- Home
- Home
- Links
- Back Issues (PDF)
- A Career in Pilotage
- About The Editor
- About the UKMPA
- Contact the Editor
- Articles
- Contents
- Features
- History
- Incidents & Investigations
- Pilot Ladders
- Pilotage News
- Reviews
- Technical and Training
- The latest issues: 327
Features
E- Navigation
E-NAVIGATION:
WHERE ARE WE AND WHERE ARE WE GOING?
The term e-Navigation first appeared formally just one year ago in a presentation given by Dr. Sally Basker of the General Lighthouse Authority (GLA) and was rapidly adopted by our own DfT who introduced it to a wider audience via a keynote speech to the Royal Institute of Navigation given by Dr. Stephen Ladyman, the shipping minister. Read the rest of this entry »
Automatic Mooring Systems
Automatic Mooring Systems
One of the highest risks to crews occurs during mooring and unmooring operations and another of the unacknowledged roles of the pilot is to ensure that the vessel is kept under control in frequently difficult and sometimes marginal conditions until the mooring operation is completed. Read the rest of this entry »
Stolt Aspiration / Thorngarth
MT STOLT ASPIRATION / TUG THORNGARTH
MAIB REPORT
Link to the original illustrated articlae (page 10):
A consequence of changes to traditional tug operations has introduced new challenges for both tug masters and pilots. Read the rest of this entry »
AIS Update
Automatic Identification System (AIS)
TRANSPONDER UPDATE
To read the original illustrated article click here
It is now just over one year since AIS became mandatory for all SOLAS vessel over 300 grt and although I must admit that my prediction that the system would have difficulty in coping with the amount f traffic in port areas has been largely proven wrong there are increasing cases of ships’ units failing in a variety of functions. Read the rest of this entry »
118th Conference 2005
Conference 2005
The 118th Annual conference was hosted jointly by
PNPF:
Richard Williamson, Boston
Following the now standard practice of holding a pre-conference pensions session Richard provided delegates with an overview of the PNPF activities since the 2004 conference. The primary change had been that there was now a requirement for trustees to be formally trained and this training requirement was being enhanced all the time.
The rest of Richard’s report was mainly based on the written report circulated to delegates and he covered the following topics:
PNPF Trust Company
Changes to Personnel
Membership: There had been a large reduction in retirements following a tightening of the ill health retirement rules which had brought them into line with industry norms. This had benefited the fund.
Review of the Equity Market
Investments and returns
Fund Value
Triennial Valuation
Having explained all the above with respect to the fund, Richard explained that although under the old Minimum Funding Requirement (MFR) the fund was fully funded, the triennial valuation now used a range of different parameters and this had indicated an on-going deficit. The PNPF was addressing this by:
Raising the retirement age from 60-65 (rather than raise contributions).
Adjusting the investment strategy which had resulted in 10% of the fund being invested in a “Hedge” fund managed by Goldman Sachs.
Had held discussions with the fund’s “Participating Bodies” and the UKMPA as to how to deal with the deficit.
Richard concluded his report by providing delegates with an explanation of Hedge funds and reassured the delegates that he was personally convinced that the fund would continue to provide on-going pensions to members.
OPENING SPEECH:
Michael Grey , Lloyd’s List
UKMPA Chairman Les Cate formally opened the conference and delegates observed one minute’s silence in memory of EMPA President Gianfranco Gasperini, IMPA President Hein Merhkens and past UKMPA president Sir James Callaghan, all of whom had died during the past year.
Michael went on to express the concern that over zealous officials, the blame culture and the lack of respect shown to professionals such as Masters and pilots was causing young recruits to abandon a career at sea in an industry already suffering from an acute shortage of skilled professionals. He personally felt that the hope that technology would provide a solution was misguided since there was no alternative to “hands-on” experienced professionals although it was essential that pilots adopted and were trained in the use of any technology that would enhance safety.
Michael then formally opened the conference to warm applause from the delegates.
BUDGET REPORT AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
Treasurer: John Pretswell (Forth )
John opened by detailing the membership which currently stood at 486.
