the effectiveness of regulation in maritime education and training

21 downloads 64882 Views 131KB Size Report
Journal of Vocational Education and Training, Volume 56, Number 2, 2004. 245. Romantic ..... (TPME), which engages in curricula development for maritime schools. In .... reputable universities and had acquired accredited teacher status in.
Journal of Vocational Education and Training, Volume 56, Number 2, 2004

Romantic Rhetoric, Revisionist Reality: the effectiveness of regulation in maritime education and training HELEN SAMPSON Cardiff University, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT This article offers an insight into the regulation and conduct of training and education in a globalised industry, and across an international labour market. Focusing on the cargo shipping sector of the maritime industry, it considers the provision of training and education for modern merchant officers within the context of an international regulatory framework. The article is based on an international, year-long, small-scale study funded by the British Academy (Ref: LRG33549).

Introduction The shipping industry is widely cited as an example of one of the most globalised of all contemporary industries (Sampson, 2003) and for good reason. The industry is regulated, owned, managed, financed and supplied with labour on an international basis. A vessel may be owned in one country, technically managed in another, have its crew supplied by several others, trade internationally and be registered in any one of a number of nations operating open registers. As such, the industry provides us with a fascinating example of how a truly global industry operates, and no more so than when considering issues of labour markets and the regulation of standards of education and training. In the post-war period the shipping industry changed from the largely unregulated form it took in the nineteenth century to one that was increasingly regulated by nation States. The situation altered once again in the late 1940s when registries, popularly termed ‘flags of convenience’ were established ‘off-shore’ or in countries with no significant maritime history or tradition, and in the case of Bolivia without so much as a coastline! Such flags allowed ship owners to evade their home-based national legislation and to capitalise on a ready supply of cheap international labour by registering their ships overseas, and taking advantage of the relatively lax approach of many such registers and their

245

Helen Sampson

lack of requirements regarding wages and nationality of employees. This inevitably resulted in a shift away from the provision of labour by traditional maritime nations such as Germany, Norway, the United Kingdom, and Japan (see Table I). Rank order

Country

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Philippines Ukraine Russia Indonesia China India Turkey Poland Greece Myanmar Romania Bulgaria Latvia Croatia South Korea Malaysia Netherlands Germany Italy Norway UK Denmark USA Pakistan Spain Japan Sri Lanka Honduras Canada Finland

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sub total (estimated world total = 631,267)

Senior Officers* 19,800 19,857 21,527 10,239 7,150 7,365 10,765 10,267 9,551 1,633 4,974 3,529 3,292 4,169 3,627 1,024 3,746 4,185 2,147 3,537 3,027 2,489 1,317 1,382 1,535 1,364 267 1 41 341 421

Junior Officers 40,636 16,038 15,476 10,297 9,606 9,799 6,226 5,531 4,326 3,913 4,453 3,465 3,101 2,452 2,239

Ratings

Total

81,263 9,712 7,098 23,056 15,623 9,171 6,818 4,259 2,075 6,973 2,029 3,861 2,753 1,371 1,563

141,698 45,607 44,101 43,592 32,379 26,335 23,810 20,057 15,952 12,519 11,456 10,855 9,147 7,992 7,429

1,472 1,337 442 1,399 1,020 1,472 1,201 1,163 1,145 858 373 405 54 360 168

3,346 208 258 1,329 206 66 101 991 656 700 132 800 544 38 32

5,843 5,292 4,885 4,874 4,763 4,566 3,791 3,471 3,184 3,092 1,869 1,473 740 740 622 502,128

Table I. Estimation of numbers of officers and ratings from top 30 labour supply countries based on crew list data collected at selected major international ports. Source: Seafarers International Research Centre.[1] *Senior officers are generally counted as the ‘top four’, i.e. the Captain, Chief Mate, Chief Engineer, and First Engineer

246

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

These countries had, over time, built up a knowledge and skills base in maritime training. Moreover, they had the economic resources at state level to devote to the provision of quality vocational training for seafarers. The ‘new’ labour supply countries were attractive to employers precisely because they could deliver cheap labour. This ability was related to the under-developed nature of their economies. However, employers, in general, retained an expectation that seafarers would come to them, more or less, ‘ready trained’ and, as a result, colleges sprung up in vast numbers in countries with little spare resource to devote to them and, sometimes, with little general educational infrastructure. As a result of the lack of resource at state level in many places and a thirst for the necessary qualifications to successfully gain employment as a seafarer, the gap in provision was often met by private and sometime unscrupulous training colleges (International Commission on Shipping, 2000). The numbers of high profile shipping accidents involving pollution and related economic deprivation in the late twentieth and early twentyfirst centuries have, however, ensured a sustained political concern with standards of maritime education and training that ship owners and managers have been forced to respond to. Mutual insurance companies (known as P&I clubs in this sector) have also been instrumental in placing pressure on the industry to improve its accident and incident rates and take greater steps to reduce the part of the ‘human element’ in causing disasters and mishaps. Concern has been voiced by, and through, the International Maritime Organisation which has responded with the development of a series of measures including the introduction of standards in certification and training via the Standards of Training Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) convention and of an on-board corporate safety management system via the International Safety Management (ISM) code. In addressing the issue of standards of seafarer competence, however, regulation of colleges has been attempted in favour of altering the training practices adopted by the industry, for example, by forcing employers to take a greater responsibility for the training of officer cadets. Many employers (particularly, but by no means exclusively, those engaged in less profitable and less hazardous trades, e.g. bulk, refrigerated, and general cargo) prove reluctant to invest in shore-based training, and often give a number of reasons for this, including the fear that other employers will poach their recruits once they have spent time and money training them to an acceptable standard. In their quest for cheap employees many employers recruit cadets from developing economies without the resources and infrastructure to provide high quality training and are generally as reluctant to invest in this infrastructure as they are to invest in individuals. Indeed, as soon as a ‘new’ source of cheap labour is identified by fleet personnel managers, in the sector, there is a degree of flight from existing labour supply

