The case being made to reduce wages for Indian seafarers

Are Indian seafarers pricing themselves out of the market, and if so, what can be done? That was the question put to me and initially, with the accompanying data viewed in purely mathematical terms, it did appear to be the case.

For example, and all figures approximate, in USD and basis contractual wages per month or pro-rata. Indian officers are typically between these two figures.

Newly promoted Master/Chief Engineer: North-West European countries  / 13000 and Far East Developing countries  /  6500

Entry level 3rd Officer / 4th Engineer: North-West European countries / 5300 and Far East Developing countries /  2200

The argument or hypothesis put forward is that Indian officers need to voluntarily start accepting salaries closer to the salaries accepted by officers from the Far Eastern countries if they don't want to see themselve being out-priced from the market. Obviously, this does not take into account flag-state requirements, and applies more to open
register employment opportunities - though even some flag states are now relaxing this when it comes to employing foreign nationals on their ships.

This would be correct if the maritime industry was a simple operational industry, where the financial aspects over-rode everything else, and humans could be increasingly replaced by machines and computers. Or treat the sailor as sub-humans. To some extent, that is the way the industry has evolved over the past 2-3 decades, but there is simply no more elasticity left in the constant battle to reduce head-count on board by every means possible. How much more can the owners and flag states play around with so-called safe manning, before port states start imposing their own conditions, is already being played out.

If anything, as enquiry reports in more than a few accidents have shown lately, fatigue and lack of competence are the two biggest reasons going hand-in-hand while safety and efficiency take a beating. Certificates of competency and time-sheets are one thing, realities are another, and ship-owners as well as operators must realise that the issue is deeper than just salaries or rather the daily-wage kind of contractual numbers.

One solution would be for the same people advocating further reduction in head-counts to spend some time on board real working ships, as pursers, to try and understand the realities involved. And on terms and conditions as applicable to 3rd Officers.

Because. Then only will management, especially financial management, learn that the modern young seafarer, as with any other career professional, is looking for more than just money. There are two other very important parameters involved:- future potential and respect at the workplace. Nothing more needs to be said or written on how both these paramters have gown downhill over the last 2-3 decades.

Not that salaries have kept pace either. Compared with other avenues open to younger people, merchant navy salaries have not kept up. Simple as that.

Speaking with a few youngsters in the Merchant Navy on the subject, one can understand their frustration - managements tend to ignore the fact that their frontline operational staff expect more than just money. Leave alone a reduction in wages, many of them were of the opinion that even doubling of wages without improving working conditions and future potential meant nothing to them.

Which takes me back to the solution - which has to go back to basics. Tthe Indian seafarer was and should still be linked to the Indian flag ships. That is where the solution lies - there will be no dearth of very well qualified people willing to work for lower salaries as long as the other two parameters of respect at the workplace and future potential are met. Sadly, the Indian flag shipowners have defaulted on this responsibility terribly over the last few decades, and this needs to be resolved first.

If, hypothetical if, the Indian shipowners simply matched terms and conditions offered by the Indian Navy to theiir younger officers, then many of the same younger officers see no reason why a 20-year working life could not be something easy to achieve. With all the other benefits that accrue to shipowners able to plan for the future. And more.

The example of the coastal and foreign going Chinese flag fleet can be quoted in this context. The example of how many of us in the '70s and '80s chose to stay on with Indian flag vessels at lower salaries for the same reasons can also be quoted.

By all means, think about reducing salaries to make the Indian seafarer more competitive, but it can not be a stand-alone. It may sound strange, but bench-marking the Indian Navy for this is not such a wild idea - the two services have always been related and till not too long ago, the best who came out of the Training Ships actually went to the Indian Navy.

The rest, the not so best, or the better than most, take your pick, can then certainly work in the open registers.


And there, let market forces decide.

Why should LSA, FFA and Medical Chest upkeep NOT be shore responsibility?