These figures represented a reduction of 7 since 2004. He then detailed the income and expenditure items for 2005 from which he had drawn up the budget proposals for 2006. Questions were asked about the legal expenditure which were passed to the Chairman who explained which elements had been funded by the T&G and which matters were being dealt with by the UKMPA through Blake Lapthorn Linnel (BLL) and Barrie Youde and he also explained the reason why the three different legal teams were engaged on the issues currently being dealt with.
DfT:
Phil Carey, Head of Ports Division
EU DIRECTIVE: The UK Government had not welcomed the return of this Directive since in many ways it was a worse document than the earlier version that had been rejected in 2003.
PORTS POLICY REVIEW: This would be
getting under way early in 2006. The last policy review in 2000 acknowledged the principle of a market led port industry with the Government as regulator but the DfT needed to respond to new developments such as the reclassification of trust ports and the large increase in container movements. Small ports could be supported as part of local regeneration or, if no longer handling trade could be better used for redevelopment. The review would not commence until the outstanding container terminal planning applications had been dealt with early in 2006. Once the review commenced the UKMPA would be fully involved with the consultation in particular with respect to safety and security issues. SECURITY: This was a separate issue with which the department was involved by ensuring that ports were up to date with security issues.
SAFETY: The
INCIDENT MANAGEMENT: This was
another area of policy which was being dealt with by the Department following MAIB reports and procedures were being drawn up based on MAIB recommendations.
CHIRP: The DfT had confirmed funding for CHIRP for a further three years.
PILOTAGE: Two general items were outstanding and these were pilot boarding and the Working Time Directive.
NOS: The new shipping Minister, Dr. Stephen Ladyman was actively supporting the maritime sector and promoting standards for shipping and the skills agenda.
PORT SAFETY BILL: Further to this the DfT were continuing to press for Parliamentary time to amend the Pilotage Act and to underpin the PMSC.
During the subsequent Q&A session
MCA, MAIB & IMO:
Don Cockrill (London
Don expressed frustration that after all the work on the PMSC, the only action taken in support of the Code by the DfT and MCA had been to produce the requirement for the CHA’s to submit a “Statement of Compliance” and it remained to be seen as to whether or not even this would result in improved compliance. From the experience of the areas in which he wasm involved Don was of the opinion that there was a deliberate policy of excluding pilots from the policy discussions by the ports and shipping industries.
Due to a shortage of time Don referred delegates to the written reports contained within the delegates conference pack.
LEGAL:
Fergus Whitty, Legal Director T&G
The theme for this year’s address to conference by Fergus Whitty was Age Discrimination, which was to be subject of the “Employment Equality Regulations” to be implemented in October 2006. After October 2006 any discrimination based on age would only be acceptable if it was justified and certain criteria and case histories for this were explained to the delegates.
Employers would in future have to specify a “Normal Retirement Age” (NRA) and there were procedures to be followed by both employers and employees with respect to this. The employer had to explain to an employee that they had the right to request to continue working after the NRA and once the new legislation was implemented the employee would have a right to “request” to stay on after the NRA and the employer would have a legal “duty to consider” such requests.
Q&A: In the ensuing Q&A session Fergus defined NRA as that determined by the employers pension fund. Also the legislation would not normally affect those pilots who were self employed unless they were operating under a contract to supply the service where advice would need to be sought.
Fergus also provided clarification over specifying age limits for certain jobs which used to be a common factor of pilotage.
This would be very difficult and if felt
necessary then the policy would need to
comply with the “justification”
requirements.
A point was made by Chris Hughes
(Europilots) concerning the fact that although self employed the conditions of his authorisation by Trinity House stated a maximum age of 67. How would the legislation affect this?
Fergus agreed that this was a very valid point which he would seek to clarify since the legislation would not appear to cover such an anomaly.
IMPA:
Nick Cutmore (Secretary IMPA)
Nick presented the report on behalf of Geoff Taylor who was unable to present the report in person due to illness.
