Ragitsu Posted September 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 7, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Huge corporations aren't exactly known for their generosity, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folded Posted September 7, 2011 Report Share Posted September 7, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Huge corporations aren't exactly known for their generosity' date=' though.[/quote'] When it's in their own self-interest, a well run corporation will pay better. Ask your average construction diver how much they get paid. A poorly run corporation, on the other hand... (and I'll let you decide which will be more interesting to have in your game) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinanju Posted September 7, 2011 Report Share Posted September 7, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Huge corporations aren't exactly known for their generosity' date=' though.[/quote'] No, they're not. But the point is that, in this case, it is in the corporation's best interests--it will improve their bottom line--to shell out the money for top-quality employees, and to keep those employees happy and productive. It's an investment, not charity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuSoardGraphite Posted September 7, 2011 Report Share Posted September 7, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Actually any competent corporation will pay really well for this sort of work. Consider' date=' if the crew is as small as 1,000 (and for the amount of resources gained that's small) and works for 5 years then then direct labor costs are only 5,000 person-years. This means for a Mars-sized planet there is over 10^15 tonnes per person-year to take. Say only 1/10 is worth extracting and it's 10 smaller than Mars, that's still 10^13 T/py. Even at much lower prices than materials currently get that's still a lot of value for the labor. Paying more for quality labor to get that value more quickly makes a lot of economic sense both in terms of better use of a huge amount of capital and getting a huge payout earlier so it can be reinvested. This and the less than ideal workplace environment, long commitments required etc. make it important and hard to persuade quality crew to sign on. Mucho dinero is the obvious answer, although no doubt there are other inducements that can be offered. For instance if you serve successfully for one trip you can get your entire family off that hellhole you call your home planet.[/quote'] Oh I agree that they would be well-paid. Probably include hazard pay and Away-from-home pay etc. Benefits would kick butt. However, I seriously doubt if the megacorp would offer profit sharing other than allowing the employees to buy some stock as a part of their retirement package. In the scheme of things, workers in such a job could save enough to be considered to be very well off if not mildly wealthy when they retire and that is the main goal of the working class for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted September 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships I grew up in a small town of 1' date='100 people. 1,332 people does not a "city" make. [/quote'] I don't really think 1300~ people make up a "city", either. In that instance, I was speaking in terms of a hypothetical large living situation. I decided to go with the term city, because Ranxerox brought it up. No' date=' they're not. But the point is that, in this case, it is in the corporation's best interests--it will improve their bottom line--to shell out the money for top-quality employees, and to keep those employees happy and productive. It's an investment, not charity.[/quote'] If a corporation can delegate as much of the work possible to automation, and hire the cheapest workers, they will. Don't get me wrong, however...even the "cheapest workers" can, from their perspective, be paid well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships The company could provide things like sex workers and other entertainment for the miners and other crew' date=' but the cost in environmental load might prohibit it. Oxygen and food production cost money and affect the bottom line. A cheaper option is just looking the other way when it comes to people like Suki, Rizzo and Scotty making a little extra on the side.[/quote'] I guess for a crew that size, the recycling or storage must be awsome. Otherwise they would need regulary transports (don't they already need ones to get the mined stuff away?). I don't really think 1300~ people make up a "city"' date=' either. In that instance, I was speaking in terms of a hypothetical large living situation. I decided to go with the term city, because [b']Ranxerox [/b]brought it up. If a corporation can delegate as much of the work possible to automation, and hire the cheapest workers, they will. If most of it is automated, then those they have to hire must be very relevant/higly skilled. Thus they must be well paid/relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Weapon Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Oh I agree that they would be well-paid. Probably include hazard pay and Away-from-home pay etc. Benefits would kick butt. However, I seriously doubt if the megacorp would offer profit sharing other than allowing the employees to buy some stock as a part of their retirement package. In the scheme of things, workers in such a job could save enough to be considered to be very well off if not mildly wealthy when they retire and that is the main goal of the working class for the most part. Whether they get profit sharing is irrelevant, profit sharing is a form not an