When head-counts were reduced onboard, they went up by multiple ashore, and continue to do so. In addition, there is no shortage of external sub-contractors for everything, to assist the poor guys ashore clocking in their 40 hours a week with lunch and tea breaks thrown in.


The workload onboard, however, went way up there. The Master is now too busy counting bedsheets and pillow covers and it goes on from there.


So, here's what one suggests, also in the interest of getting a grip on realities.


Quick thoughts on maintenance of LSA and FFA equipment onboard ships, as well as Medical Chest and other specific emergency equipment, which is not in regular use but only on an "as required" basis when the need arises. Thanks to gCaptain for the idea, here:-

http://gcaptain.com/practicing-what-cant-be/?35165

Frankly, the workload onboard as well as the commercial pressures from ashore with increased communications are so heavy, that the first casaulty onboard modern ships are the LSA, FFA and medical chest requirements. A few small tests that I have used personally on the last ship I sailed on a few months ago, as well as by asking people who work on or visit ships, show me that things are worse than before.

There is no point in specifying details here, we all know about the lifeboat that will simply not be lowered except in the calmest of weathers in port, the rust expanded pins in the quick release lifebuoys, the provisions from the boat that were stolen in some port, the painters used for some other purpose, the fire-suit which makes movement impossible, and more.

As seafarers, unless we are working for companies where the work ethics and attention to details like this have over-riding importance, we know that in the rush to "get things done", LSA, FFA and medical chest take a back seat. Why we seafarers would put this aspect behind is something sociological I have never understood - till I came ashore at an early age and realised that the quality of life of the seafarer onboard and his safety is about the last thing on the mind of  most ship-managers and their staff.

Frankly, in many cases, it is almost as though there is some sort of hatred at the offices where people are dealt with, still called "crew department" or similar, for the man onboard the ship. None of the rapidly evolving concept of HR (Human Relations) for us - we don't even deserve a pension fund or Provident Fund with a company contribution. And nothing reflects this better than the way LSA, FFA and medical chest are treated like a survey to survey item by all and sundry.

So here's a solution that the DG Shipping may consider as an implementation item, to start with on all Indian flag ships and subsequently put up to the various bodies including the IMO which make up the maritime world's lawmakers - make the DPA of the shipping company absolutely responsible for the LSA, FFA and Medical Chest on Indian flag ships as a shore maintenance job.

Whether done by a shore workshop, or by the Marine Superintendent using external contractors when the ship is in port, there needs to be some specific accountabilities and responsibilites that the shore management need to take. As well as liabilities if things go wrong.

How about it, does it work for us, ashore? Or does human life onboard remain a line item, unchanged since the days of seafarers being kidnapped from bars ashore and being forced to work on sailing ships of yore?

Our fellow ex-seafarers working ashore will be the last to suggest this, the shipowners will obviously resist this, the regulatory bodies are thoroughly controlled by the shipowners, so it is left to those sailing onboard, or the maritime media, to PUSH this through with the authorities.


Those onboard are, obviously, worried about their jobs. So maybe, the authorities would help?

But then, will that work, when most of our "authorities"look forward to post retirement avenues in the same companies!!


Speak up, and as said before, confidentiality totally guaranteed. 


Soon publishing responses I have got from active seafarers.

+++

Anti-Piracy - what do YOU want??

Ok, so one has been attending a few seminars and conferences on the issue of piracy, mainly one-way gab-fests which don't merit even a passing mention - since they seem to be monopolised by people who are not necessarily old but are certainly behind times in their approaches to reality. For example, the BIGGEST flaw in these seminars and conferenes is that the actual seafarer on the frontline of piracy does not have a simple voice.

In addition, there are these meetings and discussions held at various levels in governance, the notes and reports on which come out partially in the media a few days later and on the RTI boards after some time - when they aren't "leaked" by assorted interested parties. As of now, barring some rapid steps taken by the Indian Navy when they were finally given the brief, the rest is of not much real good. Oh yes, the Foreign Ministry diplomats are doing a good job too, somewhere, but that's always under wraps, till wikileaks brings those out.

