Steven Adams’ submission included:- “
....Safety of life at sea and the consequences to the environment have been become topical with the well publicized series of maritime calamities over the past few months. The grounding of the containership Rena off Tauranga and more recently the loss of the cruise liner Costa Concordia in Italian waters, will no doubt prompt regulatory responses when the findings of the respective marine courts of enquiry are handed down. As conditions were calm it would appear that operator error was a contributing factor in both wrecks. At a time when countries such as India and Pakistan are tightening their crew training requirements it comes as a surprise to me that Australia is unambiguously driving its professional seafaring base down...”
Janaka Alahakone’s submission included:- “
....As we all know engineers require more sea time than what is specified in AMSA regulations for AMSA qualifications. Reducing this further will only lower the standard of the certifications. This is already a provan factor with all ratings and has increased the personal injury rating in the industry. Please leave the current MO3 career path for ratings candidates as is, as we will all benefit from the quality candidates it produces...”
Don Moore’s submission included:- “
....Maintaining existing qualifying sea service time: this time period has been developed over many years. Why? Because marine engineering is a very broad field of knowledge, it takes time and experience and in most cases guidance from more senior personnel to get to the level that Australian engineers have maintained over many decades. This knowledge cannot be learned from a text book but with hands on experience. Do not lower our standards to make a career path for people who haven’t bothered in the past to get off their arses to avail themselves of the opportunities already at their disposal...”
Steve Jappy’s submission included:- “
....An integrated rating or Chief I.R. does not have the necessary knowledge or experience in ship board systems to carry out repairs even on deck equipment breakdowns they do not usually assist an engineer in repair work. So again I ask you where is this “experience” gained for time towards this new certification...”
Trevor Faust’s submission included:- “
....It is a worthy objective to provide a career path for people to progress through the maritime industry. However there needs to be objective analysis to show how these pathways do not compromise existing safety standards. The current draft makes radical changes, in order to provide careeer pathways into marine engineering, at the detriment of obtaining proper engineering experience for a certificate of competency. ..”
Shannon Flaherty’s submission included:- “
....This will affect me greatly with a lot of discomfort in the fact that this draft MO3 is taking the current high standards of Marine Engineers and assassinating it. The sad thing is I have seen it all before in the RAN and if this proposed draft remains as is we will see it repeat the tragic circumstances the RAN is currently in. The Navy over the years as I am sure most people who read or listen to the news would know about the lack of Marine Engineers in the RAN. Their (RAN) solution was to also drop the high standards to gain the necessary qualified man power to keep their ships at sea. Then they dropped them again, and again and again. I was subject to two changes while I was in, and there were plenty changes before me and there are changes happening again now to the ends of dropping standards...”
Mick Handcock’s submission included:- “
....the potential cost of lowering standards below that of Australias peers in other OECD nations. This cost can not be covered by any potential short term benefit in increasing the availabilty of Marine Engineers of any standard. Once standards are lowered they may never be brought back up. This will have a long term detrimental effect on the industry far outweighing any short term benefit. A significant knock on effect of this thinking is that it will stunt industry prospects of senior personnel outside of the seagoing fraternity. Typically a senior Engineer officer may wish to pursue a career at AMSA or with another regulatory body or with a ship owner or operating company. A solid and secure grounding, proper training and experience leading to a command position is the only way such personnel are created. Australia as a Maritime Country with a significant maritime task cannot afford to miss these personnel...
On Watch March 2012 page 18
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44