247

Helen Sampson

countries to newer ones, which have to start from scratch in terms of building up the very expensive training infrastructure required for adequate seafarer training. Given that the ‘industry’ response to poor levels of education and training has primarily taken the form of international regulation, this article focuses on the STCW code, and considers the effectiveness of regulation in raising standards of competence, education and training in the sector. The article first outlines the methods employed in the data collection for the small scale study informing the account. It continues with a consideration of the regulatory context of the industry and the organisation of cadet training offered by Maritime Education and Training institutions (METs), followed by an analysis of the findings from the study in so far as they relate to the role of employers in training provision and the constraints under which METs operate. The article concludes with reference to arguments about the effectiveness of ‘self-regulation’ in the context of highly skewed access to material and human resources. Method This article presents the findings of a small-scale study considering standards of maritime education and training, focusing on three nations, the United Kingdom, Singapore and the Philippines.[2] It considers the effectiveness of the introduction of international standards in maritime education and training, and asks whether efforts to implement such standards amount to anything more than romantic rhetoric on the part of governmental and non-governmental organisations and agencies? The study on which the article is based encompassed a number of ethnographic site visits to maritime colleges and training centres. A total of four colleges were included in the research, as well as one independent and two-company run training centres offering a variety of mandatory and non-mandatory courses for officers. Thirty in-depth interviews were also carried out with company managers, college lecturers and trainers, union officials and a member of the IMO. These interviews were semistructured, anonymous, and tape-recorded, in line with standard research practice, and were transcribed and coded prior to analysis. In the course of the visits to METs, detailed field notes were maintained and subsequently analysed. In protecting the anonymity of participating colleges and training centres this data has been aggregated in its presentation in order to prevent specific sets of characteristics revealing the identity of institutions. Regulatory Context In the context of an increasingly internationalised labour market and poor controls by Flag States (International Commission on Shipping, 2000) 248

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

international regulation of the shipping industry via the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and to a lesser extent the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has become increasingly important. The IMO responded to disasters such as that of the Torrey Canyon (1967) when 120,000 tons of oil were spilled, with the introduction of measures to prevent pollution of the seas (MARPOL, 73/78), and to organise and regulate compensation when such pollution occurs as a result of an accident. Despite their efforts however, the last decades of the twentieth century saw a number of well-publicised maritime accidents causing grave ecological and economic damage. The Exxon Valdez and the Braer were hugely publicised examples of oil spillage, but these represented just two of the many major disasters involving oil tankers worldwide. National states and international regulators were forced to respond to the criticism that these public events caused and, in the face of a deteriorating public image, they increased their efforts to regulate standards in the industry. In doing so, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO)[3] devoted time and attention to strengthening internationally recognised, but locally implemented and monitored, standards, setting out the duties, and requirements for the training and education, of watch-keeping officers and ratings. Thus, following early disasters such as the Torrey Canyon, standards in certification, training, and watch keeping (STCW78) were agreed and introduced by the IMO in 1978. In the IMO’s words the STCW convention: Was the first to establish basic requirements of training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers on an international level. Previously the standards of certification and watchkeeping of officers and ratings were established by individual governments, usually without reference to practices and procedures varied widely, even though shipping is the most international of all industries. (IMO, 2003) Subsequently, following further shipping tragedies, the 1978 convention was amended in 1991 and 1994, and substantially revised and updated in 1995.[4] One of the major objectives of the 1995 revision of the convention was to attempt to establish more uniform compliance with the regulations by removing the ambiguities of the 1978 convention and reducing the opportunities for differing interpretations to be utilised in implementing STCW. Further amendments followed in 1997 and 1998, and following the IMO’s 73rd session of the Maritime Safety Committee, at the end of 2000, a so called ‘white list’ was published listing all those nations that were adjudged to have fully complied with the provisions of the 1995 code. These international regulations rapidly became the reference point in the design, and implementation of education and training programmes for officers on a worldwide basis. The process was assisted by the

249

Helen Sampson

production by the IMO of ‘model courses’ that could be adopted and adapted by Maritime Education and Training colleges. The introduction of STCW had a major influence on training within the industry. This was achieved by ensuring that states that were not party to the convention were bound by its regulations on entering any port within a party state. States that were party to the convention were bound by its provisions to: Apply the control measures to ships of all flags to the extent necessary to ensure that no more favourable treatment is given to ships entitled to fly the flag of a State that is not a Party than is given to ships entitled to fly the flag of a State that is a Party. (IMO, 2003) This aspect of the STCW convention ensured that it gained massive coverage in terms of its implementation across the world fleet. The intention of the IMO’s policy was to raise standards in nations that had previously provided poor education and training for maritime officers and ratings. However, as a ‘Trans-Statal’ organisation, the IMO faced a number of acute problems in achieving this end. It was quickly recognised that such regulation could have the unintended and unwelcome consequence of reducing the standards of education and training in institutions, and countries, where they exceeded the IMO’s minimum standards. In addition, and in common with other industries, the new regulation raised problems of enforcement. Concerns with the effectiveness of processes that depend on the provision of information by the regulated to the regulators have been discussed elsewhere (Lange, 2002), and this was precisely the position of the IMO in relation to STCW95. There is also evidence that where enforcers find it difficult to obtain such information they may respond by relaxing rules to accommodate deficiencies, rather than apply the sanctions at their disposal (Shavell, 1998; Lange 2002). A third problem of enforcement relates to expediency. As documented by Hawkins, in his study of the regulation of water pollution in the United Kingdom, regulators are often faced with dilemmas in enforcement. In the example provided by Hawkins, environmental control officers would often be aware that enforcement of pollution regulation could result in immediate or eventual closure of a factory providing vital employment and wealth to a local community. They might then take a pragmatic approach to enforcement referring to the wider context in their decisions and often adopting a strategy of lenience (Hawkins, 1984, p. 197). It was apparent in the ‘enforcement’ of STCW95 that such practical considerations might also be paramount. Prior to the creation of a so-called ‘white list’ of states, deemed to have complied with the IMO regulations, concerns were expressed about a potential conflict between IMO objectives relating to standards in education and training, and a need to protect the industry’s labour supply. Certainly, the industry would have been faced with a crisis