amount of renumeration. Let's look at some numbers. Say 10% of the usable stuff is iron ore 62% Fe which was at $177/t last august. Assuming prices are 1/10 present in real terms due to more efficient extraction. That's still $177 *0.1 *0.1 * 10^13 = $1.77 * 10^13. Assuming an interest rate of 5% each day the crew can speed up deliver means 0.01336% of this extra or about 0.00001% extra per crewman or almost $2 milliion extra profit per crewman. Bear in mind this is for speeding up delivery by one day and only covers one of the less valuable parts of the cargo. Assume the company only pays about 20% of the extra profit in bonuses, it's still over $2M/week early delivery for the AVERAGE crewman. Higher ups will get much more. Anyone with a decent 3x5 year trip career will retire more than "mildly" wealthy and pretty young really. Even if their first trip was at 30 and they spent two years training between trips they're not even 50 on their third trip payday. Sign up straight out of a 2 year tertiary degree and you might not even be 40. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Whether they get profit sharing is irrelevant, profit sharing is a form not an amount of renumeration. Let's look at some numbers. [...]Assume the company only pays about 20% of the extra profit in bonuses, it's still over $2M/week early delivery for the AVERAGE crewman. Higher ups will get much more. Anyone with a decent 3x5 year trip career will retire more than "mildly" wealthy and pretty young really. Even if their first trip was at 30 and they spent two years training between trips they're not even 50 on their third trip payday. Sign up straight out of a 2 year tertiary degree and you might not even be 40. 1. They will pay closer to 0.1 % in Bonuses. Why give them $2M/week when $10k/week motivate them enough? 2. Most likely they will also compensate for it with lower normal pay or even no salary at all, only a workload dependent wage. 2b). Perhaps you even have to pay for food or the air provided during your trip or rent your 4x4 meter cabin. 3. That would be 15 Years working straight through. It asumes you do not go mad from it and do not use most of the money earned to compensate for the time you spent aboard a isolated spaceship. Both the "cinematic reality" and what I heard of (for example) drilling rig crews indicate different. The saying "a women in every port" does not comes from nowhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Weapon Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships 1. They will pay closer to 0.1 % in Bonuses. Why give them $2M/week when $10k/week motivate them enough? 2. Most likely they will also compensate for it with lower normal pay or even no salary at all, only a workload dependent wage. 2b). Perhaps you even have to pay for food or the air provided during your trip or rent your 4x4 meter cabin. 3. That would be 15 Years working straight through. It asumes you do not go mad from it and do not use most of the money earned to compensate for the time you spent aboard a isolated spaceship. Both the "cinematic reality" and what I heard of (for example) drilling rig crews indicate different. The saying "a women in every port" does not comes from nowhere. 1) This is the pay per week saved in a 5 year tour, a crew smart enough to get it there a week early is smart enough to realise they'll pay way more than $10K for a $2M benefit. 2) There is no way they'd skimp on non-bonus pay. There is just too much that can go wrong that is beyond the control of the regular crew and could completely nullify their bonuses. So why should the crew gamble a decent living on the company not screwing up? The difference between 5*1300 years of upper class pay is trivial compared to the difference between the profitability of a good and bad crew. Remember the company wants good crewmen BAD. There's not way they'd risk losing one for what is a rounding error on a rounding error on a rounding error on the interest of this sort of investment. 3) Actually my example had 2 year breaks between each trip. The point is that these crews get considerably more than even drilling rig crews, by probably an order of magnitude. With judicious investment they need not work at all for the rest of their life after a good trip as middle range personel. Bear in mind that the company is looking for people who can handle this sort of social situation in the first place. One of the assets you need to get the job is the ability to keep your sanity (and therefore productivity) in those 60 months. People who have to blow off steam in disruptive ways after a week need not apply. In fact now that I think of it these ships are ideal hideouts for illegally genetically enhanced humans. The company does care as long as they consistently exceed quota, the doctors on board have bonus pay in their eyes and the government can't get on board without going light years out of their way (and then anything that slows production will have a rich corporation taking some politicians out of it's pocket and siccing them on the cops). Having to constantly spoof roving DNA scanners is a) expensive and totally unnecessary onboard. The position of fall guy should the presence of illegal enhanced be discovered is probably an unofficial part of the corporation budget. You know for when the board are "Shocked, shocked!" to find enhanced on their ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancer Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships This site seems to have documents ... for Earthbound naval vessels, but submarines might be directly applicable ... relevant to the thread discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted September 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Just for fun, below is the breakdown of the Ishimura's passenger occupations. Crew 1,332Clerical: 65 Colonial: 307 Crew: 80 Custodial: 88 Extension/Familial: 208 Medical: 69 Other: 104 Security: 89 Service: 145 Technical: 177 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Miles Posted September 13, 2011 Report Share Posted September 13, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Even though it's not a ship, check out the mining colony ConAm-57, from the movie "Outland". