<p>I come back to find a PM box LOADED with PM's!!!</p>
<p>I hope I answered all you questions and wish you all the best in your decisions, pro-KP or anti-KP....I believe me, I had plenty of PM's from both sides of the fence.</p>
<p>Keep your questions coming, I will continue to answer them. </p>
<p>As for the latest and greatest in the "KP screw you over" scandel...</p>
<p>Students of the Class of 2006 that wanted to work maritime-related ashore jobs were told to sign a piece of paper and they were "ok" to work as such, as per a high ranking CAPT of the academy. </p>
<p>They are ALL now currently recieving letters that says this is no longer the case. They were to all go sea and now they are all in jeopordy of being in non-compliance with their commitments which could mean forced active duty service or repayment of nearly $200k for the price the school quotes the education. </p>
<p>Goes to show that even after you leave this place, they still work to make your life miserable.</p>
<p>I guess there is a reason you call yourself disgruntled.</p>
<p>KP is sending out those letters to keep grads from getting themselves in trouble. Rumor has it that most that are getting non-compliancy letters are because the grads have not reported.</p>
<p>I sure if they read the letter Sean Connaughton gave them before they graduated, they would not be in this position.</p>
<p>oliver,
gotta tell you, sean connaughton didn't give them a letter... he wasn't in office... their jobs WERE legit, but the connaughton went back and is changing everything
i've heard a lot about what disgruntled is talking about. as far as i know, it's legit.</p>
<p>he may be disgruntled, but he's still part of the KP family. as such he does share a lot of the sentiment that doesn't always surface from those that want to show the pretty, polished version of KP. take it all with a grain of salt.</p>
<p>I sent the op's message above to my s, an '06 grad who is currently on a ship somewhere in the Caribbean, and here is his reply. It was actually much lengthier, but I cut out the middle part where the asterisks are so it wouldn't be censored and I'm only pasting the pertinent info. Take it as you will, I will not engage in any arguments about this, just passing on the info:</p>
<p>I haven't heard anything about this and my best friends are shoreside, so i would have. I know of one person who has received such a letter, but that is just because he didn't fill out any reports and was non compliant. ***********Actually the school has helped me since i graduated by helping me to get a job and hasn't once tried to make my life miserable.</p>
<p>OK. So the Maritime Administrator gave them a letter and outlined the policies. Nothing has changed in their obligation. Many just don't care. I am sure Disgruntles would hate to be an Alumni of a school that doesn't exist. That's were KP is heading if the Alumni don't comply and REPORT!!</p>
<p>Ah, my dear friend Oliver D...I have a feeling your last name begins with a "c".</p>
<p>The people that have rcvd this letter DID report and it states that at the top of the letter. I do not have a copy in front of me but if i recall correctly it states something along the lines of...basis your last reporting, it appears you may be in non-compliance. </p>
<p>As to kpmom06...if you child is on a ship in the caribs...how would he have rcvd this letter that was sent out two weeks ago? Also, we should he rcv it, he is sailing. The letter is for those students that were told their shore-side maritime related jobs were approved upon gradutaion and are now being told they may not be. </p>
<p>From what I gather from some of them, it's this new Maritime Admin...but I do not know that for a fact.</p>
<p>I am not a member of '06 but I know quite a few from the academy and outside the academy through work. I do not like seeing them get jerked around like this...they are out working to preserve what's left of any maritime heritage the US still holds and being told they should attempt to sail foreign flagged vessels??? I do not really understand this sailing aboard foreign flag vessels business but i'm pretty sure I read about it last year in some MARAD press statement. Maybe i'm incorrect which is quite possible and I really hope someone step up to let me know this is not the truth.</p>
<p>At first I was going to write that you were incorrect and that this only applied to the LNG jobs; however, I have read over a copy of the letter which can be found here:</p>
<p>(I think this is the letter that is being referred to)</p>
<p>I am actually very concerned regarding a paragraph at the end in relation to "Seagoing employment on a foreign vessel or as an unlicensed person on a US vessel"</p>
<p>I will be trying to get more information on this as this has very wide ranging implications and I feel does not go along with what is written in the US Code in regards to the USMMA obligation.</p>
<p>Because I do not want to see MARAD trying to force people to take a job to which they are not required by US Code Title 46. I do not want to see them make someone take a job for which they are over qualified for. In the past with MSC they tried to make KP grads sail unlicensed for a while before sailing as a Mate; however, I remember a decision being made that this was not kosher at some point. </p>
<p>I can see them "allowing" someone who wants to take a job as an unlicensed member (QMED's trying to upgrade, someone who wants the job) or on a foreign flag ship (LNG ships); however, reading this letter the feeling I get is that they could "make" someone do this over taking a shoreside job.</p>