Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Manning

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,663
    Thanks (Given)
    8146
    Thanks (Received)
    8367
    Likes (Given)
    11525
    Likes (Received)
    37864

    Default Manning

    John in Oz , carried that conversation onto a different post heading under Manning. We all assume through repetition of what we beleive true as through habit, on uk ships I always sailed with a cook as under the British MSA it was stated This was regardless of crew numbers , and no doubt there would have been things said if that routine was changed. This also applied to the offshore Industry even though most of the time they were in home trade limits. Crew numbers on the average supply vessel offshore are 8 possibly 9 at times. 13 sticks in my. Mind but may be wrong as over this number the ship had to carry a cert, cook and did so. I got a lot of work taking ships back and forward to Singapore and to do this the deck and E.R. Had to increase by 3 bringing the number up to 12 , usually there was always some thumbing a ride up or down. So a cook was also carried . A chief and only steward would be carried if you had supernumeries . It’s quite farcical when you think about it because when you need the extra man power was when the ship was working , and not going on a pleasure cruise doing nothing apart from watchkeeping. There were 3 maritime unions on my arrival here in the offshore trade, the Guild, the Engineers , and the Seamans Union. The stewards union which used to exist at one time and may of still done so deepsea , I never saw , so unless they were keeping a low profile or not I don’t know. The maritime union replaced the federation here as regards shipping and as far as I am concerned they made a good job of it for their members Although the shipowner would not say that , just the opposite. However that was 20 years ago and believe conditions have gone backwards in most cases .cheers JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 2nd June 2020 at 08:35 AM.
    R575129

  2. Thanks Doc Vernon, happy daze john in oz thanked for this post
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,663
    Thanks (Given)
    8146
    Thanks (Received)
    8367
    Likes (Given)
    11525
    Likes (Received)
    37864

    Default Re: Manning

    Added to previous John in Oz. That is the reason why on British ships the mates and engineers sailed with a superior cert. it happened to me once when the Master flew himself home from South Korea , I thought he was joking when he came in to say goodbye he was in his late 60s and brought out of retirement . I refused the job on a permanent basis and I got relieved in Japan and carried on as Mate as had nearly a year in, and had no intention of doing another year without a break. A mate of mine had similar happen to him in North Africa and sailed for Port Said , However arriving there he was thrown in Gaol And accused of stealing the ship. He had left without getting his clearance. JS.
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 2nd June 2020 at 07:34 AM.
    R575129

  4. Thanks happy daze john in oz thanked for this post
  5. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Shields
    Posts
    4,471
    Thanks (Given)
    432
    Thanks (Received)
    4750
    Likes (Given)
    2461
    Likes (Received)
    10404

    Default Re: Manning

    J S
    As per #22 in the mutiny on board ships thread,
    The Manning on board merchant vessels of any flag is governed by IMO regulations, STCW, International Labour convention etc. Flag states produce their own legislation that enacts the IMO regs into there own legislation that should mirror what the IMO states as minimum. With regards to STCW, many of us who obtained our verification under the B.O.T exam system in the U.K. regarded the STCW certification to be the start of the dumbing down of standards as the syllabus for STCW certificate was written to a level that any candidate in any flag state taking the exams, should be able to gain a pass mark. My Croatian ship mates who obtained their tickets prior to STCW were in some aspects more highly qualified than those of us who got ours under B.O.T syllabus, especially so in,for example, mathematics, where their syllabus required them to be able to do calculus and higher maths.
    Rgds
    J.A.
    MSN_1846_MLC_Ships_Cooks_all_tagged.pdf

  6. Thanks Ivan Cloherty, j.sabourn thanked for this post
    Likes happy daze john in oz liked this post
  7. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,663
    Thanks (Given)
    8146
    Thanks (Received)
    8367
    Likes (Given)
    11525
    Likes (Received)
    37864

    Default Re: Manning

    John regardless of what the IMO regulations say , I will give a few examples of them not being complied with.
    Year 1969 lifeboats had been condemned for at least 6 months previously and still were on leaving vessel 10 months later.
    Same vessel re manning for the 10 months I was there no second mate , certification for Bridge watchkeeping 2 masters F.G.. ships registration Gibraltar.
    Some on site maybe able to confirm or not but when offshore oil was in its infancy. There was. An outcry that the discharging and backloading of supply vessels should be done by the dockers . Think this lasted one bad weather trip as they refused the conditions. However apart from that how did they get out there in the first place when they exceeded the allowable persons on board ?
    One of My last offshore vessel was certificated to carry 250 extra people a small fishing side winder. And yet if you brought in passengers from the rig on a supply vessel who had missed the hello flight you had a good chance of being fined as ship exceeded the crew requirement . Also if you went above 60 north without the FG certification ship was also fined, but happened all the time as was cheaper to pay the fine than finding the correct certification.
    I can think of numerous other occasions when the letter of the hopeful maritime law has not been followed to the letter. Call it the custom of the trade. It still goes on and always will as there will always be ways round it , if
    worthwhile to do. The biggest mistake and bad law that was never followed up was that on British ships which today are almost an extinct breed that a British crew had to have a percentage of British nationals on, and which I suspect the EU had their finger in the marmalade jar. I remember bringing one ship down from Singapore where the 2 engineer was sailing on an Australian State cert.issued in the Northern Terrorities , ( Darwin ) the AMSA surveyor was a young kid with a check list in his hand ticking off his requirements. He queried the legality of a
    N.T. Certificate in South Australia and was going to stop the ship sailing. Wiser heads than him no doubt corrected him as there was no Dalay to the ship. JS
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 3rd June 2020 at 05:48 AM.
    R575129