250

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

had a major labour supplier such as the Philippines been excluded from the ‘white list’. Indeed, whilst there were known to be some challenges facing the Philippines in demonstrating full compliance, their exclusion from the ‘white-list’ was unthinkable. In introducing STCW the IMO was effectively introducing a system of enforced self-regulation. Just as under United Kingdom health and safety legislation corporations have a legal responsibility to enforce health and safety regulations by the self-imposition of a series of measures and practices, so too under STCW were party states required to enforce STCW by the self-imposition of a series of measures and practices relating to their national provision of Maritime Education and Training. The reliance on such enforced self-regulation elsewhere has resulted in a number of problems. Crucially, compliance with such regulation may be somewhat superficial. For example, in the case of the railways Hutter observes: Regulation may have shaped what the company did but it had not altered it as fundamentally as regulatory objectives would appear to desire ... In many respects British Railways’ attempts at self-regulation were more procedural than substantive. So the systems, rules, and procedures demanded by regulatory law were in place but there was little evidence of the deep understanding of what these were attempting to achieve ... they paid more attention to the letter rather than the spirit of the law. (Hutter, 2001, pp. 393-394) If we assume compliance with the letter of the STCW ‘law’, therefore, and overlook concerns about the pragmatic application of regulation in the sector, the question nevertheless remains as to whether party states comply with the ‘spirit’ of the code in successfully raising standards of competence amongst their officer corps, and standards of education and training in their maritime colleges? The Training of Officer Cadets in Maritime Education and Training Colleges (METs) Maritime Education and Training colleges (METs) offer courses to ‘cadets’ that provide them with a basic education designed to enable them to qualify, subject to successful examination, for the certificates of competency required by junior officers in conjunction with the stipulations of STCW regulations. The June 2001 ‘white list’ of administrations complying with STCW totalled 94 States and one IMO associate member (IMO, 2003). Within states numbers of METs vary substantially and may fluctuate from year to year. In 2002, there was a range from one MET in Singapore, to 76 in the Philippines (MARINA, 2002) and more than 88 reported in India (Almazan, 2002). The design of course 251

Helen Sampson

curricula is generally a matter for colleges in negotiation with and overseen by national ministerial departments or bodies specifically assigned with such responsibility. In the Philippines, for example, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) holds this function and heads an inter-agency committee the ‘Technical Panel for Maritime Education’ (TPME), which engages in curricula development for maritime schools. In the United Kingdom, the Merchant Navy Training Board (MNTB) works closely with both the Maritime Coastguard Agency (MCA) and METs in establishing standards and developing curricula for maritime education, whilst colleges formally come under the jurisdiction of the DfEE and the Scottish Executive. In Singapore, the Maritime Academy is part of the national Singapore Polytechnic and is formally governed by the Education department. However, maritime courses are moderated by the Shipping Division of the Maritime and Port Authority (MPA) of Singapore, which assumes responsibility for the enforcement of STCW. In the course of their college study, cadets are required to spend time at sea undergoing structured, practical, on the job training, under the supervision of senior serving officers on board. Where berths aboard working vessels are unavailable, cadets may spend their ‘sea-time’ aboard a training vessel, owned and run by the institution in which they are enrolled. Inevitably, there are both advantages and disadvantages in such arrangements. Cadets aboard training ships may have better access to computer-based training programmes, lectures and libraries. On the other hand, they are unlikely to experience cargo-handling operations and may not gain experience of current practices in seamanship, learning rather outdated habits instead. The introduction of the 1995 revision of STCW was intended to homogenise standards of education and training across the world by demanding that party states supply detailed written evidence of compliance. Nevertheless, despite these efforts, the data collected in the course of this project suggest that there is a considerable range in the standards of contemporary provision both within and across national boundaries. To this extent, the findings highlight the inadequacies invariably inherent in any paper-based assessment of the provision of education and training, and more generally the inadequacies of ‘enforced self-regulation’. Physical Resources The physical resource that supports education and training includes the buildings, classrooms, laboratory facilities, simulation equipment, audio and visual aids, libraries, computers, computer-based training programmes, swimming pools, lifeboat and fire drill equipment available on site, or in an accessible location. In the course of this study, it became apparent that such resources are not evenly distributed across MET 252

