Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Effective Manning of the U.S. Merchant Fleet Committee on Effective Manning Marine Board Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council National Academy Press Washington, D.C. 1984

OCR for page R1
NOTICE: The pro ject that is the sub ject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Counc il. whose member s are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Eng ineer ing, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropr late balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sc fences, the National Academy of Engineer ing, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy' s purposes of further ing knowledge and of advising the federal government. The Council operates in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy under the authority of its congressional charter of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a pr ivate, nonprof it, self-governing membership corporation. The Council has become the pr incipal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineer ing in the conduct of their services to the government,- the public, and the scientif ic and engineer ing communities. It is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineer ing and the Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively, under the charter of the National Academy of Sc fences . This report represents work supported by Contract No. DTMA91-82-C-20025 between the U.S. Department of Transportation and the National Academy of Sciences. Limited copies are available f ram: Mar ine Board Commiss ion on Eng ineer ing and Techn ical Systems National Research Counc il 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Wash ing ton, D. C . 20 4 18

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON EFE ECTIVE MANNING Committee Members Wayne L. Horvitz, Chairman Labor-Management Consultant Wash ing ton, D. C .- Frank J. Boland National Mar itime Union New York, New York John V. Caffrey Mobil Oil Corporation New York, New York Har ry Benford The Univer s ity of Michigan Ann Arbor, Mich igan C1 inton J. Maguir e U. S. Coast Guard, Ret. Washington, D.C. John W. Re dater Amer ican Bureau of Sh ipp ing New York, New York Jacques Roggema Organizational Development Consultant Kantens, Netherlands Julian H. Singman Mar itime Institute for Research and Industr ial Development Washing ton, D.C. Thomas J. Smith Farrell Lines Oradell, New Jer sey Richard E. Walton Harvar d Un iver s ity Cambr idge, Massachusetts Government Liaisons Virgil Williams Mar itime Administration Richard Suther land U.S. Coast Guard Staf f Charles A. Bookman, Senior Staff Off icer Michael E. Gaf fney, Senior Staf f Of f icer Donald W. Perkins, ASSL. Executive Director Terr ie Noble, Secretary

OCR for page R1
MARINE BOARD of the COMMISSION ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SYSTEMS NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL John E. Flipse, Chairman Texas A&M Research Foundat ion College Station, Texas John F. Wing, Vice Chairman Sooz, Allen and Hamilton Bethesda, Maryland William M. Benkert Washington, D.C. Kenneth A. Blenkarn Amoco Production Company Tulsa, Oklahoma Donald F. Boesch Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium Chauvin, Louisiana H. Ray Brannon Exxon Production Research Houston, Texas Clifton E. Curtis Center for Law and Social Policy Washington' D.C. Rober t G. Dean University of Florida Gainesvi lie, Flor ida Edwa Ed D. Goldber g Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla, California Arthur J. Haskell Matson Nav igation Company San Francisco, California James A. Higg ins Stanley As sac fates Washington, D. C. STAFF Bramlette McClelland McClel land Eng ineers, Inc e Boss ton, Texas William M. Nicholson Annapolis, Maryland Fredric Raichlen California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Clifford M. Sayre E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company Wilmington, Delaware William H. Silcox Standard Oil Company of California San Francisco, California Jul. fan ~ . Singman Maritime Institute for Research and Industrial Development Washing ton, D. C . Nathan Sonenshein Global Marine Development, Inc. Newport Beach, California Marshall P. Tulin University of California Santa Barbara, California James G. Wenzel Lockheed Missiles and Space Company Sunnyvale, California Jack W. Boiler, Executive Director Doris C. Holmes, Financial Assistant Donald W. Perkins, Assistant Executive Director Gale M. Munson, Administrative Assistant Charles A. Bookman, Senior Staff Off leer Phyllis Johnson, Secretary Aurora M. Gallagher, Senior Staff Officer Terrie Noble, Secretary Richard W. Rumke, Senior Staff Officer Joyce Somerville, Secretary 1V

OCR for page R1
PREFACE ORIGIN OF STUDY In recent years, ship operators, maritime unions, and governments in the maritime nations of Europe and Asia have made substantial produc- tivity gains through more effective manning of merchant vessels. This has been accomplished through various combinations of shipboard auto- mation, changes in ship operating company and vessel crew organization, and government maritime policies. The need to enhance the competitive- ness of the U. S. -f lag f feet has raised interest in the productivity improvement that might be realized through innovations in manning practices, and in the costs and consequences. At the request of the Maritime Administration, the Marine Board of the Nat tonal Research Counc il established the Co~mnit~ee on Ef festive Manning. Members of the committee included persons with baclcq~ounds in maritime labor union management, U.S.-flag vessel operations manage- ment, and U. S . government oversight of vessel operations and safety. Other expertise on the committee included a labor mediator with experi- ence in maritime labor issues, a scholar whose research focuses on the effect of technology development on the American work force, a social psycholog ist who was involved in a number of effective manning experi- mental projects undertaken in Northwestern Europe, and an expert in technical aspects of vessel design and operation. Consistent with the policies and programs of the National Research Council, appropriate balance of perspectives was an important consideration in choosing committee members . SCOPE OF STUDY The charge to the committee was to provide technical background and analysis in support of management, labor, and government decisionmaking regarding the means and process by which effective manning may be best accomplished in the U. S. -f lag merchant f leet. The committee assessed the experiences of other countries with manning innovations, the similarities and differences between the United States and other countries in the conditions and factors important to implementing such changes, and the considerations important in making v

