Certainly, the problem is more acute from the landward end when peered through telescopes. I recall a commercial manager querying after a short voyage to get the feel of the ship, as to what the Master really does. He did get the feel that at high rate of compensation, He is a supernumerary. Guess he may have been comparing with the honchos ashore lunching, golfing and flying around most of the time, whilst labour class sweats it out and middle level manages.

Wonder how many and at what levels landlubbers have understood about the nuances of work and management aboard when it is more like living and working in a sailing three star hotel with no grog and shore leave. HR issues are more aired than implemented and eventually translated to wage packets, as jobs increasingly fail to cater to aspirational factors, EQ and emotive coefficients.

It is indeed a myth that a ship can be managed by remote control from shore. Yes, good shore management team can guide and assist –without seen to be interfering. Be assured that a bad team on board cannot be elevated to better performance levels just by better inputs and supervision from the office. Brilliant teams, if there are, needn’t be, at all. The in-betweens are run in reality by a mixture of carrot and stick policies. What is paramount is a well-knit team aboard, properly moulded in teamwork and leadership.

However, work on ship is essentially about performing tasks and getting the job done with a dose of management philosophies thrown in. I recall a pioneer ship-manager enquiring about setting up a management office on board –files, work stations, communication center, secretariat et al, a la ashore, as if shipboard managerial cadre will occupy the haloed room during working hours and `go home’ when theirs is done.

Whilst the concept itself is laudable and adaptable to a certain extent, the hierarchal system of responsibility, alter ego and criminalisation of late, limits applicabilities. Isn’t it like the generic MBA term of `product’ for all and sundry that enterprises produce?

The offshore oil industry has somewhat been more successful in adopting management techniques and systems. Perhaps due to diversified labour/skill/technologies and higher risks, it is necessary and enforceable. Accessible too, since the rigs are mostly stationery and a chopper flight away.

What all then can be transposed from the oil industry to shipping? Let it be underscored that most safety norms in shipping are generally of oil industry origins and driven by the tanker sector, and their tested practices have rightly migrated across the spectrum; pre-charter inspections by bulker operators for instance. Hazop analysis for one for sure. Finite element analysis next, redundancies, rest periods and so on.

Even as a back up team and for emergency response, the combined ship-shore systems are not without limitations. For, events outpace inputs and decision making after live conferring online would still leave the feel of the situation wanting, in different time zones. The ones ashore would be daylight driven whereas those aboard per force would have to be ants around round the clock. The us and them gulf is inevitable and unavoidable when what is endeavoured to be managed efficiently is at one end, with the front desk ashore in effect being the virtual back office.

Technical superintendents are the ones who know –and should know- ships under their care and their crew best -not the personnel man, as he gauges them in their elements on ship visits and audits. He could be a seamless link but his HR expertise and skill sets are limited. More often than not, the friendly visitor turns foe, to demonstrate what can be saved by overburdening mariners and what had not been saved by seafarers’ callousness, conveniently forgetting that mail, stores, spares and reliefs often miss ships and incorrect stemming/supply occur, because of poor foresight ashore. Frequent ship visits and their sea sojourns are the apt solutions; not just to keep their tickets valid but.

When the technocrat that comes calling on board, budget is what drives his decision making, as ship-management contracts are won on costs, and desirable mariners are poached on demand. What the system has precipitated is disloyal mariners, turning murderers! Isn’t management afloat supposed to sense the developments and fissures aboard in good time and institute remedial measures? Do short tenures help meet the objectives, unless senior seafarers work on back-to-back basis on few vessels? What then, when the supers themselves drift around for greener pastures?

Should he preach and not ensure that it is practiced, the whole system crashes. Aren’t rest hours flogged on almost all ships? Pollution investigations point fingers down the line ashore, not on board, as no right thinking sailor would pollute -respecting intent and spirit of law- fearing criminalisation. What of sludge, garbage, packing, dunnage and cargo residue disposals?

Wait and watch wider environment issue compliance levels and audit remarks! Marpol/ISM notwithstanding, ISO 14000 (Environment Management) & ISO18000 (OHSAS) still being voluntary, it is customers’ pressure like tanker industry’s TMSA (Tanker Management & Self Assessment) that is setting standards for good management practices.

Swimming pool compulsion and gymnasium aside, what else for welfare? Is medical facilities on board adequate to attend to accidents and has it improved of late? Shouldn’t proactive management instill confidence in their subjects by providing better medical response? For instance, by having crew medical records online for accessing by company Doc, Ship and Radio medical aid, like Radio Roma? How many are aware/using AEA of Internationalsos.com? Some have reduced quantum of medicines on board as per WHO scale to match smaller crew numbers, it seems.

When tolerance limits are specified, is total alcohol ban fair to sailors toiling for a living? Don’t they gulp a sundowner and/or nightcap ashore? Wasn’t weekly booze issue a well thought out measure? Aren’t these valid management concerns? Kudos for permitting wives on board at senior & middle level, but welfare measures need be focused on.

What is desirable is not dilution of authority –as ISM specifies- but more of delegation and empowerment for supporting-operational-management structure aboard in setting up, implementing and following up –management steps in true sense- of all aspects of routine operations, proactive planning, preventive maintenance and emergency preparedness/response, assessing variances from goals and targets set, introducing changes and continuously refining holistic systems. This in essence presumes ship-shore bonding and not a cleavage. In such scenarios, has manning agent a role to play?

In lighter vein, one hopes that the newfound unisex induction mantra does not encompass agenda of erasing salty words from mariner’s vocabulary, though the influx of fairer sex as colleagues will help dilute saltiness and not desalinate. Let us, as ever, hope for the better, manage at best and plan for the worst.