Geoff’s report opened by paying tribute to Hein Mehrkens who had sadly died during 2005. As Senior Vice President Geoff had been nominated as Acting President to serve out the remaining term of Hein’s Presidency to November 2006 and he had been honoured to accept this. Two key issues which IMPA were currently involved in were the EU Ports directive and also the ESMARALDA project which once again meant that arguments previously used in questioning bodies such as IALA over “Remote pilotage” would need to be revived to challenge the new phraseology of “remote access”.
The matter of compulsory pilotage in the Torres Straits had caused some dilemma for IMPA in that the administration of the proposed pilotage service would be using competitive pilotage services which was against IMPA principles. Negotiations with
IMPA had achieved a success in formally removing references to shore based pilotage from the IALA VTS manual. Geoff was pleased to report that IMPA membership was continuing to grow and it now had over 8,000 members. The finances were in good order but costs were high and pilots should all recognise that especially at IMO the IMPA representatives were dealing with many from the highest level of member Governments and were often pitched against other vested interests with very large budgets!
During the last year IMPA had had meetings with three different P&I Clubs and these had been very constructive for both sides. The Congress of Canadian pilots had been well attended by many influential international representatives.
TECHNICAL & TRAINING, ECTS,
MarNIS
An updated report is on p.9
PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS:
Lord Tony Berkeley
President Lord
LEGAL:
Mark Foden, Blake Lapthorn Linnell (BLL)
Mark detailed the work undertaken by BLL on behalf of pilots during 2005. This included reviewing contracts for both employed and self employed pilots, unfair dismissal and with the
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Section 22(1) of the 1987 Pilotage Act had provided valuable protection for pilots and had thus kept the number of claims against them low. This legal protection was now being challenged and Mark was of the opinion that it was only a matter of time before a test case claim was made against an individual pilot. This section of the Act just covers civil liability for negligence but not criminal misconduct which is covered under Section 21.
In the case of a negligence claim against a pilot although 22(1) provides a maximum personal financial liability of £1000 the pilot would also be likely to have his authorisation suspended or removed and he would then be responsible for his own legal defence costs in fighting the suspension and potentially the costs of the claimant. The limitation also only applies when a pilot is undertaking his duties as a pilot. It does NOT apply to criminal cases which may be brought following an incident under the other Acts such as the Water Resources Act or if manslaughter charges are brought following a fatality in which a pilot may be implicated. It was for this reason that Mark was of the opinion that pilots needed to ensure that they had adequate insurance cover.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE 1987 PILOTAGE ACT:
Joe Wilson (Tees), Barrie
(Solicitor, Hill Dickinson)
James Weedon (DfT)
Joe detailed the proposed amendments and new Sections that it was hoped could be included in a new Pilotage Act. The document provoked considerable discussion amongst the delegates and James Weedon (DfT) was able to clarify some of the points on procedure and Barrie Youde was able to clarify some of the legal phraseology and explain the legal reasoning behind some of the proposed amendments. Following the discussion it was agreed that SC members would hold a meeting with the DfT on procedures and that the document would be placed on the members’ only section of the UKMPA website for members to consult and comment.
CHIRP:
Mike Powell (Director)
CHIRP had been subjected to several reviews by various departments during 2005 and this had delayed work on some investigations. The good news was that funding had been approved for a further three years. Since its inception, CHIRP had received 221 reports and about 100 of these had been progressed into action. About 70% were from the commercial merchant sector and the other 30% fishing and leisure. The “Maritime Feedback” newsletter now has a circulation of 140,000 and there was increasing interest from abroad where around 30,000 were currently sent to 47 countries. Mike detailed the many areas where CHIRP had been involved and he explained the processes which had resulted in changes being implemented by (sometimes reluctant) management. With respect to reports from pilots, reports concerning PEC issues had reduced but there were increasing reports concerning VTS. There had also been reports concerning the unfamiliarity and complexity of some new bridge equipment along with poor bridge team management problems and there had also been reports concerning fatigue induced by pilots’ rosters. During the subsequent discussion many different points were covered and Mike was able to clarify specific aspects of the CHIRP process to delegates.
