Guidance

Further comments on the standards of certification, training and watchkeeping survey

Published 1 May 2020

The following are raw, verbatim comments and suggestions from respondents collected during the standards of training, certification and watchkeeping (STCW) survey review.

1. Navigation and deck survey further comments

• outdated sections/topics should be removed (e.g. LORAN) and any modern equipment or procedures not included should be included (e.g. use of binoNav for navigation etc.)
• we need a much higher standard. Cannot get much lower than present standards
• The load of onboard training shall be reduced. Seafarers shall embark ready to respond and perform in emergencies
• the MCA should take a more proactive role in shutting down some to the profiteering companies who are not providing quality training and are only in it to make money!
• believe there should be less emphasis on principles behind equipment e.g., radar, echo sounder, GPS and more emphasis on their limitations (I realize they are linked)
• please and seriously take a look at Cadets suggestions. We are not all idiots and some of us have been in different professions beforehand that have had to move with the times. If the MCA is sincere about wanting to attract more British Seafarers to choose a career at sea, then we need to update things to reflect the job of a modern-day seafarer, especially in this age of increasing automation. Will there be Deck Officers in 50 years? We need to retake our place as the world’s leading maritime nation and produce the best Officers in the world
• good questionnaire
• yearly refreshing STCW should be removed as there is Drill on board on weekly basis, because these courses are very expensive, and seafarer has no choice - he/she has to do these courses to join the vessel.
• more enhanced training concerning the application of the COLREGS, enhanced bridge watch keeping procedures and tools for enhanced situational awareness
• my command experience of 17 years and shore management experience of 12 years tells me that there is a serious erosion of knowledge of basic principles of navigation, ship stability and seamanship among junior officers. Senior officers onboard today have no time for mentoring or training juniors, this needs to be shifted ashore to the extent possible. The FAL convention needs serious enforcement to reduce the ridiculous amount of paperwork that Agents are outsourcing to the Master due to easy email communication. Master and CE are PC bound and tying their experience to the chair instead of making their presence felt
• take input from younger stakeholders. Not just the grey beards running the national admins and in senior positions ashore
• it all needs looked at. It requires modernization
• revalidation courses are not needed if the candidate has sailing experience
• refresher training for STCW courses should be conducted with the help of online module course, instead of personally attending the course at training institutions
• damage control course
• specially how to respond during flooding or collision or grounding or such emergencies
• even during my cadetship starting 2013 almost everything I learned in college was so outdated it wasn’t even applicable while I was on board. All reasonable sized ships are now full ECDIS and over certain tonnages have electronic stability equipment. I’m now halfway through my Chief Mate’s and I’ve learned how to make a passage plan on paper charts and stability on paper, but I’m none the wiser where the electronic ECDIS/Stab computer on my actual ship is concerned. What I’m learning in college per the SQA syllabus is irrelevant to my actual work on board.
• smaller certification regarding near coastal and 30’NM limits needs to be simplified.
• smaller tickets to be amalgamated, get rid of confusion amongst some ranks
• what countries actually perform a Oral Examination to attain a CoC (Deck or Engine) and subsequently how easy is it for another non UK attained CoC country to be issued a Uk CeC? Troubling times ahead for agencies blatantly advertising on LinkedIn and other social media sites to assist non Uk CoC holders in obtaining UK CoCs? (Seaworthy Manning ltd agency is one to be asked the question)
• jumping into the sea every five years isn’t necessary. Refreshing equipment is necessary
• first aid should be added.
• close scrutiny of all countries training standards as ability to follow RoR in good time is shocking low by some vessels
• seafarers are saturated with short course additional certification. Any changes made should relate to base syllabus for operational or management certificates and not result in more additional training with personal financial burdens attached
• celestial navigation has no place in the modern application on ships. As carrying a sextant is optional and not carried on any ship I have worked on
• nowhere in this survey has it been mentioned who this survey is commissioned by
• the questions appear to only be geared towards an OOW and I suspect that you will get a very different answer looked at from a different perspective from a Captain
• I feel that the training programs are more down to the individual student doing modules in his own time, having them signed off by a mentor then moving to the next course module without any real depth of knowledge about the subject. Personally, I feel the proper and most valuable way is attending college for 3 months, attending proper tutorials with a lecturer for chart work - Met. - Navigation- stability and G.S.K. After obtaining pre- Lim courses, Electronic Aids, radio Cert (G.M.D.S.S).- E.D.H.- Lifeboat etc. The training today is to stop/start and drawn out taking years to obtain a C.O.C.
• seafaring remains an activity undertaken a long way from help and out of the public eye, in the rush to embrace new technologies and systems do not forget the dark and stormy night in the of ocean when the only thing left between the loss of the ship and crew is the knowledge gained in training and through experience
