[Marmot]

“You are right in that the "paper" knowledge is about to kill the real world knowledge.”

Let’s look at this from another point of view. The number of commercial yachts is growing rapidly. The number of trained and experienced mariners is dropping nearly as quickly. The passengers carried aboard a commercial yacht have every right to expect that the crew and yacht both meet the highest standards in every respect. The increased training standards were developed to protect passengers and the environment, not to eliminate “real world knowledge.”


STCW and the other IMO conventions related to maritime safety did not just appear because the regulators were bored, they were developed in response to a real need to improve safety and reduce the number of deaths of crew and passengers and reduce marine pollution. None of this really applied to yachts in the past, yachts were for the most part privately owned and the public was at little risk. The only yachts that traveled the oceans were mostly privately crewed by professionals with a long history and a great deal of experience. Very few advertised themselves as charter boats and offered international cruises to anyone with enough money.

With charter yachts over 300 tons becoming the norm and yachts over 500 tons very common in international trade, they have become commercial shipping as much as a bulk carrier or containership. The life of a yacht charter passenger is no less worthy of a qualified crew than one onboard a cruise ship or ferry.

We are talking about international trade, not the small boats being used to take people fishing on near shore waters or day-trips around a bay somewhere. There are no new requirements for US issued “6-pax” or the other highly limited domestic tickets that have no application or validity on commercial yachts.

There is a new world order, we can either adapt or become irrelevant. The seatime and experience of the old guard is not gone but unless they have evolved with the system and made the choice to continue their professional development through recurrent training and upgrades they will be left in the past. It is a matter of keep up or get forced out. It isn’t necessarily fair but it is the only way to eliminate those who can’t keep up. And that is what is most important to the future of the industry.

Do I think the “system” is going is the right direction? Mostly yes, but I believe it is a flawed system, especially in the case of yacht restricted licenses. The sea-time requirements are so very low that we are becoming highly dependent on technology to replace experience and a quick review of the accident reports makes it very obvious that technology alone is not sufficient.

[AMG]

Originally Posted by Marmot

“You are right in that the "paper" knowledge is about to kill the real world knowledge.”

Let’s look at this from another point of view. The number of commercial yachts is growing rapidly. The number of trained and experienced mariners is dropping nearly as quickly. The passengers carried aboard a commercial yacht have every right to expect that the crew and yacht both meet the highest standards in every respect. The increased training standards were developed to protect passengers and the environment, not to eliminate “real world knowledge.”

I am not sure I follow what you are saying, but when I say real world knowledge, I mean what it takes to do the job, not to get the job.

[Marmot]

"... when I say real world knowledge, I mean what it takes to do the job ..."

Uh, that is what I was writing about. To do the job now takes a lot more training and the certifications to prove it. Doing the job is more than just steering a boat and avoiding the rocks and shoals.

[AMG]

Originally Posted by Marmot

Doing the job is more than just steering a boat and avoiding the rocks and shoals.

If you look into all of the courses here, there isn´t much a senior yacht captain doesn´t already know: http://www.bluewateryachting.com/yac...nformation.php

[NYCAP123]

So not counting the time it takes to gain enough experience to "just steer and stay off the rocks and shoals" (which so far has taken me 50 years) a person entering this field should go to this school for about 150 days and pay several thousand dollars for the privlige of what. And that's not counting little things like stints at a merchant marine accadamy or military time. Oh well, at least they'll be able to read a wine label. I'm sure that will make up for not being able to read a sea or a chart like the yacht I watched coming down from Boston in 7' seas last summer who followed his courseline religiously while taking it on the quarter all the way to the CC canal (can anyone spell seasick guests)and while almost running into a lighthouse because he didn't notice the buoy a 1/4 mile to its east. I think the profession may be heading for a time when they have very well tested, multiply certified, computer skilled ....oh wait, they can make more money on land working 9-5 and have a family.

[Marmot]

” … a person entering this field should go to this school for about 150 days and pay several thousand dollars for the privlige of what …?”

Since the original poster has already invested considerable time and effort in training, has acquired the certification required for international service aboard a commercial vessel, and is seeking a berth as a senior officer I think he has already answered your question. If you want to work for big bucks as an officer onboard a commercial vessel in international service you have a few hoops to jump through. If you can’t or won’t then the system has worked, it has filtered out those we can’t afford in this business any more.

“You are right in that the "paper" knowledge is about to kill the real world knowledge.”

