CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

In this area, you can comment on employers, trends, jobs, rumors affecting the jobs and job prospect of Marine Engineers.
Sea Rover
Deck Plate Wanderer
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby Sea Rover » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:59 pm

We are not Doctors.

Why not just memorize the material, write the exams and get the license? In any case, it's better to have it.

tintean
Deck Plate Wanderer
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:48 am

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby tintean » Wed Dec 13, 2017 6:03 am

We are not Engineers either.
I've had this discussion many times over the years with the rabid types who think this occupation is the be all and end all. Real Engineers are the people who designed and built the machinery we work on. We are little bits of mechanics, electricians, pipefitters, welders etc. If this all ended tomorrow none of us could get a job at any of the aforementioned , as we don't have enough skills at any of the trades. We couldn't even get a job as a painter. I once had a cadet ask me for career advice and I told him to go back to school and get a real trade. Today he is an industrial electrician with a full time high paying job. I should have taken my own advice years ago. So I repeat; you young guys should probably be looking at getting some new training before it's too late . I would assume it's hard to become a trainee in a new profession in your 40s or 50s.

User avatar
JollyJack
Fleet Engineer
Posts: 1176
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:57 am
Currently located: Eastern Canada

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby JollyJack » Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:33 am

I apprenticed as an Engine Fitter before I became a Marine Engineer. When I came to Canada, I challenged Exams for Heavy Equipment Mechanic, Millwright and Power (Stationery) Engineer, got the lot. So a basis in Marine Engineering is a solid base for other Trades.
Discourage incest, ban country "music".

Ratherbeonvacation
Leak Patrol
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:09 pm

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby Ratherbeonvacation » Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:59 am

Not sure what year that was but things have changed. I think some provinces may allow this but not all. I have contacted my local authority for power engineering certification many times over the past 10+ years. It’s not an equivalent trade (in their eyes) and if I wanted it....go back to school. As for the millwrite and heavy equipment, you need to get the hours signed off....who or what company in their right mind is gonna do that and risk their own certification.

Yes marine engineer is a great foundation but it’s not getting you any further ahead in regards to certification in another trade.

User avatar
D Winsor
Superintendent
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 8:23 am
Currently located: Dartmouth

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby D Winsor » Fri Dec 15, 2017 5:43 am

A few years ago, after talking to and lending my Marine Steam Engineering books to an engineer who worked at Point Lepreau Nuclear Plant. He wanted to borrow the books because the Marine Engineering Books were the best reference books for the Power Engineering exams. I looked into challenging at least the 4th class Power Engineer exam in New Brunswick but was told that my certification, training and experience did not meet the criteria that would allow me to challenge the exams. I would have to complete a "Recognized" Power Engineering Course first and obtain at least 12 months experience on a plant with boilers that had a working pressure of at least 2 bar. When I told them that I worked on ships with boilers that worked on pressures up to 45 bar I got the response "That's a ship not a power plant".

In Ontario I know that Marine Engineering training is recognized by Bruce Nuclear & Ontario Power Generation because many of the best graduates of the Marine Engineering program at Georgian College are recruited by these groups. Now when we get a cadet from Georgian that comes aboard for sea training and he/she is in the top tier in all the necessary skills to be top quality Marine Engineer. They now get labeled in not a derogatory way as a "Homer" (as in Homer Simpson) because we know they will be hired by Bruce Nuclear or OPG after graduation.
Troubleshooting 101 "Don't over think it - K.I.S.S. it"

tintean
Deck Plate Wanderer
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:48 am

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby tintean » Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:23 am

As you say, it is a good base but a good base would be preferable in your early 20s; not a lot of good in mid 40s or 50s. Who can afford to be entry level at that stage of life?

blackhatch
Deck Plate Wanderer
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:06 am

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby blackhatch » Mon Dec 18, 2017 6:47 am

I am amazed at the amount of " I did it the hard way, you should have to as well" going on in this post!! It is not the point of how you got your licence, it is the point of how it was rescinded. Today, I personally know of several people who have appealed this and managed to retain these licences, because they could lose their jobs, and have been given minimum 2 years exemptions to pass exams!!! These are not just 1st Class licences, these are 2nds too. That means the guy who left the 2nds job when he was issued his Chiefs cannot move back because his position is filled by someone on an exemption for 2nd Class, and he cannot go back as Chief because he cannot get the exemption.

Stop bickering about which school, program, company, life struggles, make the best Engineers, and realise that somebody, at the moment, is playing God when it comes down to deciding who gets it, and who doesn't. No matter how you got there, none of you got there based on arguments being put forward by companies lawyers, which is what is happening now.

Sea Rover
Deck Plate Wanderer
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby Sea Rover » Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:06 pm

What's the point of licenses if you don't have to earn them. Are you seriously implying that the only separation between the lowest and highest license be 36 months sea time? That's ridiculous.

