Putting some thoughts together

[paul norman]

Thought I’d chip in, as a person trying to enter the industry. So these thoughts are not from experience, but from a beginners perspective.

I have researched on these boards, and the main topics seem to be:
1. crap training
2. Reducing pay

1.Crap Training
As I see it, the general concensus on these forums is that the schools are kicking out underskilled personel. These schools are following the IMCA guidelines which the industry bosses have agreed to.
From IMCA website "With membership as at September 2010 standing at over 700 companies in more than 50 countries, IMCA has grown fourfold since its establishment in 1995 in terms of both members and geographical spread."
I think IROVA should make it a aim to work WITH IMCA, to set out the correct Training Regime, and a appropriate certification level for the rank structure.
In effect IMCA have the schools/companies support. IROVA has the experience in the field (piloting/teching) by the workers.
If the two bodies could work together, the schools would kick out people with a usefull skill set (set out by Irova) and the companies hiring would have a more structured and relevent rank system for the work required.
The main problem would be who in IROVA would set out these minimum requirements for training?
I guess that the ROV comunity, would have to elect/vote for who you would want to set these standards, and who you would trust to set them as well.
Another thing would be setting a global standard for advertising positions across all interested parties. 1 set of titles for ranks and abilities would make things easier, globally.
With a certification system set by IROVA and supported by IMCA, you would have a better work experience CV, where everyone would be singing from the same hymm sheet.
I know that is what I would want as a industry noob.
I could go to a school, leave with relevent paperwork, then look for a job where I have the correct certs for, anywhere in the world.
Makes sense to me, work with the IMCA, and improve the industry.

2. Reducing Pay.
Well as a outsider looking in, I dont know exactly how much this has dropped. As others have stated, cheaper labour is here, and wont go away. World travel is cheap, and finacal migration is a fact of life nowdays. Unless you setup usefull training/certification levels, you will continue to be swamped with under trained/experienced personel. And even then you will only slow the flow.
I really dont know if IROVA could change that much.

In conclusion, I believe that setting IROVA as a professional body, talking with IMCA and sharing knowledge is the way to start. Get the majority of the ROV community interested in setting stardards of training and getting the skilled people they want, and then you can start talking about pay/conditions.
This may seem like a lesser goal at first, but getting the industry to listen to a new organisation,will be the hard bit.
Start small, and build up to the harder descisions. If the industry bosses see that we are trying to improve the industry as a whole, with worth while, and cheap for them, ideas, then will listen when you have more radical, and expensive, plans

I’ll get back under my rock now. 😳
Cheers
Paul

[luckyjim37]

I just picked up on this thread and have not read it all fully yet so please forgive me if I rehash over old ground.

Before we as the employees of the industry go steaming into the companies we have to fully establish a membership base of IROVA and establish a mandate of what we will do for the industry and what we expect of our employers.

We can then go forward by first establishing a network of representatives and have them formally approach the employers with what we expect.

It appears IROVA is on the edge of ailenating the staff who are interested in this but did not like the idea of being in a Uni0n.

Personally I never liked the ideals of the RMT and would join a professional body but not one which might end up being a Uni0n in disguise.

[James McLauchlan]

It appears IROVA is on the edge of ailenating the staff who are interested in this but did not like the idea of being in a Uni0n.

Jim
Unless I have missed something I’m not quite sure what brings you to that conclusion. Do you have a recent example to support your statement?
If so, it will need looking into. I don’t see any evidence of that on the IROVA website.

Personally I never liked the ideals of the RMT and would join a professional body but not one which might end up being a Uni0n in disguise.

I feel that the IROVA should be nothing more than a professional body representing the Subsea ROV industry, NOT a union in disguise. I’ll be the first to fire off at anyone involved with the IROVA if union type rhetoric starts emanating from the association. Judging by the IROVA website it appears such action would also be against the association’s mission statement anyway. So, any IROVA organiser making union type noises would be in breach of the mission statement.

See item 9. below.