No, it adds value to real world knowledge. It is one of the requirements to hold a license and utilize that knowledge in the industry. If you want to carry passengers for hire or sell your skills and call yourself a professional you will have to keep up the paperwork like every other licensed professional. The “good old days” are gone and they aren’t coming back.

“I will say though that they are regulating and licensing old and young out of the trade. Just too many papers required these days and they cost too much in money and time to get to be worth the trouble. I think I'm getting out at my next renewal. That's a bit of experience leaving the trade”.

What are “too many papers?” How many do you personally need to renew? If you only have a 100 ton ticket, no STCW, and only work inland and near coastal waters in small boats the only paper you need to get is a TWIC. If that describes your position, all you need do is to spend $105 on a TWIC. No one is regulating or licensing small boat operators out of “the trade.” That doesn’t seem like enough of a burden to drive an old pro out of the “trade.” That “trade” is not what we are talking about anyway and it is not what the original poster is looking to get into. All my comments are about commercial yachting which is an international business that falls under a much more complex regulatory regime than U.S. inland or near coastal voyages on small boats.

“… years is worth nothing since I have not been renewing my papers this side of the millenium.”

The point is that if we make the choice to NOT take professional advancement courses, license upgrade training, and participate in the system that has evolved to increase marine safety and protect passengers and the environment then that is what happens. There are few professions where recurrent training and professional growth is not part of the process.

[AMG]

My only problem is that I have not been working as a captain for a 12 month period during the last five years. I have just had fun with boats...

[Marmot]

"I have just had fun with boats... "

Well, if you are lucky enough to be able to choose, that is at the top of my list. We should all have such results from our problems. 8-)

[NYCAP123]

The proof of it all comes down to this. Are the positions getting filled or is one person doing the job of two. Are you ending up with untrained and inexperienced crew that hold all sorts of certifications. I keep reading about people looking for work in this industry boasting that they have or are about to complete their STCW, but have basically never set foot on a boat. As for us guys with these little coastal licenses that aren't worth much, in the last 2 years I've kept (4) 100 ft. plus yachts from running aground, more than a dozen in my career. Some of the big guys aren't so great about reading coastal waters, but at least they listen to their radios. Don't be too quick to knock the little guys. They run hundreds of hours each year in the shallows, in close quarters, in storms. Most of them barely earn a living though and can't really afford another $105 or another day off to go to the CG. They will give up their time to come help you though when you need. We go out when the oil spills or the planes crash or the megayachts sink.

[Marmot]

“The proof of it all comes down to this.”

Proof of ?

“ Are the positions getting filled or is one person doing the job of two.”

Large yachts carry a little piece of paper called a Minimum Safe Manning Certificate, it determines the number of crewmembers and their level of certification. Sometimes one person does indeed do the job of two such as when a deckhand holds an engineering certificate of some sort. Most crews are larger than the minimum anyway and most crews multitask.

“Are you ending up with untrained and inexperienced crew that hold all sorts of certifications.”

That is the problem with yacht limited certificates. They don’t require much sea time and rapid promotion often leads to unqualified people working above their experience and qualifications.

“ I keep reading about people looking for work in this industry boasting that they have or are about to complete their STCW, but have basically never set foot on a boat”

H’mmmmm Let me try and explain it to you cap …it’s not a boast. It says that they know what the minimum training requirement is for being able to work on a large yacht and have made the effort to obtain the training. STCW is an IMO Convention created to establish minimum levels of training for seafarers. There is a group of courses referred to as Basic Safety Training or BST which is required of crewmembers working on a vessel in international service. It’s primary purpose is to provide people who may “have never set foot on a boat” with a minimum level of training that might save their lives, show them how to fight fires, and help them to understand some of the risks of seafaring and how to deal with them. I recommend you look up STCW and see what it is all about.

“Don't be too quick to knock the little guys.”

Looking back over the posts I don’t see anything knocking the “little guys.” I just pointed out that there are no increased training requirements or regulatory issues that effect U.S. domestic inland or near coastal operators of small vessels.


"Most of them barely earn a living though and can't really afford another $105 or another day off to go to the CG."

Keep up the good work but don’t forget to get your TWIC before next April or you will be pleasure boating. And don’t go to the CG for a TWIC or you will waste a big part of that day. Fill out the enrollment form online and make an appointment at your nearest TWIC facility.

