Close down the ROV Training Schools

[Andy Shiers]

😀
ROV companies should invest in their own Training schemes .

[Andy Shiers]

Don’t shoot me down in flames just yet ! 😀
Just because I’m the only one audacious enough to speak my mind.
Lets debate this on the true values of these "ROV schools"

[James McLauchlan]

Just because I’m the only one audacious enough to speak my mind.

I disagree with the above statement.

[Savante]

good – ok lostboy -lets start a brawl !! 😆 Have you that chair ??

[Andy Shiers]

I don’t need a chair , I’m six foot low so you can talk to my chest Savante 😀

[rover22]

Hi Lostboy,

I think it would be better if the schools were regulated and had to conform to existing IMCA guidelines ITO admission criteria and ensure that the course is relevant and meets the needs of the industry. If you take a tech (mech/elec/electronics/hydraulics) and follow the IMCA ROV training guidelines (ROV induction, hydraulic and electrical safety as a minimum as described by IMCA in the guidance notes), make the trainee understand the competence scheme and how to prepare for an assessment in the field, you shoul dbe good to go. This will take about 2 weeks.

This idea of regulating the schools is not new. They do it for dive training, but not ROV hence we have so many bodies doing courses with little or no chance of getting work afterwards as no company would consider a non-tech on the basis of a 3-8 week ROV course with tech add-ons.

If this regulation started, schools that are dodgy would not pass audits and would lack the IMCA-accreditation to do the training so hopefully potential students would stay away as the qualification would be uselss. I mean, who would do a commercial diving course at a commercial diving school that is not accredited by IMCA to present adn issue IMCA-recognised certs?

If this were done, the schools that are not up to scratch would have to either shut down or pick up the standard.

Aslo, it would men that a ccourse delegate who completes, passes and earns a P/T II cert of competence (not to be confused with completing the 10 core P/T II competencies as a certain school on the west coast of Scotland does), the certificate woul mean something.

[Ray Shields]

😀
ROV companies should invest in their own Training schemes .

Some of them did – and then someone decided to stop doing that and send them to Fort William!
😀

[Savante]

It’s always going to come down to cost and "what is reasonably practicable"……. and whether or not the school can cater to the companies vehicle-specific needs. If you use things like seaeyes, sub-atlantics, etc then at some point someone is going to try and cut costs by using sub-contracted training. Fixed costs, no site maintenance costs, no contracts to staff, etc…..

Its a sad fact that in any industry when belts get tightened, training costs are the first to fall into the basket.

I’ve been on this chair too long ! Must find a fence.

[Stephen Black]

If companies would employ trades people or the likes and send people on manufactures training courses what need is there for training schools

[T-Boy]

I agree LB,
So long as the courses follow IMCA guidlines, standard company procedures can then be integrated into the course, tailoring your staff to your company…LOGICAL 😉

A few do…OI, GMSL and SOI before they wound up the ROV part of the company. 😥

[Andy Shiers]

I think they should shut the schools down this month / this year until 2010 😯

[Author]

Posts