In a way, that's good - the anti-piracy movement ashore could do with some more discretion too. But that's as long as there IS an anti-piracy movement. Which, even if it is, does not seem to be filtering down to the seafarers on the ships.

As a result, courtesy the rapid evolution of social media onboard, natural progression to the way it has moved ashore - some of us who have been more than vocal on the subject are receiving inputs from seafarers who would otherwise not have a voice. Even this, cloaked behind earnest requests for anonymity, is rare. But it seems to be growing.

Here are some examples;-

1) Facebook seems to have a few groups on the subject already, some are open to all, some are closed and some are by invitation. Once in, the discussions are fairly controlled, but the message gets across - there seems to be no shortage of people who will not go into the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean piracy impacted areas in a hurry. However, poverty worldwide being what it is, reality and truth is that there are others willing to go in too.

2) On Indian seafarers, I have seen a rise in the statistics on my blog and articles pertaining to piracy, on this blog and elsewhere. Even older articles are being read, and re-read - and then distributed further or linked ahead. That feels good, too.

3) Most importantly, I have to word this carefully, assume a scenario (like in orals . . .) where I have also had access to a few email messages to the effect that - we or my spouse/son are on such-and-such ship which is heading into the piracy area, we have not got any anti-piracy measures on board other than fire hose and some barbed wire, we do not want to sail but the owners/managers are telling us they will give us a DR and play around with our wages. On top of that, the ship is in terrible shape and there are rumours that the owner has sold it, taken huge insurance and is now purposely moving into an insurance game.

And so, I have sent such and such photos and such and such scanned documents to such and such person, and if something happens to me then please make sure they are published but only if something bad really happens to me.

What would you do in my place, dear reader?

+++

The power of social media can not and should not be under estimated by the regulators, owners, operators, classification societies, flag states, port states and everybody else involved.

Views invited.

Regine Brett - at 90

Lady called Regina Brett wrote this when she turned 90 - and I read it years ago, came back to me when I was looking for something else. Sounds good, so here's this for all the young and younger seafarers . . .

Written By Regina Brett, 90 years old, of "The Plain Dealer", Cleveland , Ohio . . . "to celebrate growing older, I once wrote the 45 lessons life taught me. It is the most-requested column I've ever written."

My odometer rolled over to 90 in August, so here is the column once more:

1. Life isn't fair, but it's still good.
2. When in doubt, just take the next small step.
3. Life is too short to waste time hating anyone.
4. Your job won't take care of you when you are sick. Your friends and parents will. Stay in touch.
5. Pay off your credit cards every month.
6. You don't have to win every argument. Agree to disagree.
7. Cry with someone. It's more healing than crying alone.
8. It's OK to get angry with God. He can take it.
9. Save for retirement starting with your first paycheck.
10. When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.
11. Make peace with your past so it won't screw up the present.
12. It's OK to let your children see you cry.
13. Don't compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about.
14. If a relationship has to be a secret, you shouldn't be in it.
15. Everything can change in the blink of an eye. But don't worry; God never blinks.
16. Take a deep breath. It calms the mind.
17. Get rid of anything that isn't useful, beautiful or joyful.
18. Whatever doesn't kill you really does make you stronger
19. It's never too late to have a happy childhood. But the second one is up to you and no one else.
20. When it comes to going after what you love in life, don't take no for an answer.
21. Burn the candles, use the nice sheets, wear the fancy lingerie. Don't save it for a special occasion. Today is special.
22. Overprepare, then go with the flow.
23. Be eccentric now. Don't wait for old age to wear purple.
24. The most important sex organ is the brain.
25. No one is in charge of your happiness but you.
26. Frame every so-called disaster with these words: 'In five years, will this matter?'
27. Always choose life.
28. Forgive everyone everything.
29. What other people think of you is none of your business.
30. Time heals almost everything. Give time time.
31. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.
32. Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does.
33. Believe in miracles.
34. God loves you because of who God is, not because of anything you did or didn't do.
35. Don't audit life. Show up and make the most of it now.
36. Growing old beats the alternative -- dying young.
37. Your children get only one childhood.
38. All that truly matters in the end is that you loved.
39. Get outside every day. Miracles are waiting everywhere.
40. If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back.
41. Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need.
42. The best is yet to come...
43. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.
44. Yield.
45. Life isn't tied with a bow, but it's still a gift.

