Michael Richardson’s submission included:- “
....The progression of an Integrated Rating into the engine room with 26 weeks sea time is not at all acceptable. The majority of Ratings these days have limited experience or knowledge in an E.R. You are allowing them to enter at the same point as an EC3 who has had to serve 24months to gain a MED1, 18 months serving as a MED1 to gain an EC3, and then hold an EC3 for 6 months before being allowed to progress to an EKW. To even suggest that an IR with 26 weeks sea time be allowed to enter into the EKW is an insult to MED1/EC3 Engineers....”
Greg Wilson’s submission included:- “....Due to the smaller crews that are now being sought by shipowners, as Chief Engineer on my vessel i need highly trained and certificated assistants. This means if an engineer comes onboard i can trust him because he has a certificate that i know has value,(i know how hard it has been to achieve as i have one) ie: the certificate proves to me he has undergone a regime that has included extensive time at sea,written knowledge and oral examinations by approved AMSA examiners. Unfortunately the new proposals all reduce those regimes, and even “Dumb” down the certification, example: eligibility MO3(7) deletes the approved Trade qualifications and and for cadets the minimum VCE/year12 passes in English,maths & Science has been removed. Why ? As a professional
Michael Naughton ’s submission included:- “....Certificates I have gained have not come easily to me: it has been a lot of hard work and sacrifice for both myself and my family.
• • •
•
• •
•
• •
rent today and recognised in the industry get a start with a shipping company as a Junior Engineer.
4 year Fitting & Machining apprenticeship to obtain a Trade Certificate of Proficiency which is still cur- 6 months at college at my own expense to obtain Part A of the 2ndClass certificate this enabled me to 36 weeks sea time to enable me to continue the path to obtain Part B of the 2nd Class certificate
6 months at college studying for Part B internal assessment by the College followed up with written
and oral assessment at the then Department of Transport. I failed the first attempt and obtained my 2nd Class certificate on the second try.
more sea time as a senior engineer.
6 months continued at college doing Part A of the 1st Class certificate before going back to sea for 36 weeks as a senior engineer before being eligible to sit for the 1st Class Engineers certificate.
6 months at college studying for Part B of the 1st Class certificate. This period I found too taxing on my-
self, my wife and young family and made the decision to complete the period at college and fulfil my obligation to the company before leaving to take up work ashore.
3 years working ashore but unable to adapt to the life style and went back to sea
6 months at college studying for Part B of the 1st Class certificate for a second time passing the college internal assessment and the now AMSA written and oral exams on my second attempt.
• This whole process to obtain my 1st Class Motor Certificate has taken me 18 years but the learning
didn’t stop there, the experience and knowledge gained before and after getting the certificate working on large deep sea vessels, working ashore in business, at sea on supply vessels and now on harbour tug boats has not been lost or forgotten and for my certificate to be down graded is taking away my right to take up a posi- tion for which I am rightly qualified...”
Anthony Bowden’s submission included:- “....if a reduction in academic and service requirements for entry into Watchkeepers were to take place this would surely devalue my certificate and it would no longer be held in high regard around the maritime world, in fact I believe a question mark would be raised over any certificate issued by AMSA. I find it difficult to believe AMSA would go down this path of reducing the quality of certificates in this country, I wonder what course AMSA is steering and if AMSA’s own reputation for setting high standards would be lost...”
The real points of contention are the changes to the Engineer Cadet program and the introduction of recogni- tion of engineering sea service for Integrated Ratings. We are all for engineering being accessible to all but these changes seem to be a kneejerk reaction to the current shortage of Marine Engineers and show a misun- derstanding of the skills and attitude required to be an Engineer...
...The 26 weeks sea service required for Ratings doesn’t provide adequate training on a number of fronts. There is a different level of attitude, accountability and decision making required as an engineer as well as a more flex- ible work structure. Can this and a whole new working environment be learned in 26 weeks under the existing framework?? The current duties of the Engine Room Rating would suggest not. Added to this is that the I/R’s rotate engine room duty 1 week at a time on our vessel. duty periods...”
It can be weeks or even months between engine room On Watch March 2012 page 20
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