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

institutions. Some sites were space rich, but poor in terms of classroom resource. As the following field note observes: The college spreads across a large un-landscaped site with lots of potential but not much current investment. Classrooms are noisy and cramped and generally only equipped with chalkboards as standard. (Field note, 2002) There were examples of classrooms lacking basic equipment, such as overhead projectors and videos, and in some cases students were packed into classrooms on chairs with rests to write upon as opposed to desks, producing an uncomfortable and ergonomically unhelpful learning environment. Colleges in hot climates did not necessarily have airconditioned teaching rooms and temperatures could be uncomfortably hot producing heat-induced lethargy amongst pupils and militating against high levels of concentration. At the other end of the scale there were classrooms with air conditioning, with permanently fixed projectors for the use of Powerpoint, with overhead projectors as standard, and whiteboards, rather than chalkboards in every class. Pupils had comfortable desks at which to write and teachers had the aid of portable radio microphones, and laser pointers to assist in the delivery of their classes. In one class, for example, the following field note was recorded: The classroom has air-conditioning, a PowerPoint projector and screen, an overhead projector and screen ... the tutor uses a radio microphone ... Occasionally the tutor holds up a ‘model’ or a piece of classroom equipment as an example of an object to illustrate a point. (Field note, 2002) In terms of laboratory space and equipment, as well as access to sophisticated, and extremely expensive, simulators there was also a huge, but more understandable, range. Indeed, pressures on colleges to invest in such expensive equipment were often responsible for their inability to improve and upgrade basic classroom facilities. One college had access to a brand new state of the art integrated simulator with the potential to link 12 separate simulators. It included an engine room simulator of a standard that was probably unparalleled in the world. This institution was fortunate in having a separate budget for the updating, and upgrading, of classroom and laboratory equipment that amounted to approximately £77,000 over a 5-year period. By contrast a different college had to put hours of effort and human resource into the raising of a major loan to purchase simulator equipment. This institution was unable to fund the purchase of basic classroom supplies, such as an overhead projector or a whiteboard for every classroom. An upgrading budget of £77,000 would probably have seemed like a lottery windfall and thus something of a pipe dream to its staff and principal.

253

Helen Sampson

It is undoubtedly the case that excellent teachers are probably able to impart knowledge without access to audio or visual aids of any sort. Nevertheless, modern pedagogy suggests that utilising a variety of teaching aids assists pupils in learning and concentrating in class. Many of the classes observed in rooms equipped solely with chalkboards were characterised by inattention and boredom on the part of students. In these cases, it was often apparent that institutions unable to invest in physical resources were also constrained in terms of their investment in human resources resulting in an unhappy coincidence of poor classroom environments and poor teaching practices. Human Resources METs across the world vary tremendously in the amount of resource available to them for direct investment in their teachers and lecturers, in terms of wages and employment conditions, and crucially in terms of staff development. The importance of staff development programmes derives from the fact that most MET staff are recruited because of their maritime experience and qualifications. Lecturers are generally certificated officers, and many are senior officers with an excellent depth of knowledge and understanding. However, these are professional mariners, rather than professional teachers, and to reach an adequate teaching standard all require training in teaching techniques and basic pedagogy. Some colleges in the study were able to recruit experienced mariners at a senior level and then put them through supported teacher training programmes resulting in a generally high level of teaching quality. At one, for example, most lecturers training navigational (deck) officers were qualified master mariners, many of whom had held command. In addition, they had undergone thorough teacher training at reputable universities and had acquired accredited teacher status in further education. A senior faculty member explained: The vast majority are master mariners, of them a very good proportion hold a degree level qualification ... They mostly have got a fair amount of seafaring experience, it is very varied. Some people have come ashore to teach, like myself if you like, before achieving command at sea. Whereas we have got quite a few newer lecturers who have had command, we have got quite a lot of command experience now on our teaching staff ... Most of the master mariners have a degree as well. Then of course once they come in to teaching we put them through a teacher qualification post graduate course ... We call it TQFE, Teaching Qualification in Further Education. It is done as a post graduate and it is a certificate course. There are a number of institutions that do it. (Interview with senior faculty member, 2003) 254

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

In another college in a very different, but nevertheless prosperous economic context the picture was similar. Here I was told they: Have a system in the polytechnic that means whomsoever comes into the polytechnic has to be taken through a teaching course ... It’s a very basic teacher training programme and after that they can go through an advanced one if they so desire. Plus we had a connection, or we still have I think, a connection with ... the United Kingdom if anyone later on wanted to do a Masters, which they would do through distance learning ... So everyone is taken through a very basic course and that course starts off immediately when anyone joins ... it lasts for eight months to a year I think. They have to work every Saturday, or every alternate Saturday, I’m not sure now because when we joined it was not there... it’s very good. (Interview with faculty member, 2002) However, not all colleges were so fortunate and in two, the level of investment in teaching development programmes was significantly lower than in the others. In one of these institutions the problems were compounded by an inability to offer teaching staff competitive salaries. In these circumstances, it was forced to rely on the good will of alumni returning to do temporary stints of teaching at the academy, and on less experienced ex-seafarers who lacked the depth and breadth of knowledge that the college would have ideally sought. In an interview one senior lecturer explained that it was very difficult for the college to recruit experienced senior marine personnel. He told me: But honestly, [it is] very hard to find a marine officer for that. We need experience on board, a senior at management level and at the same time with teaching experience and at the same time [experience of sailing aboard] a big ship. (Interview with faculty member, 2002) As a result of these difficulties some very inexperienced teachers were recruited and formally the minimum requirement for teaching staff was one year of experience at sea. As a lecturer explained, staff were then put through a basic ‘train the trainer’ course that lasted for a week and covered some of the fundamentals of classroom instruction. However, this was a very basic course and of far less benefit to staff than the longer 9-month teaching courses available to staff at other colleges in other countries. In the words of the lecturer: For the marine officer, they must be at least at operational level [at sea], one year experience, and for those [teaching] in the third year, fourth year students, will have to be at least management level. And what else? Of course, the very basic

