This post was first featured in the fall edition of the Council Of American Master Mariner’s official publication Sidlights. You can find the article on page 18 of the PDF found HERE.

“The only man who never makes mistakes is the man who never does anything.” Theodore Roosevelt

The maritime world is full of strict rules that may only be broken “in extremis”. The best known of these rules are “Never Turn Left”, “The Rule of Gross Tonnage” and my personal favorite “When In Doubt, Call the captain”.

Like a brimstone preacher we put the fear of god into heads of young cadets with the telling of these rules and back them up with sea stories of near misses and failure. The cherry on this sundae is often the saying “Take heed young man, these rules were written in the blood of past mariners.”

I contend these rules are doing more harm than good. Here are three modern examples that lead me to this conclusion:

ONE
Sailing on foreign flagged vessel I was amazed by one thing above all others, the sea stories. Having coffee for the first time with a group of Indian officers and discussing shipboard safety initiatives I soon discovered my sea stories, a collection of half truths I’ve deliberately embellished over the years, were passe. To further compliment personal confusion, my lack of experience in a major incident (e.g. hard collision, multiple-week grounding or engulfed fire, all experienced by at least one of my fellow crew mates) put into question the value of my input. “Wait a second, I protested, I have never experienced a major incident because I am a good mariner. My safety record alone should increase the value of my input.” After a long silence one of the Indian mates said, “John, we do not question your knowledge or ability just your experience. It is not your fault you had the resources available to prevent incidents and mentors able to guide you from trouble. We were not as lucky then but have experience now.”

What is evident here is a Catch 22. We can not suggest that young cadets experience the dregs of management aboard rusting freighters in the hope of gaining experience through failure.

TWO
In his bestselling book “The Four Hour Workweek”, Tim Ferris tells us that experts are simply the people who have accumulated the highest number of failures in a specific niche. It would therefore make sense to encourage failure among our industries best captains to evolve their expertise. A solid theory in principal. The problem with this thinking, however, is that the failure of a captain, especially one in command of a supertanker or LNG carrier, can lead to disaster in the magnitude of environmental catastrophe or loss of life.

THREE
In his book “Tankers Full Of Trouble”, Eric Nalder tells us that it’s not the young Captains who are most likely to face an incident. Rather it’s the experienced Captain, bored after years of taking the same route over and over, that often tries something new that leads to disaster.

The History

“I never saw a wreck and never have been wrecked, nor was I ever in any predicament that threatened to end in disaster.” Captain Edward Smith

If modern examples are not enough to convince you History is littered with lessons on the importance of failure. The Handbook Of Damage Control is considered the single best manual for preventing the loss of damaged ships. My question is… would the lessons contained in its pages have been learned without hundreds of hulls being lost under the authors’ watch? Would SOLAS regulations, which have saved countless lives, have been written without the tragedy of the Titanic and what about the morality rate on the day of her sinking? Would it have been so high if Captain Smith had prior experience in emergency response?

The Solution

“I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.” -Thomas Edison

At sea the importance of experiencing failure is second only to avoiding failure in the first place. We can have no desire or even tolerance for disaster at sea regardless of the importance of lessons learned from there occurance, so what is the solution? I offer four:

ONE

“When I interview a Master my first question is ‘Have you ever grounded a ship?’. If the candidate answers no he is either a liar or lacks experience, either way he’s unfit to command my vessels” -Anonymous Ship Owner.

Failure is critical to the learning process and should be encouraged in the resumes of candidates for master. The question of past failure needs to be asked in every senior level interview and should be a mandatory section of a candidate’s resume. It is not critical that past failures lead to a severe loss or that they even occurred at sea. It is important, however, that the candidate’s actions are analyzed and they have a robust understanding of the lessons learned.

