117th Conference

January 15th, 2005 by JCB
Posted in Features | No Comments »

117^th CONFERENCE

Eastbourne: 17^th-18^th November 2004

PRE CONFERENCE SESSION

PNPF (Richard Williamson, Boston)

As a SC deputy for Region 2 and PNPF trustee, Richard provided delegates with an

overview of the fund, the investment policy and its performance. He answered questions on Advanced Corporation Tax (ACT) and the role of trustees. Richard was followed by the PNPF Secretary, Debbie Marten whose report appears separately.

 

PNPF and the Pilots’ National committee for Pensions (PNCP) (Joe Wilson, Tees)

Joe advised delegates that whilst looking for ways in which to keep costs down the

SC had looked at the relevance of the PNCP for UKMPA members. Joe explained that since the 1995 Pensions Act had incorporated safeguards and rights for pension fund members and pensioners and pension advice was available for all UKMPA members through the specialist pensions department of the T&G. SC had considered that the funds currently allocated to the PNCP for meetings would be more constructively used in permitting an alternate trustee to attend trustee meetings. A debate on this issue saw presentations from Mike Kitchen, Chairman PNCP and Dan Macmillan, the pensioners’ representative on the PNCP who both provided the conference with arguments as to why the PNCP should be retained.  A subsequent vote saw delegates vote in favour of the disbanding of the PNCP by 24 votes to 22.

Further to this debate, PNCP chairman Mike Kitchen has written a letter to the magazine which appears on page 14.

MAIN CONFERENCE

Delegates stood in order to observe one minute’s silence in memory of the President of EMPA, Gianfranco Gasperini and other deceased colleagues.

The UKMPA President, Lord Tony Berkeley then formally opened the conference and opened his presentation by explaining how the growth in container traffic, was leading to logistic problems in cargo movements. It was now a critical time as to how the

infrastructure could cope. The lack of interest by MP’s in shipping meant that there was no ports’ strategy from the Government and this was holding up development. There was therefore a danger that the UK would be left as a feeder outpost for the rest of Europe. The revival of the EU ports’ directive was a concern for the safety of shipping and safe port operations.  Tony acknowledged the validity of concerns by pilots over this directive and also understood the need for the flaws in the 1987 Pilotage Act to be addressed by new legislation. He was prepared to use his position within Parliament to help the UKMPA in any way that he could.

Chairman’s Report (Les Cate)

An updated report appears on page 6.

Secretary/Treasurer’s Report (John Pretswell)

John opened his report by detailing the membership which at 30^th September 2004 stood at 493 members from 47 Districts. This figure represented a reduction of 8 over 2003. Neath had withdrawn from membership.

Dundee had reduced from 5 pilots to 3 but the other two pilots had transferred to Perth thus creating a new District.  It was believed that the other 6 pilots who had ceased to be members were from ports where pilots had retired and not been replaced.

John then referred delegates to the printed “Financial Statement and Budget Proposals” contained within the conference papers and available to members from their local Secretary. He then detailed the Budget / Expenditure figures for 2004.

2005 budget:

John explained that there had been a change to the insurance cover offered by Navigators & General which, had resulted in N&G removing the 50,000 cover altogether and increasing the premiums payable on the 100,000 cover.

On the basis of the revised insurance figures John had calculated a 2005 subscription rate of £105.

When this was put to the vote the delegates were unable to accept this without a remit from their membership.  Paul Haysom, who was now responsible for the insurance brief was seeking quotes from other insurers and Drew Smith had possibly identified an alternative provider who might provide £50,000 cover The Chairman therefore suggested that delegates accept the budget with a reservation on the subscription element that could be revised downwards should a cheaper alternative premium quote be achieved.

This was accepted unanimously by delegates (see page 11).

