FRIDAY MAY 30, 2008 Lloyd’s List
First Person:
Dirty work: crews were cut thanks to automation, but Hendrik van Hemmen says now is the time to address the extra workload created by green concerns.
R Marine
ADIO officers were considered an indis-
pensable beacon for safety and effi-
ciency in the aftermath of the Titanic
casualty a century ago, and the use and
employment of these individuals was
actively encouraged and eventually incorporated into
international regulations.
Is today’s surfeit of environmental systems and the
workloads that they spawn a similar tipping point,
one that can only be redressed, or even addressed,
with the creation of an entirely new position?
A marine consultant and naval architect in Red
Bank, New Jersey, is making such a case.
Hendrik van Hemmen, principal of naval architec-
ture, engineering and consulting firm Martin, Otta-
way, van Hemmen and Dolan, has been investigating
the relationship between increased regulations and
increased workloads.
His conclusion, Mr van Hemmen tells Lloyd’s List,
is that it might be prudent as well as opportune for all
large merchant vessels to add a dedicated environ-
mental department to the ship’s complement.
“The time has come for the industry and the Inter-
national Maritime Organization to return ship’s
crews’ workloads to a realistic level,” he says.
The environmental department suggested by him
might consist of just the environmental officer, or the
officer plus a dedicated rating. Creation of this new
position would allow for the environmental workload
that has been added to normal shipboard operations
in the last few decades, he suggests.
Mr van Hemmen does not make this suggestion to
simply add more cost to ship operators, but compares
it with other manning trends that have taken place in
the history of modern shipping.
Some of these end up in crew reductions and some
result in increases in crew levels. He uses the fate of
the radio officer as an example.
While a radio officer was meant to increase safety
and efficiency, this position was increasingly seen as
superfluous due to increased automation of radio
equipment and was eventually eliminated under the
assumption that, if it is in good operating condition,
today’s ship-to-shore communications equipment
can be used by ‘anyone’.
As a marine consultant, having seen the stress on
crews aboard vessels, Mr van Hemmen performed a
‘human system integration’ analysis on today’s mer-
chant vessels. His conclusions are precise and power-
ful. “As compared to the workload on an automated
vessel 25 years ago, crews simply cannot accomplish
what they are actually tasked to do,” Mr van Hemmen
says.
“Instead, crews end up cutting corners where they
can, while at the same time providing the appearance
that all is working. This hurts the crews and hurts our
industry.”
Even as ocean trade sails on through the genera-
tions with timeless grace and infinite efficiency, the
milieu in which modern-day industry operates has
shifted away from the romantic and daredevil days of
yore, Mr van Hemmen says. These changes are mostly
related to emerging international environmental reg-
ulations.
“Our seafarers are centre-stage in some of the most
dramatic developments and changes the profession
has ever seen,” he says.
“Not too long ago the seafarer just served the
owner. Today, the ship’s crew does not just serve the
owner, but also the public.
“Besides ensuring that the cargo is properly cared
for and delivered, and that the propeller turns, the
ship’s crew and particularly the ship’s officers are now
also tasked with the maintenance of systems that
have nothing to do with the cargo or propeller, but
consultant
Hendrik van
Hemmen,
right, is on a
mission to
redress the
sometimes
fatal
imbalance
between workload and
workforce. Rajesh Joshi reports
instead exist to ensure that the ship’s impact to the
environment is reduced to an absolute minimum.
“Reducing environmental impact is a noble goal on
many levels and not just from the shipowner’s point
of view. When ship’s crews learn to operate systems
that protect the environment, they will take that
knowledge to the shore in their homelands and that
will benefit all of us in all the countries of the world.”
However, in the rush to ensure the environment is
protected, the industry has not had the chance to
evaluate the effect on ship’s crews, Mr van Hemmen
says. “Unfortunately, as an industry, we have failed
miserably in providing the ship’s crews with the
proper training, manpower and motivation to operate
all the environmental systems that are being installed
aboard ships at the direction of IMO, national and
state governments.
“This failure to ensure that the crews are properly
integrated in an industry-wide movement at making
ships leading examples of environmental responsibil-
ity is not due to any nefarious inaction by regulators,
shipowners, or crews, but stems from a simple techni-
cal oversight.”
This oversight fails to recognise the correlation
between workload and workforce, Mr van Hemmen
suggests.
“Ship operators and designers have always striven
to greater efficiencies, often with great success. One of
those successes was the implementation of large scale
automations in the wheel house and the engine room
in the late 1970s.
“This reduced the typical bulker or tanker crew
from about 40 to about 20 officers and ratings.
“However, all the new environmental regulations
that have come into effect since the late 1980s have
now exponentially increased communications and
reporting tasks aboard ships. In addition, ship’s crews
now also have to understand, operate and maintain
the many new environmental systems and equipment
that have arrived aboard vessels because of these reg-
ulations.
“This is where the technical oversight occurred.
While we reduced crews when we did not need as
many crew members due to automations, we
neglected to increase crew sizes with the increasing
communication loads, paperwork loads, training
loads, maintenance loads and operational loads that
resulted from new regulations.”