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragitsu Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships How about the Nostromo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Celt Posted September 15, 2011 Report Share Posted September 15, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Allan Steele wrote a series of novels collectively called the Near Space series, also known as the Rude Astronaut series, (Orbital Decay (1989), Clarke County, Space (1990), Lunar Descent (1991), Labyrinth of Night (1992), A King of Infinite Space (1997)) involving working class stiffs in similar circumstances. He also collected a series of short stories and science articles in Rude Astronauts (1987). Entertainment, both supplied officialy and illicit, factor as material in the story. Worth a look IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranxerox Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships I'm always on the look out for Solar HERO books. I'll have to check those out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships How about the Nostromo? Doesn't really count since the crew spent the vast majority of the trip in hibernation (according to some of the supplementary material, a requirement for their (quite slow) FTL drive). A person requires no entertainment when they're asleep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlHazred Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Doesn't really count since the crew spent the vast majority of the trip in hibernation (according to some of the supplementary material' date=' a requirement for their (quite slow) FTL drive).[/quote']Man, I loved the Aliens Technical Manual. The little throwaway bits in there are pure roleplaying gold! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Crew 1,332Clerical: 65 Colonial: 307 Crew: 80 Custodial: 88 Extension/Familial: 208 Medical: 69 Other: 104 Security: 89 Service: 145 Technical: 177 Let's divided that in Mission Critical, uncritical and "scaling with the number of people": Uncricitcal: Colonial: 307 (what do they even want with colonists? As I understand they "chew up" the entire planet) Extension/Familial: 208 Service: 145 Critical: Crew: 80 Technical: 177 Custodial: 88 (I asume that are convited people who's penalty is working here) Scaling with total number of people on board: Clerical: 65 Medical: 69 Other: 104 Security: 89 Summed up that makes: Uncricital Crew: 660 Critical Crew: 345 Scaling Crew (only 2/3 would be need without the uncritical crew): 327 Without all the uncricital crew (and the scaling crew not needed then) the ship would only have around 563 people on board (42% of the crew listed). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucius Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Yeah, but look back a century. Ordinary seamen signed on for 10 years. If they were lucky, that might involve a variety of short trips with liberty in between. If unlucky, that might involve 5+ years without a break except short shore leaves - and damn few of those. People adapt. Given that a mile-long ship like the Ishimura with a crew of 1000+ contains far more possibility for entertainment than a 90 foot long brig with a crew of 65, I'd say it might be rough, but it'd certainly be doable, even if there were no leaves. cheers, Mark But if there are no leaves, where do they get roughage? Lucius Alexander "Excelsior!" quoth the palindromedary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships But if there are no leaves' date=' where do they get roughage?[/quote'] On board of the Ishimur, they just ask one of the 660 who are not directly employed or mission relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlHazred Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Let's divided that in Mission Critical, uncritical and "scaling with the number of people": Uncricitcal: Colonial: 307 (what do they even want with colonists? As I understand they "chew up" the entire planet) Extension/Familial: 208 Service: 145 Critical: Crew: 80 Technical: 177 Custodial: 88 (I asume that are convited people who's penalty is working here) Scaling with total number of people on board: Clerical: 65 Medical: 69 Other: 104 Security: 89 Summed up that makes: Uncricital Crew: 660 Critical Crew: 345 Scaling Crew (only 2/3 would be need without the uncritical crew): 327 Without all the uncricital crew (and the scaling crew not needed then) the ship would only have around 563 people on board (42% of the crew listed). Don't know if the entire Medial and Security staff could be called "Scaling," since I imagine the 345 "Critical Crew" need medical care and regulatory enforcement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 Re: Long tours-of-duty on industrial/mining ships Don't know if the entire Medial and Security staff could be called "Scaling' date='" since I imagine the 345 "Critical Crew" need medical care and regulatory enforcement.[/quote'] As the uncritical crew does. Having less crew overall will reduce the need for Medical atention and Security accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.