CHIRP (Confidential Hazard Incident Reporting Programme) (Mike Powell, Maritime Director)

Mike provided an overview of the CHIRP program which was witnessing an increasing number of reports as seafarers became aware of its existence. Of the 121 reports received since the start of the programme in July 2003 two thirds had been processed and 57 had resulted in action being taken to address the issues raised and this was a positive indicator that the programme was working. The quarterly newsletter “Feedback” now had a circulation of 140,000 worldwide.

The top issues had been:

·        Control of navigation

·        Hazards

·        SMS

·        Fatigue: This is a major area of concern since reports indicate widespread abuse of official records being completed to indicate compliance but actual hours being dangerously in excess of those permitted.

·        Technical processes (ie design of equipment, quality of manuals etc)

The top pilotage issues had been:

·        Deep draft navigation in the Dover Straits. The reports from

N Sea pilots on this had been well received by the MCA and

CNIS Dover

·        PEC: This had been the topic least well received by the shipping industry!

·        Bridge Team Management (or rather lack of BTM). This was an area where CHIRP encouraged reports and it was a relatively easy matter for CHIRP to raise with the company concerned.

·        Mobile phone usage.

·        ISPS and access issues

Mike concluded by acknowledging that pilots were in a good position to submit reports and CHIRP welcomed such reports.

Q&A

Were the reports received so far indicative of insufficient manning on board?

Yes. But because of the manipulation of official logs to indicate compliance it was almost impossible to address. Those reporting fatigue were concerned about their jobs but CHIRP was seeking ways to resolve this.

Is it not possible for the SMS auditors to identify the falsification of working hours records since there were probably many occasions where such records would indicate that the logged compliance would have been impossible?

Again yes, but the majority of SMS auditors would not have the time or the training to undertake the detailed cross referencing of data to be able to identify non compliance. Unfortunately all the evidence of groundings and collisions meant that everyone was aware that there was a major problem but no one was prepared to break ranks and address it. The issue of safe manning was on the international agenda for next year and CHIRP would be contributing their data to the debate.

Health & Safety (Susan Murray, T&GWU)

Susan provided delegates with some background information of the T&G’s H&S function. Susan herself worked within the legal department and her main experience had been gained from compensation claims.

The department provided union response to HSC consultations and encouraged involvement and communication from safety officers within the various companies with T&G representatives.  They were also involved in many consultation forums and advisory groups.

The departments remit is very large and Susan had been very interested in the issues of fatigue and the falsification of documents revealed by CHIRP. Of particular relevance to pilots was the issue of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) and the T&G had produced a free book and advice leaflets on H&S and PPE for safety officers.

The Employment Act 2002 (Fergus Whitty, T&GWU legal director)

Fergus provided a detailed presentation on the new Act which gave unions cause for deep concern in that it had ignored the ACAS Code for handling disputes and had, in the view of Fergus, enhanced the powers of employers in dismissing employees and weakened workers rights to a fair hearing under certain circumstances. Part of the

driving force behind the new legislation had been to reduce the number of dispute claims being handled by tribunals by 40,000 per year by seeking to have disputes resolved

internally. Only if these internal discussions fail can the matter be referred to an external tribunal. The procedures for an external reference are very specific and in detailing some of these Fergus stressed the point that it was very important that correct procedures were be strictly adhered to otherwise any dispute could be declared invalid or out of time. There is no requirement for the employer to inform the employee of these procedures!  Fergus went on to explain the detail of the new Act and how the procedures failed to offer protection to an employee.  The conclusions from the T&GWU were that on the positive side it was a good idea to hold internal meetings and set out the complaint to the employer before a claim was made to a tribunal.

On the negative side the T&GWU felt that:

·        The (old) ACAS Code should form part of the legal disciplinary process

·        It was absolutely wrong to dismiss an employee without an investigation

·        Wrong for employers not to have to detail the consequences of failure to follow correct procedures

·        Wrong for employers not to have to advise on rights of an employee to be accompanied.