Source: http://www.irova.org/

The mission of the IROVA:

1. To assist in the professional development and career progression of Remotely Operated Vehicle professionals.

2. To help promote the observance of high professional standards of Remotely Operated Vehicle professionals.

3. To promote and gain recognition of the IROVA as a responsible organisation representing the interests of Remotely Operated Vehicle professionals.

4. To establish and maintain guidance and advisory facilities in relation to the activities of Remotely Operated Vehicle Professionals.

5. To work to enhance the appeal of careers in the sub-sea ROV industry to the wider industry, and also potential candidates currently outside of the sub-sea ROV sector.

6. To align with the principles of the sub-sea industry at large in promoting “safe, secure and efficient sub-sea operations”.

7. Generally to undertake all such activities as are likely to be of benefit to the ROV sub-sea industry as a whole and the interests of Association members.

8. Seek to represent the professional views of its members to and within national and international bodies deemed likely to benefit from its input.

9. The IROVA shall not support with its funds any objective, activity or endeavour which, by any definition, would make it a trade union.

regards
James Mc

[luckyjim37]

My thought process on this is the first thing that IROVA is addressing is pay and conditions without bringing anything positive to the employers. This is exactly the sort of retoric which the Uni0n push attempted last year.

It just seems like the IROVA movement is doing the same thing. The first thing that should be addressed is industry standards so as an association the first thing we do is appear to be working toward improving the industry then money should be discussed. The last thing we want to do as an industry is bite the hand that feeds us. We need to promote some positives and bring something to the table before starting to ask for something in return. It is fine to be in a postion of power with numbers but if our only barganing chip is withholding labour I think that would be a huge mistake.

We need to demonstrate an ability to make change to the industry and offer the companies some kind of incentive to go with it.

[luckyjim37]

If we approach the companies with a clear set of standards we expect of ourselves and then with communication between IROVA and the companies start to formalise that then we are in a position to start to standardise the wage structure within the industry.

It would appear reading through the thread that the main initial aim is to start pushing pay and conditions which I feel may put the organisation straight into conflict with the employers.

[Scott Beveridge]

Jim,

Can you explain the above statements? I’m confused here….

[luckyjim37]

In a badly worded way what I was trying to get accross is at the time of approaching the companies we need to have a clear mandate as to what we can offer them to justify the expense that it will cost them to support us.

The expense to the companies could be additional training to meet the standards IROVA expects for its members, additional pay or better standards of PPE.

As a professional body approaching companies and not wanting to appear like we are just seeking more money then we have to be able to show them that the association offers some kind of end user benefit. In real terms that could be improved standards of trainees entering the industry or at the very least a clear cut career path for ROV staff.
My fear is that greed will take over the first issue to be addressed will be money and this whole thing will fall on its face as there will be no employer support for the association.

[James McLauchlan]

My fear is that greed will take over the first issue to be addressed will be money and this whole thing will fall on its face as there will be no employer support for the association.

It is a valid fear and something that should be resisted from the outset.

I see the IROVA as a representative body for ROV professionals working in the subsea related ROV industry, not a union hell bent on the getting the best pay deal for its members at any cost. In my view the two (Associations and Unions) are incompatible.

[Andy Shiers]

How about professional ethics , Removing incompetant individuals and a experienced base of pay structure ! 😯

[JB2]

The obvious plus point for the employer here is he can demand accredited IROVA personnel for his project from our own company there by achieving what most supervisors want is not cheap bums on the seats but 2 X senior techs Mech/Elec which saves the obligatory row with the Base manager about the first time trainee and the one trip wonder they’ve just sent out.
Now the obvious groan here is "How are we supposed to get our first trip offshore?"
My answer is you DONT unless the industry projects demand it and there is nobody left at the agencies simples No?
Its supply and demand or nature culling if you will, you shouldn’t be offshore if there is an experienced guy in the same CV pile and your only plus point is you offering yourself for £50 a day.

By no other means or that Word some people don’t like you would have the client inadvertently policing your own Managers budget and costing sheet to the Supervisors benefit.

[Andy Shiers]

Bloody hell JB2 😀 ( I only said that ’cause you look demonic 😀 )
I think you are on the same wave length as me …………………………
The logical one 😀

[Author]

Posts