TWO

“If you bungle raising your children, I don’t think whatever else you do well matters very much.” -Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis

As senior officers aboard ship it’s critically important that we allow the bridge team the opportunity to make mistakes so they can learn from their failure. During my first cargo discharge aboard a product tanker it took me 45 minutes to strip one tank. I did not learn for many years that my repeated failure to empty and switch tanks (without loosing suction or flooding the pump) caused a fight in the mess. The captain and chief mate were arguing about what should be done with the former saying “It’s an art he needs to learn through failure” and the later saying “We’d all save time and effort if I go teach him”.

Small failures can lead to big results. In this specific case I learned in 45 minutes what it takes some tankermen years to master, transferring from an empty to full tank, but I also learned other lessons like the management of a frustrated deck crew and remaining calm under stress. It is also important to note the conditions in which this lesson was learned. Sure there was great potential for environmental catastrophe or even flooding of the pump room but the lessons was taught in a controlled and monitored environment. In addition to closely monitoring me through the mess room porthole both the pumpman and engine room had been (quietly) put on notice, the weather was clam and daylight strong.

THREE

“Everybody’s a mad scientist, and life is their lab. We’re all trying to experiment to find a way to live, to solve problems, to fend off madness and chaos.” -David Cronenberg

The captain who creates a tanker full or trouble is the same man who played with chemistry sets as a child. He may no longer have the desire to create an explosion but his desire to experiment has not been quelled. Without the trial and testing of theories man has little room to grow and while a boring watch is certainly a safe one it serves no purpose beyond the short term goal of moving cargo from point A to B. It certainly does not prepare the vessel for the unforeseen circumstances of subsequent voyages.

There is a critical difference between experiments and unforeseen incidents. Both have the potential for catastrophic results but one can be accomplished with preparation, planning and under controlled circumstances. One can be dome with well rested personnel and cancelled at the first sign of bad weather or postponed after the failure of critical equipment. The other can not.

For example, advanced shiphandling techniques, like the use of anchors in maneuvering, are taught in simulator training along with guidance from the instructor to use these techniques when emergencies leave you with no other options but is an emergency really the time you want to try a new tactic on your equipment and crew? Would it not be safer to test these practices under ideal circumstances with a powerful tug alongside and ready to correct your mistakes?

My suggestion is to experiment under controlled circumstances.

FOUR

“Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.” -C. S. Lewis

Are you an expert in the management of major emergencies? Have you ever heard the sound of the hull cracking under your feet as the chief mate calls the bridge with last words for his family? I have. No, I did not experience this tragedy at sea but in the safety of a major emergency lab. Simulators may not be as effective as your own vessel in testing skills like shiphandling or emergency response but when done with an eye for realism and expectation for failure they serve a critical purpose.

Currently the maritime world utilizes simulators for shiphandling, dynamic positioning, cargo ops and bridge team management but have we seen the extent of their ability to let us fail safely? The offshore industry has embrace the management of major emergencies with the simulation of tragic events but this technique has yet to be adopted by the wider maritime community. What other opportunities for training area we missing out on?

Final Words

For many years the maritime community has been searching for new ways to prevent and control the occurrence of incidents at sea but the level of loss remains at unacceptable levels. The master of a vessel is suppose to be the voice of sound reasoning that refuses to take any and all unnecessary risk but in doing so fails to train himself and those he commands in the lesson of failure. If we are going to take the next step towards a goal of zero loss then we need to accept the reality of danger at sea and promote the lessons of failure. If we can do so with proper management of circumstances and experimentation the results will lead to improved safety. If we can foster an acceptance of failure and promote individuals that have experienced its lessons, both ashore and at sea, the results will be powerful and lives will be saved.

Have you ever really considered why your workplace is lacking in some areas?  Or why, for example, individuals sometimes act unsafe even when they know the rules?

It’s easy to blame these issues on the managers in town, or the Captain, or the OIM, because they are in charge of that (supposedly) perfectly oiled machine of a company you work for.

So clearly it must be them.  Right?

Not necessarily.

