Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

reviews of cruise ship companies

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • reviews of cruise ship companies

    What can employees expect from Carnival? Slightly lower salaries and somewhat lower standards when selecting candidates comparing to most of the other major cruise lines. Carnival crew members are like their clientele, they like to party and most of them believe that the more "loose" atmosphere and the presence of younger passengers makes up for the slightly lower salaries.
    source: http://www.cruiseshipjob.com/carnival.htm

    Oo-er missus!

    One thing that put me off them was the way they say they only pay you when you're on the ship... it gives the sense that you'd be like agency staff or something. Getting paid every month gives a certain amount of reassurance that you've got some security.

    edit: some of the info on that site looks a bit out of date, maybe it's just too American? Americans seem to get paid less than Brits at sea, is that so?!
    Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

  • #2
    Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

    I wouldn't think so, Americans are generally paid a LOT more than their British counterparts.
    As regards being paid only onboard and not on leave, that harks back to ye days of old when you only got paid when onboard ship - permanent contracts etc are a 'relatively' recent idea.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

      I'm surprised to hear that, because so far all the figures I've found seemed lower.

      What would you say were usual annual or monthly salaries for UK officers?

      From what I'd found it seemed as though junior qualified officers got something in the range of ?21k-27k (the top end being Shell and RFA, BP a bit lower than Shell at 24k)

      This source shows similar looking rates of pay:
      http://www.michigan.gov/careers/0,1607, ... l#EARNINGS

      I wonder whether the amounts offered for cadets give a clue to the relative amounts qualified officers get in the same companies?
      Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

        Those American numbers are from 1998 and at the time the pound/dollar was circa ?1/$1.5, so even by those figures the difference between UK/US was almost a factor of 2.
        When I last sailed in BP in 2005, a 3/O or 4/E was earning over ?24000 basic, plus annual bonus, shares, pension et al, Shell were about the same. I would expect them both to be nearer ?30k by now.
        After leaving BP I was offered a job with Chevron, but the proviso was I'd have to join as 3/O as I'd be new to the company. That was one of the reasons I turned it down, my other was that I was utterly fed up of Tankers. Anyway, the starting salary for a 3rd Mate in Chevron was about ?31000, plus pension, plus shares, plus private medical insurance - quite a good deal really.
        A newly qualified 3rd Off or 4th Engineer in my present company is on ?28700 basic, which as far as I can gather is slightly less than the Oil companies.
        We do however have more time off; we work 3 months on/off whilst Junior Officers on Tankers are generally working 3 months on/2 months off with Passenger ship people right at the bottom of the pile regarding both wages and trips working 3 months on/6 weeks off.
        ETO's are a completely different beast with conditions varying massively from company to company. ETO wages are generally halfway between 3rd and 2nd Engineer (i.e. a 2 1/2 striper), however that's for a 'full' Senior ETO. My outfit have just created a 'Junior ETO' rank to cater for our newly qualified Leckie cadets and I think they're on about ?25k, with the proper Batti Sahibs on about ?36.6k
        I remember being alongside a US flag BP tanker circa 2004 in LA and we duly invited those onboard across for drinks (all US flag ships are 'dry' - poor souls). It wasn't long before the question of wages came up - generally the Yanks were earning upto 3 times as much as we were. One figure that stuck in my mind was that our ETO was on something like ?35k, yet his American equivalent was on circa $100,000!
        The US system is incredibly heavily unionised and is a completely closed shop - no union membership no job. They have had far better working conditions and wages than those of us in the UK for much of the last century. High crewing costs was one of many reasons why the US Deep Sea Fleet went down the toilet in quite spectacular fashion in the 60s/70s - even more so than ours!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
          the starting salary for a 3rd Mate in Chevron was about ?31000, plus pension, plus shares, plus private medical insurance - quite a good deal really.
          I would expect Chevron to be good - they have the best pension scheme on the planet. It's confusing why they use Clyde to train their cadets - so tight compared with the "other two"!
          (We have a Chevvy cadet on board, perhaps they could add their tuppence wuth?)

          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
          I was utterly fed up of Tankers.
          Why?

          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
          We do however have more time off; we work 3 months on/off whilst Junior Officers on Tankers are generally working 3 months on/2 months off
          I thought it was 4 on, 3 off? Does it vary more than that?

          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
          ETO's are a completely different beast with conditions varying massively from company to company. ETO wages are generally halfway between 3rd and 2nd Engineer (i.e. a 2 1/2 striper)
          I posted a recent ETO advert (for the NOC in So'ton) offering ?37-46k.
          http://www.cv-library.co.uk/uk-jobs/107 ... ficer.html
          http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk/vacancies/do ... culars.doc

          BP are advertising for one now: they say it's the STC EE course, and yet there's an OOW qual with it (didn't know it existed yet!)

          I've always been wary of applying for ETO for the simple reason that it seems to be a more limited career option than ME in terms of promotion and number of companies you can work for at sea; and it seems to me that an EOOW CoC + a HNC in EE (which can be done by distance, and modules waived if you're qualified in them), is maybe a better option long-term.
          Yet all the mood music is that ETO is an emerging third discipline, and so it might be not so bad to get on that conveyer belt as ships gradually become more UMS and cybery.

          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
          One figure that stuck in my mind was that our ETO was on something like ?35k, yet his American equivalent was on circa $100,000!
          100 000 U.S. dollars = 64 453.7544 British pounds (according to google)
          ...still, Americans are always liable for tax unlike us, so you can lop off a third of that straight away! Then it looks like the top end of the advert I posted, and who of us knows how much seniority that American has racked up.
          I suppose they'd get medical and dental thrown in though, and don't have to worry about National Insurance with their company pension instead of the pointless SERPS. Sounds good, and yeah we can't get in on that without a green card!
          (My figures for BP and Shell are a couple of years old, and came direct from them, BP are bit cagey about cadet pay, but over the blower a couple of years ago it was 10,400 rising a grand a year, a shade lower than Shell).

          Still, that's oilies, most of the numbers I've seen for pay for Americans were passenger ones, and don't seem to compare quite so favourably.
          Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