So, you get it?

HE-Alert - the magazine for safety on ships

Now also available online at:-

http://www.he-alert.org/index.asp

Here's my short response to an article on a subject dear to me . . . read on:-


Richard Sadler's column (Alert/issue No. 23/May 2010) makes some very valid points on the relationship between finance/financiers and shipping/seafarers.

Here's my point of view, and please don't put it aside as "3rd World" because of my physical/geographical location on date - as an ex-seafarer who has been a shipbroker, into politics, as a freight forwarder, been part of bringing unitised cargo inland into India, on television as an anchor, within all forms of media and headed the Asia operations of a Silicon Valley tech company in the business of transaction management for 3 industries - financial, gaming and preventive defence - as well as fathered two investment bankers - and so I do think a bit of world view comes from New Delhi, too. Please also excuse the syntax and grammar - for the last one year I have been at it trying to also revive my CoC issued 1980 and that has been an experience, too.

1) The biggest flaw is that the seafarer is seen by everybody ashore as an over-worked donkey - which she or he is. The rest of the world has moved on, not just in reduced working hours, but the seafarer is still flogged on 4-on/8-off, or worse. Between IMO, ILO, STCW, ILO 147, ILO 163, ILO 180 and now ILO Super - everybody knows that the seafarer they visit on the ship is still subjected to something called "not undermining the authority of the Master" - in this day and age. The first thing that needs to be done, therefore, is to bring down working hours onboard, especially for deck watchkeepers, by the simple method of adopting a Master + non-watchkeeping First Mate, and 3 independent watch-keepers. At the very least.

2) The training for seafarers is still stuck in arcane subjects like magnetic poles, theory of gyro and other ancient art forms - when what is needed for interaction with shore staff is more a PR cum legal person. An average seafarer by the time he is 30 or so has spent more than 4 years learning about stuff that is going to be of no use to him, while the same time could be spent better in understanding the simpler art of collision avoidance, pollution prevention and acquiring basic economic skillsets. That's the next thing that needs to change. You want respect from your banker - you have to understand what he is saying.

3) Industry meaning shipowner - and I have spent some quality time lately with shipowners as well as taken part in piracy/hijack release discussions - considers the seafarer on board as a standing expense - whether alive or dead. As long as the CoC and other certification is in order keeping the ship seaworthy, it does not matter - the seafarer is a commodity to the shipowner. Barring passenger and cruise ships, it is better to treat the seafarer as somebody who eats too much food, and then cribs about everything.

4) Industry meaning cargo interests, port state staff, insurance the rest of them - in my part of the world, treats the seafarer as somebody from the bottom rung, like the hapless truckdriver. Somebody to hold as hostage for a period of time at no cost to anybody other than the shipowner, so why feed the seafarer in the period ad interim. For "food" read salaries, and other expenses. I have heard shipowners crib about paying salaries to seafarers who have spent months onboard ships arrested, hijacked or similar - or been jailed for alleged crimes committed while on duty.

5) On crew shore leaves, and the comparison to airline crew, very valid points. Where do we start - should seafarers demand shore leave as a right? Good heavens, even earned leave is deemed to be a "privilege" extended at the mercy of the owner, so what cost shore leave? So
would owners now start insisting that charter parties include clauses on shore leave for seafarers, or ensure additional "bonuses" in lieu, is that a thought the time for which is very overdue?
What I can not agree with, Sir, is the approach that we leave it to the bankers to administer these changes. Having been a vendor to the banking industry for the last decade, I would suggest that change in inertia level is one thing they hate. What we have to do is look within. Take, for example, the whole wonderful concept of GMDSS. Great. But how on earth did it evolve into something which did away with a Radio officer onboard, when in actual fact we need a Super Elecronics and Communication person on every Merchant Navy ship?