Port Marine Safety Code

(Simon Gooder, Ports liaison manager member of the Navigation Safety Branch of the MCA)

Simon opened this presentation by providing brief details of his background. Following service in the RN where he had become a navigation specialist he had served from 1995 – 2003 as the Deputy Queen’s HM at Plymouth where in addition to the normal responsibilities of a HM he had become a fully qualified VTS operator and been involved in port risk assessment and emergency response. He had joined the MCA in July 2004.  The MCA were now responsible for overseeing implementation and compliance with the PMSC.

Following the introduction of the PMSC in December 2001 an implementation review had been held in 2003 and this had led to the following:

·        The MCA adopting responsibility for the operational aspects of the Code

·        The DfT retaining responsibility for the policy and legislative aspects of the Code The MCA ensure compliance, follow up any incidents and chase up any ports revealing a reluctance to comply.  They also act to develop and support the standards accompanying the Code.

One new area being subjected to national standards and guidelines was that of PEC holders.

Simon considered the PMSC to be an evolving document with standards being introduced and it was hoped that by examining the weight of evidence the PMSC could be progressed to ensure enhancement of port safety and introducing the concept of “Assured Compliance”. The UKMPA was actively involved as a stakeholder is this process.

Q&A

During the Q&A session Simon confirmed that the PMSC was currently a voluntary code which was not supported by any legislation.

The point was raised that in the case of a breach of the Act rather than the Code then this Act was law and therefore a plaintiff should be able to take the case to a court. A legal opinion from the floor was that any interested party could present information to a court to commence a prosecution.

The Humber Dispute

(David Devey, Liverpool pilot & Barrie Youde, Ex Liverpool pilot and Barrister)

David Updated delegates on the latest situation regarding HPL members and the Humber dispute that had led to the withdrawal of their authorisations. Barrie Youde presented delegates on several legal options available to HPL members against ABP and David Fortnum, HPL member, confirmed that HPL members were taking the first steps to launch a legal challenge.

Technical & Training Committee Report

(John Wright, Chairman and Tees pilot)

John referred delegates to the written report within the conference papers which detailed the work undertaken by the committee on the following topics:

·        Personal Protection Clothing & Equipment

·        Pilot Transfer Equipment & Pilot Boarding Arrangements

·        Pilot Boarding and Landing Code of Practice

·        Electronic Aids

·        RNLI Technical Liaison

·        UK Safety of Navigation Committee

John Wright concluded by announcing that he was now stepping down as chairman and would be replaced by Gareth Rees from Southampton.

MCA, IMO & MAIB Report

(Don Cockrill, London)

Don referred delegates to the reports on his activities included in the conference papers. Adding to those reports Don reminded delegates of the need to ensure that all the non delegate members throughout the districts were kept fully aware of the activities of the MCA and DfT who, despite being the bodies responsible for safety were also subject to commercial pressures and would invariably succumb to commercial interests over safety issues and avoid any policy which may incur a cost to the shipowner. The current statements from the Chamber of Shipping questioning the need for PEC standards was a prime example of how the agenda could be manipulated to the detriment of pilotage and its skills. The ports’ representatives were equally dismissive of the need to specify training and standards for pilots.

VTS Policy Group

Some had questioned as to why the UKMPA needed to be involved with this group but having attended some of their meetings Don was in no doubt that this was a very powerful lobby group with great influence within the MCA and the DfT and although a token gesture of removing references to “shore based pilotage” within VTS literature had been made, the concept had been reincarnated under the heading of “Navigational Assistance” and plans for promoting such assistance were still firmly on the agenda.

EMPA (Les Cate, Chairman & Vice President EMPA)

During the last year, in order to participate in EU projects and to be eligible for EU funding it was necessary for EMPA to become a “Non Profit Association” and EMPA is now officially known as EMPA vzw.

Full details of the amendments to the previous structure are contained within the conference papers.