All companies have issues and the Fleet Superintendent is not responsible for your job satisfaction.  It comes down to individuals being empowered to exercise personal initiative and leadership.  What are YOU doing to promote a safe-work culture?  What are YOU doing to promote personal initiative in your workplace?  What are YOU doing to improve the systems and procedures within your company?

One of the issues I saw when I worked offshore was that junior personnel were typically not encouraged to lead discussions at pre-tour meetings, yet as soon as they were promoted into a leadership position, it was assumed their new positional authority would translate directly to their ability to speak effectively in front of groups.

This was obviously not the case, and a culture of partially effective leadership was just the way it was in the offshore industry.

“That’s crap,” I thought.  And I’m going to figure out how to change it.

Being the new guy from New England, I figured I’d take a little risk and say a few things at each tour meeting that didn’t necessarily have anything to do with current operations, yet were in line with promoting leadership and teamwork.

I was standing on my soap box for a minute or two, and a few of the guys probably thought I was ridiculous, but everyone in that room appreciated the fact that I had the gumption to get up in front of a bunch of “country boys” and deliver a positive message before they started their day.

This process has since evolved to the point where junior personnel are the ones who now lead most pre-tour meetings and all associated training on board my former rig.

The vital behavior of promoting public speaking was the behavior I identified, and it was positively reinforced to the point where individuals in the crowd realized 1) they had the ability to get up there and speak, and 2) they had reasonable expectation that it would be positively reinforced by their peers.

Ability, and the question,“is it in my best interest?”, are the two reasons why people do anything in this world.

We are certainly capable of accomplishing almost anything we put our minds to, NASA is a good example of that.  In many cases however, we decide that inaction is a more favorable decision than taking that first risky step out of the “box”.  We view in our minds that the chance of someone negatively reinforcing our initiative is much greater than the chance of receiving praise for it.  And rightly-so considering the fact that most people are more comfortable pointing out errors than giving someone a pat on the back.

Effecting change however is rarely something that an individual can do on his or her own.  It’s also a matter of selling the idea to the social leaders within the group.  For example, A Roustabout on a drilling rig is not going to change the way the rest of the guys in his crew work anything unless he’s able to sell the idea to the senior Roustabout, and subsequently the Crane Operator.  The senior Roustabout provides the social backing required in order to get buy-in from the rest of the deck crew.

Finally, the identify the programs or method currently in place that support, or prevent, initiative in the workplace.  Besides financial rewards, are there other methods for rewarding your employees for a job well done.  How many different types of rewards can you identify that people use in your workplace?  Is positive reinforcement given in a timely manner?   Are correct behaviors reinforced, or correct results?

I encourage you to find answers to these questions and try to identify the vital behaviors required to effect change in your workplace.  Please comment in the forum if you would like to share success stories or failures.

For more insight into this topic, I recommend reading: Influencer: The Power to Change Anything, by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, David Maxfield, Ron McMillan, and Al Switzler.

Do you have an environmental question to explore? We were recently asked to participate in a Blogger’s Roundtable discussion on the Exxon Valdez grounding that occurred 20 years ago today. Unfortunately, it was canceled but we were offered a direct interview with a topic expert in matters that relate to the incident. Where to start? Here is the response I wrote in an email to USCG Public Affairs:

The Exxon Valdez itself is too big of a topic, with too many misconceptions for us to cover with anything short of a book. We are, however, looking for an audio interview to fill our next podcast episode. I would like to cover something that is important but has not received much press. I am open for suggestions but here are some related topics suggested by our readers:

1. Changes in mariner liability since the Valdez.
2. The untold story of ballast – Why in-tank treatment alone won’t solve the problem
3. Nuclear Waste At Sea – How do we detect and deal with dangerous foreign waste disposed of in international waters.
4. Marine Pollution in the Gulf Of Aden – How global pollution concerns effect shipping.
5. A look at what keeps the Captain Little, Commander Of Marine Safety, awake at night?

This email stems from internal debate here at gCaptain, mostly centered around the question: Are there still lessons to be learned from incident? The answer, of course, is yes but defining those lessons becomes troublesome as the topic has already been well explored. The question I keep returning to is: Have hey been explored too well?

