Six on, six off "As close to slavery as we have..."

I have worked 6+6, 12+12 and 4+8 . When I worked Deep Sea the 4+8 plus OT was nice. But working 6+6 on a Large A/TB as a CE is brutal! I can not even remember all of the times I would be up for 24 hours +++ only to have to stand watch as soon as repairs were completed as we were sailing. One trip from Hell, I had been up for almost 24 hours prior to sailing only to have the Brake Band on our Tow Winch Break while we were getting on the wire (another long story). We turned around and got back in the Notch to head back in to a repair berth. Once there I was told to go to bead as the CM would supervise the repairs. Well, I got about Four Hours of much needed sleep but when I inspected the Brake Band Repair I found that the brake band that was installed (and inspected by the CM) was too big and would not hold. The Captain tried to throw me under the bus but it back fired on him, That was one long tow until the weather got good enough to notch back up.

Back in the 80’s when I worked in N.Y. most tugs only carried one engineer. It was not a bad gig if things worked right but truly SUCKED if they did not! Some of the boats I worked had great deck crews that would lend a hand. One boat I worked on had a Captain that hated engineers and refused to allow the Deckhands to help for any reason. So, we had a break down and the entire Deck Crew when to bed and I was up for way over 24 hours doing the repair on my own. I almost threw a 4 foot pipe wrench when the old man came down in the E.R. after about 18 hours to find out “When The Hell Was I Going To Finish The Repair”. I did not even answer him as he left as soon as I picked up the wrench and started to swing it. The Asshole was not the normal as like I said before most of the guys helped and I always went on deck to help them whenever I could.

When I was working on the Large A/TB’s in the Gulf, we would sometimes have an extra AE and I would give them the option of working 4+8 or having them work 6+6 and I would do 12 hours straight and work on the Barge underway. Most of the time they choose to stay on 6+6 as they shared a room.

So, I will say that 4+8 is about the best way that I have worked but I do not see any company putting the extra engineers onboard unless they are forced to.

I worked 4&8 about 25% of my career (the best) and some 12 & 12. On the first 6 & 6 contract with SIU Inland I worked was pretty good. We got overtime after 6 and “out of department”. Also penalty overtime for tank cleaning and spills. We worked 28 & 28 with top pay, “missing man pay”, paid travel, paid top tier medical and 2 for 1 pension contributions. I was amazed (though I shouldn’t be) that a handful of “creative writers” with their overtime sheets and insisting on drawing unemployment on their time off (permanent employees) would ruin it for all.

I’ve worked unmanned engine room 0600-1800 day working, 8 on 4 off with 4 hrs OT, and last boat was 12 & 12. I did some 6 and 6 on the Blue Ridge if one of the watchstanders got fired or had to leave for an emergency. The extra money from sailing short was nice, but after about 4 days of that, it got old quick. My favorite was day working, but that doesn’t make sense on short runs since instead of having one barely awake officer (CE) during maneuvering, you have two duty engineer and C/E. Engine crew on the Legacy/750-1 worked 12/12. The 3rd is 1200-2400, 2nd engineer 0000-1200, C/E and 1rst 0600-1800. Going from 3rd to 2nd was an interesting shift as your body has to get used to going to bed at 14:00. I honestly liked the 12/12 as the watches went by really fast.

"Getting too little sleep for several nights in a row disrupts hundreds of genes that are essential for good health, including those linked to stress and fighting disease.

Tests on people who slept less than six hours a night for a week revealed substantial changes in the activity of genes that govern the immune system, metabolism, sleep and wake cycles, and the body’s response to stress, suggesting that poor sleep could have a broad impact on long-term wellbeing.

The changes, which affected more than 700 genes, may shed light on the biological mechanisms that raise the risk of a host of ailments, including heart disease, diabetes, obesity, stress and depression, in people who get too little sleep.

“The surprise for us was that a relatively modest difference in sleep duration leads to these kinds of changes,” said Professor Derk-Jan Dijk, director of the Surrey Sleep Research Centre at Surrey University, who led the study. “It’s an indication that sleep disruption or sleep restriction is doing more than just making you tired.”

Previous studies have suggested that people who sleep less than five hours a night have a 15% greater risk of death from all causes than people of the same age who get a good night’s sleep. In one survey of workers in Britain more than 5% claimed to sleep no more than five hours a night. Another survey published in the US in 2010 found that nearly 30% of people claimed to sleep no more than six hours a night.

Professor Dijk’s team asked 14 men and 12 women, all healthy and aged between 23 and 31 years, to live under laboratory conditions at the sleep centre for 12 days. Each volunteer visited the centre on two separate occasions. During one visit, they spent 10 hours a night in bed for a week. In the other, they were allowed only six hours in bed a night. At the end of each week, they were kept awake for a day and night, or around 39 to 41 hours.

Using EEG (electroencephalography) sensors, the scientists found that those on the 10 hours-per-night week slept around 8.5 hours a night, while those limited to six hours in bed each night got on average 5 hours and 42 minutes of sleep.

The time spent asleep had a huge effect on the activity of genes, picked up from blood tests on the volunteers, according to a report in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Among the sleep-deprived, the activity of 444 genes was suppressed, while 267 genes were more active than in those who slept for longer.

Changes to genes that control metabolism might trigger or exacerbate conditions such as diabetes or obesity, while disruption to other genes, such as those that govern the body’s inflammatory response, might have an impact on heart disease. Further genes that were affected have been linked to stress and ageing.

Sleep loss also had a dramatic effect on genes that govern the body’s biological clock, suggesting that poor sleep might trigger a vicious cycle of worsening sleep disruption. The tests showed that people who slept for 8.5 hours a night had around 1,855 genes whose activity rose and fell over a 24-hour cycle. But in the sleep deprived, nearly 400 of these stopped cycling completely. The remainder rose and fell in keeping with the biological clock, but over a much smaller range.

“There is a feedback between what you do to your sleep and how that affects your circadian clock, and that is going to be very important in future investigations,” said Dijk.

The researchers did not check how long it took for genes to return to their normal levels of activity in the sleep-deprived volunteers, but they hope to in further studies. Though scores of genes were disrupted in the sleep-deprived, the scientists cannot say whether those changes are a harmless short-term response to poor sleep, a sign of the body adapting to sleep-deprivation, or are potentially harmful to health.

Jim Horne, professor of psychophysiology at Loughborough University’s Sleep Research Centre, said: "The potential perils of ‘sleep debt’ in today’s society and the need for ‘eight hours of sleep a night’ are often overplayed and can cause undue worry. Although this important study seems to support this concern, the participants had their sleep suddenly restricted to an unusually low level, which must have been somewhat stressful.

“We must be careful not to generalise such findings to, say, habitual six-hour sleepers who are happy with their sleep. Besides, sleep can adapt to some change, and should also be judged on its quality, not simply on its total amount.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/25/sleeping-six-hours-night-activity-genes#start-of-comments