255

Helen Sampson

requirements, the IMO specifies. (Interview with faculty member, 2002) In these colleges, with very limited funds, resource was often channelled into hardware rather than human resource. In the maritime education and training sector simulators are increasingly utilised in the course of training officers. These facilities range from full 360° bridge simulators, to liquid cargo handling, engine and GMDSS, simulators. All of these facilities are highly costly, but many institutions feel obliged to invest in them to keep up with their competitors and sometimes to fulfil the requirements of their accrediting/licensing bodies. Lecturers often recognised that these investments were at the expense of investment in staff and their development. One pointed out that there is little point in acquiring state of the art equipment if you are only able to employ ineffective teaching staff to make use of it: We all see infrastructure, sprouting like now and then. But in my mind, the real thing is, manpower .[sic] ... we need to really improve the quality of instructors. (Interview faculty member, 2002) Infrastructural Resources Not only were colleges hampered by the lack of resources directly at their disposal, they were also affected by the level of economic and infrastructural resource in their national context. Across the small number of countries included in the study there was, nevertheless, a huge range in terms of economic and natural resource. Singapore and the United Kingdom were relatively closely aligned, but available economic indicators suggest that the Philippines is characterised by considerable scarcity. In 2001, in Singapore and the United Kingdom, for example, per capita Gross National Income (GNI) was US$21,500 and US$25,120, respectively, whilst in the Philippines it was only US$1,030. The infant mortality rates for the same year stood at 3 and 5, per thousand live births in Singapore and the United Kingdom, respectively, and at 29 in the Philippines. In 2000 per capita electricity use varied enormously across the three nations standing at 6948 kWh in Singapore, 5601 kWh in the United Kingdom and a mere 477 kWh in the Philippines where access to an uninterrupted supply of electricity is not guaranteed, particularly beyond the borders of Metro Manila. Access to an ‘improved water supply’ (in all areas) and ‘improved sanitation (in urban areas) was 100% in Singapore and the United Kingdom, but stood at 86% (water) and 93% (sanitation) in the year 2000 in the Philippines. In terms of telecommunications in 2001 Singapore and the United Kingdom reportedly had 1195 and 1358 mobile phones and fixed telephone lines

256

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

per 1000 population, i.e. an average of more than one per person, whilst in the Philippines the figure stood at 192 (World Bank, 2003; see Table II). Singapore Per capita GNI (2001) US$ Infant mortality rates (2001) per thousand live births Per capita electricity (2000) kWh Access to improved water supply – all areas (2000) % Access to improved sanitation – urban areas (2000) % Fixed line or mobile telephone per 1000 population (2001)

21,500 3

United Kingdom 25,120 5

Philippines

6,948

5,601

477

100

100

86

100

100

93

1,195

1,358

192

1,030 29

Table II. Selected economic indicators for Singapore, the UK and the Philippines. Source: World Bank (2003). NB most recent available data is utilised, i.e. that for 2000 or 2001 as available.

Differential access to such resource manifested itself both directly and indirectly. There was evidence for example of a lack of telephone and internet access, as well as interrupted power supplies resulting in frequent ‘brown outs’, to quote the term used in the Philippines. There was also evidence of the indirect impact of a lack of national economic resource in the form of poor entry level student knowledge and understanding, poor access to teacher training, and an inability to pay for staff salaries, new buildings, and a variety of hard and software. Thus, in terms of physical, human and infrastructural, resources the evidence of this study suggests that colleges in less developed parts of the world face multiple disadvantages. As one Maritime Education lecturer in a well resourced context elegantly put it: The advantage we have is we have fantastic resources, because of the wealth of the nation maybe. That’s how we get it. Which I suppose, if it was available in poorer countries, I mean those countries who are actually serving this industry – today you don’t get that many people from United Kingdom or the West, you’re basically getting everyone from this side – it would be so much better. I mean see in India, take Bangladesh, take Philippines. I was in the Philippines last year. One college ... was fantastically done up. What was the rest [gestures nothing]? So if either the resources could be sent there or rich countries, or countries which had things, contributed to look

257

Helen Sampson

after this industry, or there was some way of taking care of getting those students in and training them ... [that would be much better]. (Interview with faculty member 2002) The Role of Employers In a study of training in the Welsh automotive and electronics industry Cockrill notes that there is a mismatch between the expressed desire of employers to have a highly trained workforce, the importance they place upon training, and their willingness to directly invest and participate in such training themselves. As Cockrill observes: It appears that companies are playing lip service to the emphasis on training but when it comes to practical application, this is not converted into action ... A large number of firms was interested in apprenticeship-trained staff and that only a small number of businesses provided such training themselves. (Cockrill, 2002, pp. 76-77) Here, there are similarities with the shipping industry where many companies were reported to be reluctant to invest in training, for example, by running a properly managed and structured cadet training programme, offering cadets berths aboard their working vessels. This lack of berths caused genuine problems for METs who could not organise appropriate sea-time for their cadets. Not only did it mean that some students were unable to qualify for their certificates of competence, regardless of their academic performance, such poor placement rates also impacted negatively on student motivation and resulted in drop-out from diploma courses. As one senior lecturer of engineering explained: Once a youngster gets demotivated ... then he spreads it. It’s word of mouth ... and it affects us. So we have approached the national shipping lines and all the companies ... they do promise that they’ll try to help but when you look at it from their angle, they’re basically doing business and whatever, and they want the maximum profits so they have to get people as cheaply as possible [rather than invest in cadet training]. (Interview with faculty member 2002) Some METs have countered such problems by refusing to accept cadets unless they are already sponsored by a company, whilst others have attempted to supply sea-time themselves by investing in hugely expensive training ships aboard which cadets spend time engaged in practical training. Governments, such as that of the United Kingdom, concerned with the decline in numbers of nationals within the seafarer labour market have attempted to encourage employers to train using incentives incorporated within tonnage tax regimes and these often enjoy 258