The cure, Sir, is from within. It is the seafarer who needs to say, OK, I am a Master, and I consider this ship unseaworthy if it does not have at least 1 more watch-keeping officer - and he then needs to work with the Port State, since the Flag State and its bankers sure will not assist.

Sincerely,
Veeresh Malik
New Delhi
India

(Courtesy of Alert! - The International Maritime Human Element Bulletin)

MLC 2010 and the seafarer onboard a ship - some new bits . . .

Many shipowners and seafarers do not realise it as yet, but the Maritime Labour Convention 2010 (MLC 2010) which is going to come into force next year (2011), will be implemented by Port State Control. So it does not matter if your Flag State has ratified or signed on to the convention or not - if the Port State has signed on, then compliance by owners, operators, Master and seafarers will be essential.

States that have already ratified the MLC 2010 include Panama, Canada, Bahams, Norway, Liberia, Marshall Island, Bulgaria, Croatia, and Spain. Countries that are expected to ratify before the end of 2010 are the European Union countries and the Pacific Rim countries.

So what are the significant changes for seafarers?

One aspect would be the contract between seafarer and owner. Some significant new points would include:-

# The seafarer has been given enough time to read and review and also take advice on the contract or agreement before signing. What is "enough time"? That is left to the seafarer. If he feels he has not been given enough time, then he asks for more.

# The full name and address of the shipowner will have to be entered into the contract or agreement. In case the ownership is multiple layered, then all the names and addresses will be required to be entered.

# Full details of the health and social security benefits provided to the seafarer shall have to be entered. In this context, the new rules pertaining to NRIs and "foreign workers/Indians working abroad" under the EPFO may also be seen.

# Where the seafarer is liable for any reason to pay for his repatriation and other expenses, then a maximum amount needs to be set out in the contract/agreement itself. This can not be open ended as it is now.

# A :Shipowner's Complaint Procedure" will have to be defined and made available to the seafarer. The exact mechanics of this are yet unknown, but it is expected that this will have provision for referral back to flag and port state.

# Disciplinary rules and procedures will have to be set down, in detail, in keeping with flag and port state requirements. This appears to be a tough one. Each Port State will have different rules for such actions.

# On rest periods, much was expected, but little has changed. Maximum interval between 2 rest periods will be 14 hours. Extra work impacting rest hours for any reason - emergency, drills, musters, safety, peril - must be compensated.

# Paid leave entitlement is now a minimum of 40 days in each year of employment. This means 325 days work, 40 days leave, which works backwards to about 3.75 days per month. Pro-rata if employed for less than a year. In other words, for a 3-month contract, onboard for 2 months and 20 days entitles you to 10 days leave. Encashment of leave permitted.

# Termination of contract by seafarer for urgent or compassionate reasons shall be without cost to the seafarer. Notice period for termination of contract shall be not less than 7 days on both sides, and both seafarer as well as shipowner shall have equal number of days for this.

# Dental treatment will now be included in medical care, when visiting doctors ashore.

+++

Ofcourse, the above is still evolving, and there may be variations as and when the MLC 2010 comes into force in your Flag State. But expect the Port State Control to implement their version of MLC 2010 with vigour, and  soon.

Good luck. One more inspector . . .

Mariners Welfare Guild - and you

Want to do something to help improve things for seafarers?

Take a look here:-

http://www.marinerswelfareguild.com/

And then, if you agree, join.

Costs nothing but a wee bit of time.

Somali piracy now all over the Arabian Sea.

And here is where Al jazeera television gives us seafarers a different camera eye's view on the issue of piracy in the Arabian Sea.

http://www.marinebuzz.com/2009/07/03/somali-piracy-al-jazeera-videos-reveal-more/

The latest attacks, 300-400 miles west of Mangalore and Mumbai, reportedly by speedboats launched from mother ship / deep sea trawlers, makes this appear as more than just some bad dream that will go away.