Problems of this size and magnitude always bring me back to the lessons of Economics and Risk, a class I took while perusing my MBA. This class taught us that every activity worth pursuing, including the transportation of oil, has associated risk that needs to be mitigated to a level of acceptance. Elimination of risk is impossible because there are a limited number of resources available to solve problems and prevent unfavorable outcomes. Here is is the relation of these lessons to oil spill prevention today:

The Law Of Diminishing Returns

According to this relationship, in a production system with fixed and variable inputs (say factory size and labor), beyond some point, each additional unit of variable input yields smaller and smaller increases in output. Conversely, producing one more unit of output costs more and more in variable inputs.

Boiled down this means: first pick the low hanging fruit.

The Exxon Valdez quickly gave rise to industry reforms that included double hull tankers, BRM training, VTS improvements, owner liability and oil spill response requirements. Would it make sense to create a triple hulled tanker or double the length of BRM courses? These would certainly lower the risk of a spill.

Ballast water is a good example as millions of dollars and countless man hours have been spent to find solutions for treating ballast to prevent the growth of invasive species in the tanks. This is seemingly necessary because the current solution, the exchange of ballast water at sea, is not working but has all the low hanging fruit really been picked? Any experienced pumpman will tell you the tanks are clean but the sea chest and suction pipes are dirty. Could our solution be as simple as cleaning the piping once a year?

Could the problem be outside of the ballast system entirely? I am certainly not an expert but it seems that the cleaning of hulls while a vessel is alongside the dock dislodges a fair amount of foreign organisms. Could we not clean the hulls each time a vessel is at anchor?

Opportunity Loss

Opportunity cost or economic opportunity loss is the value of the next best alternative foregone as the result of making a decision. Opportunity cost analysis is an important part of a company’s decision-making processes but is not treated as an actual cost in any financial statement. The next best thing that a person can engage in is referred to as the opportunity cost of doing the best thing and ignoring the next best thing to be done.

Boiled down this means that focusing too heavily on one topic keeps our focus off other solutions.

My reply to the USCG was primarily driven by this factor. The public and industry’s focus has been so focused on the news headlines that it has missed opportunity to fix other issues.

For Example, it has been widely reported that piracy in Somali waters is the result of reduced fish stock from illegal dumping and an overabundance of foreign fishing interests in the Gulf Of Aden. Lack of fish created desperate fisherman looking for new opportunity for wealth. Could we have been so concerned with other environmental problems that we don’t have the resources to tackle the underlying problem? Are other environmental concerns like the disposal of nuclear waste in Russia a larger risk to the global environment?

Unintended Consequence

Unintended consequences are outcomes that are not (or not limited to) the results originally intended in a particular situation. The unintended results may be foreseen or unforeseen, but they should be the logical or likely results of the action. For example, historians have speculated that if the Treaty of Versailles had not imposed such harsh conditions on Germany, World War II would not have occurred. From this perspective, one might consider the war an unintended consequence of the treaty.

Boiled down this means that every cloud has a silver lining and every solution to a problem has negative consequences.

The Exxon Valdez had many silver linings, not only in terms of environmental protection but also in safety at sea. The addition of BRM training, improvements in incident response and better ship owner liability statutes have all resulted in safer operations and less marine causalities. There is, however, a dark side.

Captain Joseph Hazelwod’s greatest fault was in not identifying the weaknesses in his bridge team. It was the mate, not the captain, that made the wrong decisions and alcohol had very little to do with the incident. The Staten Island Ferry and Cosco Busan incidents both brought into question the use of medications by pilots but every day thousands of mariners operate ships with the safe use of medication. The Captain and Chief Mate of the Heibi Spirit were convicted for spilling oil into the sea despite the fact they were at anchor when their vessel was hit by a barge. Their crime? Pressuring up the IG system, inert gas that prevents tank explosions, forced more oil into the surrounding water.

