[I]Ultimately it is the owner who puts the master in charge of a ship. If owners were unhappy with the present system they would be pushing for change.
[/I]The owner of my Company hardly knew anything about shipping when he stared investing in this business a decade or so back. And most of the ship owners know little, like mine. Owners don’t appoint ‘Masters in Command’: The Law does. While applicable in the last century, i wonder why it is in this one. Thats why i asked about it’s inviolabilty.
Is it possible, to have a Cargo Engineer who do all the deck work that the mate does today, and also assist the C/E where week long breakdowns in cranes occur and where the Mate/ Master cannot assist him. Is it possible to have a team of people on board with total responsibility to implementing and enhancing the SMS and not reliant on the Command System. Maybe we have a better and safer ship.
Margins are down so much in shipping it’s unbelievably hard to run things. And one thing that i wanted to come here in the end was also reduction in the size in Office establishments. How about just very few people managing a 100 ships. It’s possible, yes, but for that we need changes on board. It’s not necesarilly taking away ‘command’ from Navigators, but exploring the possibility that the owners/ their representatives can choose according to routes and types of ships, who they would like to have be a Chief Exec on board a ship, a Navigator or Engineer. What expenses it would entail and would it enhance the aspects of the Management system. Let them, instead of the law have a chance.