            Originally posted by Tron
            Originally posted by Malim Sahib
            I was utterly fed up of Tankers.
            Why?
            BP was quite a good outfit to work for up until 2003 and many of us, myself included rather enjoyed it.
            That year there was a major change in management and it went downhill rapidly. A lot of former BP Tanker employees keep in touch using a forum on another website, and the general consensus, which I must say I rather agree with, is that the company which exists today bears no resemblance whatsoever (aside from name) to the outfit which existed 1915-2003.
            When I joined the company there were only 18 ships, most of which were circa 20 years old (and then some).
            There were over 600 British Officers spread across those 18 ships and of course on leave.
            When I left BP they had about 50 ships, the average age of which was about 3 years old, however by then there were only about 150 Brits left and most of them had been in the company less than a few years.
            There were no redundancies made during my period with them (although there has been recently) - so the best part of 400 plus Brits decided they'd had enough and left, including a good few Masters and Chief Engineers (almost unheard of in the shipping world).
            On my first ship there were no less than 17 Officers onboard and about 20 ratings. All of the Officers and a good chunk of the crew had spent their entire career with BP - outsiders were unusual. On my last ship, I was the longest serving company employee onboard, the next most 'senior' bloke was the Polish C/O who'd been with BP about 3 years!
            However, main reasons for departure:
            Crap runs to some of the armpits of the world, no time ashore.
            Constant lies from Head Office regarding just about everything you can think of in an attempt to assert and maintain authority, especially when 'caught out'.
            Expecting Company loyalty and wanting us to go the extra mile when all you'll ever see in return is betrayal - at one ship visit a Company Exec bemoaned the lack of 'loyalty' in the fleet - our C/O said "we'll be as loyal to the company as they are to us". Cue very flustered Exec "what do you possibly mean by that" - a rather telling reaction.
            League of Nation crews, many of whom have a poor command off English making even trivial conversation difficult. My last trip with BP we had a crew of almost 30 and I was the only Brit onboard - this on a British Owned/Flagged/Managed ship.
            Crews are mainly Polish/Chinese/Indian all of whom formed their own little cliques with no interaction outside it - the language barrier being the biggest problem.
            No social interaction onboard whatsoever. Most days everyone would do their days work, have dinner (often in silence) and then run off to their cabins to watch DVD's all night. Imagine doing that for 5 months!
            Effectively dry ships (the drink regulations have to be seen to be believed), regular searches of shopping bags/backpacks/suitcase when coming from ashore in case you have any 'hooch' with you.
            Massively increasing petty regulation and inspection.
            Incredibly severe criminal penalties for the slightest incident (real or imagined)
            MASSIVE blame culture with even minor incidents turning into company wide Witch hunts, e.g. a 4/E hitting his hand with his hammer and breaking a bone - complete Fleet safety stand down for a tele-conference, regardless of timezone of the various ships around the world etc.
            In connection with the above Lost Time Statistics and Safety records which were a complete work of fiction, especially when some of the more 'international' Officers arrived and we began to have a lot more accidents.
            Bizarre, petty, perverse and downright ridiculous regulations and requirements in the name of 'safety', contrived by an absolutely massive HSE Dept within the company who were continually trying to justify their existence. There were more people in the HSE Dept than there was that actually ran the ships, e.g. Superintendents, Charterers, Purchasers etc - most of this HSE Dept had no experience in Shipping whatsoever, in common with a lot of the Management. Cue countless financial 'boo boos' which were regularly brushed aside because nobody really knew what was going on but which didn't really matter as, uniquely within the group, 'big BP' effectively gives BP Shipping a blank cheque to run their affairs.
            The paperwork had to be seen to be believed, with many in the outfit resolute in the belief that it was the be all and end all - the notion that filling out the right forms somehow makes something safe - partly a arse covering exercise on the part of the Company, but it was quite obvious that they really believed in what they were doing.
            To voice any form of dissent or criticism of the above was treated as heresy akin to the likes of 'Thought Crime' in 1984 and generally led to the 'perpetrator' being belittled, isolated or in some cases being shown the door pretty quickly (we were all on offshore contracts run by a Post Office Box subsidiary so none of us actually worked for BP Shipping, ergo they could effectively give you the push anytime they wanted).
            It was a good way to earn money, but really it was a pretty soul destroying existence and I really began to hate my job, despite the financial positives.
            When I left I went on the agency circuit for a year or so and served on Rig Boats, Ro-Ros, Container ships and even a Cruise ship. Believe you me, that actually getting around a bit and seeing how other companies work was a real eye opener to just how much bull**** dominates an Tanker Company.
            The above is not exclusive to BP, from what my friends in Shell tell me it's not much different there either.
            I'd never set foot on another Tanker now - the money may not be as great (although it's not far off), but the time off certainly is and my present outfit at least treats us like adults with nothing like the nonsense to be encountered with BP, has all British Officers and Ratings and also allows a decent social life onboard.

            Originally posted by Tron
            I thought it was 4 on, 3 off? Does it vary more than that?
            It is supposed to be 3 on/2 off, however since BP and all the other Tanker companies continually haemorrhage people, it's not uncommon for them to do longer onboard.