  8. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sunbury Victoria Australia
    Posts
    17,895
    Thanks (Given)
    5463
    Thanks (Received)
    6603
    Likes (Given)
    66481
    Likes (Received)
    26603

    Default Re: Manning

    John, it was a similar situation on some cargo/passenger ships.
    I was on the Paparoa from UK, Hull, to Oz.
    We had 9 bloods on board even though there was room for 12. We also had to seamen, well they looked like men, who were being carried back to Oz as repatriation.
    But had there been 12 a doctor would have had to be on as well.
    With the two and the nine we were under the limit.
    The chief steward told us that the two crew being taken back had been classified as passengers.
    So the question is, who made the rules and who was responsible for them being carried out?

    I have been told by some down at the Mission here in Melbourne that many of the container ships do a have a small galley but it is a cook your self or use the microwave with ready made meals.
    Happy daze John in Oz.

    Life is too short to blend in.

    John Strange R737787
    World Traveller

  9. Thanks j.sabourn thanked for this post
    Likes Denis O'Shea liked this post
  10. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Torquay
    Posts
    8,623
    Thanks (Given)
    2547
    Thanks (Received)
    5202
    Likes (Given)
    6708
    Likes (Received)
    19642

    Default Re: Manning

    Just a small note John, if you had a capacity/cabins fore 'more' than 12 passengers then you had to carry a doctor, that is why scores if not hundreds of liner(regular runs) companies vessels were certified to carry 12 passengers and no more. Passenger capacity beyond 12 usually went to 24 or 36 as that is when it became commercially viable to carry a doctor and not a commercial liability with only 12. When you think of the extra cabin/services/stewards/salaries/victualling/medical facilities etc etc you can see why companies stuck to 12 and no more.
    Last edited by Ivan Cloherty; 3rd June 2020 at 09:47 AM. Reason: old age

  11. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    CHESTER LE STREET
    Posts
    780
    Thanks (Given)
    340
    Thanks (Received)
    418
    Likes (Given)
    4447
    Likes (Received)
    2443

    Default Re: Manning

    Quote Originally Posted by j.sabourn View Post
    John regardless of what the IMO regulations say , I will give a few examples of them not being complied with.
    Year 1969 lifeboats had been condemned for at least 6 months previously and still were on leaving vessel 10 months later...........................................

    The biggest mistake and bad law that was never followed up was that on British ships which today are almost an extinct breed that a British crew had to have a percentage of British nationals on, and which I suspect the EU had their finger in the marmalade jar. I remember bringing one ship down from Singapore where the 2 engineer was sailing on an Australian State cert.issued in the Northern Terrorities , ( Darwin ) the AMSA surveyor was a young kid with a check list in his hand ticking off his requirements. He queried the legality of a
    N.T. Certificate in South Australia and was going to stop the ship sailing. Wiser heads than him no doubt corrected him as there was no Dalay to the ship. JS
    Everything is tick boxes these days John and sight of the main purpose often overlooked, as long as those boxes are ticked everything must be OK
    Last edited by Chris Allman; 3rd June 2020 at 10:44 AM.

  12. Thanks j.sabourn thanked for this post
  13. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    14,663
    Thanks (Given)
    8146
    Thanks (Received)
    8367
    Likes (Given)
    11525
    Likes (Received)
    37864

    Default Re: Manning

    #7 I think that particular AMSA Inspector looked to me like a university graduate still busy graduating to what ever was his aims in life. So was probably a one off. JS
    R575129

  14. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,337
    Thanks (Given)
    1796
    Thanks (Received)
    2724
    Likes (Given)
    8629
    Likes (Received)
    9879

    Default Re: Manning

    Tony, Reminiscent of the rating on deck D.H.U. Deck hand uncertified, I personally never questioned anyone on there rating aboard ship as long as we all got on reasonably well and the job got done all was fine. The only time a D.H.U. And not all of them came up, Was when someone got hurt or worse, And it was usually an incompetent D.H.U. Who got hurt i remember meeting a shipmate with a log wheel in his hands on the after deck he didn't have a bloody clue what to do with it. The same guy emptied the ship of shackles of the coast of Trinidad while we where on the hook the bosun grabbed him and gave him large, Bosun think how many of them sharks ate seaman after there ship being torpedoed, OH Yes the bosun said and how many of them did you manage to kill with my full compliment of shackles you bloody idiot
    Last edited by Red Lead Ted; 3rd June 2020 at 11:01 AM.
    {terry scouse}

  15. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    6
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    5
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    13

    Default Re: Manning

    Passenger ships, ie more than 12 pass, had yearly surveys too. That would have an effect upon the bottom line the accounts.

  16. Likes happy daze john in oz liked this post
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •