I thought the video was very interesting, looking forward to watching the next ones. Looks like a very well run outfit.
I interviewed with them a long time ago but ended up working elsewhere. Some exceptionally skilled mariners working in that trade.
IIRC the only fatality Coastal has had was a Chief that got zapped hooking up shore power so I wondered about this myself.
It’s not necessarily a procedural simplification or a time saver though. If you have multiple shore power possibilities all with different phase rotations and possibly some with only 208 it is often faster to just have a J-box hook up than continually disassembling a plug.
Could just be institutional inertia.
There is no need for a lot of this over the top safety nonsense.
How in hell would anyone get a chain binder tight enough without a cheater bar?
A real safety hazard is a chain binder that is not tight.
You probably wouldn’t like the way we tighten turnbuckles with short lengths of rebar, or the jaw end of another turnbuckle, but these are well proven and accepted methods. Any claim that only a $300 UL listed tool factory manufactured in China is safe - is baloney.
You probably wouldn’t like my channel locks with one handle self-modified into a marlinspike, but I certainly don’t care whether you like it or not. My channel locks are very handy.
Real safety like having enough well rested, skilled crew is important, but companies won’t pay for it because it’s expensive.
Companies like to shift all the safety burden onto mariners because it’s cheap to require mariners to wear hard hats and steel toe boots which are useless and unnecessary 95% of the time.
Fortunately, there are lots of jobs around right now. We are not stuck with working for landlubbers that get carried away with unnecessary psudeo safety nonsense. We can work for companies with common sense, a good safety record, and top pay, similar to Coastal Transportation.
Quite a peculiar argument. Just because you utilize exemptions and don’t need a full SMS doesn’t mean you can disregard recognized safety procedures. You can always quote the relevant provisions, that I asked for, from your Vessel Operating Manual.
You’re wrong. The obligation to wear a helmet or other PPE doesn’t solely depend on the task at hand but can also be tied to the area where there’s a risk to health. Hence, wearing a safety helmet is necessary not only on the working decks of the ship but, for instance, within an active terminal area, even if you’re just going for a walk, these are the basics.
I’m not sure how things were on your ship, but I do know that modifying hand tools is illegal, and we’re not allowed to extend lever arms using a cheater bar. This restriction is a direct result of CFR, OSHA guidelines, as well as other recognized standards like the Code of Safe Working Practice for Merchant Seafarers. And it’s not just about using an ill-fitting pipe; you can’t increase torque multiple times without consequences.
Simply use cargo lashing tension levers as intended and recommended by the manufacturer. If you’re not confident in safely using a lever binder, you can always opt for a ratchet binder or web lashing with a ratchet tensioner.
But my post was not about safety principles or the use of proper PPE; it was simply to highlight the unwise practice of posting on social media materials that document irresponsible behavior by members of your crew.
Please point us to the federal reg that makes the use of added mechanical leverage or field tool improvements illegal. Crosby is a pretty respected gear manufacturer, and while they explicitly recommend against the use of cheater pipes - by that name - on their load binders, they also include instructions on doing so should you decide to.
I thought about that after. I had assumed (with no actual knowledge) that Coastal had their own regular berths so a consistent setup would be easy. But I understand that might not be the case and not as practical without a standard fleet and standard shore infrastructure. The tankers I worked on had a plug style connection for each individual lead so if the rotation was wrong you just shift the plugs.
3 posts were split to a new topic: Fishing boat videos
Unlike Coastal where the crew is used to lash cargo with deep-sea commercial the lashing is done by longshoreman. No reason to assume because a tool is being used that the chains are being over-tightened. Added leverage can be used to increase force or reduce effort.
I enjoy the video series and feel that it accomplishes it’s stated recruiting objectives.
For those that don’t like these ships to be classed as fishing vessels there is a well documented history as to why this is so.
The newest ship in the Coastal Transport fleet, Costal Standard, blt. 2015:
None of them are any great beauties, but I’ll vote for Kvitbjørn as the most efficient and least ugly.
A good reality TV show is all about voice-overs, dramatic cut aways to commercials, and Ford truck ads.
I completely understand that this is the image—and by and large, the desired reality—that companies wish to purvey. When it comes to nitty gritty, I prefer my rock-climbing helmet to any hard-hat you could try to foist on me, and my $50 rigging gloves to any crap you’ve got lying in the bottom of the bosun’s locker. And hey, sometimes you gotta jump over a rail…
I don’t think the focus of ship operations should be on the goal of avoiding legal liability. It’s better to strive for safe, efficient and economical operations and think of compliance with procedures, rules and regulations as tools to achieve that end.
Ideally, a holistic approach to safe operation will result in better and safer outcomes that exceed the minimum standards, rather than focusing first on simple compliance with rules and regulations.
3 posts were split to a new topic: Video Series About Working Boat Episode 1 - Inside Passage
Of course, here are the relevant regulations:
29 CFR 1926.1434 - Equipment modifications.
There are a few other fundamental rules directly related to hand tools:
29 CFR 1910.242(a)
29 CFR 1910.243(a)(4)
29 CFR 1910.243(d)(4)(ii), (xiii), and (xiv)
29 CFR 1910.244(a)(2)(vii)
I’m not surprised by occasional irrational and irresponsible opinions posted on the Internet. However, what does surprise me is the lack of any reaction to such posts on forums that bring together professionals. I intentionally held off on responding, for which I apologize, hoping for some clarification. Unfortunately, I haven’t received any, and now I’m unsure if it’s just a meaningless and foolish statement or perhaps a more significant issue regarding work culture and awareness of safe work practices.
Blindly following stupid rules and lacking the good judgment necessary to know when to ignore rules that don’t make sense is not good seamanship.
It’s necessary to know how to adapt to reality and operational needs onboard to safely and efficiently get the job done with good seamanship.
Most of us are happy to disregard pontificating pedantic pissant, wannabe safety nazis
A great deal of the safety equipment supplied onboard is not fit for purpose. A safety helmet suitable for a building site is marginally better than nothing at all when worn in a rescue boat. Some gloves I have seen supplied would be more suitable to my wife’s gardening group.
Hard hat without a chin strap is more of a safety hazard than a benefit. I’ve come close to falling overboard several times while trying to catch a hard hat that feel off. I’ve let a few go overboard too. I don’t wear them unless needed during overhead work.
Back to the arguably on but off topic:
@Sirk you have cited a non-maritime OSHA standard for the Construction industry for the Modification of Cranes used in Construction (29 CFR 1926.242.a). Followed by other OSHA regs stating, among other things, that the Employer is responsible for safe use of hand tools (243.a.4), that portable grinders can’t be used when broken until repaired (243.d.4.ii) and have to have a shield (243.d.4.xiv), and that portable tools should be inspected for defects (244.a.2.vii).
Those are all great regulations. None say what you were commenting on though, nor do any prohibit the fabrication of hand tools nor use of leverage. Never mind the fact that 29CFR and OSHA is likely not the governing body for an offshore vessel (I guess grey area in port in this case?). But nice work pulling some random irrelevant regulations out of a hat.
There was a thread here about this
Check List, Procedures, Training and Experience
Two very good articles.
Light bulbs, red lines and rotten onions
This graphic is from that article.
Mariners are in the “Work-as Done” section, you are in the “Work-as-Imagined” section.
See 29 CFR 1910.5(b) and this MOU between OSHA and the USCG.
