes, struck at the core of Boilermakers’ concerns. The bill also gave the Secretary of Commerce the right to disapprove ODS for vessels found to be overly manned or inefficiently operated, which would result in undue interference in the collective bargaining process.
“The measure should be retitled the Foreign-Jobs Creation Act of 1980,” Buoy declared, emphasizing the potential impact on American jobs and the shipbuilding industry. The sentiment was echoed by other unions, including the Marine Engineers’ Beneficial Association, whose representative, David Leff, criticized the bill as “purposeless” and lacking economic analysis.
The opposition to the omnibus bill extended beyond the confines of the conference. Transportation Institute President Herbert Brand criticized the bill’s development process, stating that it was “punitive” and lacked the necessary consultation with private industry that could have fostered a more constructive approach.
Amidst the dissent there was a glimmer of hope. Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Maritime Affairs Samuel B. Nemirow hinted at possible modifications to the administration’s stance, signaling a potential shift in policy regarding the reflagging provision. However, the battle lines were drawn, and the Boilermakers, along with other unions and industry leaders, prepared for a protracted struggle against a bill they deemed detrimental to the very fabric of American shipbuilding.
The gathering concluded with a unanimous resolution adopted by the Boilermakers, calling on President Jimmy Carter and Congress to recognize the perilous decline of U.S. naval and merchant marine capabilities. The resolution served as a rallying cry, a potent piece of paper that symbolized the unity of the Boilermakers in their commitment to fight for a strong merchant marine and naval force.
As the Boilermakers left the conference hall, echoes of their opposition reverberated through the corridors of power, setting the stage for a fierce and determined campaign against a legislative tide that threatened the foundations of American shipbuilding. The general sentiment after the meeting was that the Senate would not pass the “Foreign-Jobs Creation Act of 1980,” as Buoy called it.
Then and now, Boilermakers are fierce political advocates and continually stand for maritime protections for U.S. workers and for U.S. shipbuilding.
