Chief Stewards Info

[john walker]

Numast (The National Union of marine aviation and shipping transport officers.) Has now become 'Nautilus International' The union joined forces with its Dutch equivalent a few years ago. It is still an affiliated member of the British Trades Union Congress and is very much involved in industrial relations, the same as any other trade union. In the 70's the MNTB brought out 2 certificates for Purser/Catering officers (Head of catering department non passenger vessels and passenger vessels.) The course I did at Liverpool took I think about 8 weeks? The certificates were never meant to have any legal need like the Ships cook's certificate but were to show that the holder had achieved a certain academic/professional standard.

[j.sabourn]

#101 Thanks John, that's probably why I get mixed up. On a Palm Line Charter about 1961 we had a Palm Line Purser and when people on site talk about Ch. Stwd. and purser tend to get mixed up. I wouldn't say the Palm Line purser had any relation to food. I asked him one time how he got the job of purser in a nice way, as to me he didn't have too much knowledge of shipping in general. He said he did his national service and went as a writer on some ship and was then promoted to Purser. He was there purely for the General Cargo. I have never on a cargo ship heard the Chief Steward referred to as a purser, in fact I don't think the average Chief Steward would want the title as would involve a lot more work, he might have signed on as such but never broadcast the fact. Someone on site who hasn't been on for some time referred to the Ch. Steward on the Warkworth as a purser whilst he was a cadet there. Both of which I never saw in Dalglieshes, so may have been well after my time there. Bearing in mind also there is a distinct difference between a Cadet and an Apprentice. I have an In Law who will be over here at New Year who was an ex BP cook and has a City and Guilds in the Art. He was the manager of Portsmouth council food part of the Council which I don't have a clue what it would be called, he was the manager that arranged the Mayors Banquets etc. on the return of the fleet from the Falklands. Will ask him, it may have been earlier than BP and may have been BTC he was cook with. Cheers JS

[Dennis McGuckin]

Don't think any shore side credits had any sway with the MN.At least not in my case. I had an apprenticeship and City & Guilds.
Maybe was asked about them in Ledenhall St when I applied at Union Castle, but never after that.

[john walker]

Dennis it always seemed daft to me that people like yourself had to get the B.O.T. certificate of competency as a ship's cook, when the city and guilds certificates were considered inferior by the shipping industry. It was the other way around shore side. The shipping industry by the mid 70's (For reasons unknown to me) were starting to see the importance of recognising some sort of parity in catering qualifications. I did all my certificates of competency at the Merchant Navy Catering College in Liverpool in the 70's. The first was a Merchant Navy Training Board certificate as a 2nd. Cook & baker which took about 8 weeks (I think) and then sailing as a 2nd. cook and baker on cargo ships. There were two guys at the college from Cunard doing City & Guilds at the same time. About 15 months later I was back doing My B.O.T. ship' cooks certificate. In other words in less than 18 months of training and experience I was considered competent to sail as the cook in charge of the daily food for 45 hungry seamen. While people like yourself would have to do a 3,4 or even 5 year apprenticeship were not even recognised as being competent. I find that ludicrous. Later in my career at sea when doing head of catering, the college courses also involved doing similar shore side exams. These were the equivalent of A levels and were recognised later in my career and were used as credits to go on and do a food science degree.

[j.sabourn]

For those ships cooks going back to the 50,60, and 70s, do you think the minimum daily rations on the Articles ofAgreement were written up my someone who knew anything about dietary needs, or was drawn up purely for costing by the shipowners. I know they were noted by all as BOT rations, but Lord Runciman was at one time Head of the BOT and he was also a shipowner. Cheers JS

[cappy]

#lord runciman was a ship owner and head of the BOT.....i think the term is ...wheels within wheels john......but having said that even in the 50s the food on average was better than at home ...ie meat twice a day and plenty eggs etc.....as one geordie stated on a runciman tramp ...bugger this for a game of soldiers this is the second time we have had lamb this week......i couldnt believe my ears ......but then it has always been the seamans right to complain about the grub..........happy days cappy

[Captain Kong]

Hi Cappy,
Meat twice a day in the 50s?????
On some ships I was on we were lucky to have meat twice in an entire voyage. and an eggs once a week if again lucky.
Cheers
Brian.

[cappy]

well brian you should have sailed out of shields we wouldnt have stood for that ....but truthfully that was in the 50s 2 runcimans one hains boat and a british tanker also a shell tanker and a thommason shipping company of newcastle on tyne....egggs every day and meat twice a day.....better food than at home regards cappy ...the happy eater

[Captain Kong]

Hi Cappy ,
It is no wonder the British Merchant Navy went bankrupt, wasting all that Good Food on Seamen.
Cheers
Brian

[john walker]

# 105, 106 & 107 J. Sabourn I think it was a bit of both the B.O.T. feeding was sufficient to survive on and indeed can be considered quite healthy if cooked properly and using good quality produce. A pound each in weight of meat/fish (protein) Spuds/rice (Carbohydrates) and vegetables is a healthy diet if you are receiving that quantity. Once you have filleted/ peeled and cooked the food you are left with a lot less to eat and leading a very physically demanding working environment you would be hungry at the end of the day. I am like you Cappy I never had to sail on a British ship that fed the bare minimum. Even with some cooks that were not the best at their jobs there was always something to eat that stopped me going hungry. The majority of ships that I sailed on were led by the cost per man per day for food and not the Quantity. This meant that you were able to buy and store with frozen meat/vegetables in ports in Australia and Kiwi South America and even Poland or China with cheap good quality food and then top up with fresh food when necessary. Or buy the basic necessities in say an expensive place like Japan and then wait for your main storing in those ports mentioned. Over a period of a voyage on both British and Foreign flag vessels I always managed to keep to my allotted budgets and (Even if I do say it myself) the people that I sailed with were well fed. Captain Kong I think you were unfortunate in that it sounds like the people responsible for your food were a bunch of thieves who managed to get fat in more ways than one by starving you and their ship mates. As a foot note to the above when I worked in Africa and West Asia for various Oil/Defence companies where the food had to be transported from the U.S.A. by container and I had to order about 4 months in advance, that one pound whack was a good rule of thumb for working out quantities eg. 450 men times 450 lbs meat/fish x 120 days add a bit on top, job done. The reverse of that was guys (Normally Locals) sending me consumption sheets for the more remote camps of say 20 men which showed a daily consumption of 1 kg. of filleted meat/fish plus 1 kg. each of rice and veg. per person per day. Before I sacked them for stealing I would try and find out who the man mountains were that could consume that amount of food.