And the plan the Captain comes up with, (as in my case), might also not be the best one - thus the concept of WORKING TOGETHER.
Again, no-one is arguing you shouldn't. It is when you claim (as you did earlier) that you should take control of the rescue that people disagree with you. Working together to come up with a good plan is a Good Thing. Taking control of the rescue, when it involves the crew under the command of the rescuing boat's captain, is another thing entirely.
The monetary reward concept would flow through the Captain, perhaps as he (if he chose to) asked for any volunteers.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I read:
"And, you should also remember that money talks. Especially with people who frequently take home minimum wage. An extra $1000 ea., might inspire a couple of guys to jump into their lifeboat."
...to mean that you were offering it to the crew in order to sway their judgement. Captains are pretty often taking home somewhat more than minimum wage and hence are unlikely to be swayed by the offers of $1K to crew members
so they risk their lives.
That is not usurping anything; that is providing the Captain with an additional resource to use, at his discretion.
The crew is already
his resource to use. If he determines their capabilities are not up to the task, they're not up to the task. An extra $1K isn't going to make them more skilled, just more likely to risk their lives. As a captain, offering inducement to place added risk on their lives (when the captain's responsibility is not
to do so) is, in my opinion, a Bad Thing.
A plan is either good or bad on it's own merits. If you need to be bribing the crew (through the captain or otherwise), you are essentially admitting there are risks to the lives of the crew in the plan but you want them to try anyway, right?