            Originally posted by Tron
            BP are advertising for one now: they say it's the STC EE course, and yet there's an OOW qual with it (didn't know it existed yet!)
            I've always been wary of applying for ETO for the simple reason that it seems to be a more limited career option than ME in terms of promotion and number of companies you can work for at sea; and it seems to me that an EOOW CoC + a HNC in EE (which can be done by distance, and modules waived if you're qualified in them), is maybe a better option long-term.
            Yet all the mood music is that ETO is an emerging third discipline, and so it might be not so bad to get on that conveyer belt as ships gradually become more UMS and cybery.
            ETO Cadets first appeared on the scene about a decade ago. Basically they did/do the usual EOOW HND but spent a further few months at college doing some bolt on Leckie stuff as well as having a few additional sections in their EOOW portfolio. I'd presume that's what BP are advertising.
            This is of course is all going to change in the next couple of years with the arrival of the new specialised ETO CoC.
            It may appear to some as a dead end job (so to speak) but there's a constantly acute shortage of Leckies at sea, especially since most of the present generation are former R/O's coming to the end of their working lives - most of them don't actually have any bits of paper whatsoever.
            If you sail on specialised ships, ETOs can easily earn ?50k plus a year (by that I mean Offshore vessels), with the experience also easily transferable to Oil Rigs and ashore.
            I sailed with an ETO some years back who had actually done a proper 4 year electrical apprenticeship, and when he get fed up of tankers went off to work on rigs and is earning about ?60k a year now, plus pension and shares working 2 weeks on/3 weeks off.
            Regarding US wages, at the time, we had worked out that this US Leckie (who was quite a young bloke, so seniority bonus would be doubtful) was on the double the wages of our own Leckie (who was on full seniority having been a Leckie for circa 30 years). Certainly their Master was on something like ?50k a year more than our own, and had a very generous bonus scheme operating on top of that.
            American Seamen can claim certain tax breaks, and depending on the trade qualify for bonuses as well as particularly generous overtime - overtime for Officers has never really existed on British ships.
            There's no guarantee that as a Brit you'll get your tax back/avoid liability, as not only are they continually tightening up the rules, but getting those 182 days a year when you're working 1 for 1 in/out of the UK can be very difficult unless you take extended holidays (being careful not to nullify the tax you're getting back!).
            I normally have to take about 6 weeks of holidays per year to keep my claim ticking over, as I've pretty much used up all the tax days I had 'in hand' from previous years when I did longer trips/shorter leaves.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

              **** me!

              I bet that felt good!!!

              That's more of a savaging than even that ex-Myursk girl gave online in a few places of them!!!

              I dunno! I bet you'd love that STV Merchant Navy video - full of footage of life aboard a Maersk and a BP vessel!

              I don't mind the solitary stuff, or even the languages issue... the aspects of corporate culture though make me want to steer clear... except for the training allowance...

              Originally posted by Malim Sahib
              I'd presume that's what BP are advertising.
              I thought that too, with the mention of OOW, but when asked, the woman said they train Deck and Engine at Warsash, and ETO at STC - which implies that they must be doing the pure EE course, as STC don't do the EOOW+ course that Warsash do.
              Plus an article from ShipTalk cites BP as amongst the few that have cadets on it.
              So I now reckon the advert is slightly incorrect in that respect (i.e. copy and pasted by a data entry monkey with the top bit left as it was).

              I've heard much about the chances of hopping sideways onto nice niche areas in O&G, like ROVs/AUVs, and Control & Instrumentation.
              I'd quite like to work on science ships (NOC/BAS) for a spell, but some of the sweet deals in O&G, like cyberdrilling traineeships sound quite good. For now, it's just a matter of breaking in.
              I thought that the Cruise Ships would be worse than Tankers for rules and paperwork...
              As it stands, CMT companies don't offer enough training money; so it would only be possible (for me) through Cannibal or BP (and RFA - very high AIB score required, allegedly; but no formal course of training); dunno about those options now... a normal FdEng and then a few HNC EE modules seems a better option at the mo'.

              What kind of vessels are you on now? Which kinds of ships/companies have the best conditions (the pay is always likely to be more than adequate, I suppose)... name any you like (we could do a "top of the ships" on the wiki! )

              Originally posted by Malim Sahib
              There's no guarantee that as a Brit you'll get your tax back/avoid liability, as not only are they continually tightening up the rules, but getting those 182 days a year when you're working 1 for 1 in/out of the UK can be very difficult unless you take extended holidays (being careful not to nullify the tax you're getting back!).
              I normally have to take about 6 weeks of holidays per year to keep my claim ticking over, as I've pretty much used up all the tax days I had 'in hand' from previous years when I did longer trips/shorter leaves.
              There may be if you're a tax nomad and spend your shore leave as a tourist in an affordable haven country, like Panama or Thailand... effectively living there, without having to get into all the icky mess of visas and things; may not even need to marry a local, but it probably helps.
              (I always suspected that the way cruise ships paid was due to most staff bobbing off somewhere on holiday between jollies to retain non-tax-liability).
              You might be interested in helping us with our wiki Tax article... Steve & I have been compiling info on this to de-confuse matters (clearing up the diff between SED and non-domicile and non-residency, with some examples, and "instructions"!)
              Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                Cruise ships do of course have their social advantages, you invariably go to nice places
                Yeah, but how much shore leave do you get?! RFAers report that you get a lot more with them than with the shiny ships.