The bigger issues here are:-

# psychological impact of ship's complement, especially the Master, when heading through the Arabian Sea. Imagine a voyage from, say, West Coast of India to literally anywhere in the world. Are we even aware of what the Master has to answer from crew, onboard ships with nothing more than fire-hose and SSO certificates, when we also know that other ships in the area are carrying armed guards?

# will the crew/officers get their wages when captured is another issue which the Master and company do not have an answer for. A quick poll indicated that people expect atleast triple wages while captured, and some heavy insurance in case of any damage caused during the capture.

One way out would be for the authorities, DGShipping, to ensure that all ships carrying Indian seafarers should:-

* provide insurance equal to total salary paid out monthly to their families while under capture by taking out policies equal to 24 months, and then pay the hardship allowance at twice that again when released.
*provide death/disability insurance equal to atleast 120 months total salary for all seafarers trading Arabian Sea.

This would obviously be in addition to the normal insurance and other benefits in case of any incidents.

I have met some people who have been released after hijacking, or after they were jailed abroad, and most of them have had their spirits broken.

Your views, please? Why should being captured by pirates be treated as anything lesser than a major disability, while on active duty??

Do you know that some seafarers have had to beg for their wages, and what their families are going through while the breadwinners are captured??

Curious shipping accidents, and photos therein

This is not morbid, but in a way amusing - you wonder how some of them got there?

http://curiousphotos.blogspot.com/2009/08/marine-accidents-19-pics.html

And here's one of the most amazing ones I read about - the Second Mate thought the radar showed a huge big cloud, de-selected it around 0330, and then handed over watch to the Chief Officer at 4am.  Nobody looked at the other radar, nobody looked at the charts, both electronic and paper, and nobody apparently looked outside at the breakers too.

Clear visibility as far as you could see. And then this tanker simply climbed onboard the island. What sort of coffee were they serving on the SICHEM OSPREY, then?

http://maritimeaccident.org/2010/10/sichem-osprey-athol-story-of-pirate-island-clouded-judgement-and-coffee-grounds/

(Thank you, Bob Couttie)

During the investigation, the Second Officer, who was the only passage planner on board since the others weren't competent apparently (????!!!!) did not know if it was a great circle course or a rhumbline, from Panama to Ulsan

http://cdn.tahitipresse.pf/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/clipperton.jpg

How many people should we have on board ships??

I believe the Port State authorities in Spain and the US, and now to some extent Greece also, have recently as Port States started taking some interesting initiatives in placing their National interests first as far as safe manning onboard ships of other flags visiting their waters and ports/countries is concerned. I do not have the exact details, but have heard about how the number of watch-keepers, for example, has to be "better" if that from the flag state is at variance to what the port state expects.

There is no reason to not motivate the Indian Government to do so for all vessels calling Indian ports, also - we are not exactly minnows in the world of ocean trade either. Likewise, with some foresight, the same can be applied to ships entering Indian waters in their voyages worldwide - especially now that ships from the PG to the Far East as well as others tend to hug the Indian coast because of the Red Sea/Somalia piracy issues.

Just a thought - but worth pursuing. Or we keep our peace - Black Rose at Paradeep and similar not-withstanding. Volvo buses plying between Mumbai and Bangalore now have 4 drivers (2 for city at each end and 2 for the long haul) like do Suez Pilots - but at sea, we keep worrying about Indian seafarers becoming non-competitive?

As far as reduced manning is concerned - it is my submission that for the typical ship-owner/operator, human beings on board are certificates of competency that eat food, so the fewer the better. In the risk analysis of seaworthy in terms of documentation versus seaworthy in terms of actual facts, the cost of those lives is factored in - so the fewer the better. Barring the Derbyshire and maybe a few other cases, has anybody here heard of family or flag state pressing for investigations, lately?