The Chamber comments on the latest annual national seafarer statistics

Media release, 19 June 2008

The Chamber of Shipping comments on the latest annual national seafarer statistics produced by the Department for Transport and reacts to the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers' (RMT) request for 'urgent action'.

Tim Springett, Head of Labour Affairs, Chamber of Shipping, said: “The Chamber of Shipping notes with regret the falling numbers of UK ratings in employment and shares the concerns of the RMT that action is needed if the UK’s maritime skills base is not to be threatened further. This is why the Chamber joined with RMT (and Nautilus UK) to call upon the Government to improve the employment environment for UK seafarers and increase the incentives available for their training [since April 2007]. Along with the unions, the Chamber has proffered practical suggestions for encouraging the recruitment and training of UK personnel to work as ratings. The Chamber has also supported the work undertaken in IMO [International Maritime Organization] to develop up-to-date competencies and sea time requirements for Able Seafarers that would be of considerable assistance in this regard and is most disappointed that their implementation has been delayed.

“These initiatives represent the only realistic means of achieving the increase in UK rating employment that RMT desires. Conversely, the restrictive legislative measures put forward today by RMT would do nothing to help – instead they would merely discourage operators from flagging their ships in the UK. Ship operators must compete in international markets and any measures that force UK operators to pay seafarers above market rates will simply play into the hands of their competitors. Hence the Chamber was pleased that the Government accepted its arguments against the proposals, introduced in the House of Lords, to amend the Employment Bill to extend the application of the National Minimum Wage to all seafarers on UK-flag ships and on foreign ships in UK territorial waters. The latter proposal was questionable legally – the former a strong disincentive to UK registration.”

The Chamber of Shipping