MAIB:
Stephen Mayer (Chief Executive)
The MAIB investigated any accident involving a British registered vessel world wide and any accidents involving any vessel in
The MAIB operates under the Merchant Shipping Act and the investigators have considerable powers which exceed those of the police and they can interview anyone, board vessels, enter property and seize documents in connection with an enquiry. There is no right to silence and lawyers may be excluded. In return for these powers there is a strict confidentiality placed upon the investigation.
The MAIB is now receiving around 2500 accident reports per year and it decides which accidents should be investigated although the Secretary of State may request an investigation into an incident which the MAIB had decided not to. The benefits of an MAIB investigation over an internal HA or P&I investigation was that there was no vested interest in the outcome and therefore the recommendations were valuable in determining the effectiveness of existing legislation and helped to underpin proposed legislation and also identifying areas of concern which may currently lack legislation. The key areas of concern at the moment are:
Fishing: Statistically now the most dangerous profession and existing legislation is largely ineffective Leisure: Is unregulated
Commercial: Fatigue
This area of fatigue has been of great concern to the MAIB especially on the 2 watch system using the Master & Mate used on the short sea trade. The awareness campaign by the MAIB has resulted in the matter now being formally tabled for inclusion at IMO in 2006. The MAIB recommendation is for a minimum of 2 watch keepers in addition to the Master. Although there was widespread support for this there was a small group of opponents but the MAIB will not let the matter be sidelined. This positive action was applauded by the delegates. In addition to fatigue the second key area of concern was complacency and the MAIB found it regrettable that there were still far too many accidents resulting from complacent attitudes by Masters. Stephen concluded his presentation by explaining that accidents usually resulted from a failure of more than one element of safety and provided some graphic examples which revealed such failures which could have been avoided by an awareness of risk through formal risk assessments by the bridge team.
INSURANCES:
Paul Haysom, Ken Pound, Drew Smith
Following the withdrawal of cover by Navigators & General in 2004, Paul Haysom had arranged for a provisional policy with Royal & Sun Alliance (RSA) to cover members during 2005. A change in rules by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) meant that the UKMPA could no longer provide a ‘group’ policy but a similar policy with extended provisions had been arranged with RSA which offered a discount on premiums for members but in future each individual would be individually named. For this reason and also for the convenience of submitting the premium for tax relief it had been decided to separate the insurance premiums from the general subscription.
The topic of insurances generated considerable debate amongst the delegates and the Drew Smith (Circle Insurance) and Ken Pound (Ropners) were able to answer the main points. The new policy now covers a member from the commencement of the pilotage act until the completion and also provides cover against pollution incidents. Two cover options are available for £250,000 and £500,000 and individual members are free to choose whichever cover they prefer.
In answer to the question as to whether or not the RSA policy was necessary, the Section Committee had examined and discussed this in detail, in particular with respect to employed pilots, prior to recommending it for a conference vote. The argument that an employed pilot was covered by his HA’s insurance had been proven not to be the case and with the growing ‘blame culture’ and evidence that the validity of £1000 limitation of liability under the Pilotage Act may be subjected to a legal challenge the Section Committee were in agreement that additional cover was essential for all pilots. Following the discussion the adoption of the new policy and the separation of the insurance premiums from the general subscription was put to a vote where the proposal was carried by 45 votes in favour, 10 abstentions and no votes against.
Since the conference it has been confirmed that all members will receive an individual policy and tax receipt for their premium payment.
BELFAST
Liam Magee
Liam updated the delegates on the latest news of the
KRISTIAN PEDERSON:
Dave Devey
Dave explained to delegates the arguments that ABP had used to dismiss Kristian for “gross misconduct”. At a preliminary hearing the T&G lawyer had managed to provide the all the relevant facts in support of Kristian and the outcome was that the adjudicator had referred the case to a full tribunal hearing. Having been involved in the Humber,
HUMBER :
Dave Devey
The
Parliamentary Questions
Lord
The NOS agenda is seemingly being driven by PSSL and other bodies which have excluded the UKMPA from participating and I am seeking clarification from the DfT over the policy and explaining the necessity of pilots to be involved in matters which directly affected them.
