In summary, it could be said for high-cost countries that the national
economy requires less seafarers from national MET and that changes in the national society
reduce the desire to choose seafaring as a career. So far, so good - but jobs in national
shipping are lost and the national maritime industry is deprived of people with shipboard
experience in positions where such is necessary or, at least, of advantage. In low-cost
countries, more seafarers are produced, not always in satisfactory quality. Overall, a
shortage of qualified officers exists (BIMCO/ISF Study).
The closer environment of MET - industry and administration
National MET is influenced by requirements of shipping companies, by
maritime administrations and, normally least, by MET institutes. In this three-party
"game", shipping companies prefer MET graduates who can operate their ships,
maritime administrations want MET graduates who meet international - meaning STCW 95 - and
sometimes additional national requirements. MET institutes are normally in a subordinate
role and see themselves as executors of industry and government wishes. Only occasionally,
they take own initiative and try to offer programmes which go beyond what they are
expected to do by their "superiors". The lack of initiative at MET institutes
tends to reduce programmes to minimum requirements which are hardly attractive for young
people with a good general education who have the choice of other more attractive careers.
In further developed countries, the role of MET often becomes more
complicated by influences from three more parties in addition to industry, administration
and MET. Trade unions, higher education authorities and seafarers/MET students join the
three-party "game" and make it a six-party "game". Trade unions are
interested in ensuring reasonable wages and acceptable working conditions for their
members. Higher education authorities set the requirements if an academic degree is issued
by MET institutes in addition to a certificate of competency by the maritime
administration. Seafarers/MET students are interested in higher professional standards and
professional mobility within the maritime industry.
The common denominator of all parties interests is or should be - in
the case of education authorities - the provision of safe, environment-protecting and
efficient shipping. Thereafter, interests begins to differ between shipping companies and
trade unions, between maritime administrations and educational authorities, and
occasionally also between MET institutes and seafarers/MET students. The main conflict
potential lies between the individual and the industry. It is not necessarily so that
conflicts will emerge. They are sometimes avoided by the absence of a party as, for
example, education authorities, or by seafarers opting out of service or young people not
going to sea. Obviously, it is no good solution to avoid seafaring in order to avoid
conflicts.
What is missing in most countries is a "round table" with all
parities concerned that