[NYCAP123]

Believe me, a trip to Staten Island takes no less time than a trip to the CG in Manhattan, and everything taught in the STCW I learned through OJT (except for the wine class). Unfortunately, too many consider that experience and the Minimun Safe Manning Certificate as the recommended level of staffing.
I read as part of a thread here recently about a charter yacht that was lost to a laundry room fire. It was cited that the captain was overworked and tired because he didn't have enough crew, the crew he had lacked experience and the vessel was maintained to minimum standards by investor owners. No fault was found though because it was noted that this is the situation throughout the industry at this time.
I'm not against licensing. I'm not against security. I'm certainly not against education. I just think that the process needs to be streamlined and more credit be given to experience. The original poster to this thread is over the hill in this business...He should be sought out and begged to bring his experience on board even if he doesn't know how to make a perfect martini.

[Marmot]

"... and everything taught in the STCW I learned through OJT (except for the wine class)."

One of the forum rules is to "be polite" so I will do just that and let your statement speak for itself. By the way, there is no wine class required by the STCW convention.

"Unfortunately, too many consider that experience and the Minimun Safe Manning Certificate as the recommended level of staffing."

BST is not experience, it is training. The safe manning level is not recommended, it is mandatory, and for all practical purposes, nearly every boat has a crew size 2 to 6 times the minimum manning level.

"No fault was found though because it was noted that this is the situation throughout the industry at this time."

I strongly suggest you download and read the MAIB report on the loss of the Lady Candida. In my humble opinion, your understanding of the loss and the circumstances leading to it and the board's conclusions may be very wide of the mark.

"even if he doesn't know how to make a perfect martini."

Again, I will let that comment speak for itself as well.

Thank you for your contribution though. I must commend you on your excellent illustration of several of the reasons why the IMO was compelled to create STCW and ISM.

[Ken Bracewell]

Originally Posted by Marmot

[i]Keep up the good work but don’t forget to get your TWIC before next April or you will be pleasure boating. And don’t go to the CG for a TWIC or you will waste a big part of that day. Fill out the enrollment form online and make an appointment at your nearest TWIC facility.

I spent an hour filling out the form because the TSA website was slower than molasses on a winter morning (I can only surmise because I haven't seen a cold morning in 12 years )
So I made and appointment and then followed a guy in the door who hadn't made one. I then waited and hour while the TSA subcontractor filled out the form for the guy! Hopefully the appointments will work out better for others.

[Ken Bracewell]

Originally Posted by NYCAP123

everything taught in the STCW I learned through OJT (except for the wine class).

In a perfect world this would be taken into consideration, but imagine the logistical nightmare if every mariner had to be individually and objectively evaluated. Heck, there is something like a 16 week backlog at the Miami Regional Examination Center just to assess whether or not mariners meet the standardized requirements for licensing.
When I was a kid in Canada, I know for a fact that the Canadian Coast Guard used to offer limited licenses based on objective assesment of qualifications. For example, they would give a regionally restricted license to a fisherman who had been fishing the same waters his whole life, but couldn't give 2 *@&#'s about what color light a submarine shows when on the surface, or which side the red buoy is on when approaching from sea in Africa. This was very logical and noble, but I would bet that it has gone by the wayside there too.


BTW- what boater doesn't learn about wine OTJ?? I could operate a corkscrew when I was 12 and driving the boat for my folks because they were having too much wine.

[Seafarer]

Originally Posted by Marmot

"Unfortunately, too many consider that experience and the Minimun Safe Manning Certificate as the recommended level of staffing."

BST is not experience, it is training. The safe manning level is not recommended, it is mandatory, and for all practical purposes, nearly every boat has a crew size 2 to 6 times the minimum manning level.

Since you've got your danders up, there seems to be some misinterpretation. Take a deep breath, and a step back...

NYCAP seems to be saying that, in too many cases "training and certification" is substituted for "experience" because experience carries a higher price tag. He's right, objectively and subjectively.

NYCAP also seems to be saying that, in too many cases the "mandatory minimum" is substituted for "recommended level" (or adequate staffing) because the bare minimum seems to be a cost advantage to investor-owners. He's also right about that, objectively and subjectively.

I'm all for training and certification, but when people point to "mandatory minimum" training or "mandatory minimum" certification in lieu of experience or hands-on training to determine sufficiency or proficiency or ability, it scares the living daylights out some of us - as it should you, as a professional.