Maritime Navigation & Information Services: MARNIS Project

This 5 year EU project got underway in September and will shape the ports VTM and pilotage. EMPA is a partner in this project and its objectives are as follows:

·        Improvement of safety and the protection of the environment;

·        Improvement of security of vessels, coasts and ports;

·        Improvement of efficiency and reliability of information flows;

·        Furtherance of the economy of sea transport;

·        Improvement of the efficiency of legal and organisational aspects regarding enforcing of rules and regulations in the

“European maritime zone”

When completed it will form part of the White Paper entitled:

European Transport Policy 2010: Time to decide

Ports Directive

Les concluded the EMPA report by explaining the work of the Council of Presidents and how they were in consultation as to how best to fight and once again defeat the revived Port Services Directive.

DfT

(James Wheedon, Responsible for Port safety & pilotage policy)

James opened this session by explaining the structure of his department and detailed the various responsibilities and the tie-in with the MCA and Trinity House There was no policy change with respect to the PMSC despite the delegation of monitoring compliance to the MCA and the code remained without legislation and thus, being voluntary, Ministers had no need to impose an external audit on HA’s. The MCA would however be required to prove to ministers that standards are maintained and progressed.

James acknowledged that the NOS had become stagnated under PSSL but that the MCA, as the responsible body for progressing NOS, would have to work with PSSL because PSSL had access to the Maritime Skills Allowance Fund. It was probable that funding for the various groups to progress NOS work would come from the MSAF.

The MCA would also be responsible for the technical and operational aspects of the Code but would work together with the Ports Division of DfT to develop policies and initiatives.  Currently work was progressing on a new section of the PMSC dealing with Incident management and expanding the code to include conservancy as well as introducing NOS for hydrographers.  With respect to the future supply of pilots the DfT felt that the traditional route of Master’s FG certificate was not sustainable and new routes into positions for maritime professionals working ashore would need to be found. A document covering this, entitled “UK economy’s Requirements for People with experience working at Sea” was available on the DfT website.

The DfT recognised that there had been concerns raised over abuse of PECs and consideration was being given to provide guidance and powers to CHA’s over what action could be taken to address these abuses. The DfT also agreed in principle to the pilots’ view that standards for PEC holders should be equivalent as those for pilots.

A question was asked as to why there was still no legislation to ensure that a CHA complies with the wish of Government and why did the DfT continue to advise ministers that it doesn’t feel that it is necessary to enforce CHA’s to comply with the PMSC?  The code does actually have reserve power for the Secretary of State to intervene if there was evidence that a CHA was acting unsafely. This would consist of visiting the CHA and reminding them of their responsibilities under the Code, but James confirmed that there were no legal measures that could be invoked by the SoS.  In response to the second part of the question James stated that the DfT couldn’t advise a minister to do something that was not within his powers.

Les Cate stated that he had understood from Andrew Burr that the SoS had reserve powers of intervention and asked why these hadn’t been used. James replied that he did not believe that there were any powers that could be invoked by the SoS but he acknowledged that supporting legislation would be desirable although with the limitations on parliamentary time the chances of a new bill were not great.

IMPA (Geoff Taylor, Tees and Senior Vice President IMPA)

During the last year IMPA had been involved in the following:

IMO Resolution A960

This resolution, drawn up by IMPA as a joint project with the IMO, had been formally adopted by IMO during the year and laid out clear guidelines for pilotage. This resolution represented a considerable achievement for IMPA and it should be supported by all pilots (see report in PILOT 279).

Mandatory Pilotage in International Waters

This was a new concept since until now only voluntary pilotage could be offered in international waters. However Australia, as a result of concerns over the environment had tabled proposals for compulsory pilotage through the Torres Straits.  This was being fiercely opposed by some IMO members who had concerns that such a move would encourage other states to consider such compulsory pilotage in other sea areas. However, following the Erika and Prestige disasters there was increasing support for such proposals since member states realised that oil on beaches was a vote loser.

Maritime Safety Commission (MSC)

Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC)

Potentially Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSA’s)

There were also many other sub groups and IMPA tried to ensure that pilots were represented at any forum where pilotage interests were being discussed. In addition to the importance for pilots, attendance at these sessions also provided a vital link between the shore representatives / officials and the real world on board ships since the pilots were frequently the only serving mariners present.