Each of these incidents is causing mariners to rethink their careers. It is true that the elimination of alcohol aboard ships was a positive move for our industry but, twenty years later, I get asked frequently by the general public about alcohol abuse aboard ship.

The Staten Island Ferry incident is even more troubling. This industry puts great emphasis on the experience of Captains to the point where some young, but qualified, Chief Mates have taken to artificially graying their hair when up for a promotion. The reason why experience matters is clear but with age comes medical issues and the resultant medication. By publishing lists of medication that are subject for “further review” the Coast Guard is sending a clear message; if you have a medical problem then take a desk job, avoid being diagnosed or roll the dice on your career. Statistically this is going to effect our oldest, and thus, most experienced Captains.

While the Exxon Valdez incident tarnished the reputation of mariners and has negative effects on our industry’s ability to attract the best and brightest candidates, and the Staten Island Ferry and Cosco Busan incidents have the potential of driving away our most experienced mariners, the Heibi Spirit sends a message the gravest message; if you want to pursue this career you may have to make the choice between potential loss of life or potential jail time.

Are some of our solutions creating larger problems?

Diseconomy of scale

Diseconomies of scale are the forces that cause larger firms to produce goods and services at increased per-unit costs. They are less well known than what economists have long understood as “economies of scale”, the forces which enable larger firms to produce goods and services at reduced per-unit costs.

Why is it that IBM, AT&T or even Microsoft did not create Facebook or Twitter? Each was created by small start-up companies that did not have the resources or cumulative experience of the larger companies.

The news headlines create congressional action, Coast Guard involvement, discussion among industry leaders and budgets to handle specific problems. Today hundreds of people are working on maritime training, schools have been set up and government budgets have been created. Thousands of individuals are personally invested in finding solutions and this creates inertia that drives the industry towards a specific end most of which were identified after the Exxon Valdez grounding. This concentration of effort has created exceptional training but, now that training levels have increased, new ideas for increasing the competency of mariners are not being invented.  Are there less traditional training, or simple not yet discovered, methods worth exploring?

Maybe it will take a small start up to create the next revolution in mariner training.

Human Resource Management

HRM is the strategic and coherent approach to the management of an organisation’s most valued assets – the people working there who individually and collectively contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the business.

This might be better served under the Law of Unintended Consequence but I was recently at an environmental awareness event conversing with phd candidates in the field of Marine Biology, all hyper intelligent and all working on whale research. A noble cause indeed! The topic of my past employment soon came up and when I mentioned Offshore Exploratory Drilling their faces  sunk. “How could you work for an offshore driller?” one asked. “And you consider yourself and environmentalist?” asked another. Meanwhile one told me his duties were primarily relegated to the operation of a small skiff. “You are a phd candidate who drives a skiff? Are you not undervaluing your education?” asked a friend of mine. “Certainly but it’s important research”.

The point of the story is that we want environmentalists, phd candidates and good mariners working aboard oil rigs. We also would be better served to have great skiff operators working on whale research. The Exxon Valdez and related incidents have pitted “us” against “them” but this is a great disservice. The solution is not to fight and not just to cooperate with smart idealists. It’s figuring out ways to have them join our ranks and supporting their work internally. We should encourage people from different fields, backgrounds and education to have a look “under the hood” and generate new ideas.

The End Result

Today I set out to write a post on the Exxon Valdez but could not bring myself to start typing. The changes brought about from the incident have created deep and lasting changes to our industry but we need to shift focus to new ideas. The solutions to our problem are not more double hulls, more oil spill response vessels or larger oil spill prevention budgets. The Exxon Valdez caused a jolt in our way of thinking and an imputes for finding new ideas and it is regenerating that jolt of change that we will improve.

Increased regulation is not a solitary solution to any problem, it’s asking unconventional questions and listening carefully to the responses that leads to answers. It’s pulling in people from different fields to find problems and giving the heretics and leaders of your organization the opportunity to influence change. Let’s not continue down the road well traveled but find a new path for the future of shipping.