• more practical skills should be taught to officers, the standard of cadet Seamanship is falling. They should have to spend at least 3/6 months working as an AB or EDH before being allowed to qualify
• celestial navigation not so relevant today. Prioritize more important items on syllabus e.g. safe look out, not over reliance on one bit of equipment, especially electronic. Back to basics with ‘looking out of the window’
• cannot reiterate how important it is to raise the standard of English. Absolutely shocking and appalling how so many watchkeepers, do not understand English or the COLREGs, something needs done very soon!
• if we are leaving the EU, the MCA and the UK, need to do what they can to make this work. Shipping accounts for a lot of our imports and exports. We need to ensure we can rebuild a UK/British merchant navy, we need to make trading areas more obtainable or at least be offered in conjunction with 30-150NM CoC’s. The smaller licenses like these will probably be doing most of the trade with us and the EU, if you brought back a class 5 system (should never have been removed). Furthermore on the reverse side of the CoC you have trading areas for persons who have a class 5 CoC, that’s fine but as you don’t issue these anymore you need to be put training areas for 30-150nm? As quick reference. My masters-OOW are tug only, because i work mainly on tugs but if you proceed to sea on a vessel of more than 80grt and over 24m waterline length, why can’t you sit the Unlimited route? Why are tug crews restricted? Seems to be unfair. In most cases a tug master will go on to be a pilot of some description, so seems to me it’s double sided. In most cases cross channel ferry Officers and crew will never sail around the world and will in most cases stay within the 150nm limit, why is it different for them? Everyone will come back and say well it’s the tonnage, but in most cases tugs we’ll exceed 80grt and generally are bigger than 24m. But the UK have always been good at restricting ourselves. In most cases the UK training weather for a 500grt or an unlimited route is much higher/harder and generally better than other nations
• increase validity of documents, if the Seafarers actively working it’s not necessary to do course every 5 years. The training drills are on board monthly. BUT course like medical is good to refresh knowledge every 5 years
• traditional skills should not be lost. They are the absolute basis and most reliable back up for dealing with ever increasing technology and electronic systems. Fundamental principles of watch-keeping have not changed. Technology and other demands on ship’s crews and shore management have changed. Leadership and Management On Board and Ashore should be a renewed focus. Active CPD and re-validation should be part of the normal culture in our industry. I see a wide variety of standards at the moment (Good and Bad)!!!
• company have stopped paying for refresher training this is expensive for a seafarer
• monthly training onboard should maintain competence following basic STCW courses Having to redo the courses every five years is an unnecessary financial burden
• with STCW having more requirements to revalidate short courses, and with there still being far too many collisions and other maritime incidents… Is there really a need to conduct frequent refreshers when the biggest issue seems to be over-reliance on ECDIS/GPS and poor passage planning
• company should arrange all the updates STCW courses
• the entire syllabus needs bringing up to date. Seafaring traditions and “the old-fashioned way” are nice to learn about and very quaint, but rarely useful. Unfortunately, most of the STCW teachers and lecturers teach by reflecting on their experience at sea, this retrospective method of teaching will never be as proactive and preemptive as the industry needs to be
• renewal of courses every 5 years seems to be a bit much for certain courses such as firefighting and basic safety training especially for those actively sailing. As there are many onboarding trainings schemes, drills and computer-based training
• basically, all of the mentioned topics, are essential for safe operations in worldwide shipping. It should never be considered to lower the standards required by STCW
• STCW courses are a bit gimmicky
• PST refresher isn’t very helpful as it’s just getting into a raft mostly
• advanced firefighting isn’t useful at all - it doesn’t teach you anything at all. Could be far better
• basic FF is far better as its practical and you can learn something i.e. attack nozzles now available whereas weren’t when i was a cadet
• crew members are not able to handle vessels the same way that they used to. This is due to the fact that the same importance is not put on this item and when called on to steer vessel they find it harder due to the electronic steering systems compared with the older hydraulic systems which were slower in response
• The STCW refreshers could be reviewed. In my personal opinion this appears to be a money-making scheme. Is it really helping refresh knowledge of seafarers? For example, personal survival. You go to the course and have the contents of a life raft listed and then jump in a swimming pool. This for me seems hugely unnecessary as this information is available on board your vessel, and who is going to forget how to jump into the sea?
• I gained nothing practically from HELM O. This time could be better served in a simulator
• I do have a recommendation specific to my sector. We have a large number of stewards and stewardesses who have a lot of responsibility and duties in emergencies, most often related to managing the mustering of crew and guests but do not do any training past basic STCW