                ...then the transition to the higher paid/better leave cargo sector will be easier.
                So cargo (e.g. OOCL, Maersk, CMA CGM, MSC etc..) pay somewhere in the middle of the range of salaries?

                I'm on what I suppose we'd call Multipurpose vessels, although on paper they're officially known as Ro-Ro's. Basically we have 3 Ro-Ro decks and two ramps, however we can also carry close to 600 containers, as well as all kinds of general/break bulk cargo, have a heavy lift (40 tonne) crane and also have the decks strengthened for working with helicopters. On any normal voyage we'll carry everything from Vehicles, Aircraft, containers, palletised stuff, general cargo in crates/boxes to even bags of sand. Last trip we even carried a few dogs!
                Not like one of these then: http://www.stxeurope.com/?page=38
                ...sounds like Bay Class to me

                I think that such a list of ships would be difficult to compile since we all want different things from going to sea. Some are just interested in the money, some aren't and simply want to have a good time, others have more noble interests (e.g. BAS/NERC) and then you have people like me who are after a decent wage, but also want to have a reasonably interesting and enjoyable existence afloat.
                I think I'd lean more towards the latter three of those five; but all of the above to some extent.
                Local "good jobs" as an engineer are around 21k minus tax; plus travel... utter grimness; running away with the circus (i.e. going to sea seems a no-brainer).

                I meant a top 40 of companies really... starting with sectors... and some columns of categories: pay; leave; paperwork; management; perks; etc... and whittling it down over time.

                Quite a lot of people live abroad for that very reason, since my outfit employs British ratings a good number of them spend their entire leaves in Thailand.
                Because of their work/leave ratio cruise ship people are normally ok for UK tax, even if they're operating out of the UK as in any 12 month period they'll normally spend 8 months of the year at sea.
                The Tax system is set up rather stupidly,
                Yeah, and the recent rule about FPSOs not officially being ships despite actually being ships, is a bit tight.

                Quite a lot of seafarers use accountants which specialise in SED, advertisements for which can be found in the Numast Telegraph
                Some people are perfectly capable of doing it themselves. We've got all that sort of info (and more) already... real-life examples are helpful to build the "user guide"!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                  whoops! I've done it again! Those buttons are too close to each other for my cross-eyed squinty typing! (sorry)

                  (I can't retreive it... but)

                  You were saying that Deckies are better off training on cargo ships and tankers for seamanship, rather than passenger ships; and that engineers are better off training on technically sophisticated ships like passenger ships, offshore support ships, RFAs, and anything old.



                  Perhaps this stuff would be best off on a page on the wiki anyway...
                  Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                    I was beginning to wonder how I'd managed to reply to my own Post!

                    Originally posted by Tron
                    Yeah, but how much shore leave do you get?! RFAers report that you get a lot more with them than with the shiny ships.
                    It does of course vary, as most Cruise ships only spend a day or maybe two in each Port, however they are on regular itineraries and you'll generally visit the same places again and again. For example shore excursions etc are normally open to all Officers and Cadets.
                    RFA's do spend long periods of time alongside and they do get runs ashore in some pretty decent places without the threat of the local Coastguard or whoever coming down to Audit you/Port State Control etc, but that's assuming you're on a ship which is actually going somewhere.
                    RFA's, like the RN, spend a LOT of time in the UK - a good friend of mine joined RFA Fort Austin and did a 7 month trip (his choice), he then had his leave and then did another 4 month trip on Fort Austin. During 11 months onboard he never left the Glen Mallan ammunition jetty on the River Clyde!
                    For this same reason tax days are also very hard to come by in the RFA as only a handful of there ships will be 'foreign' at any one time and just about everyone is clambering to get on them.
                    So to summarise, with the RFA, if you are on a foreign trip the runs ashore are generally very good - that's if you manage to get a foreign trip!

