Front Page |
 |
 |
Staring Down The Deadline For STCW '95 Compliance |
|
|
|
|
By MICHAEL R. McKAY | |
|
Remember when all you needed to work as a U.S. merchant marine officer were your Z-card and your license? That was before the rigid regime known as STCW '95--Standards for Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping, adopted by the U.S. and other seafaring countries through the International Maritime Organization of the United Nations. The IMO was established March 17, 1948, and it now has 154 participating countries. Its initial function was to draw up treaties establishing safety and pollution prevention protocols that have by now been ratified by nearly all IMO nations. While the IMO establishes international requirements, enforcement is up to individual countries. When the U.S. accepts an IMO convention, for example, it agrees to conform its laws and regulations to the IMO's. "The problem is that some countries lack the expertise, experience and resources necessary to do this properly," said an IMO official in 1998. "Others perhaps put enforcement fairly low down their list of priorities. With 154 governments as members, IMO has plenty of teeth. The trouble is that some of them don't bite." Once an IMO convention is in place, the IMO must reconcile what the official called "a maze of differing, often conflicting national laws--one nation ... might insist on lifeboats being made of steel and another of glass-reinforced plastic. Some nations might insist on very high safety standards, while others might be more lax, acting as havens for substandard shipping." We're seeing that now with STCW, which is the IMO's attempt to narrow the safety standard gap between the U.S. and Liberia, for example. In January, IMO Secretary-General William O'Neil said in London that the organization had found "very disturbing" evidence of fraudulent STCW certification under some flags of convenience. IMO researchers will now attempt to pinpoint what one report called "the nature and extent of unlawful practices," with emphasis on "the identification of the major unlawful practices and their main sources and geographical areas." The IMO project will estimate the number of forged STCW certificates and endorsements on the high seas and "the frequency and extent to which certificates of competency are checked by employers, issuing states, and flag states." The report noted: "Fraudulent certification is by no means a new issue. However, the IMO has been under increasing pressure for action as a result of its adoption, nearly five years ago in July 1995, of radically revised standards of training, certification, and watchkeeping." But the issue of whether STCW will be uniformly and fairly enforced worldwide is another topic for another time. In the U.S., STCW is enforced by the Coast Guard--an agency that, to its lasting credit, takes its responsibilities seriously and cuts no slack when it comes to mariner qualifications. The IMO's STCW convention requires compliance by February 2002, and U.S. merchant marine officers who have not completed all of the appropriate training in the relevant and specific seafaring disciplines will not be permitted by the Coast Guard to work on ships operating outside U.S. waters. The choice for all officers is therefore plain, if unpleasant--compliance with STCW mandates or limited job opportunities. That's obviously an important consideration in AMO, the only U.S. merchant marine officers' union with a steadily growing deep-sea job base--no AMO member should have his or her work options narrowed for lack of STCW certification. So our immediate priority is to certify every deep-sea AMO member under STCW in advance of the deadline. AMO's Raymond T. McKay Centers for Advanced Maritime Officers' Training and RTM Simulation, Training, Assessment and Research Centers are operating at capacity to meet demand, and the schools are expanding to provide such required training as lifeboat and fast rescue boat proficiency. The STCW intent--greater safety at sea--is admirable. But STCW has forced complicated and expensive adjustment on AMO's training programs, and it is an imposition on each AMO member, who must spend even more time away from home and personal interests--even if an officer has been at sea for four or more months at a time, he or she must still schedule STCW training while ashore. But there could be a sea change brewing in the IMO bureaucracy, where some are beginning to question the wisdom of reflexive rein-tightening--typically occurring after a catastrophe at sea, such as the December 1999 sinking of the Maltese tanker Erika, which fouled the French coastline with heavy fuel oil. "The feeling now is that we have somehow got to get away from this cycle of disaster followed by reaction followed by regulation," IMO spokesman Roger Kohn said in the Feb. 21 issue of Traffic World magazine. "Everyone is conscious of the fact that every time something goes wrong there is a new regulation--we are trying to cut back on the amount of regulations and inspections." Meanwhile, STCW in its current form is here to stay, and additional requirements are always possible. AMO members who have not yet received the appropriate certifications, or who need additional information about STCW or other training needs, are asked to call Student Services at CAMOT/STAR in Dania Beach at 1-800-942-3220, ext. 7112, for class schedules and availability. CAMOT/STAR will do everything possible to accommodate them. |
 |
| Front Page |  |
Return To Section-Front |