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

limited success.[5] However, within the industry many companies stand accused of short-termism in their refusal to become more involved with cadet training. Again, there are similarities with other sectors. In the hospitality sector, for example, on the job training or ‘internship’ is seen as vital, yet in an extract from a written article quoted by Baum (2002) one employer reportedly claims: Employers need to get more involved in work placement schemes ... They should be thinking long term about the future of recruitment. At the moment there are not enough employers involved and the schemes are not always comprehensive enough. (Walker, quoted in Baum 2002, p. 358) This sentiment is uncannily reminiscent of the comments of many employees working in METs and even in shipping companies. However, concerns go beyond simple involvement in work-based training programmes to the quality of such programmes. As one lecturer pointed out it is not enough to have cadet placements, they have to be placements entailing the delivery of quality training and not an excuse for the employment of cheap manual labour: There are other companies ... who are using our people as basic manual labour – doing all the cleaning work. So that sort of thing takes place then naturally people get dejected you know ... So that’s where our problem lies. Even if we get places ... when you go on board and all you have to do is clean, what are you wasting your time doing ... The companies have to change their way of thinking or do something about this. (Interview with faculty member, 2002) Similar arguments could apply to METs themselves in as much as it is not sufficient for such institutions to exist, the quality of the learning environment and the teaching provided by such institutions are of critical importance. The findings of the study, reported here, suggest that the quality of such provision is far from homogenous. Furthermore, they indicate that the unevenness of provision in METs across the world and within party states results not only from the natural variation that can be attributed to the individual characteristics of teachers or key individuals, such as college Principals, but crucially from the uneven distribution of resource across such institutions and between nation States. ‘The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly’? Employer Attitudes to Training Provision and Regulation Given the difficulties faced by states with limited resource in attempting to provide maritime education and training to their population in order to satisfy the international demand for relatively inexpensive (in financial 259

Helen Sampson

terms) labour, it is legitimate to consider the attitude of employers to both the provision of and standards in maritime education and training. Generally, managers and directors of shipping companies taking part in the research represented the ‘top end’ of the market (often specialist sectors carrying hazardous cargoes) where more money is generally invested in training. These concerned company representatives agreed that, notwithstanding STCW, there remained a tremendous variation in the quality of education and training provided by METs across the world. Some suggested that STCW was nothing but a paper trail, and that it had done nothing to actually raise the standards of maritime education and training for cadets. One employer explained: STCW has created a lot of work for the shipping companies. But [in] this STCW a lot of things [relating to compliance and enforcement] is paperwork ... Seafarers have training to meet STCW95 amendments, [but] are they really improved themselves? And then [does this act] to solve the problem, to reduce the accidents? I really don’t think so. (Interview with employer, 2002) Others were critical of the regulation and indicated that they believed standards of enforcement had been relaxed to guarantee compliance for the purposes of political expediency. One explained what he felt had happened in his own country with regard to the approval of colleges in line with STCW: Here’s the story. Before, when the issue of the STCW95 white list was very hard, they were talking about only seven [institutions in the Philippines] will pass the criteria of STCW95, and these were the seven I mentioned. And then when we were in the process of submitting our papers to IMO, suddenly we have seen, the industry has seen 20 more, a total of 20 now, being considered, because they said okay they have reached a standard that has surpassed the IMO requirement. And then until we were confirmed in the white list, there were more than 40 who finally made it. Out of the seven , became 20 and then more than 40. We were very happy with seven, or at least even 20, but not with 40 now. But now, I don’t know really, but there are some political issues about then, when that was being considered because some maritime schools are owned by congressmen. So I am probably suggesting something ... (Interview with company manager, 2002) Many employers reported avoiding recruiting from specific countries or from specific institutions. For example, some specifically avoided recruitment in the Philippines. One manager reported that his company:

260

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Haven’t got any Filipino cadets although we have been looking at the new ITF backed college down there that may be sponsoring a couple of them but the standards are no where as high as Pakistan or India ... That’s the standard of education and also the maritime side down there. (Interview with employer, 2002) Several managers recounted bad experiences of cadets from specific institutions and some felt that they had been misled by the superficial façade that some colleges were able to maintain. One described how: When I did the tour of the Philippines before the [company’s] recruitment exercise, one of the colleges I went to appeared to be really good, of a very high standard. But when I did the interviews I found that – what we did was that we had a simple ten answer multiple choice test, because for every place that we went to we had two to three hundred people wanting to apply for the job so we had to weed them out ... I was amazed that the students from this university were consistently failing and those that made it to the interview table were quite poor. I found out later that it is a lot of whitewash for people who visit, they have this big plan ... What they do is they have these beautiful classes with computers, and things written on the board, all set up but locked away. So whenever a visitor comes they put all the students in that class, they open up the class, dust it up so there is an appearance of very specialised teaching going on. (Interview with employer, 2002) Perhaps as a result of similar ‘mistakes’ some companies had drawn up ‘black lists [6]’ of institutions within so called ‘white listed’ countries, i.e. those that are IMO approved in terms of STCW. One employer explained: In the Philippines we are quite selective, I am not sure of the ones we have blacklisted but there is a list we don’t touch. Generally we use the [name of specific institution] because we have had very good results so I would say the vast majority of cadets come from there [The others are] A waste of time. There is no proper education and it falls apart very quickly. (Interview with employer, 2002) In their reluctance to recruit from some world regions or from specific institutions several employers identified lack of resources as a problem in the training of cadets. One, for example, was dismayed at the facilities available to students in many colleges in the Philippines. He suggested that what was important in a college was a good library, and good classroom and laboratory equipment, and he went on to bemoan the facilities and instruction available in many institutions:

