Download - Royal Australian Navy

More documents

Recommendations

Info

NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 2003 55 team will consist of at least one MT Senior Sailor with extensive experience in the class concerned and a member with the computer skills necessary to allow the “manpower vs maintenance” computer model, (which was used so effectively in analysing and restructuring the ANZAC MT workforce) to be modified to suit the platform. The Senior Sailor’s role will be to validate the maintenance and manning data input into the computer model, and to provide on-site management and advice during the transition to the new qualifications and watchkeeping routines. A fundamental principle of the transition period is to avoid disadvantaging individual Marine Technicians as far as possible. The changes shouldn’t be perceived as moving the goalposts or creating extra hurdles to be overcome before promotion, but in some cases extra learning and the achievement of extra competencies may be unavoidable. Conversely, in some Ships the transition to the new qualifications may consist of nothing more than a simple name change. To ensure the transition arrangements are equitable and streamlined, during the implementation phase Ship’s Engineer Officers, Senior Marine Technicians and the STO’s of MWVs will be provided with the ability to award the new qualifications and set consolidation periods on a case by case basis, based on their assessment of an individual sailor’s current level of proficiency. For example, a sailor may automatically be awarded an EHWC based on the fact that he already holds a full AMOC and has sufficient DC knowledge in the opinion of the awarding officer. Or, a sailor may be awarded an MSC, and have the consolidation period waived or significantly reduced, based on his previous console operating experience. Sounds good, but….. The changes outlined in this article represent one of the greatest transformations to occur in the history of Marine Engineering in the RAN. We are challenging old, outmoded work practices with a new vision which will not only help us better man and operate the Ships we have now, but will prepare us for the technology of the future. Major platforms entering service in the next decade are likely to be classified as Unmanned Machinery Spaces (UMS) under the Certification of Notation for Ships, meaning watchkeeping as we now know it will cease to exist. We need to institute change now, to be proactive rather than reactive, or we risk being caught out with unsustainable workforces, excessive workloads and unhappy, unfulfilled technicians. Perhaps the greatest benefit these changes will bring is to improve working conditions for Marine Technicians, by helping to eliminate the mundane, monotonous aspects of their employment and allowing them more opportunity to exercise and improve their technical skills. However, they have no chance of success without the cooperation, involvement and commitment of the whole Category. We all need to take ownership of the change, to mould it so we get what we really want. These changes are dynamic and can be customised to suit changing requirements or overcome unforeseen difficulties, which is why the MEAG is meeting regularly to manage them. However, this will only occur if those they affect most, Marine Technicians both at sea and ashore, work with the change and provide constructive feedback. To this end, you are actively encouraged to make use of this forum to promote discussion about these issues. ‘ERUS’ will be a regular feature of the <strong>Navy</strong> Engineering Bulletin from now on and is available to present your comments and hopefully answer your questions. Other avenues you might like to use to air your views are the Techo’s Discussion Database on Lotus Notes, for those who have access to the DEFWEB, or you can contact the MT Category Sponsors direct. Their details are listed below. However, they have no chance of success without the cooperation, involvement and commitment of the whole Category. I hope this article has answered some of your questions about the new watchkeeping routines and operator qualifications and allayed any concerns you might have had. There will obviously be considerably more information to pass on as the details of the transition and implementation phases take shape. I will keep you informed. In the meantime, whatever you do, don’t postpone or delay progressing towards your current operator qualifications in any way. Till next time, Cheers. Richo WOMT MARK RICHARDSON CPOMT ROSS MARTIN LSMT RACHEL SIMPSON SSOMT to DNPR (E&L) SOMT1 to DNPR(E&L) SOMT3 to DNPR(E&L) CP 4-7-131 CP 4-7-130 CP 4-7-132 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE CAMPBELL PARK OFFICES CAMPBELL PARK OFFICES CAMPBELL PARK OFFICES CANBERRA, ACT 2600 CANBERRA, ACT 2600 CANBERRA, ACT 2600 PH. 02 6266 4212 PH. 02 6266 4211 PH. 02 6266 4071 FAX 02 6266 2388 FAX 02 6266 2388 FAX 02 6266 2388 E-mail E-mail E-mail mark.richardson3@defence.gov.au ross.martin@defence.gov.au rachel.simpson@defence.gov.au
56 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 2003 MT Category Sponsor gets Junior Sailor perspective As a relatively new post-in to DNPR(E&L) I’d like to introduce myself. I am LSMT(E) Rachel Simpson and have come from HS Blue in Cairns. This is my eighth year in the Mob and I have been lucky enough to be posted to the category sponsors in Canberra for four short months so far. My new posting is vastly different to my previous ones. In my first week I helped to proof read the previous bulletin. Subsequent weeks I acted as a travel agent, drafted minutes, processed your IEAUST applications, attended two MEAGs (Marine Engineer Advisory Group meetings) and have travelled to some of the bases around Australia to help promulgate the new watchkeeper routines etc on the roadshows. The big project our office is working on at the moment is the change to the watchkeeper qualifications and associated routines that have been necessitated by the Anzac class sustainability problems. To change the scheme of complement the watchkeeping personnel have to change; that changes the qualification requirement and the increased sea time coupled with the new crewing requires the maintenance ability to also be brought into alignment. To design and implement these changes a close liaison with the MEAG members is required as it is a policy change that will ultimately affect the whole branch. At least being in this job I get to see why ABR 5225 is so outdated and has not been updated before. I must admit I am biased toward using the multi million dollar systems on our ships as they were originally intended to be used. Especially now we are facing minimum manning as the norm now that we no longer have steam ships. With these watchkeeper and dutywatch trials currently being conducted the time to lay our trust in technology is fast approaching. I anticipate that job satisfaction can be improved and retention therefore increased with the implementation of the new system. During my time here I look forward to hearing from many of you and fielding any suggestions you may have further up. I can be contacted by email at rachel.simpson@defence.gov.au and will reply to all emails personally. LSMT RACHEL (I WASN’T HIRED FOR MY DISPOSITION) SIMPSON, STAFF OFFICER 3, MT CATEGORY SPONSOR
Page 2 and 3:
NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 200
Page 4 and 5:
NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 200
Page 6 and 7: NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN MARCH 200
show all

Download - Royal Australian Navy

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?