The second question asked was a result of the situation at
Lord Berkeley asked: “Whether the use
of a simulator at
Lord Davies replied: “It is for the CHA
to determine the qualifications and experience required of maritime pilots in
Whilst the answer had been predictable this PMQ had been tabled in order to ensure that ports were aware that their compliance with the 1987 Act, PMSC and IMO 960 was being monitored at Government level.
1987 Pilotage Act
The UKMPA’s proposed amendments to the Act have been submitted to James Weedon (Policy Advisor Ports Division) of the DfT. A “scoping paper” would now be presented to the Ports Division and if accepted would form a new Port Safety Bill. The UKMPA team working on the amendments are: Joe Wilson, Dave Devey and
Legal
Blake Lapthorn Lovell was representing several pilotage districts. The cost of up to two hours for each district has been met by the T&G but any time over that is charged to the UKMPA and during the past year those legal costs had been considerable.
Europe
The Ports Directive was finally rejected on 18th January by a vote of MEPs by the following voting:
532 against – 120 for – 25 abstentions In the plenary there were calls for starting from scratch with a new white paper on Ports. Alternatively, the Services Directive that will be discussed next month in the parliament could call for Transport to be included in it. It will not go away it would seem.
I am pleased to tell you that the ESMERALDA document has not been accepted by the EU. Rumour has it that a new Ports document has surfaced called EFFORT written by a Professor from a
Thanks to those pilots who contacted their MEPs. Pilotage was mentioned by MEPs from the NW, Tees,
Les Cate
Stolt Tern Grounding
STOLT TERN
To read the original illustrated pdf article click on Back Issues: October 2005
I have decided to make the MAIB report into the grounding of the Stolt Tern the feature subject this quarter because the report covers many of the issues currently high on the UKMPA agenda. Read the rest of this entry »
Watchkeeper Fatigue
WATCHKEEPER FATIGUE
Although pilots in the
For many years pilots, whilst acknowledging that modern on-board equipment has made navigation in pilotage waters safer, have argued that compulsory pilotage should not be reduced because as new technology has been introduced the consequent reduction
in manning has more than cancelled out any safety advantages achieved by such technology. This argument has of course been fiercely opposed by the shipping
industry and some ports who always perceive compulsory pilotage as an expensive and outdated anachronism! However, the statistics cannot be disputed and fatigue amongst seafarers is now a major cause of groundings and collisions and at last there is a spotlight being shone upon shipboard practices which is revealing a murky world of
unethical practices which until now have prevented the reality of seafarer fatigue from being exposed to the public gaze. Much of the focusing of this spotlight has been undertaken by the MAIB who are to be congratulated in their persistence over the last few years in placing the issue on the agenda at maritime forums and this perseverance is now at last producing recognition that a serious problem exists.
The results of a specialist survey undertaken by the MAIB, in conjunction with Qinetiq Centre for Human Sciences, into the six on / six-off watch system operated by deck officers on many vessels make for frightening reading.
Such is the concern of the MAIB over this issue, they have taken the unprecedented step of including a special report on their survey in the Safety Digest 1/2005 One aspect of this survey looked in detail at 19 groundings where the on-board watch patterns were identi.ed and the statistics from those 19 groundings revealed two key facts:
· 68% of the vessels were operating a 2 watch system
· 100% of the groundings between 0000 – 0600 were on vessels operating a two watch system.
Using an assessment programme based on one used for aircrews the MAIB survey model analysed the typical working pattern of an officer on a 12-6 watch on a 2,000grt ship. Even when not subjected to extra duties in the off watch period the model indicated that “dangerous” levels of fatigue were reached after as little as two to three weeks.