261

Helen Sampson

A good library [is important] and next is equipment. Of course [name of specific college] are alright. Another maritime school, almost all over ... very poor ... very poor equipment and very poor, sometimes, instructors also. They have no experience. That’s only one year, two years experience [as] ...engineer ...officer. So, if not with good equipment, if with poor instructor, it’s the same. Cannot expect good result. (Interview with employer, 2002) In order to redress such deficiencies, particularly where they were identified as national trends, rather than institutionally specific idiosyncrasies, some employers (engaged in more lucrative trades and safeguarding better reputations) had adopted a strategy of ‘topping up’ the training of cadets in an effort to guarantee some basic minimum standards in their new recruits. One, for example, had a different approach for the nationals of different countries. A representative explained: Generally those trained in [X college] we don’t require further training because [X college] training is quite a high level of training. Also the calibre of the people who come in don’t have a language problem.[In] Singapore, India and Malaysia, I think their basic education is very strong. After going to [X college] normally we don’t proceed with further training but countries like China and the Philippines we actually have to do additional training before we put them onboard our ships. China the concern is basically language. In terms of technical knowledge they are acceptable but it is the language which is the concern. That is why we put them through a course of about 6 weeks ... In the Philippines, we have a training institute in the Philippines so we bring them over and we spend 6 weeks with them. During this 6 weeks of course, it is not just learning English we do cover some basic subjects, operational subjects, company systems, company culture, safety requirements ... some of the basic things and all this is taught in English so that they improve their English. So that is what we do for the Chinese. For the Philippines we also make them go through a similar course where we actually put in some of the basic requirements because by and large we find that [in] the Philippines their technical knowledge is quite weak probably because their education system is not so strong. (Interview with employer, 2002) Despite the fact that many shipping companies refuse to become involved in cadet training programmes (even to the extent of accepting cadets aboard in order that they gain practical experience and the statutorily

262

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

required ‘sea-time’), there are other companies (usually engaged in the more lucrative and specialised trades) who become far more directly involved in training. In these companies, not only were there active cadet training programmes, but a significant level of company training was also provided. Some of this training was purely technical in nature, but in some companies there was also an expressed desire to ‘mould’ their new recruits, and induct them into the corporate culture and ethos: Cadetship is where you can make, a company can mould you and shape you like ... You know, they can usually shape you the way they want you to be like. (Interview with employer, 2002) Such comments resonated with those made by Heyes in relation to the findings of a study of training in the chemical industry. He observed that: The management may attempt to use training as a means of indoctrinating workers into expected standards of work and behaviour. In the case of Reaction, management attempted to use training as a mechanism to impart values, attitudes and behavioural characteristics congruent with the new pattern of work organisation. (Heyes, 2001, p. 550) Thus, Reaction (the name of the company studied by Heyes), also tried to create purpose-moulded, if not purpose-built employees for their specific work environment. Conclusion The shipping sector is in many ways, due to the nature of its activities and the extent of its globalisation, unique. However, in talking with MET staff and the employees of shipping companies it became apparent, in the course of the study, that employers in this sector are also similar in many ways to the employers who have been the focus of previous studies of training (Heyes, 2001; Baum, 2002; Cockrill, 2002). In general, they are reluctant to invest in training citing profit margins and fear of poaching by other companies as reasons for their unwillingness. Like other sectors, they would therefore prefer vocational training to be funded and supplied by state, or private colleges as far as possible (see Heyes, 2001). Indeed, to a large extent, companies could, in the recent past, have relied on colleges in wealthy traditional maritime countries to provide them with a ready supply of well-educated cadets from which they could develop a corps of competent officers. However, since the proliferation of flags of convenience, and the expansion of labour sourcing from new and less developed countries, many of today’s labour supply states, and thus METs, do not have the resources to provide that same level of education for new cadets. Enforced self-regulation of labour supply countries 263