User avatar
JollyJack
Fleet Engineer
Posts: 1176
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:57 am
Currently located: Eastern Canada

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby JollyJack » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:24 am

From TC HQ in Ottawa this morning.

Good Morning,

Transport Canada is willing to cooperate with a person that has been affected by the rescinding of the Ship Safety Bulletin 05/2017 and his/her employer to find an agreement that will fit all parties to the highest level allowed by our international engagement. These persons did not received an exemption but instead he/she will be able to sail as Second-Class Engineer or First-Class Engineer on a dispensation given to a specific vessel. This dispensation is given to the vessel on board which a person was hired with a certificate based on the Ship safety bulletin 05/2017. This way the employer is not caught short handed while the employee has an opportunity to fulfill the requirements needed for the certificate at the level sought. Such dispensation has to be renewed every six months and we will do so for a certain period or until the person has met all the requirements for the First-Class Engineer Certificate or Second-Class Engineer certificate. The person will have to show us the progress that he/she has made towards the completion of his certificate upon each renewal of the dispensation. If there is no significant progress made after a certain period, there will be no more dispensation given to the company. Please take note that a dispensation will be authorized to a vessel sailing within the water boundaries set out in the Ship Safety Bulletin 12/2016 and could, after consideration, be extended to a near coastal 1 voyage between Canadian ports.

The dispensation has to be requested by the company the usual way and they must mentioned the special nature of the demand. AMPSE must be informed and instructions will be given to the examiner. Since November 27, 2017 AMPSE received only 2 requests. Examiners and the district offices will keep AMSPE informed about the progress made by the person. This option was only offered to the 46 persons that could have been directly affected by the rescinding of the Bulletin and based on a case by case evaluation. If you need further information please, do not hesitate to contact me.

Best regards.
Discourage incest, ban country "music".

Revolver
Chief Engineer
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby Revolver » Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:43 am

46 people across Canada...woah...

But:
Fuckin' eh, light a fire under some asses.
Sounds plenty reasonable.
Get'er done bys!

Jon
Deck Plate Wanderer
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:48 am

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby Jon » Wed Dec 20, 2017 5:28 am

For me it isn't so much about the issuing of licenses as it is about Transport Canada's handling of this situation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't TC have a 5 year transition period to finalize the 2010 Manila Amendments? TC finished this period 2 months behind schedule with a document that was rescinded in November. SO We're looking at 6 years to be back in the same spot we were in before this all started. Have any apologies been issued or a statement made by TC accepting that little work has been accomplished?
AM I also correct in saying TC is working on new MPR's for 2018? If so, it doesn't fill me with much confidence when such a small document took 5 years and 2 months to write only to be rescinded 9 months later.

Revolver
Chief Engineer
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:55 pm

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby Revolver » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:09 pm

Your are not at all wrong, and I find it to be such a sad sad joke. It's incredible how slow and painful this process has been for TC - and therefore us.

What's going on in Ottawa JJ? You're our only link to any insider information hah the people in my local TC office don't know anything...

User avatar
JollyJack
Fleet Engineer
Posts: 1176
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:57 am
Currently located: Eastern Canada

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby JollyJack » Fri Dec 22, 2017 10:29 pm

Any concerns should be addressed to bernard.leclerc@tc.gc.ca. This from the Director of the certification branch in Ottawa.
Discourage incest, ban country "music".

User avatar
The Dieselduck
Administrator
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:41 pm
Currently located: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada (West Coast of Canada)

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby The Dieselduck » Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:19 pm

Here is the actual letter from Transport Canada to a person who's First Class Ticket was revoke after holding it for over six months.

2018.01-TC Cert Rescind Letter.pdf
(561.61 KiB) Downloaded 114 times


I guess the million dollar question is what exactly is the "discrepancy". I think that's bullshit. I could see a discrepancy being, "oh sorry" typo, or you need another course, or we needed more of this type of time. To do a 180 like they did, the discrepancy sounds like a interpersonal battle at HQ brought on by some very powerful string puller with a big phone.

One has to wonder why is there no accountability for this shameful treatment of professionals, who invest a great deal in time money and resource into their careers. This decision has had major impacts on so many real people - and their families. If you have been affected, first order of business, get the word out to your Member of Parliament, not that it will do much good from past experience, but one has to start somewhere.