The MAIB report states that the “…survey serves to reinforce the MAIB’s long-held belief that fatigue, brought on by minimal manning and arduous watchkeeping and operational routines, is endemic at sea, especially in the short sea trade”. The report also states that:
A number of the accidents in the study were caused as a direct result of a lone watchkeeper falling asleep, but fatigue was a factor in many more of them. Long before a watchkeeper has reached the stage where he cannot keep his eyes open, fatigue is affecting his performance. It can cause the following:
· Inability to concentrate, including being less vigilant than usual
· Diminished decision-making ability including:
· Misjudging distance, speed, time etc
· Overlooking information required for complex decisions
· Failing to anticipate danger
· Poor memory, including forgetting to complete a task or part of a task
· Slow response, including responding slowly to normal, abnormal or emergency situations
· Reduced competence in interpersonal dealings
· Attitude change, including:
· Being too willing to take risks
· Displaying a “don’t care” attitude
· Disregarding warning signs
The data used in the safety study, especially that associated with grounding accidents, indicated a strong link between fatigue and watchkeeping arrangements. In its “Lessons” summary the report includes the following two specific recommendations:
· Minimum safe manning levels need to be increased so that each seagoing
vessel of over 500gt has at least a master and two bridge watchkeeping officers.
· Masters and owners should ensure that a vessel does not leave harbour unless all the watchkeepers, including the master where appropriate, are well rested.
NUMAST has taken up the issue and been running a major campaign recently to highlight the problem. Further to data received from the MAIB survey, NUMAST are supporting research by
THE EU WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE?
In order to address the problem of fatigue at sea the EU included seafarers in the WTD in July 2003. Despite much resistance from shipowners the directive rules that seafarers should work no more than 14 hours in any 24 with a maximum of 72 hours in any seven day period. They are entitled to 10 hours rest in any 24 hour period with rest of 77 hours in any seven day period. The rest period may be divided into two periods but must include at least one period of 6 hours and the interval between consecutive rest periods must be no longer than 14 hours.
Having worked the 12 -6 watch myself as Second Mate in the 1970’s for 4 -6 weeks at a stretch my observations are that these WTD working rules, if adhered to, would result in a reasonably safe watchkeeping regime. The problem is that the rules are not being adhered to and up until now no one has really shown any interest in enforcement. Indeed, evidence seems to indicate that whilst all companies now issue instructions to their Masters that working hours must be compliant with the WTD some companies unofficially, actively discourage the Master to actually follow the regulations. The compliance instructions obviously remove the potential for liability from the Owners but leave the Master literally between the rocks and a hard place! The Master is always under pressure to sail and regrettably there is evidence to support the claims that if a master delays his ship for the purposes of resting the crew he will rapidly be replaced by a Master who is prepared to interpret the regulations in a more “flexible” manner! From a practical point of view there are frequently pressures on berth availability which may force a master to sail anyway and anchoring is not really a solution since normally an anchor watch will need to be kept so the vessel might just as well be on passage.
There are of course exceptions and I have piloted many coasters where the owners request the master to ensure that the crew are sufficiently rested in accordance with regulations and will never query his decision to remain alongside a berth for rest. I have also piloted other small vessels where, although the vessel is not subject to compulsory pilotage a master has taken a pilot in order to catch up on rest for
himself. It is of course an appalling situation where such good practices are undermined by a significant number of operators who whilst writing instructions on compliance will penalise or threaten a master who actually seeks to operate within the law. The
situation is also not helped by the practice by some companies of offering the master additional payment for self piloting his vessel thus providing a financial incentive to
stay on the bridge although he may be dangerously fatigued. Most VTS centres will have records of desperate attempts to alert non-piloted vessels that are standing into danger. Although it is obvious that these navigational errors are a result of the master or
watchkeeper falling asleep there is always an excuse other than fatigue provided by the master and some of these can be very imaginative and occasionally amusing. Insects of various varieties and grades of malevolence are a popular reason for causing
distractions to the OOW but in all cases the watchkeeper is always effusive with thanks when alerted to the danger! Unfortunately
outside areas covered by VTS (and occasionally within) the OOW fails to awake and the results are yet another wreck on the coast or a collision. It is the investigations into these incidents that has revealed the problems of fatigue
INSPECTIONS & ISM
The point is often argued that vessels need to show records of compliance with the WTD as part of their ISM procedures and it is true that “official” records of inspections will reveal that vessels are complying with the WTD and that there is no problem. How can this happen? Well, “flogging the log” is still a thriving practice and I have had masters admit to me that they keep one set of records for the inspectors and another for the office for the overtime! I have also heard a story of a company sending a computer program to cover shipboard ISM requirements and in the section for recording working hours, if hours in excess of those permitted by the WTD were entered, the program refused to accept “illegal” data and requested that the operator enter correct data!!