• I think it would be very beneficial for there to be some mandatory courses for these crew members such as AFF, crisis management, HELM, SSO, medical first aid and Medical care. In an emergency on a yacht it it likely that the deck and engineering officers would be busy dealing with other aspects and therefore it would be extremely helpful for senior crew in other departments to have this training to spread the load and improve standards across the board
• monitoring and recording of oral examinations by video and sound. (personal safety requirement) No STCW certification should include multiple choice options
• UK CEC certification should not include any international examination that has had multiple choice answers. UK CEC certification should include an English examination paper as proof that the candidate fully understands and can write English. (the common language of the sea)
• one of the most important things that I consider important is revision of the COLREGS rules and regulations
• they need more simplification
• scrap the GMDSS, as its outdated and doesn’t reflect on board equipment or operational requirements. Internet and phone via satellite are reliable, fast and efficient
• again, once you do the GMDSS course, you’ll never need 90% of it again
• the standard of STCW courses needs thorough investigation as many seafarers are joining with ‘valid’ certificate but lacking the basic knowledge and skills
• being able to refresh all 4 STCW courses in one day in an ‘approved’ provider overseas for 200euro compared to the UK where each refresher course is a day and £200+ each raises a lot of questions to their validity
• I believe STCW is nothing but a ruse. So, shipowners can replace sailors from more expensive countries with sailors from cheaper places. That is ALL that it has accomplished. It has not made things any safer, the people are NOT any better trained than they were before. It’s all about $$$. If not, then prove it by removing the requirement for shore-based training and assessments!
• PRODUCE A CREDIT SIZE CARD WITH ALL YOUR TRAINING CERTIFICATION ON WHICH IS EASIER TO CARRY AND ACCESS FOR COMPANIES TO CHECK THE DATA BASE FOR AUTHENTICITY. INSTEAD OF CARRYING MORE WIEGHT OF CERTIFICATES IN YOUR BAG THEN WIEGHT IN WORK GEAR, AND GETTING THREATEND WITH DISCIPLIN IF WE DON’T HAVE THEM
• We must retain the orals exams process
• STCW still works mostly
• the maritime schools/education facilities have to be checked that they comply with the level of training which is needed to safely conduct navigational watch
• I think the MCA could do more to help UK CoC holders to achieve higher tickets. As it stands it’s much easier to gain another nationalities CoC then get it converted to a CeC
• CEC given to anyone who applies dilutes the difficulties we have to obtain a COC and the high regard a British Ticket is held worldwide
• the present STCW refresher courses are from my experience, a waste of time. Too many training establishments have seen an opportunity to make money and do not deliver valuable training. Some course lecturers do not even have a MN background and do not recognize a CoC as ID! I did not gain any benefit from having done the familiarization courses. The level of competence can be ensured through other means. For example, for the seafarer to keep a log of all emergency training conducted on board ship
• add more IT knowledge as official requirements, this is future and every year even deckhands have more to do online
• I welcome this review and I hope it can be used to implement significant changes within the training and certification system to better reflect the challenges faced by the modern navigational Officer
• STCW helm is a waste of time
• advanced firefighting could include more for the management of teams and use of resources in an emergency on a larger vessel, e.g. passenger
• the STCW short courses I have attended have all been fantastic
• keep as is
• by far the biggest problem with the current system is poor quality lessons and lecturers. Many of my ‘lessons’ were just the lecturer reading through the notes verbatim. I could get an audiobook to do that. Being a master mariner does not automatically make one a good teacher, so the industry and colleges need to invest, or be forced to invest time and money in teaching their lectures how to teach. Whatever system is currently in place is not working! I truly value having some interesting and experienced mariners teaching me, and listening to their experiences, but they need to be taught how to teach
• generally, the subjects are still fine but it’s up to the colleges to bring them up to date with modern content
• CONSULT WITH LEGAL AND INSURANCE INDUSTRIES TO SEE WHERE FAILURES ARE OCCURING, ADDRESS THESE. STCW SETS THE BAR TO LOW, DEMONSTRATING COMPETENCIES NEEDS TO BE RIGOROUS NOT JUST A COUPLE OF HOURS IN A CLASSROOM OR A RECORD BOOK BEING SIGNED
• as and aside from the actual training, although I personally had a very good experience, the number of colleagues who were let down by their training providers was shocking. There is absolutely no accountability to these organizations whose sole job it should be to ensure their cadets are placed on suitable ships for training purposes and to ensure they get the necessary sea time before their final phase
• finally, I should point out I still think that UK cadets gain the best cadetship overall by far and particularly those who have gone down the HNC/D route. I’m still not sure why an FD route seems to be able to ‘short cut’ or condense the course by so much, making it far more attractive for employers to take on an FD trained officer as they will have a much shorter study leave when training for Chief Mates
• reduce the importance of manual calculations when it come to the old stuff that’s rarely used, focus on the modern systems. A better understanding of mechanical and electro-tech, and administration systems
• more simulator time. We are 40 years behind the aviation industry
• remove PSSR

