В настоящей статье рассматриваются вопросы, связанные с бюрократизацией судоходства. Плавсостав обременен значительными обязанностями по составлению многочисленных документов и изучению документов, составленных другими. Составление различных планов, учетных документов и отчетности занимает около 85% времени старших офицеров на судах. Увеличение за счет бумажной работы времени на обучение и профессиональный тренинг команды способствовало бы уменьшению количества чрезвычайных морских происшествий. Автор предлагает передать обязанность по ведению бумажной работы корабельному писарю.
I would like to express my warmest appreciation to the NI for the report published in Seaways concerning the China Maritime Conference in 2014 (‘Reducing the administrative burden’, May 2014). It was at once encouraging and scary to read the presentations from Captain Sanjeev Kumar and Captain Chawla. Encouraging, because it is good to hear seafarers’ feelings and experience being spoken aloud, and maybe they will be noted. Scary, because the figures presented are so horrifying.
The view onboard
For the last several years I have been working as the Master on VLCCs. The vessels I sail on are managed by one of the ‘leading’ companies. You would expect the standards on such vessels to be high, as is clearly stated in our SMS policies. In recent years, everyone working on board our vessels has noticed that development of standards mainly means expanding the SMS, and implementation of ‘ship-specific’ procedures. We all understand that this is due to constant pressure from the market, and a need to keep ahead of the competition. What we do not understand is why all this pressure has been passed on to ships’ staff.
Complication and duplication
In concrete terms, what exactly does the bureaucratic burden on board look like? A few examples:
RISK ASSESSMENT
The company has implemented risk assessment in our planned maintenance system (PMS), but still requires us to fill out and report the risk assessment in the old fashioned way as well, using the previous forms. Now we have to do the same job twice. If risk assessment is so effective, why has it not been standardised?
HOURS OF REST
The oil majors demand advance planning of Hours of Rest. Every professional knows it is not feasible to accurately predict a tanker’s cargo operation schedule to within 30 minutes. In such cases, the planning is theoretical only, and can rightly be considered part of the bureaucratic burden.
Another thorny issue: the software does not allow us to calculate overtime separately from resting hours. To calculate the real overtime, senior officers have to do it again, manually.
On top of this, all rest hour records have to be exchanged with the office three times a month. Prior to sending the records to the office, the Master and head of departments have to check that they were correctly filled out by the ratings. We are threatened with sanctions against crew and seniors if wrong entries or non-compliance is discovered, or if the company is not promptly notified in case of deviation. And yet, we are expected to manage all this with reduced deck and engine room crew.
CREW MANGEMENT
Twice a month, even if nothing has changed, or as often as there is any change to certification status or crew complement, we have to send updated reports on the officer’s matrix, VPQ and Q88, even though the ship managers are well aware of the changes.
Time lost
Senior officers are overloaded with paperwork. I estimate we have to spend 85% of the time on paperwork: creating or filing documents and reports, checking forms, reports and documents filled out bv others, answering e-mails, confirming ‘receipt and understanding’, and so on. Planning and supervision of maintenance, cargo operation and routine inspections still have to be carried out. There is no time for proper relaxation or social life. At the same time, the company is deeply concerned about resting hours. The crew has to be rested, overtime has to be avoided. How?
Some possible solutions
Do we actually need to earn” out paper-based risk assessment to the extent that we currently do? It is bordering on insanity; risk assessment for painting on the poop deck, a separate risk assessment for painting on the forecastle. We old-timers are used to carrying out risk assessment for every job – but we did not put it on paper, but in our head. We could do this, because of the basic education we had received, the professional education we had gained, and experience captured from superiors and more experienced colleagues – all things there is little time for now.
All too often, the people responsible for these regulations forget or do not know the reality on board, which is not always easy to imagine ashore. How would office employees react if they had to fill out a risk assessment each morning before sitting in front of their computers? In any case, all the checklists and safety campaigns are not sufficiently effective, given that one of the leading oil majors reported 700 incidents during 2013! Maybe if, instead of meetings and filling checklists, more time could be allocated for mentoring, on the job training or even a moment of reflection, the amount of incidents would be reduced significantly.
Bring back the clerk!
The Master is responsible for the safe and efficient operation of the vessel. It is imperative that he should have an opportunity to run the ship without being overloaded with unnecessary paper work. Supervision, planning and mentoring is the work of the Master. Paperwork, however important, should be delegated to the ship’s clerk.
Signs of progress?
Back in 2011, the IMO requested the Council to establish an Ad Hoc Steering Group for Reducing Administrative Requirements. So far, all we have seen on board is words.
Автор:
Capt Tomasz Kilanski
AFNI
Источник:
Seaways. – 2014. – December. – P. 16.