Preventing and managing fatigue in the Shipping industry

Transcription

1 TNO Quality of Life TNO-report TNO report R Preventing and managing fatigue in the Shipping industry Work and Employment Polarisavenue 151 P.O. Box AS Hoofddorp The Netherlands T F Date October 27 th, 2008 Authors Annick Starren, Madelon van Hooff, Irene Houtman, Nicole Buys (TNO), Audrey Rost-Ernst, Sjoerd Groenhuis, Ronald Janssens (STC-Group), Drew Dawson (Centre for Sleep Research, University of South Australia). No part of this publication may be reproduced and/or published by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without the previous written consent of TNO. In case this report was drafted on instructions, the rights and obligations of the contracting parties are subject to either the Standard Conditions for Research Instructions given to TNO, or the relevant agreement concluded between the contracting parties TNO

2 TNO report R

3 TNO report R Contents Executive summary Introduction and background Research Questions and project activities Phase 1: the time-use study Introduction and goal Method Target group The time-use diary questionnaire Development of list of activities Participation by ship owners Participants and Procedure The questionnaire Additional questions Results Respondents Time-use on board Effort Transferability Transferability in relation to time and effort Sleep & Fatigue Summary and conclusions Conclusions on delegation of tasks Phase 2: the study on Fatigue Management Introduction and goal Methods Literature and internet search on fatigue management Interviewing experts on the implementation of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems Results: literature and internet search on fatigue management Results: expert interviews on the implementation of Fatigue (Risk) Management Systems The old and the new approach to fatigue management Ingredients of a F(R)MS recommended by the experts High-level aspects of a F(R)MS Proactive measures as potential ingredients of an FMS Reactive fatigue measures as potential ingredients of an FMS A framework for fatigue management Comments on the implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry Conditions for a successful implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry Fatigue management measures in the shipping industry Conclusions fatigue management... 81

4 TNO report R Phase 3: economic consequences and consequences for training Transfer maintenance activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care and administration activities to shore in all watch- systems Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st officer to the dual purpose officer or the 2nd officer in 3-watch system Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems Transfer of organization & leadership activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system Transfer of safety & training activities from master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system Implementation of Fatigue Management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, ERM training -group process) Fatigue Incident reporting Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry Summary & conclusions... 89

5 TNO report R Executive summary As a follow-up to our earlier research on fatigue 1 in the shipping industry, the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management has asked TNO and the STC Group Rotterdam to do research on Fatigue Management Programs and other measures to reduce and prevent the risk of fatigue in the shipping industry. Measures are explicitely related to the delegation or redistribution of workload from the master and 1 st officer on the bridge, or by undertaking more integrated 'Fatigue Management' activities to combat fatigue at the organisational level. Hence, delegation or workload redistribution is assumed to be the most effective if it is contextualized as a part of Fatigue Management System (FMS). Proper and effective implementation of a FMS identifies if the whole system is out of balance and if reallocation of work may be necessary. This study aimed at answering three main questions: 1. Which activities on board and/or in port do seafaring officers perform, what time do they actually take, which of these activities take a lot of effort and which can be organized more optimally, e.g. by being delegated to other crew members, to lighten the master s and officer s workload? 2. What are potentially effective elements of a Fatigue Management System and what are the preconditions for implementing these fatigue measures, especially the measures that are compatible with the 'Safety Management System' that prevent or tackle fatigue effectively? 3. What is the expected effect of the most feasible fatigue (FMS) measures on the short sea shipping industry and maritime education in the Netherlands? The first question was tackled by a time use study. In order to further look into the potential effectiveness of Fatigue Management Systems a literature study was performed, followed by interviewing experts in the field. Additionally, a conference was held with sector representatives who were fed back the preliminary data of this study and were challenged to respond both on the findings of the time use study and the findings on 'FMS's'. Finally a cost estimate was performed on the most effective, feasible, acceptable and compatible measures. Time use study The results of this time use study can be used to select the tasks that can have the most effect in preventing fatigue. An overview of tasks and their categories as studied are given in the main text on page 19 (table 1). The assumption is that delegation of tasks that take much time and effort in combination will make the largest difference. Conclusions can be drawn for the master and the deck officers in the 2 and 3 watch system at the level of categories. There is not enough information available to draw conclusions neither for the engineer officers nor for the subcategories. The conclusions based on the data from the 2- watch and the 3-watch system have to be interpreted with caution due to the few number of respondents. 1 In this study, the use of the word fatigue does not necessarily refer to over -tiredness or exhaustion. Fatigue as defined here is the same as is used in the former research on fatigue and as is formulated by the IMO: 'Fatigue is a reduction in physical and/or mental capacity as the result of physical, mental, or emotional exertion which may impair nearly all physical abilities including: strength, speed, reaction time, coordination, decision making or balance'.

