Download - Royal Australian Navy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 2003 33 Turning Things Around – A Team effort CAPT CRAIG KERR, DIRECTOR, NAVY PROFESSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (ENGINEERING AND LOGISTICS) In the second issue of the Navy Engineering Bulletin I wrote an article regarding workforce structures which pondered the underlying reasons why RAN technical workforces are seemingly ‘upside down’ and unsustainable. One of the main points of the article was that through modernising our Navy we had changed the required ratio of Senior Sailors to Junior Sailors. But, by reducing the relative requirement for Junior Sailors we have unwittingly decimated the ‘breeding ground’ for our Senior Sailors. In this article, I will touch on the changes that have been developed to address the ANZAC MT conundrum. I offer it as an example of what can be achieved when adequate time and resource are made available and focussed effort is put into resolving problems. There has been tremendous teamwork across and beyond the RAN in addressing not only the specific ANZAC MT problem, but also in taking on other technical personnel issues across Navy. ANZAC Marine Technicians There have been some exciting developments regarding the ANZAC MTs, which you may recall had more POMTs in their workforces than LSMTs. (This made for an “upside down” workforce structure and carried with it unsustainable manpower overheads.) A comprehensive ‘reverse engineering’ of the Organisational and Corrective Maintenance requirements has been completed together with an analysis of a number of options to restructure the ANZAC MT workforce. The result was that it can be demonstrated the ANZAC MTs can have a sustainable workforce and meet the onboard ‘O’ level maintenance requirement, (there are, of course, limits and a number of caveats to this statement) Trials and implementation subsequently commenced. HMAS ANZAC deployed with extra bunks fitted and additional crew to facilitate transition into the new structure. The end state increases the onboard MT Scheme of Complement by one ABMT per Ship. (Shock, Horror – 8 sea going billets across the class. But...) The number of POMTs is reduced and offset by an increase in LSMTs and in doing so we can re-align the driving rank and actually reduce the ANZAC Class total (sea and shore) liability from approx 890 MT billets to 445. Smoke and mirrors, you might say but the facts are we simply don’t have the 890 personnel and are unlikely to even get them / afford them. What has been done here is an optimisation of the available / projected available ANZAC MT workforce, and adjustment of the workloads to best fit the available workforce. We are trying to live within our means. Use the Technology! In order to make this work it was necessary to free up the talent invested in our Engineer Officer of the Watch (EOOW) at the POMT level tied to the Machinery Control Room Consoles watchkeeping. The analysis found that we actually needed the POMTs to supervise maintenance rather than watchkeep in the traditional manner. It was also considered that the levels of protection and automation provided by the machinery controls did not justify the presence of an EOOW qualified technician in the MCR under most circumstances. An alternatively (lesser) qualified person should be able to safely monitor and control the plant – and bring it to a safe state under fault conditions. The above considerations also prompted a questioning of current paradigms relating to all MT watchkeeper requirements. Through a fairly intense series of Marine Engineering Advisory Group (MEAG) meetings we are changing towards more relevant / modern watchkeeping arrangements. There is reinvigoration in the air. Technology already embedded in our Ships is being utilised more appropriately. There have also been a number of trials conducted in Major Fleet Units which break the mould of machinery rounds and recording data (seemingly) just for the sake of recording it. I personally believe rounds need to further
34 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 2003 evolve from a data recording exercise to really assessing plant performance, identifying developing problems and preventing accidents. We are a smart Navy – time to get with the times. Where we now have Ships that, to a much greater degree, have automated systems and autoinitiate corrective ‘fail to safe’ capability, we should capitalise on the utility of those systems and free up our technicians. Modern personnel systems need to be applied to the modern technology available in the Fleet. WOMT Mark Richardson’s “ERUS” article in this NEB discusses in more detail the issues I have touched on above. Resource and Teamwork I am really excited about the quantum improvements springing out of the ANZAC MT initiatives. But these improvements have not come about without focussing on real problems, resourcing and using a team approach. To address this problem firstly required the “right” people to really “listen” and to quarantine the time to really do something about it. Support from Naval Personnel and Training (NPT) branch in facilitating WOMT Brad Whitford’s return to Continuous Full Time Service was key to getting the ball rolling. Brad has taken a leading role in this project and all parties have endeavoured to ensure this project remained his primary task. We all considered it was important he did not get dragged off to do “other things” as all too often happens. Analysis of the problem and solution development used input at various stages from the Workforce Planners, DNPR(E&L) and in particular, the ANZAC CEM. The MEAGs provided a consultative forum for the Marine Engineering community, including the RNZN and considerable information flow was achieved. Most certainly, the results of surveying of crews shaped the direction taken. A vital consideration has been acceptance and ownership of the changes by those they most concern, the Marine Engineers and Technicians. MHQ Engineering Division initiated and successfully trialed revisions to watchkeeper routines within the Fleet. High level direction and support was willingly afforded by the SCFEG Commander, DGNPT and CNE. Noting the FEG-centric structure of the Navy we tried as far as practicable to facilitate the changes through the FEG. So far, there has been great enthusiasm from the crews, and in particular from HMAS ANZAC, the first Ship to be “converted”. Resourcing the Category Sponsors at DNPR(E&L) by actually getting our MT billets filled has empowered the team! This rings true also for the WE/ET and AE/AT category sponsors who are also kicking goals (I will leave you to read their respective articles in future NEB’s). The message is clear, you must provide resource (the right people with enough time) if you are going to have any hope of solving problems. The Bottom Line I have been at this now for 3 years and it’s time to move on. Undertaking the role of DNPR(E&L) has been an education for me. I hope I have been able to positively contribute to the future of engineering and time will tell. Perhaps the most rewarding part of this job has been the fantastic support I have enjoyed from the Navy at all levels. The bottom line is we are all in this together. Our Navy is small and resources are tight. We will not succeed in turning things around unless we work as a coherent, efficient team. By the time you read this I will have handed over to CAPT Peter Law. Please support him in the same way you have supported me. All the best, Craig Kerr About the author: Capt Craig Kerr joined the Royal Australian Navy on the UVEN scheme from Monash University in 1979. He has served in numerous RAN warships and was MEO of HMA Ships Darwin and Perth. His shore postings have covered a range of areas including Ship repair, refit and material support, quality assurance and training delivery. In the training role he served on the staff at CERBERUS and RNEC Manadon. Twice on the engineering staff of MHQ, he more recently served as FMEO. Capt Kerr was elected Fellow of the Institution of Engineers, Australia in 2002, and has finally been posted to CDSS thanks to the hint he dropped in Issue 2 of the Navy Engineering Bulletin!
Page 2 and 3: NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 200

Download - Royal Australian Navy

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?