The environmental officer billet would serve to
redress this glaring oversight, he suggests. Moreover,
the position could also afford the incumbent a
rewarding and exciting career path in its own right.
As outlined in a technical paper that Mr van Hem-
men will present at the Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers’ Ship Operations Symposium
in Greece this September, a ship’s officer would need
to fill this billet before he or she can advance to mas-
ter or chief engineer.
It would be a ship officer’s first departmental com-
mand, and would include a period in the shore oper-
ational office that would make the officer familiar
with shore-based procedures and personnel.
“This position would provide the chief engineer
and master with the skills, time and insight to prop-
erly address the much more complex environment
faced by masters and chief engineers today,” Mr van
Hemmen says.
“A dedicated environmental department aboard
merchant ships will ensure that shipping will success-
fully continue to be in the vanguard of humanity’s
advance to greater good for all, and we should not
wait to make this vital technical adjustment.”
Insight & Opinion 9
Hendrik
van Hemmen
Why ship’s
officers should
get the same
respect as
airline crews
A
S A marine consultant I have the pleas-
ure of slowly dragging myself through
the airport security line.
This provides me with ample time to
observe chipper airline crews with their
roll-on bags and uniforms sail through the crew-
only line, and wonder why I, as a paying passen-
ger, am not extended the same privilege.
It makes no sense from a business point of view.
Why does the service provider enjoy greater privi-
leges than the customer? As a customer, I should
blame myself for not protesting more loudly.
But as a person who serves the marine industry,
the ‘crew only’ line is even more deeply troubling.
Why do aircraft crews enjoy this privilege while
similar privileges are not extended to ship’s crews?
In worth, stress and skills there is no compari-
son. Airline officers basically work an eight-hour
day, sleep in comfortable hotels and, in essence,
have no maintenance, management or operational
worries beyond flying the plane from point to
point with detailed instructions provided through
outside assistance. If something on the plane does
not work, they fill in the gripe sheet and leave it to
the ground crew to deal with, without worrying as
to whether they can take the plane out the next
day or not.
How sharply this contrasts with ship’s crews.
After slugging themselves across the ocean
standing day and night watches for many days,
they arrive in port and are interrogated, inspected,
investigated and treated as suspects by the port
they arrive in. They do not get to leave the ship so
they can sleep in a hotel room, but instead work
long hours until the vessel is ready to leave again.
They do not get the benefit of repair and ground
crews that ready their ship for the next trip.
Instead they stay aboard and do it all themselves.
Ship’s crews are not just ship drivers; they are very
highly skilled individuals who perform a huge
number of different tasks. While there are ranks
and task divisions aboard a ship, in fact, with
today’s small crews, ship’s officers are jacks of all
trades and master of most. What is incredible is
that, considering the number of various tasks that
officers are engaged in, there are actually people
out there who can perform all those tasks.
To a large extent this is related to the ship’s
crews’ traditional ability to make do, and to bear
the load in silence. Shipboard employment is not
for the faint of heart and those who can handle
the load simply are not the types to complain.
Still, as an industry, we know there are rumblings
from the crews and our difficulties in attracting
young people into the seafaring profession are
probably a sign of our neglect.
Actually, today we are facing a crisis in ship crew-
ing. Some argue that young people are no longer
interested in the hardships at sea. This is possible,
but I do know there are still plenty of young people
who are willing to undergo hardship if it includes
commensurate respect and compensation. There
are still plenty of young people who endeavour to
become astronauts, commandos, firefighters and
police officers, and none of those professions can be
characterised as high-paying or low-stress.
While we know there is a shortage of seafarers,
very little research related to crews’ motivations is
taking place. One exception is the Shiptalk crew
survey programme that is presently underway*,
and hopefully this very worthwhile effort will shed
more light on this complex subject. (If you have
contact with ship’s crews, please encourage them
to do this survey. Our industry desperately needs
the data to be able to attract the next generation
of seafarers.)
What does the preliminary data show? It points
to factors such as increased paperwork, schizo-
phrenic job description, lack of shore time, lack of
training, excessive work hours and lack of rest.
But regardless of the results of the survey, we
will fail in finding the next generation of seafarers
if, as an industry, we do not insist on better treat-
ment and greater respect for crews.
At this stage there are no simple answers but
every journey starts with the first step and in this
regard let me suggest that at the next ship visit,
when you ask to see the master or one of his offic-
ers, that you do not judge them by their dirty cov-
eralls, puffy eyes and their limited success in mak-
ing themselves understood in your native language.
Instead, realise that you are not talking to just
some random labourer, but rather that you are
talking to a hardworking ship’s officer who, with
his shipmates, has just hauled thousands of tonnes
of vital materials across the ocean. That this
officer is not just a boat driver but a person skilled
in foreign languages, works with technologies that
you might have never heard of, is able to perform
managerial, security, legal, commercial, opera-
tional, repair, maintenance and reporting tasks
that you might have never heard of, is able to do it
far from his home and his family and does it 24
hours a day, seven days a week.
I cannot think of a way to provide these officers
with crew-only privileges, and I doubt it would
impress ship’s officers, but, as an industry, we will
be well served if we provide them with the respect
they deserve in any other way we can.
*http://www.shiptalkjobs.com/common/survey.php