6 TNO report R The time used to perform a predetermined and tested set of activities was registered for mainly masters (n=43), 1 st deck officers (n=20), 2 nd deck officers (n=20) as well as some chief engineer officers (n=6) and 2 nd /3 rd engineer officers (n=6). On total 95 working days were registered, from which most of them at sea Time Regarding time-use, the results show that, on average, masters and deck officers spend most of their working time on watchkeeping activities and that engineer officers devote most of their time to maintenance activities. Activities with respect to safety, security and training generally take the least time of seafarers daily time-budgets. See for an example of time use figures a1, a2 and a3. time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training 2 watch 3 watch day duty 2+3 watch/other Figure a1: Time use of the Mater per 24 hours (in minutes) time-use master per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care Maintenance Communication Organization and Leadership Command & Control Safety, Security and Training on-shore off-shore both Figure a2: Time use of the master at sea and in port (in minutes)

7 TNO report R The master spends most of his time on watchkeeping, slightly more working in a 3 watch system than in a 2 watch system. This outcome may appear illogical at first, which can be seen as a consequence of the seafarer s scoring the more active activities that are done in combination with watchkeeping, e.g. navigation, instead of pure watchkeeping. Navigation tasks are indeed most common among masters working in a 2 watch or 2+3 watch/other watch system. Time on administration tasks is equal in all watch systems. Tasks related to loading/discharging/cargo care are mostly conducted by masters working day-duty. Masters also spend time on command & control, the most in the 2+3 watch/other watch systems. Generally, masters conduct most administrative tasks in port and have most off-duty time in port as well. time-use officers per 24 hours (minutes) Off-duty activities Watchkeeping Navigation 95 Administration Loading/discharging/cargo care 201 Command & Control Communication Organization and Leadership Maintenance Safety, Security and Training st officer 2nd/3rd officer/marof Figure a.3 Time-use of the 1 st and 2 nd officer or dual purpose officer per 24 hours (in minutes) The 1 st deck officers spend most of their time on watchkeeping and navigation. Navigation tasks are conducted most in day duty (which is logical) and considerably more in a 2 watch system than in a 3 watch system. Watchkeeping activities are performed by 1 st officers, slightly more in a 3 watch than in a 2 watch system. Just like watchkeeping, activities regarding loading/discharging and cargo care are mostly executed by 1 st officers working a 2+3watch/other watch system. The 2 nd /3 rd deck officers/dual purpose officers spend most time on watchkeeping (except when working day-duty). Maintenance activities, and also loading/discharging cargo are relatively often performed working day-duty. Maintenance is mostly executed in port. Most chief engineer officers, and all 2 nd and 3 rd engineer officers in this study work day duty. Chief engineer officers working spend most of their time on maintenance, administration and watchkeeping, and also on organization & leadership. In a 2+3 watch/other watch system they spend more time on administration and in day duty more on watchkeeping. Effort With respect to effort, the results of this study show that off-duty activities are generally not considered as effortful, as to be expected. However, maintenance activities are on average the most effortful work tasks. These findings are also observed for the master. Within this rank, navigation tasks are considered as rather effortful as well. In general, 1 st deck officers consider loading/discharging/cargo care activities among the most effortful activities, and indicate that tasks with respect to safety, security and training are effortful as well.

