Training

[tc1]

This might bite me on the ar.e but wtf here goes.
Working offshore and onshore as ROV or Diving personnel what training do we really need and who should provide that training and who should pay for that training?

Firstly Fitness to work ….
In any line of work personnel should be fit to work for reasons of difficulty in receiving comprehensive medical care quickly and also if sudden illness occurs accidents could happen exposing a sometimes unstoppable domino effect exposing further catastrophes etc,etc.
So we all need a medical at regular intervals to try and prevent unfit persons being involved in what is definitely a dangerous line of work.
At present most companies require an offshore medical supplied by an " approved " doctor.
Getting to an " approved "doctor may not be easy in some circumstances and as our medicals are stamped "Special" medicals then we must pay ridiculous money for the half hour privilege of a "special "doctors stamp and signature.
Why oh why can we not just have a "Special Approved "form issued free by a medical department of an acceptable body and let any qualified doctor perform the tasks required on the form which would make it easier and cheaper all around for both companies and the guys on the ground?
The offshore medical for both surface and subsea work are not rocket science to any general practitioner .
TBC

[tc1]

Contiuation.
Offshore survival.

It is without doubt that obtaining offshore survival training is a must for the industry,However following the initial training from a bone fide establishment would it not be more pertinant for offshore clients,at their costs, to have, on each and every workplace, personel to provide refresher deliveries, on offshore survival ,for everyone prior to any work taking place particular to that workplace which should aleviate people trecking all over the world renewing their offshore certificate and listening to the same things and seeing the same videos at rediculous costs again borne by most people in ROV and Diving.
This would keep personell up to date in any workplace they enter and be continually reminded of offshore survival techniques .
The costs involved to the companies would be negligable to their profits as opposed to the pockets of the workforce.

[tc1]

Continuation….

ROV Training.

To become an ROV Pilot/Tech.

There are many businesses around who have jumped in to this industry and made claims about how they are approved by various bodies for training personel to become Pilot/Techs at rediculous costs and now we have other companies claiming that your "certificate" only lasts for a certain time ie in one case I know three years then you must renew for more bucks outa the old sky rocket.
To be a Pilot/Tech firstly you need a good backgound in engineering whether it be mechanical electrical or hydraulic and by having this then it shows very quickly in an offshore environment if you are what you say you are.Bluffing is easy on paper but not when you are part of a team.
If you are capable all well and good,if you are not then head for the engineering training establishments around the world and get yourself some qualifications and engineering experience.
All new potential techs should be assessed by their peers at work and if not able to perform then should be replaced.

Flying

The only place you can be assessed on your ability to learn flying techniques is on the actual job being trained by your peers and this flying should only happen if your engineering capabilities are found to be acceptable as we dont need "pilot only" personell.

Rather than spend pots of money getting a certificate that no one in the industry cares about spend your time and money getting engineering experience before attempting to put your bum on a seat by providing a costly cert that nobody cares about.
Potential Pilot/Techs should be in excess of the bone Fide team on that job,this may add a bit of cost to the job but as in all businessess you must put some budget into training of potential workers as opposed to thinking only of the highest profit.

[tc1]

Training has become a huge business in itself over the past couple of decades and the only way of being successful in training is to put bums on seats at big costs.
The training companies will dream up anything to train you in so they can make a buck outa you.
Are all these courses and certificates necessary? I think not but its all down to these training establishments convincing clients that they should ask for that particular companies certificate before allowing personel to work for them,and Im sure there are many legitimate and illegitimate methods they use to make that happen and complicate our industry more. Please stop being parasites in the pockets of the guys who are doing the actual job.
There are a number of things that specific training is a must but there are also many that are just money spinners for people other than the guys at the front.

😀
Whatever happened to common sense lets get back there guys.

Well Im not going any further at the moment by dipping into safety etc so Ive had my rant for now and await the flack with baited breath.

[Andy Shiers]

I agree 😀

[rover22]

Well-said tc1, I am sure that training centres and those outside the industry will disagree, but reality is that many people are doing courses on the expectation that it will lead to employment and that the certificates they earn are a lot more meaningful than simply an attendance certificate from a commercia business.

I wish that we, and the facilitators on this website, could be more clear than we are, by putting the truth out there about training and work opportunities, so that new-comers can know the reality of getting into this industry and what they are really getting from doing an "ROV course" from an IMCA-member company from the Service Provider/Training Institution membership category. Maybe the IMCA R002 Rev 2 document can be put on the site as a down-loadable (as it is on the IMCA website(www.imca-int.com, downloadable documents) and people interested in doing a course to get in, can at least make an informed decision to join (pity figures are not available showing them how many experienced guys (and others who hold certificates from the various ROV schools) are sitting at home without work or what companis (if any) are hiring. 😀

[Robert Black]

I’m posting this in the hope there are any lads reading this who are thinking of attending an ROV training school.
Two years ago before I was piloting this desk, I was a Supervisor on a Technip vessel. We got an agency guy in over christmas as a pilot tech that none of my team had ever heard off before. Turns out he was the chief instructor from a well established ‘training’ school in the Scottish Highlands moonlighting on his leave.
He was without doubt the weakest pilot or technician we had ever had on board, we replaced at the ealiest oppotunity and asked our office never to employ him again. I also caught the little weasel going through my e-mails when I returned to the control room early one morning.
I wouldn’t trust him with a stuffed animal, let alone the training of new personnel.
All ROV schools are a rip-off. Don’t waste your money, you will learn more from a good Supv on you first trip that they will ever teach you. If you go on a course and send me your CV, it will be binned as I don’t want to employ gullible people.
If you meet someone who works at one of these places, treat them the same way you would treat a timeshare salesman. Actually that is unfair on Timeshare salesmen.