                    Originally posted by Tron
                    So cargo (e.g. OOCL, Maersk, CMA CGM, MSC etc..) pay somewhere in the middle of the range of salaries?
                    OOCL/CMA CGM/MSC by and large don't employ British Officers to a great degree,although they will train cadets as per their Tonnage Tax obligations. As has been well noted recently, Maersk are in the throes of purging their fleets of British Officers both Junior and Senior.
                    For the better salaries you really need to stay either deepsea or go 'specialised'.
                    Generally, all that's really left for Brits at sea today are coastal outfits (generally bottom end of the wage scale), Cruise Ships, Tankers, a few Maersk Box Boats, the RFA, as well as a handful or two of small, specialised operators.

                    Originally posted by Tron
                    ...sounds like Bay Class to me
                    Close, but no cigar!

                    Originally posted by Tron
                    Yeah, and the recent rule about FPSOs not officially being ships despite actually being ships, is a bit tight.
                    There was bit more behind it than simply being a money making exercise - the problem with 'North Sea' ships are the hordes of non Seamen claiming SED, such as Divers (on megabucks already), surveyors etc, who do not 'Sign on' articles/are on the Safe Manning Doc - all of whom have been given a discharge book under false (not necessarily illegal) pretences. This was one of the driving reasons for the change in the rules.
                    I do agree with the sentiment of this change, however what I don't agree with is it's implementation.
                    I think, that for example Seamen on Offshore Construction vessels for example should still qualify - what really needs to happen is for SED to be properly enforced in compliance with the present rules rather than have the Inland Revenue make blanket arbitrary restrictions.
                    SED was conceived in the late 80s whilst the MN was in freefall as a way to encourage British Officers and Ratings to remain Deepsea, and therefore maintain a pool of suitably qualified individuals who would be available to man our Merchant ships in times of crisis - Saturation Divers and Hairdressers should not fall into that category.

                    Originally posted by Tron
                    Some people are perfectly capable of doing it themselves.
                    I'm sure we all are, but it does make life easier to have a Professional looking after it for you, as well as SED they'll also look after your other financial interests, e.g. Pensions, shares etc.
                    There is also another reason - should there be a balls up with your tax calculation then the Accountant will take a good deal of the responsibility for it and will to a certain extent be liable, rather than you having to take the full responsibility for it should you do it yourself (not difficult!).
                    To do this you fill in and sign an IR declaration giving your accountant responsibility over your affairs and directing tax related communications to them.
                    For the services they provide and the specialist Maritime knowledge they have, the average fee of circa ?150/annum isn't a bad investment.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                      Originally posted by Malim Sahib
                      For the better salaries you really need to stay either deepsea or go 'specialised'.
                      Generally, all that's really left for Brits at sea today are coastal outfits (generally bottom end of the wage scale), Cruise Ships, Tankers, a few Maersk Box Boats, the RFA, as well as a handful or two of small, specialised operators.
                      So condensing all that you've said into a simple message of your opinion of the state of play these days...

                      If you're Engine or ETO...
                      Train with the RFA, Cruise Ships, or Maersk, then try and get a job on something specialised and deep sea, then long-term look at O&G, or shore?

                      If you're Deck...
                      Train with the RFA, Tankers, or Maersk, then try and get a job on something specialised and deep sea, and long-term look at cruise ships, or shore?

                      So what kind of operators are examples of these handful of small specialised operators you mention?
                      Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                        Originally posted by Tron
                        If you're Engine or ETO...
                        Train with the RFA, Cruise Ships, or Maersk, then try and get a job on something specialised and deep sea, then long-term look at O&G, or shore?

                        If you're Deck...
                        Train with the RFA, Tankers, or Maersk, then try and get a job on something specialised and deep sea, and long-term look at cruise ships, or shore?
                        I wouldn't suggest where to go after qualification as each to their own, but what I'd maybe say is:

                        Deck - Train with RFA/Tankers/Cargo Ships and do at least a few trips with the same company (if possible) once qualified, after that you will generally be able to choose where you want to go and will always have that experience to fall back on.