OCR for page R1
decisions about effective manning of the U.S.-flag fleet. Among the factors considered were the safety and efficiency of vessels, and opportunities presented by new technology, management of change, and organization of crews. The committee directed its assessment to prov id ing a teas is f or dec is ions and pol icy . I t d id not f ormulate a plan of action or select from candidate alternatives for manning. The committee' s interest extended beyond manning innovations to their impacts on safe and economic operation, and to the mitigation of side effects such as unemployment, altered career paths, and changes in the nature of shipboard work and quality of shipboard life. The committee addressed a number of issues: Changes Aboard Sh ip o How far can manning levels be adjusted at vat ious levels of existing and proposed technology and still operate ef f ic iently and safely? o What changes in the organization of crews will need to be accompl ished? O What technological innovations will be required? O By what method (s) will the safety and eff iciency of crews be assessed? Changes in the Operation of Ship Operating Companies o What corresponding manning and organizational changes should be made in shipping company of f ices? Other Impacts o How must training programs be instituted or modified to correspond to new organizational forms? O What regulatory legislative reform must be accomplished to permit vessels to operate at these levels and with new organizations of crew? o What contractual and/or government policy innovations have accompanied manning adjustments to obviate or mitigate the human costs of increased productivity (e.g., construction programs and retraining schemes) ? V1

OCR for page R1
CONDUCT OF STUDY The committee conducted its assessment by means of an information- gathering trip to Northwest Europe, a workshop involving government, industry, and labor participants, and a literature review, which produced an extensive bibliography (Chapter 7). In June 1983, members of the committee conducted interviews with ship operators, union leaders, government administrators, and researchers in England, Sweden, Denmark, Germany' Norway, and the Netherlands. A list of interviews and discussion topics used by the committee in the interviews appears as Appendix A. The interviews provided an unparalleled opportunity to put the committee's questions directly to researchers and the government, industry, and labor leaders most closely involved with manning innovation in the maritime industry. Committee members gained insight into the motivations of the various interests in and parties to manning innovation, and the intricacies of their involvement. The committee documented its observations of European experience with manning innovation In a working paper.* The observations In the working paper are based on what the committtee learned through interviews, and on literature reporting on overseas innovations. The persons contacted and interviewed in Europe are not necessarily representative of the European maritime industry, since the committee sought out the companies and individuals most heavily engaged in manning innovations. The working paper provided the committee with a basis for comparison concerning organizational change that might be considered in the United States. Copies of the working paper were provided to U.S. government, industry, labor, and research principals who were invited to a committee meeting, held at the Maritime Institute of Technology and Graduate Studies (MITAGS), Baltimore, Maryland, in October 1983, to consider with the committee the European experience and how manning innovations might best be accomplished in the United States. The participants in and agenda of the meeting are provided in Appendix B. To foster free exchange of information at the meeting, no written record was kept. The meeting enabled the committee not only to discuss the prospects for manning innovation with its guests, but also to bring to their attention the accomplishments that have been achieved overseas. The committee's observations of European experience and of the attitudes and experiences of U. S. principals provide a basis for this report . The committee's report is, accordingly, based on committee activities and the professional experience of committee members. *Much of the material in the working paper appears in Chapter 4 of this report. Limited copies of the working paper are available from the Marine Board, National Research Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418. Yii

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations 2 . Eff ective Manning 3. Status and Manning of the U . S. Merchant Fleet Status Manning of the U.S. Merchant Fleet Rules and Practices Governing the Manning of U.S. Vessels Training in the United States Extent of Manning Innovation in the U. S. Fleet 4. 1 7 9 9 14 20 24 26 Manning of Merchant Vessels in Northwest Europe and Japan Roots of Change Manning Innovations Changes in Vessel Design, Technology, and Equipment Changes in the Organization of Crews Changes in Union/Management Arrangements, Shoreside Support, and Corporate Policies Process of Change Nature of Organizational Change Key Ingredients in the Change Process Importance of Training Government and Union Rules and the Process of Change Compensating Workers for Their Participation Results of Manning Innovations Economy of Vessel Operation Quality of Working Life and Job Satisfaction Safety and Health Additional Comments on Measurement of Results A. Opportunities for and Obstacles to Change in the U. S.-Flag Merchant Fleet Technological and Organizational Considerations Manning Research and Exper imentation, and Technology Transfer Tr aining Government Rules Implications of Changes for Seafarers 6. Ref erences 7. Bibliography 29 29 31 31 34 41 47 47 55 56 57 58 58 59 60 61 63 63 66 68 68 69 71 73 Appendix A: European Information Gathering Trip 93 Appendix B: Meeting of Government, Industry, Labor, and 9 5 Research Principals in U. S. Manning Innovation Appendix C: Laws and Rules of the United States 99 Concerning Vessel Manning Appendix D: Data on Vessel Manning in Northwest Europe 115 and Japan ix