[Scott Beveridge]

KruezOps,

Your post essentially mirrors my sentiments concerning ROV schools. There are a few more old hands that are of… well… the old school whom prefer to have a lad trained on company premises as well as a "TRAINEE" status on their offshore contracts. It behooves companies to do so as it’s more personalized than a school churning out unqualified personnel. A good supv. overseeing a trainees task is the way to go…..

[Craig Thorngren]

A few observations/questions…

As to "Fitness to Work Offshore" are you referring to a Dr.’s certificate or an actual physical fitness assessment (running, push up’s etc…) or both? Personally I’d like to see folks have to meet a minimum physical fitness assesessment. Some of these guys are going to take a freaking crane to get off the rig…

"Pilot Only Personnel"- Most people don’t want to believe it or think it will happen, but it’s coming… You will have people that will fly the ROV and those that will work on them. It is a matter of what is better financially for the companies…

"Training" People should be trained and certified by the manufacturer to a certain competence level to use their gear. I know a lot of old timers are going to scream foul, but just because you can fly and work on one type of ROV doesn’t mean you know squat about another. Once you are certified to work on a system, then you go out on jobs as a trainee and you fall under your employers training regimine.

Chief

[Robert Black]

Scott,
I briefly touched on this with my old firm but we never followed it through as I left shortly after. I feel companies should appoint people in their firm as ‘Trainers’. They, of course must be willing and have the necessary patience an skill set to carry a trainee and ensure he learns the right way of doing things. I’ve seen too many trainees who spend a year with a system and still have not learned the basics. This is mostly down to the supervisor they were with being a mouth breather who should never have been in the position in the first place.
These trainers can be reviewed annualy and given the training they require to develope personnel.
This would make training schools even more redundant than they already are. That pointless certificate they issue at the end of their useless course is the only reason as far as I can see that we can’t justifiably label the people who run these courses ‘thieves’.
Rab

[thomas]

Gents,
It would appear to me that the whole training setup in relation to ROV people is something that is close to the heart of many knowledgable people within our industry.

It has without doubt been used ,abused and manipulated increasingly so during tha last few years.

I note that even IMCA has revised their recommendations in relation to the suitability of candidates to enter our field ( hmm Maybe someone is watching and reacting to what we intend doing.).

Training and abilities are very important to our future and I envisage that the IROVA will look at the whole aspect from all sides and form our own recommendations which will reflect our needs and not the needs of others.

This association is gaining momentum and is progressing towards being a voice within our industry.

[Scott Beveridge]

A few observations/questions…

As to "Fitness to Work Offshore" are you referring to a Dr.’s certificate or an actual physical fitness assessment (running, push up’s etc…) or both? Personally I’d like to see folks have to meet a minimum physical fitness assesessment. Some of these guys are going to take a freaking crane to get off the rig…

"Pilot Only Personnel"- Most people don’t want to believe it or think it will happen, but it’s coming… You will have people that will fly the ROV and those that will work on them. It is a matter of what is better financially for the companies…

"Training" People should be trained and certified by the manufacturer to a certain competence level to use their gear. I know a lot of old timers are going to scream foul, but just because you can fly and work on one type of ROV doesn’t mean you know squat about another. Once you are certified to work on a system, then you go out on jobs as a trainee and you fall under your employers training regimine.

Chief

While I agree in principle with what you say concerning training, I’ve seen some guys with more experience on a certain system than some of the manufacturers field representatives / engineers for the said system. Taking this into mind with KreuzOps’ On-The-Job-Training thoughts/plans, there is no reason why there couldn’t be one or 2 individuals within an ROV company (operator) that could be trained on "THAT PARTICULAR SYSTEM" (no, I’m not shouting…) and train guys just coming onto it – this could be done offshore if the ROV operator managers are willing to eat the cost of a trainee offshore. Of course, bunk space is usually a problem….

Let’s throw this one around for a bit guys as I think it’s a big issue on most companies and old hands shoulders at present.

[thomas]

Chief,
Thank you for your valuable input.

On the question of fitness to work.We have at present a medical periodically by a specialist doctor which costs us dearly.

The medical brief on the form whether it be for surface or subsea is not rocket science to any general practitioner.

If we had access to an agreed form of medical form then I say that the candidate should be able to visit any Gp with forms in hand and gain an examination.This would stop all this nonsense of people having to trek all over the world searching for the right doctor who has the correct forms.

This examination would be certified in the normal way and we would be charged the going rate for that particular medical.

Every day throughout the world we have doctors doing every kind of medical you can think of so why not ours at a reasonable cost.

I understand that this could lead to abuse,however the present system is no different.

[thomas]

In relation to team size and make up.

We all know the abuse that is happenning with the make up of teams at present.

It would be nice to think that some day we can have a team made up of individual specialists,ie pilot,elec tech,mech tech,hydraulic tech,fiber optic tech,rigger,crane operator,banksman,it specialist and team secretary.

Im sorry maybe I go too far but I just dont see how the client or companies would accept this as the fiscal penalty would be enormous.

I agree that their are some who are good at one thing and bad on another.

When considering sending a team to operate and maintain a valuable piece of equipment, then surely the company hirer and firer, should always consider the needs.Im afraid at present in some cases the only need that is considered, is how little can we provide to gain the biggest margins.

Here lies the root of the problem and I envisage in future that the IROVA will get involved in re education and movement away from these sharp practices by bean counters to the detriment of our pay and conditions of work.

Our job, like many others throughout the world ,has evolved as a multi task job.The reason that multi tasking originally came about was as a cost cutting measure.I do not envisage that any company could support the old system of one man one job.

[Author]

Posts