Do you have a new idea or environmental question to explore? gCaptain would be honored to hear it.

gCaptain is excited to announce that Barack Hussein Obama was elected today as the 44th president of the United States Of America.

Just a few short weeks ago when I made my personal decision on which candidate I would vote for I also made the decision not to endorse a candidate here on gCaptain. This is not a political blog and we work hard to keep personal opinion far removed from our pages. It is an open blog meaning we quietly publish well written articles by those who’s point of view is contrary to that of our editors. We also seek out criticism at every turn but each article and comment published shares a common goal; adding value to our readers who, in turn, will be better informed to promote the safe operation of ships.

The only thing more rare to gCaptain than political commentary is the personal story behind these words but today is not your average day so here it is; I have met John McCain and he is personally responsible for getting me through a difficult time in my life. I voted for McCain in both the 2000 and 2008 Republican primaries and have full confidence his election to the presidency would have been a true asset to our country. I am also a Republican but I voted for Obama.

Today the maritime industry is facing a crisis. I don’t need to repost this year’s casualty list or share the 5 year forecast set by marine insurers to inform you of the trouble we face as doing so would only discourage hope. Today my country elected an individual who ignored the pundits and put in the hard work required to win. It’s true, Barack Obama lacks the experience or deep understating of maritime affairs to fully support our industry from Day 1 but what he possesses is a true willingness to listen, learn, take risk and put in the hard work to help us meet our industry’s needs. Ideals we share.

I ask all our readers to put aside their past, their voting record and partisan beliefs to help Barack get this ship underway. We will need teachers willing to help the public understand maritime affairs, we will need those with ideas to put in the work needed to make them happen and we will need heretics like Barack who are willing to assume the risk needed to stand up and call attention to the problems they so clearly see.  We need hope and we need action.

I ask, regardless of your decision today or even your nationality that you join us in your support of Obama and his message of getting this ship of ours back on course. gCaptain intends to put our full support behind his message and relay it to our industry. If you are looking for motivation, here are his words:

Gathering that he was earning well in excess of $100,000 per year with about six months vacation, I chided him for complaining about a job situation that a lot of people would kill to obtain. My comments were NOT well received.

Well had Keefe called any member of gCaptain’s staff we could have gently clued him in on the likely response. The reason? Well he lays out all the major points but let us add a few minor ones. Mariners currently in top positions aboard ship are loyal to their profession. We have seen tough times and stayed at sea to the protest of loved ones and in doing so have payed the price. From high points to low a mariners life is one of hard misses. Personally I’ve sacrificed being with my family on the day of my father’s death and missed the birth of his namesake, my first child, Jack. Mine is one of the least troubling stories but the hardships are not the primary reason for the discord; it’s the rewards, or lack there of. To show my point I offer some examples;

• Mariners in the first Gulf War bravely supplied the troops in countless runs to the war zone and in return received “all you can eat” overtime pay and handsome bonuses. For my wife’s 30 days in the war zone she received little more than a medal.
• Mariner’s salaries are just recently breaking above the levels (not adjusted for inflation) of those in the same position 30 years ago.
• Sailing 30 years ago was an enjoyable experience that did not entail constant communication with management. Email and “real” phone service didn’t exist.
• Port time is currently non-existent.
• The U.S. mariner has historically come at a premium to their foreign conterparts but the gap is closing fast.
• With the decline in the dollar we are suddenly being recruited be European companies that are offering considerable bonuses. U.S. companies are not following suit.
• Specialists in support roles, mostly from Europe, freely share their salaries which can be considerable higher than an American Captain’s.
• The majority of mariners live in areas (New England, Florida, California) of skyrocketing housing expenses.
• Mariners are now getting arrested for incidents that, as CAMM (The Council of American Master Mariners) put it, “were at one point considered mistakes”.
• Today civilians are more likely to ask you how you can work for an Oil Company than reply with a statement once heard often; “Wow, what an interesting job”.