The other areas where IMPA had been involved included:

Integrated Bridge design, standards for mooring lines, Marking / testing bitts and fairleads, standards for new radars, common symbology for navigational equipment.

With respect to on-going work, pilot boarding was being progressed. The poor quality and sighting of AIS units on ships had been acknowledged. Several IMPA members were involved in training and standards and the ETCS project being run by EMPA dovetailed well with similar initiatives around the World.  One new project had been to establish a long overdue dialogue with the P&I Clubs. Although these were run by ship owners there was the obvious common interest of safety of shipping. So far the Clubs had acknowledged the common ground and in particular IMPA was being successful in challenging the widely circulated statistic that “pilot error” was responsible for 30% of claims.  Surveys had revealed that 99.96% of voyages were successfully concluded so only 30% of 0.04% of incidents occurred in pilotage waters which were acknowledged to be the highest risk areas. With 95% of world trade being moved by ship this was an admirable safety record. Pilots were effectively professional “risk managers” who statistically achieved nearly 100% successful operations. It was therefore impossible to comprehend why, especially in the UK following the 1987 Pilotage Act, pilots had no independent authority which could challenge the drive by ports to put profit before safety.

One final very important area of lobbying was the proposed EU Directive criminalising seafarers. Although in its early stages, this directive on marine pollution would include pilots with criminal liability in the case of a pollution incident.

IMPA Congress at Istanbul

This had been very well attended and very successful. Three

resolutions were passed

1.  Commending to Governments, pilotage authorities and pilots the contents of IMO Resolution A960.

2.  Publicise the result of the G8 summit which encouraged the IMO as the appropriate body to develop mandatory pilotage in narrow and congested waterways by means of “strictly regulated systems”.

3.  VTS and Pilots: “VTS is not pilotage, nor is it a substitute for pilotage and shore based pilotage cannot be a substitute for pilotage performed by a pilot on board.”

PENSIONS (Peter Smith, T&GWU National Pensions Officer)

Peter Smith detailed the provisions of the new Pensions Bill and explained that unfortunately this was a Bill with no coherent policies with many complex anomalies some of which Peter listed.  The Financial Assistance and Pension Protection Fund elements to help those deprived of their pensions were totally inadequate and would be means tested to provide undefined “Meaningful Assistance”.

The Bill also did not address the various ploys that employers had adopted to reduce pension provisions which had resulted in 65,000 employees losing out on their pension entitlement.  It was hoped that the proposed new Pensions Regulator would be able to use legislation to prevent employers from breaching pension provision agreements.

Overall the TUC were concerned that the new Act would not provide the necessary protection for employees but it was possible that a proposed EU Directive may help.

Peter concluded by reminding delegates that the T&G was available to assist in protecting members’ pension entitlements and that no matter how secure a scheme may seem vigilance was required.

Les Cate closed this session by advising delegates that Peter Smith and his department within the T&G could fill any gap left by the loss of the PNCP.

Legal (Mark Foden, Blake, Lapthorn and Linnel)

Mark, having taken over the legal assistance from Michael Nott, opened his presentation by detailing the work that BLL had been involved with on behalf of the UKMPA.

Poole & Gloucester:

Advice had been given on new provision of service contracts for the self employed pilots and the final documents checked before these were signed.

The employment department had also checked contracts on behalf of employed pilots from other districts.

Milford Haven:

Following the issue of a new incident report form by the HA, BLL had worked with N&G on the disclosure of information aspect of the form. This sought to retain some control by the pilot involved over disclosure to 3^rd parties other than statutory bodies.

Alcohol & Drug testing:

Advice had been provided on the provisions of the new legislation covering this in order to clarify who could test pilots and under what circumstances.

Review of the 1987 Pilotage Act:

BLL would be working closely with the Section Committee as the review progressed and this would probably result in a “position paper” being circulated to members.

This article represents a brief resume of the conference to provide members with an overview of the many areas in which the UKMPA is active.