I have just read the STCW article in the May 2006 issue of The Triton [Bridge: STCW-95 no replacement for experience,” page A1].

I was surprised at some responses, especially the common impression that STCW equates to Basic Safety Training. Mariners should know BST is only one of numerous training requirements in the Code.

This is a minimum standard and was not intended to qualify a deckhand or stew for their entire job. It is designed to familiarize crew with the proper safety procedures and minimum standards in “Basic Safety Training” that everyone should know. I believe, and our student questionnaires support, that most people who have taken the BST course at MPT feel that it was a valuable learning experience that everyone should take before working on a boat or for owner/operators planning extensive cruising.

Most yacht jobs require crew to have BST even when not mandated by their flag state. It is also a prerequisite for an MCA Yacht Ratings Certificate. In no way does growing up on a boat in the Great Lakes (an example in the article) or anywhere else prepare someone to fight a fire onboard a vessel or conduct a helicopter evacuation, board a life raft, perform first aid, etc. These are only learned through education.

Imagine being on an airplane with a flight crew that was not trained in safety and could not help during an emergency, evacuate the airplane after a bad landing, or assist a passenger having a medical problem. I think charter guests and owners also assume and expect the yacht crew to have proper safety training to assist them in case of an emergency.

Certificated crew and officers are taking much more than Basic Safety Training. Many of the new system mates train for up to 26 weeks, more than 1,000 hours, including ship handling simulation. The courses are international coast guard requirements and have nothing to do with “schools selling courses.” This education is in accordance with the STCW Code and requires a great deal of experience and practical assessments as the prerequisite to achieving the end result.

Never has training been in lieu of experience as the article insinuates. Finishing medical or law school does not make you a good doctor or lawyer; it simply makes it legal to start practicing. Training and education are only the beginning; nothing replaces real experience. The problem is that experience without training can only prepare you for situations you are already experienced with. It does not prepare you for an emergency scenario. Training can help you successfully handle the situations you have never faced before. It is ultimately the combination of the two that truly make a qualified and competent mariner.

While I agree that voicing the industry’s concern and negative feelings is important and newsworthy, I believe also including the benefits would be more balanced. Perhaps you could reprint some of the letters we have received from students whose lives and careers have been changed by taking courses here.

I am disappointed that the headline (on the second page of the article) read: “Captains: Maritime schools push certificate to sell classes.” Most people in the industry think of Maritime Professional Training in particular when they hear “Maritime school.” This could have simply read “schools.”

You could have handled this situation by offering local schools an opportunity to explain what STCW is since there are still many people who don’t fully understand it. Additionally, MPT has never “sold” students a course for the sake of selling classes. It has always been to satisfy a regulation or make mariners more marketable.

Most of today’s captains obtained licenses before STCW was revised and were required only to meet gap-closing training for compliance. I believe that when they hire a new-system-educated mate, the long-term value of the revised code will be evident.

I have been with MPT for 20 years and we are always honest with candidates about requirements. I am very passionate about the education of this industry. I feel that it is the responsibility of the schools, captains, managers, and marine journalists to encourage professionalism and education rather than playing into the hands of the few who consider training an inconvenient, unnecessary and expensive impediment to their careers.

Consider case histories where yachts have sunk or run aground in clear weather due to poor navigation and bridge procedures according the MCA, NTSB and investigating officers. These, among others, are indications of the need for continued professional training and education in the maritime industry, and the need for an international code of minimum standards … STCW.

Amy Beavers
School Principal
Maritime Professional Training
Ft. Lauderdale

Captains need to get facts straight

I read with some dismay the comments made by captains at the last Bridge lunch, published in the May issue of The Triton.

To clarify, all maritime regulations evolve from the International Maritime Organization (an offshoot of the United Nations), a body of more than 160 national members. The IMO decides on international policy and publishes a convention, such as the STCW 95 Convention, COLREGS and MARPOL. It is up to individual Flag State administrations to enforce the convention by supporting it with legislation in their own countries.

Regulations are made a requirement by the Flag State for its vessels (i.e. certain crew must hold STCW Basic Training Certificates and engineers must hold certain licenses/certificates).

This is driven by Flag State law (and to some extent by insurance companies). To suggest that schools are selling the courses for their own gain is not just ignorant but ridiculous. Perhaps these captains would benefit from returning to school to learn what they should already know.

Chris Taylor
Vice President
International Yachtmaster Training
Ft. Lauderdale

Yachting is a profession

Training in this day and age is important. A lot of training with captains just doesn’t get done. What STCW training does is open a student’s mind. I take what they teach in STCW and go further with my training on board. We do three hours of training every month. In our first aid drill, most of the time is spent dragging a 250-pound man upstairs and onto the deck for evacuation.

Are the schools money-hungry? I’m not here to judge. Are they teaching stuff they shouldn’t be teaching? No. It’s all required by the license.

But in my opinion, celestial navigation is old school. I have five GPS’s on board. What’s the chance I’m going to lose them all? And if I do, I have my watch, a compass and charts. They don’t teach celestial navigation at New London, and they don’t teach it at Annapolis. What else could they teach to give me an all-oceans license in place of that class that I’ll never use? How about a bridge management resource class or a chart-plotting course? Or give me $1,400 of simulator time. You may not need these for the license, but that doesn’t mean schools can’t offer them.

Yachting is a profession. It won’t be long before getting your license will be just like going to college.

Capt. Paul Stengel
M/Y Martha Ann

Basic training is just that

I was interested to read the STCW article in the May issue. The one major factor that may have been overlooked is that STCW-95 Basic Training is just that, basic training. It also shows commitment to the industry from a crew member who has shelled out up to $1,000 to take the course.

Some crew agencies charge significant fees for crew, but there is a lot of work involved. Interviewing and staying in touch with crew and captains is time consuming. It’s a little like being a dating agency. It’s not just a matter of finding someone with the necessary experience and qualifications, it is also a matter of finding a “fit” with everyone else.

Elaine Christopher
Crew placement division
Select Yachts
Sint Maarten

<<back to main