I understand there are consultations with legal representation ongoing, if you are interested in this route, I can help get you in touch with like minded people - send me an email.
Martin Leduc
Certified Marine Engineer and Webmaster
Martin's Marine Engineering Page
http://www.dieselduck.net

User avatar
The Dieselduck
Administrator
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:41 pm
Currently located: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada (West Coast of Canada)

Re: CoC as per STCW 2010 Manila Convention

Postby The Dieselduck » Sat Jan 13, 2018 8:42 pm

I wonder how many of those cancelled CoC were vetted against the rules set in the CSA2001 for cancelling a Canadian seafarer' document? Seems TC is showing strong signs of being the wild wild west, do whatever, whenever; not really a promising future.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts ... ml#docCont

Canada Shipping Act, 2001
Notice before suspension or cancellation
20.1 The Minister of Transport must, before suspending or cancelling a Canadian maritime document issued under Part 3 (Personnel), give the holder 30 days notice of the proposed suspension or cancellation. The notice must
• (a) provide the holder with all relevant information concerning the grounds on which the Minister proposes to suspend or cancel the document; and
• (b) indicate, in the case of a proposed suspension or cancellation of a document on the grounds referred to in paragraph 20(1)(a), (b), (c), (e) or (f) or subparagraph 20(1)(g)(ii), the address at which, and the date, being 30 days after the notice is given, on or before which, the applicant may file a request for a review of the Minister’s decision.
Exception
• 20.2 (1) The Minister of Transport may suspend or cancel a Canadian maritime document issued under Part 3 (Personnel) without complying with section 20.1 if, on ex parte application by the Minister, the Tribunal determines that compliance with that section is not in the interest of public safety.
• Decision within 24 hours
(2) An application by the Minister of Transport under subsection (1) must be heard by a member of the Tribunal, sitting alone, whose determination shall be made within 24 hours after the application is filed with the Tribunal.
• Appeal
(3) The Minister of Transport may, within 24 hours after the determination, appeal the determination to the Tribunal.
• Decision within 48 hours
(4) The appeal panel of the Tribunal assigned to hear the appeal shall make a decision within 48 hours after the appeal is filed with the Tribunal.
Notice after suspension, cancellation or refusal to renew
20.3 Except where notice of a proposed suspension or cancellation of a Canadian maritime document is given under section 20.1, the Minister of Transport must, immediately after suspending, cancelling or refusing to renew a Canadian maritime document, give the holder a notice that
• (a) confirms the suspension, cancellation or refusal and provides all relevant information concerning the grounds on which the Minister suspended, cancelled or refused to renew the document; and
• (b) indicates, in the case of the suspension or cancellation of, or the refusal to renew, a document on the grounds referred to in paragraph 20(1)(a), (b), (c), (e) or (f) or subparagraph 20(1)(g)(ii), the address at which, and the date, being 30 days after the notice is given, on or before which, the applicant may file a request for a review of the Minister’s decision.
Request for review
• 20.4 (1) Subject to subsection (2), the holder of a Canadian maritime document that is referred to in a notice under section 20.1 or 20.3 may, within the time specified in the notice or any further time that the Tribunal on application allows, file a written request for a review of the decision referred to in the notice.
• Exception
(2) A request for a review must not be filed with, or accepted by, the Tribunal if the grounds for suspending, cancelling or refusing to renew the document are set out in paragraph 20(1)(d) or subparagraph 20(1)(g)(i).
• Effect of request
(3) The filing of a request for a review in respect of a notice under section 20.1 operates as a stay of the proposed suspension or cancellation until the matter is finally disposed of in accordance with this section or section 20.5.
• Time and place for review
(4) On receipt of a request filed under subsection (1), the Tribunal must appoint a time and place for the review and must notify the Minister of Transport and the holder of the time and place in writing.
• Review procedure
(5) The member of the Tribunal assigned to conduct the review must provide the Minister of Transport and the holder with an opportunity consistent with procedural fairness and natural justice to present evidence and make representations.
• Person not compelled to testify
(6) In a review of a decision made under paragraph 20(1)(e), the holder is not required, and must not be compelled, to give any evidence or testimony in the matter.
• Determination
(7) The member may
o (a) in the case of a decision made under paragraph 20(1)(e) or subparagraph 20(1)(f)(ii) or (iii), confirm the Minister of Transport’s decision or substitute his or her own determination; and
o (b) in any other case, confirm the Minister of Transport’s decision or refer the matter back to the Minister for reconsideration.
Right of appeal
• 20.5 (1) The applicant for, or holder of, a Canadian maritime document may appeal to the Tribunal a determination made under subsection 16.1(5) or 20.4(7), and the Minister of Transport may appeal to the Tribunal a determination made under paragraph 16.1(5)(a) or 20.4(7)(a). The time limit for making an appeal is 30 days after the determination.
• Loss of right of appeal
(2) A party that does not appear at a review hearing is not entitled to appeal a determination, unless they establish that there was sufficient reason to justify their absence.
• Disposition of appeal
(3) The appeal panel of the Tribunal assigned to hear the appeal may
o (a) in the case of a determination made under paragraph 16.1(5)(a) or 20.4(7)(a), dismiss the appeal, or allow the appeal and substitute its own decision; or
o (b) in the case of a determination made under paragraph 16.1(5)(b) or 20.4(7)(b), dismiss the appeal or refer the matter back to the Minister of Transport for reconsideration.
Martin Leduc
Certified Marine Engineer and Webmaster
Martin's Marine Engineering Page
http://www.dieselduck.net


Return to “General Job topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 

 

cron