IS THE PROBLEM BEING EXAGGERATED?
The reason that a formal survey is being undertaken is a direct result of the hidden picture revealed by MAIB investigations. A survey by NUMAST amongst its members, who one would expect to be working on fully compliant vessels, revealed the following statistics:
2% of masters and officers were clocking up 16 or more hours per
day
2.4% worked in excess of 100 hrs per week.
29% did not regularly obtain 10hrs rest in 24
12% failed to get at least 6 hrs unbroken rest in 24
27% worked 15 or more hours continuously
20% spent 4 or more hours on additional duties.
50% felt that their working hours presented a potential threat to their personal health and safety 30% felt that working hours presented a danger to safe operations on board.
Obviously, being statistics, these figures need to be put in context since they represent those who responded to the survey. NUMAST does not detail the respondents as a percentage of the membership but it is obvious that those who are working non compliant hours are more likely to respond than those who are on fully compliant vessels. Despite this the survey does reveal a disturbing picture of non compliance with the WTD and another important finding of the survey was that only 7% stated that their hours had reduced in the last 5 – 10 years where a massive 51% reported an increase in working hours over that period.
Could these results be put down to members disgruntled with their lot and therefore be unrepresentative?
The following represents the findings of a researcher who spent fourteen days on board a 3500dwt mini bulker, with only two watchkeepers, during which time the vessel visited ports in
“Both men were working six hours on, six hours off on a four months-on/two months-off work/leave pattern. The standard working arrangement for the deck officers was therefore 12 hours a day, seven days a week for four months without a break. Whilst such a working schedule appears patently excessive by onshore standards, 84 hours a week is actually very much the best case scenario for seafarers working a six-on/six-off two man watch. The captain in particular would frequently work from the start to the finish of a port visit without sleep, a stretch of as long as 24 hours. With only two officers to cover a 24 hour watch there was no ‘slack’ in the system – if one of the officers was unfit to work the other officer was forced to cover, putting an immense burden of duty on both seafarers.’
The researcher said it was clear that excessive job demands had been woven into the culture onboard ship. The deck officers on the vessel were expected to work 12 hours a day – which failed to account for the fact that one or two hours of paperwork would routinely have to be done in supposedly ‘off-duty time.”
The study identified a number of factors which come together to make working on a mini-bulker particularly demanding:
· Short port stays, leaving no time for rest or recovery before heading back out to sea
· Frequent port visits
· Changing cargo types placing extra demand on the crew to prepare the ship accordingly
· Only two officers to cover a 24-hour watch
· Longer pilotage
· Unpredictability of tramping’ from port-to-port, which can be stressful and makes planning sleep and rest periods difficult
“In terms of understanding seafarers fatigue, therefore, where working hours might often appear the obvious culprit a more sophisticated approach is required’ which sees excessive working hours as potentially symptomatic of a poor solution to the port versus-
sea ‘crewing conundrum’,” the report concluded. As the researcher left the ship at the end of the study, the master appealed to him to highlight their conditions. “Something’s going wrong,” were his parting words.
SHOULD PORTS BE INVOLVED IN THE DEBATE?
The ports are obviously reluctant to become involved in this issue. Already, the owners of small vessels feel port charges such as pilotage more than larger vessels and ports have addressed this either by subsidising the charges applicable to small vessels from the revenue obtained from the larger vessels or by excluding small vessels from compulsory pilotage altogether. Regular traders will usually be issued with a pilotage exemption certi.cate. The factor of fatigue is not addressed because if the master declares compliance with international and local regulations then the attitude is that the vessel will be manned in accordance with regulations so fatigue management is a matter for the Master and therefore not relevant to a vessel’s visit to the port. But, is this a neat excuse for avoiding the issue? Under the
WHAT CAN PILOTS DO?