8 TNO report R The 1 st deck officers, 2 nd /3 rd deck officers/dual purpose officers indicate that loading/discharging/cargo care tasks are relatively effortful as well, and consider these tasks as even more effortful than the 1 st deck officers. Maintenance activities are effortful as well within this group. The average effort attributed in these ranks is higher than the effort attributed in the other ranks. Tasks with respect loading/discharging/cargo care are judged as most effortful by the chief engineer and they consider these tasks as more effortful than the 2 nd /3 rd engineer officers. This latter group of workers considers tasks with respect to communication as most effortful. Transferability Tasks that are considered to be most suitable to be delegated are those regarding safety, security and training. These tasks require nonetheless only a limited amount of daily work time. To a lesser extend loading/discharging/cargo care, organization & leadership and for 2 nd /3 rd deck officers tasks with respect to maintenance are considered effortful. Most interesting are the tasks which are transferable and take a lot of time and/or are effortful. For the master and the 1 st deck officer in the 2 watch and in the 3 watch system, a closer look has been taken at the combinations of transferability on the one hand, and time and effort on the other. For the master in the 2 watch system, these analyses show that tasks regarding organization & leadership and maintenance are among the most suitable for delegation: these tasks are considered to be transferable and are also considered relatively effortful, but do not require a lot of time. For the master in the 3 watch system, tasks with respect to communication and safety, security and training are considered to be most transferable. Only a limited amount of time is spent on 'maintenance', but these activities are considered as rather effortful. Time and effort for safety, security and training are average. In the 2 watch system, the 1 st deck officer assesses that activities regarding loading/discharging/cargo care can also be delegated, but these activities are not reported to take a lot of time and effort. Navigation is considered to be mediocre in transferability and it can result in saving a lot of time and effort. In the 3-watch system, tasks with respect to watchkeeping are the most transferable ones, they require a lot of time and are quite effortful. In the two watch system watchkeeping activities are also considered transferable, but these are not the most effortful tasks. Loading/discharging/cargo care is considered less transferable but when transferred, a lot of time and effort can be gained. Fatigue and sleep Fatigue as reported here refers to the level of overall tiredness in a range form 1 to 10. On average, participants sleep about 8 out of 24 hours. Hours of sleep vary across ranks: chief engineers sleep substantially less than 1 st officers. Generally, masters and officers sleep least on days during which they are both in port and at sea. The respondents rate the quality of their sleep as very good in all ranks. The seafarers score themselves in the centre between not fatigued" and very fatigued. For master and deck officers, fatigue levels are generally higher during work than during off-duty time. Their work-related fatigue is highest during in port days. To be mentioned is that for engineer officers the levels of fatigue do not decrease substantially after work.

9 TNO report R Based on the fatigue and sleep results, it can be concluded that fatigue scores work out quite well for most of the groups, but there are varying fatigue levels across rank and watch systems that ask for more analyses and research. In addition, the quality of sleep is considered to be good enough. The largest gain in handling fatigue appears to be at the days that ships arrive at or depart from port Potential activities for delegation The time use study has resulted in a set of potential activities for delegation, which are not only specified on the basis of the time-use study, but also on the input from the workshop with delegates from the shipping industry who were presented the preliminary findings of (amongst others) the findings of the time use study: 1. Transfer of maintenance activities from master to the engineer officer(s) in 2- watch system; 2. Transfer of loading, & discharging & administration activities to shore in all watch- systems; 3. Transfer of watchkeeping activities from 1st deck officer to the dual purpose officer/ 2nd deck officer in 3-watch system; 4. Transfer of administration activities to software in all watch- systems; 5. Transfer of organization & leadership activities from master to the engineer officer(s) in 2-watch system; 6. Transfer of safety& training activities from master to the 1st deck officer in 3- watch system. At last, the time-use study showed us that there is significant opportunity for transferring or delegating tasks, e.g. to other crew members, the shore etc. On the other hand there is not yet sufficient information to enable clear policy to inform the specific details on when, to who and how to delegate workload in order to reduce fatigue-related risk. This still depends on a more detailed understanding of the relationship between the person, time and situation and the resultant fatigue-related risk. Actually, it is good fatigue management, which is also needed to contextualize these types of task allocation process Fatigue management and its potential to prevent and manage fatigue, is described in the second part of this study. Ideally, a good fatigue management system identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. A good fatigue management system gives an answer to the question of how best to redistribute workload when somebody inevitably ends up tired. Delegation may be a way of fatigue proofing (the management of fatigue related errors) in a way that is attractive to the industry, cost effective and realizable in the short-term. Important is not to forget that delegation may just be a part of the solution. Fatigue Management Systems and their preconditions In the 3 rd chapter of this report a framework for Fatigue (Risk) Management systems is provided, together with its most frequent and most recommended ingredients. Fatigue Management is introduced as a way to contextualize the task allocation process as potential part of a package of effective measures for fatigue management. A good fatigue management system identifies if the system is out of balance, what the risk factors for fatigue are or may be, and if reallocation of work is necessary. A good fatigue management system gives an answer to the question of how best to redistribute activities in work from who to whom.