                        Engine/ETO - Train on High Spec ships such as RFA/Cruise/Offshore/LNG, you'll then have covered most of the technical competence bases and can go pretty much anywhere.

                        We could then maybe have a list of types of ships with information regarding what they do, working environment onboard, wages etc and then provide examples of Shipping companies who operate them.
                        You will of course have to be careful as to what you say on the likes of Wiki about certain outfits!
                        Regarding going ashore, they say that if you're still here after say 15 years then you'll probably be at sea for life as not only will you be too used to the wages/leave, it will require a major personal upheaval to deal with going ashore.

                        One point of concern within the MN is that it seems that a good number of people entering the industry now aren't particularly interested in staying at sea for the medium to long term, although that has always been the case to a certain extent, it seems more common than before. Indeed the endgame of a job ashore after a spell at sea is what seems to be the latest advertising mantra by the likes of the MNTB and Chamber of Shipping. It's fair to say there are a lot of Senior people in the industry who have reservations about this campaign as it could damage the MN in the long term - i.e. the possibility (remote perhaps) of having a large number of people with either no desire to advance to Senior Officer level or no desire to remain at sea in a 'Junior' capacity and who will in course become the older experienced men which form the backbone of any ship.
                        This has been raised a few times within the Nautical Institute, but at the moment the thinking seems to be to concentrate on filling the current/impending huge shortage and hopefully at least some of them will end up hanging around for a bit!

                        Originally posted by Tron
                        So what kind of operators are examples of these handful of small specialised operators you mention?
                        A few off the top of my head: BAS, NERC, Lighthouse Authorities (TH, NLB, CIL and MENAS), RMS St Helena, Campbell Maritime, PNTL, China Navigation (big operator with a few Brits, but not well known) etc.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
                          One point of concern within the MN is that it seems that a good number of people entering the industry now aren't particularly interested in staying at sea for the medium to long term, although that has always been the case to a certain extent, it seems more common than before. Indeed the endgame of a job ashore after a spell at sea is what seems to be the latest advertising mantra by the likes of the MNTB and Chamber of Shipping. It's fair to say there are a lot of Senior people in the industry who have reservations about this campaign as it could damage the MN in the long term - i.e. the possibility (remote perhaps) of having a large number of people with either no desire to advance to Senior Officer level or no desire to remain at sea in a 'Junior' capacity and who will in course become the older experienced men which form the backbone of any ship.
                          This has been raised a few times within the Nautical Institute, but at the moment the thinking seems to be to concentrate on filling the current/impending huge shortage and hopefully at least some of them will end up hanging around for a bit!
                          I think part of the problem is the kind of bad news stories that keep seeping out... you don't sound like one of the old timers who go on about the golden age of the 60s, yet your tales of life on board a tanker don't make it sound like a great long-term option.
                          I think the biggest barrier to recruitment and retention is the pay and conditions (respectively)... if there were more majority-UK-flagged-and-crewed ships, you could imagine good times to be had, and having long-term career-related-mates, but it seems like there are precious few outfits where that's likely now.
                          You can rarely have quite the same rapport with foreigners - even if they speak English (with the exception of Irish, Aussies, and Kiwis, I suppose), and the ethno-linguistic cliques you describe are unsurprising (especially when you all know you're on quite different pay and conditions packages...).
                          I don't think promotion matters as much as having good mates and good times... a well run management team, and good leave and perks... you'd stick around then and take the promotion, not for the money, but for the sense of it being the next chapter in the story of your life at sea.

                          Originally posted by Malim Sahib
                          A few off the top of my head: BAS, NERC, Lighthouse Authorities (TH, NLB, CIL and MENAS), RMS St Helena, Campbell Maritime, PNTL, China Navigation (big operator with a few Brits, but not well known) etc.
                          Yeah, BAS & NERC, and TH have always been favourites of mine... the scienceyness, the tradition, and the Britishness; RMS St Helena (Andrew Weir) too, for the same sort of reasons.

