this minimum age in many cases as well as standards for medical fitness, seagoing
service and examinations. It is noteworthy, that specific minimum ages had earlier
been considered in the ILO setting with ILO C007 (the Minimum Age (Sea)
Convention, 1920).
The STCW 1978 Convention, further, sought to set out mandatory minimum
knowledge/training requirements, the first international convention to do so. It also
set mandatory minimum requirements to ensure continued proficiency and the
updating of seafarers’ knowledge. The convention entered into force on 28 April
1984, 12 months following acceptance by 25 States, with combined fleet constituting
not less than 50% of world tonnage of ships of gross tonnage of 100 or above.
However, with time, the 1978 Convention was challenged for having a number of
significant shortcomings. It was deemed to have too much ambiguous language,
primary among which was the term “to the satisfaction of the Administration”.
35
Many standards, including medical standards, length of seagoing experience, examinations, competency of trainers and assessors were left to the “satisfaction of the
administration”, leading to what was referred to as “the impossible situation of
proving that a standard was not to the satisfaction of the Administration”.
36 Additionally, there was an absence of specific competence requirements and no uniform
and globally accepted processes of control and verification either by port States or
the IMO itself. From an educational philosophy perspective, its comprehensiveness
was also limited by the fact that it had an undue focus on the cognitive aspects of
education with relatively little focus on the affective and psychomotor domains of
education, although seafaring, like many other vocational domains, requires substantial demonstration of performance-based skills and not just mental knowledge.
This was compounded by the trend toward reduced crew on board ship and higher
mobility of seafarers resulting in challenges with on-the-job training, a necessary
corollary for shore-based seafarer education and training. Other shortcomings were
that the 1978 Convention had no simulator requirements although radar simulators
had been in existence since the late 1950s and that certificates issued by non-Parties
could be accepted by Party States.
Amendments to the convention in 1991 and 1994 addressed the Global Maritime
Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) and tankers respectively, but the substantive
issues remained until 1995, when a major revision brought in significant additions
and structural improvements in both legal and structural/textual layout terms. In the
1995 major revision, the text of the substantive Convention was retained, but
fundamental amendments were made to the annex of the Convention. All technical
requirements were transferred to a new Seafarers’ Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping (STCW) Code which was made up a mandatory Part A and a Part
B for guidance. Specific skills and competences were clearly outlined in this Code
together with the required knowledge, understanding and proficiencies, methods of
35 “Administration” here referring to the national jurisdiction in charge of the operationalizing of the
convention requirements in a national setting upon ratification.
36 Morrison (1997).
480
M. E. Manuel and R. Baumler
service and examinations. It is noteworthy, that specific minimum ages had earlier
been considered in the ILO setting with ILO C007 (the Minimum Age (Sea)
Convention, 1920).
The STCW 1978 Convention, further, sought to set out mandatory minimum
knowledge/training requirements, the first international convention to do so. It also
set mandatory minimum requirements to ensure continued proficiency and the
updating of seafarers’ knowledge. The convention entered into force on 28 April
1984, 12 months following acceptance by 25 States, with combined fleet constituting
not less than 50% of world tonnage of ships of gross tonnage of 100 or above.
However, with time, the 1978 Convention was challenged for having a number of
significant shortcomings. It was deemed to have too much ambiguous language,
primary among which was the term “to the satisfaction of the Administration”.
35
Many standards, including medical standards, length of seagoing experience, examinations, competency of trainers and assessors were left to the “satisfaction of the
administration”, leading to what was referred to as “the impossible situation of
proving that a standard was not to the satisfaction of the Administration”.
36 Additionally, there was an absence of specific competence requirements and no uniform
and globally accepted processes of control and verification either by port States or
the IMO itself. From an educational philosophy perspective, its comprehensiveness
was also limited by the fact that it had an undue focus on the cognitive aspects of
education with relatively little focus on the affective and psychomotor domains of
education, although seafaring, like many other vocational domains, requires substantial demonstration of performance-based skills and not just mental knowledge.
This was compounded by the trend toward reduced crew on board ship and higher
mobility of seafarers resulting in challenges with on-the-job training, a necessary
corollary for shore-based seafarer education and training. Other shortcomings were
that the 1978 Convention had no simulator requirements although radar simulators
had been in existence since the late 1950s and that certificates issued by non-Parties
could be accepted by Party States.
Amendments to the convention in 1991 and 1994 addressed the Global Maritime
Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) and tankers respectively, but the substantive
issues remained until 1995, when a major revision brought in significant additions
and structural improvements in both legal and structural/textual layout terms. In the
1995 major revision, the text of the substantive Convention was retained, but
fundamental amendments were made to the annex of the Convention. All technical
requirements were transferred to a new Seafarers’ Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping (STCW) Code which was made up a mandatory Part A and a Part
B for guidance. Specific skills and competences were clearly outlined in this Code
together with the required knowledge, understanding and proficiencies, methods of
35 “Administration” here referring to the national jurisdiction in charge of the operationalizing of the
convention requirements in a national setting upon ratification.
36 Morrison (1997).
480
M. E. Manuel and R. Baumler