1 / 38

Effective maritime education and training Our contribution Opatija , 28 September 2011 Dr. Jaime Veiga Sector Leader

Effective maritime education and training Our contribution Opatija , 28 September 2011 Dr. Jaime Veiga Sector Leader B.1.3, Training of Seafarers . What ships need?. Competent crew. Motivated crew. Well managed crew. Assis t. European Commission EU Member States.

thora
Télécharger la présentation

Effective maritime education and training Our contribution Opatija , 28 September 2011 Dr. Jaime Veiga Sector Leader

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Effective maritime education and training Our contribution Opatija, 28 September 2011 Dr. Jaime Veiga Sector Leader B.1.3, Training of Seafarers

  2. What ships need?

  3. Competent crew Motivated crew Well managed crew

  4. Assist • European Commission • EU Member States • Proper implementation of STCW • Qualified seafarers on board EU ships • Ensure • Our Task • On behalf of the 27 MS • Common methodology • Sharing of results • Reduced costs • Added value

  5. Inspection visits • Preparation • In cooperation with the competent authority • Maritime Administration • Maritime Education andTraining institutions • Visit • Report • Assessed by the EC • Decision taken by COSS (Recognition/Refusal/Withdraw) • Cycle • Every five years

  6. Inspection by EMSA: EU Member States Assistanceto the Commission to verify on a regular basis (at least every five years) that Member States comply with the minimum requirements laid down by (this) Directive (article 25, Dir2008/106) • STCW Convention • EU Directive 2008/106

  7. Inspection by EMSA: non-EU countries Assistanceto the Commission and the Member States to verify whether the country concerned meets all the requirements of the STCW Convention and the appropriate measures have been taken to prevent fraud involving certificates(article 19, Dir 2008/106) • STCW Convention • EU Directive 2008/106

  8. Non-EU countries Recognitionof certificates • Article 19 • Request for recognition by the MS to the EC • Assessment carried out by the EC assisted by EMSA • Decision on recognition of the country taken by EC through COSS • MS’ decision to endorse the certificates issued by that country (undertaking)

  9. Non-EU countries Withdrawalof certificates • Article 19 • MS’ notification to the EC • Re-assessment by the EC assisted by EMSA • EC’s notification to the country of the withdrawal (within 2 months’ unless measures are taken to ensure compliance with the STCW requirements) • Decision on the withdrawal by the EC through COSS • MS informed to implement adequate measures

  10. Non-EU countries Re-assessmentof recognition • Article 19 • On a regular basis, at least every 5 years • Reassessment by the EC assisted by EMSA

  11. EMSA task: How do we do it? • Planning • Performing • Initial request toThird countries throughdiplomatic channels • Initial request to authorities • Inspecting • Reporting

  12. EMSA task: Methodology

  13. Inspection methodology processesMaritime Administrations • Quality Management: Art. I and Reg. I/8 • Programme and Course approval: Art. I and IX and Reg. I/6, I/8, I/11 and I/12 • Monitoring and Evaluation of Training and Assessment: Art. I and IX and Reg. I/6 and I/8 • Qualification and Training of Assessors, Instructors and Supervisors: Art. I and Reg. I/6 and I/8 • Assessment of Competence: Art. I and Reg. I/6, I/8 and I/12 • On-board Training: Art. I and Reg. I/6, I/8 and I/12 • Certification and Endorsement: Art. I and VI and Reg. I/2, I/3, I/8 and I/9 • Registration: Art. I and Reg. I/8 and I/9 • Revalidation: Art. I and Reg. I/2, I/8, I/9 and I/11 • Medical Standards: Art. I and Reg. I/9 • Incompetence and Fraud Prevention: Art. I and Reg. I/5 and I/8

  14. Inspection methodology processesMET Institutions • QualityManagement:Art. I and Reg. I/8 • Course Design, Review and Approval: Art. I and Reg. I/6, I/8 and I/12 • Staff Qualification and Training:Art. I and Reg. I/6 andI/8 • Training Facilities:Art. I and Reg. I/6 and I/8 • Monitoring and Supervision of Training:Art. I and Reg. I/6 and I/8 • Use of Simulators:Art. I and Reg. I/8 and I/12 • Examination:Art. I and Reg. I/6, I/8 and I/12 • Admission of Students and Issue of DocumentaryEvidence: Art. I and Reg. I/8 and I/9

  15. Inspection process • Reportwriting • Final desk study • On site visit • Desk study

  16. On site visit • Plan and schedule inspection visit • Inform the management of entities to be inspected • Keep the inspection on track • Review identified deficiencies with staff to understand failures and gather valid evidence • Wrap-up inspection visit with staff and management informing of the main issues

  17. Evidence of complianceor non-compliance • Documents and records • Interviews with staff (Management, Operational and Support Levels) • Review of equipment and facilities

  18. 22Member States • 32non-EU countries Inspected Countries (as of July 2011)

  19. Follow up – Member States Assist the EC • Verify on a regular basis and at least every five years that MS complywith the provisions of the Directive (article 25, Directive 2008/106/EC) • Inspection criteria: EC Directive

  20. Follow up – Non EU countries Assist EC and MS for the purpose of recognition of CoCs • to verify whether the country concerned meets all the requirements of the STCW Convention (5 years cycle) (article 19, Directive 2008/106/EC) • Inspection criteria: STCW Convention & STCW Code

  21. STCW InspectionBeforethe EC Directive • Individual EU Member States wereconductingby themselves the assessment of compliance • Inspected countries had to deal withdifferentevaluations (inspections)

  22. STCW InspectionsAfterDirective 2008/106/EC • The system becamecentralised • A commonmethodologyisused • The costs are reduced • The findings are dissemminated

  23. STCW-IS: Supporting tool

  24. STCW-IS Objectives in Phase 2 • The total number of CoCs issued by country? • The total number of EU certified seafarers? • The number of seafarers from third countries serving on board ships flying the flag of an EU Member State? • The Age profile of EU seafarers? Whatis?

  25. STCW-IS Objectives in Phase 2 • The number of cadets from MET institutions versus the age profileof existing seafarers? • The real shortage of EU seafarers? • The impact will face the EU shipping industry if EC will decide to withdraw the recognition of CoCs issued by a third country? • The trends on seafarers supply in EU? Whatis?

  26. Norway EDR Iceland EDR MS 1 EDR MS 2 EDR MS n EDR STCW-IS Human Interactions

  27. Implementation Different institutions have a role to play IMLA has also a role to play

  28. Thanks! Hvala!

More Related