| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. 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 R2
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 R3
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 R4
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 R5
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 R6
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 R7
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 R8
OCR for page R9
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