                          No sign of recruitment here...
                          http://www.nlb.org.uk/
                          http://www.commissionersofirishlights.com/
                          http://www.menas.org/recruitment.htm

                          http://www.pntl.co.uk/ <- James Fisher Ltd

                          Found your oriental connection..
                          http://www.cnco.com.hk/?content=67

                          Campbell Maritime seem to have fallen off the edge of the world... Gordon-Pritchard seems to have replaced them in the realm of cadetships at least.
                          Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                            Originally posted by Tron
                            I think part of the problem is the kind of bad news stories that keep seeping out... you don't sound like one of the old timers who go on about the golden age of the 60s, yet your tales of life on board a tanker don't make it sound like a great long-term option.
                            I think the biggest barrier to recruitment and retention is the pay and conditions (respectively)... if there were more majority-UK-flagged-and-crewed ships, you could imagine good times to be had, and having long-term career-related-mates, but it seems like there are precious few outfits where that's likely now.
                            You can never have the same rapport with foreigners - even if they speak English (with the exception of Irish, Aussies, and Kiwis, I suppose), and the ethno-linguistic cliques you describe are unsurprising.
                            I don't think promotion matters as much as having good mates and good times... a well run management team, and good leave and perks... you'd stick around then and take the promotion, not for the money, but for the sense of it being the next chapter in the story of your life at sea.
                            I would fully agree with all that, the problem is trying to convince Management of the same!

                            Originally posted by Tron
                            Yeah, BAS & NERC, and TH have always been favourites of mine... the scienceyness, the tradition, and the Britishness; RMS St Helena (Andrew Weir) too, for the same sort of reasons.

                            No sign of recruitment here...
                            http://www.nlb.org.uk/
                            http://www.commissionersofirishlights.com/
                            http://www.menas.org/recruitment.htm

                            Campbell Maritime seem to have fallen off the edge of the world... Gordon-Pritchard seems to have replaced them in the realm of cadetships at least.
                            From what I remember NLB/CIL/MENAS don't take on cadets directly, but they do offer berths for those employed by Training Groups etc, like those with Trinity House/Conway and to an extent Clyde Marine. So if you're lucky it is possible to get a trip in and get your foot in the door so to speak. NLB only have 2 ships, CIL 1 ship and MENAS 1 ship so recruitment is always going to be sparse.

                            Campbell Maritime/Pritchard-Gordon are effectively the same outfit, with PG owning the ships and Campbell's operating them (there are family shareholders in there somewhere too). There were a couple of Campbells cadets in my class when I was college and they're still on the go (I saw a couple of their ships in Belize last trip), so it might be worth firing off an email to them.

                            Talking of the Lighthouse authorities, it'd be pertinent to include the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency. Again, they don't take on cadets, but they offer cadet berths to other companies and also regularly take on newly qualified Officers - often through the Officer recruitment side of Clyde Marine.

                            http://www.sfpa.gov.uk/

                            One outfit which I'd forgotten to mention which not only takes on cadets (Managed on their behalf by Bibbys) and does employ them afterwards is Foreland Shipping:

                            http://www.foreland-shipping.co.uk/
                            http://www.foreland-shipping.co.uk/trai ... pment.html
                            http://www.foreland-shipping.co.uk/crew_management.html

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: reviews of cruise ship companies

                              Originally posted by Malim Sahib
                              I would fully agree with all that, the problem is trying to convince Management of the same!
                              Which management though? I imagine few former seafarers need convincing.

                              You can see how a "short-termist" focus in their recruitment bumf is not really required when there are jobs like this floating about online:
                              Permanent ? ?80,000 ? ?90,500/yr ? We are looking for a Technical Superintendent for our clients in Singapore. The successful candidate will have sailed as a Chief Engineer and must have worked in a shore based position.
                              source: http://www.crewvacancies.com/cruise-emp ... singapore/

                              I imagine many people would be happy to stay on board for years if there were more 100% UK crewed vessels? Surely it's not about the money... it's about the atmosphere and the way you're treated?
                              Emeritus Admin & Founding Member

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X