Whilst piloting a vessel, if a pilot becomes aware that fatigue may be a problem the pilot can be placed in an awkward position if the Master tells him in con.dence that he is suffering from fatigue.The Master/Pilot relationship could be weakened if the pilot immediately reports the fatigue to the Harbour Master but there is a duty to report the matter in the interests of safety. The port may .nd it impossible to take any action if the Harbour Master visits the vessel and the Master shows false documents indicating compliance with rest regulations. Likewise if the MCA are called to inspect the vessel, again the Master may be reluctant to reveal a true picture and have the vessel detained. In such a case the best solution would appear to be to obtain as many details as possible from the Master and report the matter to CHIRP. By using the RISAP inter pilot reporting facility other ports can be alerted to the problem and if suf.cient data is obtained then the con.dential and anonymous CHIRP process would probably be able to confront the owners without jeopardising the Master’s position. In the case of exempt vessels the problem is more dif.cult but if a vessel appears to be displaying symptoms of being under the command of a fatigued PEC holder then the HM and the MCA should de.nitely be informed.
CONCLUSION
The fact that this issue is now receiving serious attention is welcome but it is not going to be easy to change the status quo and already pressure is growing to prevent the matter being raised at the IMO. The current situation is summarised in the following edited
extracts from a Lloyds List feature (2nd June) entitled “go on, stop on”
“There is no doubt in the minds of the MAIB inspectors who have ploughed through the causes of some 1,600 accidents over a 10-year period that “poor manning levels and fatigue were major causal factors in collisions and groundings”.
“It is an anachronism in the 21st century”, Admiral Stephen Meyer points out, “that seafarers are falsifying their timesheets to prove that they are working ONLY a 98-hour week. And many of these seafarers work every week, without a break, for between four and nine months before getting leave”.
There is equally no doubt that the operation of ships with a Master and mate alternating 6-hour watches is a recipe for disaster, even though it is a practice that has been widely used in the short sea trades, often, and illegally, without even a lookout during hours of darkness.
There is conclusive research to point to the rapid onset of fatigue aboard ships operated in such a fashion. There is, in fact, no reason for such a way of working to be perpetuated, and the MAIB has made it clear that it considers this way of ship operation is downright dangerous.
It is also interesting to note that the MAIB is regarded with great respect for its independence and could form a “model” for other casualty investigation systems in both European countries and elsewhere.
But issues of fatigue and manning levels cannot be confronted at a national level. The International Maritime Organization needs to take the matter forward as a matter of urgency.
Which makes it quite mysterious that a
JCB
Lee, Martin
MARTIN LEE
Last “Grand Mat’’ of the AICH (UK branch)
View the original illustrated pdf article:
https://pilotmag.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/pilotmag-281-final.pdf
It is with sadness that I have to report the passing away of retired Trinity House (latterly Medway) pilot Martin Lee. Many will remember Martin for his enthusiasm for the “wind ships”, one of the last of which was the Passat where Martin served much of his apprenticeship in the late 1940s. Read the rest of this entry »
117th Conference
117th CONFERENCE
Eastbourne : 17th-18th 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,
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
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
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 30th 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
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
· 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
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
Technical & Training Committee Report
(
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
·
MCA, IMO & MAIB Report
(Don Cockrill,
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 “
The DfT recognised that there had been concerns raised over abuse of
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
Maritime Safety Commission (MSC)
Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC)
Potentially
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
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
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 3rd 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.
Pilotage History Part 2
PILOTAGE HISTORY ~ Part 2
Harry Hignett
View the original pdf illustrated magazine article:
pilotmag.co.uk/userfiles/Pilotmag%20279%20(Oct%2004).pdf
The Francis Henderson, built by Murdock and Murray in 1896, the first steam pilot
vessel for the Liverpool Pilot Service. From an original painting by J Witham.
In part 1 we learned how the situation for pilots over the centuries had resulted in
legislation covering compulsory pilotage being introduced but as a result of poor
drafting much of this legislation was open to abuse and offered poor protection for
pilots. Read the rest of this entry »
SITE SPONSORS
RSS Feed