2. Engineering survey further comments

• For any practicing seafarer the revalidation of various courses should be stopped. Any updates on training should be made compulsory on behalf of owners.
• First Aid training should need to be renewed every 5 years
• There are too many short courses needed to ensure compliance. It should be possible to package all the statutory courses together.
• Look at increasing the amount of sea time between the OOW, Second Engineer and Chief Engineer CoC’s to at least 18 months between each grade, as to increase the practical engineering knowledge as well as introducing more control/electronic training into the syllabus.
• It is appreciated that asking over 170 nations to agree more than “generic statements” about the competency requirements is a difficult task. However, agreeing a greater level of detail at IMO will help to move toward raising the “Global” base level standards of shipboard officers and ratings. A greater appreciation of how people from different nationalities can work together in a coherent team will grow in importance.
• STCW for older seafarers not available
• Skills, qualifications and experience are not keeping pace with increasing ship complexity and exponential rate of technical refresh
• Qualifying sea time is impacting on quality of certified personnel, is at an alarmingly low level. This is with regards Second Engineer to Chief Engineer.
• I was fortunate to do my cadetship with Maersk and it was done to a very high standard. I do believe that perhaps nowadays some shipping companies are doing it for the wrong reasons and as a result there are some people coming into the industry who have not experienced the standard of training that I did, which ultimately leads to unsafe working practices.
• I realize that cadets sailing on FoC ships may not be entirely within the MCA remit however if there was some way to audit the level of training on board it would be an improvement for the people undergoing training and the future of the industry.
• Ensure 1st aid training is updated to all
• Many changes requiring to redo expensive courses
• Feel that most onboard training covers STCW requirements and that 5-year refresher courses are just overkill
• I also think colleges and training providers need to be reminded that courses are there to assist and teach crews, not simply a money-making ploy.
• Today’s vessels are very busy. Some Chief Engineers may not like allowing new British Cadets on starting of Main and Aux. engines and allow them just to stand by and watch. Same goes for handling the pumping.
• With mixed crews usually there might be no problems with their training and some engineers will help in their education. On the other hand, some will view them with suspicion as a threat to their future!!
• Every 5 years interval all the short courses to be attended in a MCA approved training center.
• LNG is starting to become more popular in the industry. Is it time to have to expand requirements for proficiency?
• The introduction of Management Level EK’s and fast tracking CoC’s is a dangerous endeavor by the MCA.
• Already very inexperienced 2nd and Chief engineers with minimal sea time (36 months) are appearing on-board vessels, often suggesting dangerous procedures due to lack of proper experience, as these officers are normally promoted to senior positions within months of obtaining their “senior” ticket, junior officers and crew are compelled to follow orders.
• I fully expect within 5 years for a death to occur on-board a vessel due to under trained senior officers making poor/uneducated decisions. There is no substitute for experience and with the fast tracking of CoC’s and leaving decision of promotions to shipping companies who are desperate for “bums on seats” the MCA is creating a very dangerous working environment. The lack of experience of some of the senior officers now appearing on vessels is quite terrifying.
• Whilst it may seem pertinent to undertake these reviews, and they are welcome and necessary in light of technological developments, the fundamental importance of the competencies within STCW remain extant, and indeed their contents require little change as indeed the fundamentals of merchant shipping have changed little - despite the technologists finest efforts.
• do sub tickets as in for cars a full driving license or just for automatic cars

3. Electro-technical further comments

• The Course gives you a good base to work on ship as it stands
• There is a need for a senior ETO certificate for many reasons. The cruise industry has a rank structure for ETOs but no defined method of promotion in line with engineers. There is no emphasis on further education or lifelong learning which makes the ETO career a bit of a dead end.
• The 5 year STCW refresher training and HELM course should be removed, every single seafarer I have met 100% agrees with that suggestion, in addition most training centres understand we only attend to get the certificate, they realize we just go there get the certificate and go back to being on leave, it’s a paper work exercise which is not beneficial and cost us our leave and money. Most vessels carry out varying drills once every week so why do seafarers need to do a refresher during their leave every 5 years?