In addition to these points the personnel shortage in our industry is not only a concern of company, it’s a concern for the shipboard management. The simple fact is positions are being filled by people who five years ago would not be considered ready for the job. In the past twenty years crew levels have been brought down to record low levels but overqualified crews “stuck” in positions they long ago mastered have kept the ships running smooth. Today an alarmingly high number of vessels list 100% of their officers as short-service employees (in the position for less than a year). This is not only a problem for officers but also for those on shore. Ships rely on a foundation of support from town that increasingly comes from managers lacking experience due to the same stratospheric rise in the number of promotions. These two factors equate to rising difficulties for Captains, Chief Mates and their counterparts in the engine room.

A manager recently asked a good friend of mine if he was ready for the big promotion to Captain, his response angered the boss. I can only assume the anger derived from the fact his statement was both accurate and troubling. He replied, “Hell no, I have no business being Captain. Professionally I’m not close to being ready but if I’m not promoted in the next few rounds you’re making a big mistake because I can run circles around my competition!” Not a good sign for those who need to trust the next man in charge of a 500 million dollar asset.

What he did not tell the manager is also reveling, “Why take a promotion for a few extra dollars and have to sit at a desk filling out paperwork, answering phone calls from town and dealing with petty squables. The captain use to have a stateroom twice the size of a seaman’s and fly to work in first class, now he just gets paid more.”

While the article was impressively accurate the following comments are not entirely correct;

His pay had been augmented three or four times in the past 18 months and his employers had confirmed that pay scales had at least doubled during that period.

While it’s conceivable that the payroll has double I’ve witnessed between 10 and 40% increases in senior mariner pay.

Gathering that he was earning well in excess of $100,000 per year with about six months vacation

“But you get Six Months vacation” is the first thing mariners hear during salary negotiations but it’s a misnomer. I don’t personally know a mariner who took less than 4 weeks of training classes last year and know many Chief Mate candidates who took between 12 and 16 weeks of class… that brings us down to 5 months “Vacation”. Subtract travel days, visits to the Coast Guard and days spent at the union hall and your down to less than 4.5 months (139 days).

The average American takes 15 days vacation, 8 personal days and 10 holidays. Add this to the number of weekends and (if my math is correct) shore side personel have 137 days off or only 3 days less than the mariner. Ever leave the office early on Friday or take a long lunch to visit the dentist? Mariners work 12 hours a day, every day which equates to nearly double the number of hours a “40-hour per week” American works during the year. Now I can begin to understand why gCaptain’s email box gets flooded with shore-side job related questions.

The number one reason for the discord is rooted by Keefe’s statement;

It is tempting to dismiss this as seafarer whining, but maritime executives everywhere had better strap on their hearing aids and listen to what their employees have to say. To do otherwise will only exacerbate the current crisis.

On the return trip for a promising shore-side job a prominent divorce attorney joined the discussion on NPR’s Fresh Air and said he often sits at the arbitration table looking at two people in love who share a life others only dream about and asks himself why. The reason is not that argued by either party, the reason is that neither listens to what the other is saying.

Mariners are being marginalized and management isn’t listening. Captains no longer have the power to solve problems aboard ship without approval from managers who frequently ask “Who died and left him in charge?”. This response filters down to the crew who justly assume their boss can not communicate their problems to distant offices ashore. This problem is exacerbated by the increased regulatory pressures, technological requirements, and industry opposition not to mention burdensome levels of training, paperwork and hands-on management from shore.

So while the “24/7 satellite television, e-mail, voice comms, excellent (but SSDD) food and media room” are nice do something that compensates me for the extra work I’ve taken on lately or double salaries instead of payroll.

What are management’s concerns? Not sure, I’m knocking on the divorce attorney’s door and just not listening!

-JD

This post is in response to Maritime Executive’s article:

Long-Term Neglect of Mariners Continues to Haunt Maritime Employers