Helen Sampson

cannot resolve this problem, and is currently failing in its intention to raise international standards of training and seafarer competence. Thus employers face several choices. They may sponsor cadets from less developed countries, and attempt to provide them with quality on-board training and additional land-based ‘top up’ courses. They may try to avoid recruiting labour from areas where they do not trust the quality of seafarer education; however, this is likely to affect their employment costs. They may choose not to train cadets themselves and to try to recruit experienced officers on the open labour market trusting to the training capacities of their competitors, a strategy adopted in other industries (Cockrill, 2002). They may even run the risk of operating their ships with incompetent inadequately trained staff. Some companies undoubtedly adopt this latter, dangerous, course of action. However, for many this strategy is too risky. Companies in the oil, gas and chemical transportation sectors may be particularly reluctant to adopt such a policy as they are subject to the tightest and most punitive international regulation, the flouting of which has direct, financial consequences for them. Accidents involving pollution carry vast penalties for modern ship operators in regrettable contrast to those ‘only’ involving loss of life. The loss of the Erika off the French coast and the Prestige off the Spanish mainland provide recent examples of the publicity, litigation and financial costs associated with such modern day accidents in these trades. In contrast, the total loss of a bulk carrier, such as The Christopher (lost with all 27 crew in December 2001), or a general cargo ship, such as the Hera (lost in 2004), is relatively unpublicised beyond the shipping press and in these trades there is little external pressure on companies to operate to high standards. The evidence here suggests that efforts to regulate international standards of education and training using a form of enforced selfregulation on the part of party states have largely failed (and may even be seen as dragging standards down). It is currently more direct forms of regulatory enforcement, with their vast financial implications for companies, which can be considered to be responsible for propping up standards of seafarer competence. Thus, the practical implementation of the IMO’s STCW regulations governing maritime education and training standards is a world apart from the ideals of policy makers. This revisionist reality fails to properly address the problems currently inherent in the provision of training in the shipping industry. It highlights the extent to which employers wishing to benefit from international variations in the cost of labour are reluctant to meet the costs of training. One solution available to employers is to adopt stable crewing practices and allow continuity of labour supply. This would allow for the benefits of infrastructural investment in new labour supply countries, such as the Philippines, to be reaped with the expectation that in time they would attain the standards in training that the industry requires. Staff would

264

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

gain experience, a stock of good equipment and facilities would be built up, and local regulators might become more effective. However, many employers take a more short-term and arguably short-sighted, approach to recruitment and are inclined to chase cheap labour sources with insufficient regard to the implications of such actions in terms of the quality of international maritime education and training. Ironically, employers’ support of free markets operating in relation to wages and conditions does not extend to training. Here, the expectation is that, to a great extent, states will intervene and subsidise employers by supplying them with highly trained and competent recruits. Where states are unable to do this, employers are left to foot the bill for additional training should they choose. Currently, however, many choose not to and it is all too often insurers, seafarers, local industries and communities, who count the personal and economic cost of disasters resulting from the inadequate provision of education and training in this sector. Acknowledgements My thanks to the British Academy and the Seafarers International Research Centre for funding the research informing this article. Particular thanks are due to Huw Beynon and Peter Fairbrother for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of the article. Correspondence Helen Sampson, Seafarers International Research Centre, PO Box 907, Cardiff University Cardiff CF10 3YP, United Kingdom ([email protected]). Notes [1] My thanks to Bin Wu for providing this data. [2] I would like to acknowledge the support of the British Academy in funding the research upon which this article draws. The research took place in the Philippines, in Singapore and in the United Kingdom and was completed in March 2003. Having presented a description of the research and its main findings, the article concludes that in the context of massive inequality and skewed global development, the objectives set by the International Maritime Organisation, in attempting to regulate standards of education and training in the shipping industry, are unattainable in the absence of specific funding in support of the established standards. In the current, most unsatisfactory situation, either companies voluntarily pick up the ‘tab’ for additional requisite training for maritime officers or they run the

265

Helen Sampson risk of being involved in accidents costing human lives, as well as jeopardising the futures of affected corporations and communities. [3] The IMO is a UN body with a voting membership of 162 Member States and approved representatives from approximately 60 non-governmental organisations. Approved non-governmental organisations have consultative status and take part in the work of committees in the development of suggested policy documents, but are unable to vote on the adoption of conventions. [4] The convention came into force in 1997. [5] Whilst employers have taken on greater numbers of cadets they are proving reluctant to employ them as junior officers, often favouring cheaper alternatives from developing regions. Thus, whilst more United Kingdom cadets are being trained the/ir future employment prospects are insecure. [6] Employers’ own term.

References Almazan, A. (2002) Looking for Cheaper Seafarers, Lloyds Ship Manager, Jan/Feb, pp. 16-17. Baum, T. (2002) Skills and Training for the Hospitality Sector: a review of issues, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 54, pp. 343-363. Cockrill, A. (2002) The Policy Implications of a Regional Case Study: skills shortages and provision in the Welsh automotive and electronics industries, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 54, pp. 67-84. Hawkins, K. (1984) Environment and Enforcement: regulation and the social definition of pollution. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Heyes, J. (2001) Experiencing Multi-skilling: evidence from the chemical industry, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 53, pp. 543-560. Hutter, B.M. (2001) Is Enforced Self-regulation a Form of Risk Taking? The Case of Railway Health and Safety, International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 29, pp. 379-400. International Maritime Organisation (IMO) (2003) Available at: www.imo.org/conventions/contents.asp?doc_id=651&topic_id=257 International Commission on Shipping (2000) International Commission on Shipping Inquiry into Ship Safety: ships, slaves and competition. Charlestown, NSW: International Commission on Shipping. Lange, B. (2002) What Does Law Know? Prescribing and Describing the Social World in the Enforcement of Legal Rules, International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 30, pp. 131-150. MARINA (2002) The Maritime Sector in the Philippines: a situationer report. Available at: www.marina.gov.ph/report/.

266

REGULATION IN MARITIME EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Sampson, H. (2003) Transnational Drifters and Hyperspace Dwellers: an exploration of the lives of Filipino seafarers aboard and ashore, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 26, pp. 253-277. Shavell, S. (1998) The Optimal Structure of Law Enforcement, in R. Baldwin, C. Scott & C. Hood (Eds) A Reader on Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. World Bank (2003) Available at: www.worldbank.org/data/countrydata/ countrydata/html.

267

Helen Sampson

268