Seafarer Research into Trust and Accidents

[John Arton]

I too looked through that questionnaire and even though for a number of years before retirement I worked for an excellent ship owner who implemented safety management systems before they became a regulatory requirement and actively encouraged reporting any and all accidents in the survey it failed to address the effect that vetting inspectors have on reporting and trust issues, especially in the tanker trade. The marketing department want the companies ships to have no reported accidents etc so the vetting inspector leaves the ship with no comments or observations at the end of his 12 or more hour inspection, in order that they can put forward the ships for contracts with the oil and chemical majors who only look at these vetting inspection reports when deciding upon whether to put their cargoes on the ships. On the other hand technical management want reporting of all accidents as they have a direct influence on the ships operations, possibly requiring changes to equipment or repairs to certain items and even having to sort out class approval to sail short handed in the event of a serious injury to a crew member. So even before you get down to the on-board ship operations you can have a conflict on interest in the office ashore and who is piggy in the middle, well it's the poor ships staff who have to try and keep three parties happy at all times. I even had vetting inspectors and minor shore staff basically accusing me of lying or at best covering up the truth by not having any recorded accidents, or lost time incidents in there language, even if we had non to report, even to the extent of asking why the sailor with an Elastoplast in his arm/hand was not a reported incident.
In the questionnaire "trust" was a big issue, how do you trust management, how do you build trust on board etc. etc.
So how do you build trust on board, well to me it's obvious, use your own expertise to observe and judge your fellow seafarers.
Bit of a ramble but hey no!
Rgds
J.A.

[j.sabourn]

John , I will give 2 examples of trust which are in previous posts . If I had come out with same whilst working I would have been black listed. After being sued most probably. Today in retirement it is not necessary to hide the truth anymore. After the PA enquiry I was asked/ told to rejoin and sail on station at a rig, with one deck crew member I refused. This was after the recommended crew level was 13 members. They had a fire in the ER. And the CE put it out by setting off the Halyon or CO2 system can’t remember which. He was fired and told if he accepted full responsibility they would give him a good reference. The fire was started by the company cancelling the shore tanker for the ER bilges to be pumped into. I could go on with numerous other incidents with other ships, trust is a two way thing , but not always there with shore based owners of ships.in latter years people were kept in employment only if they walked the tightrope set in place by the owner, not all owners had a conscience. Today is a new generation of seafarers and it is up to them to set what standards they want to see, and at the same time prove to themselves whether they are men or mice. They should all be aware of the tightrope they walk between employment and non employment a hard choice. JS

[Colin Wood]

If UK had not complied would have been fined by Brussels bureaucrats.

[Ken Atkinson]

Around the late 1970s we were encouraged to have a safety committee and as second engineer I was delegated with the task. Most of the problems brought up I responded with why did you not fix it or tell me about it before now and when we have finished here go and fix it yourself. That was why traditionally a sailor reported to the Bosun who told the Mate that it had been repaired. Everyone was expected to be their own safety officer with responsibility for each other.

[j.sabourn]

I have just remembered I was on the Safety Officers Course with the mate whilst working offshore ,think it was 3 days Safety Officer course at Leith Nautical College sometime in the eighties. Apart from the paperwork involved they put up various articles on a Screen by what was once called a magic lantern.they were shown for about 5 seconds and then switched off. The object of the exercise was to see your powers of recall. As I had spent the previous evening in the bar of the Hotel my head was a bit fuzzy my Powers of recall for these 10 objects was a bit fuzzy so after 4, I was feeling stumped. the Mate sitting next to me whispered Pink Elephant which I dutifully put down , whether this was correct or not I don’t know but know he sniggered a lot later . I got my own back later as appointed him Safety Officer on the ship for his able assistance and his good powers of observation. JS

[Bernard Kates]

Safety_Award_sml.jpg
I got a safety award once. Dunno what for! Perhaps because I went to sea, did my job and came home again without injuring myself. Never met a "safety officer" though.

[j.sabourn]

Richard whoever sets you the agenda on whatever course you are doing you should ask them their views on a common occurrence which was still happening when I retired. What response would he give. situation is crew change day, ship is 4 th. Ship outside of other 3. The inboard ship will be fined if no gangway net. After onboard the inboard ship the various deck levels still to surmount are all at different levels and only means of access is by climbing over and if lucky a plank may be available. Quandary are those supposedly in charge of safety sufficiently brain conducive to see and take the steps to disrupt the whole port and do a shuffle to put the outside ship inboard and have a proper gangway equipped with safety net , and thus upset their employers.This is a continuous occurrence even today I would imagine and makes a mockery of many safety laws including the one about not going more than 2 feet off the deck without a Safety Harness . There is or was no place for idiot safety laws made up by people who mostly don’t know one end of a ship from another. proper Laws yes! People will listen to, but not just those which are concerned about business as usual. JS

[happy daze john in oz]

Working in the University system I was a member of the OHS committee.
One other member was a Barister who was very good.
But as he said, no matter how good the laws are made by governments in the anticipation of making the working place a safe one there would always still be problems.

The point he made was that no matter how good the politicians think their laws are there will still be problems, but there are smarter legal and financial minds out there who will find a loop hole to either get the guilty party off, or to gain more in compensation that the statuary amount.

Smart ones do not work for the gov, but they do well from them.

[j.sabourn]

It is common practice for most governments to put their reputation on the number of pieces of legislation they have passed into law during their administration. Nothing is ever heard how worthless and a waste of time some of those pieces are. JS

[Red Lead Ted]

Around the late 1970s we were encouraged to have a safety committee and as second engineer I was delegated with the task. Most of the problems brought up I responded with why did you not fix it or tell me about it before now and when we have finished here go and fix it yourself. That was why traditionally a sailor reported to the Bosun who told the Mate that it had been repaired. Everyone was expected to be their own safety officer with responsibility for each other.

Spot on Ken, We where all on B.O.T. Article's we where taught at our sea schools under B.O.T. Regulations, As the old saying goes there are no problems only solution's. Health and Safety never applied to us you got given a job you done it i think looking back there could have been a case for Danger money. Terry.