Bill Overview
Title: American Offshore Worker Fairness Act
Description: This bill further restricts foreign crew members from working on vessels, rigs, and other structures engaged in offshore energy activities on the Outer Continental Shelf.
Sponsors: Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]
Target Audience
Population: Foreign crew members working on offshore energy activities
Estimated Size: 10000
- The bill aims to restrict foreign crew members from working in offshore energy activities.
- This is related to operations on the Outer Continental Shelf, which are a significant part of global offshore energy production.
- Foreign crew members working in these activities around the world would be restricted, hence they are directly impacted.
Reasoning
- The policy's budget indicates it is designed to create jobs for American workers by limiting foreign crew employment on offshore energy projects.
- The target population primarily consists of American workers seeking opportunities in offshore sectors; thus, we anticipate the policy will have a significant impact on this group.
- Individuals who might work in supporting or auxiliary industries associated with offshore projects could also be impacted indirectly, providing additional economic benefits.
- Some Americans not directly employed but involved in sectors related to these operations might not feel a pronounced change, thus representing the 'none' or 'low impact' group.
- With a cap on spending, the policy must efficiently allocate resources where it garners the highest impact within economic constraints, focusing on training and integration of American workers into roles previously filled by foreign workers.
Simulated Interviews
Offshore Drilling Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this Act as a positive shift towards job security for American workers.
- It might strain collaboration, as we often learn from foreign colleagues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Marine Welder (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy leads to more steady jobs for people like me.
- Concerns remain about whether companies will really hire more locals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Logistics Coordinator (Lafayette, LA)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might complicate logistics but should result in more American jobs.
- We will need to adjust operations to align with new legislations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Environmental Scientist (Mobile, AL)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this bill will affect my role much since environmental assessments are always needed.
- Increased domestic hiring might broaden understanding of local ecological concerns.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Offshore Safety Inspector (Miami, FL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Maintaining safety standards will require these new hires to be well-trained.
- Initially, there might be friction adjusting to workforce changes but ultimately positive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Diver (Galveston, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More opportunities for local divers could emerge, however, skills and training must match up.
- I believe the right training programs could make this policy successful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Helicopter Pilot (Anchorage, AK)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could stabilize my job, offering more local contracts.
- Increased demand for transportation safety training is likely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Petroleum Engineer (Baton Rouge, LA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Change in workforce may lead to new dynamics in project approaches.
- More focus might shift towards local talent development.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Maritime Lawyer (Jacksonville, FL)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I anticipate potential legal challenges as the industry adjusts.
- The shift might generate more regulatory work within this field.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Offshore Staffing Manager (Corpus Christi, TX)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 18.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There will be challenges sourcing qualified local workers quickly.
- This is a big opportunity to drive up regional employment rates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $14500000 (Low: $9500000, High: $19500000)
Year 3: $14000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $19000000)
Year 5: $13000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $18000000)
Year 10: $12000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $17000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Key Considerations
- Enforcement of hiring restrictions poses logistical challenges.
- The bill could face lobbying pressure from foreign firms operating in the U.S. energy sector.
- Impacts on energy production and prices are indirect but should be monitored.