10 TNO report R Tools appear to be available that identify if the system is out of balance -i.e. efforts put into work are not fully compensated for by the rest periods provided for or taken-, what exactly the fatigue risks are, and what the organization can do to manage these fatigue risk and how to bring activities back in balance (risk mitigation). The latter is preferably done by way of integrating fatigue management into the company s (e.g. safety management) systems and S.O.P. s (Standard Operating Procedures). One of the main conclusions is that fatigue management is a process. It is not some kind of paperwork. An important aspect of preventing fatigue is that fatigue should be seen as just one of the risks (financial, safety, business continuity) in an organization. The occurrence of fatigue has a frequency and consequence. Fatigue has to be managed in such a way that the most severe consequences have to be prevented. Moreover, fatigue as a risk can be a part of a broader (safety) management system. Over the last years, one can speak of an old and a new approach to fatigue management. The old approach can be characterized as: - aimed at the direct cause of fatigue, e.g. measures focused on a person who is already fatigued; - an individual responsibility, aiming at the aspects relevant to the personal vulnerability for fatigue for a/that individual; - well known measures against fatigue to be used (drinking caffeine, napping, training on awareness); - restrictions in the amount of working hours. The new approach can be characterized as: - need to look at the chain of events further away in time and location from the actual event; - to be initiated from within the organization s policy (safety mgt); - a shared responsibility; - countermeasures which are defined at several levels, aimed at schedulers, operators (e.g. drivers) and executives/managers; - measures how to assess personal fatigue risks (early warning signals). The common thought is that several (as opposed to one) measures are necessary to have an effective F(R)MS. The 5-level model of Dawson has given us a framework for fatigue management measures at all levels. Inspired by the philosophy of the 'Reason s Swiss Cheese Model', the model reflects the range of tools or measures to take at all levels, starting from proactive prevention of fatigue to eventually handling fatigue as it occurs. Moreover, management commitment, good communication and training on fatigue at all levels are necessary. The model is a framework for the variety of options to manage fatigue. At the end, it is the fit to the organisation s culture that is most critical for success. Interesting options for the implementation of fatigue management in the Shipping Industry, more specifically, are measures that are compatible with the ISM code. For example the integration/inclusion of fatigue in (company) incident reporting (see ISM Code, section 9) is considered to be an interesting option. Another interesting example is a fatigue management training program, compatible with the existing training and education of seafarers, e.g. the BRM (Bridge Resource Management) and the ERM (Engine room Resource Management) training. Rostering analysis models could not only help the industry in signalling fatigue, it can also be the beginning of more flexibility in (watch) scheduling.

11 TNO report R This has lead to the following 3 potential measures: 1. Implementation of fatigue management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the BRM, ERM training -group process). 2. Fatigue to be integrated/included in (company) incident reporting. 3. Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry. Economic consequences and consequences for training Selection of the delegation and fatigue management measures is based on the results of both the time-use study as well as the fatigue management overview and more specifically the input from sector representatives in the workshops of the conference organised to feed back the preliminary results of this study (phase 1 and phase 2). Criteria for selection of the measures were: Effectiveness in reducing fatigue. Feasibility. Acceptance within the sector. Compatibility with existing procedures & regulation, e.g. the ISM code.

12 TNO report R Table a1 below summarises the above findings related to the costs of potentially effective, feasible, acceptable and in principle compatible fatigue reducing measures Measure Effectiveness Cost in euro per Investment costs day per ship 1. Transfer maintenance activities from Limited time reduction 25 master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system 2. Transfer of loading/discharging/cargo care and administration activities to shore in all watch- systems Significant reduction in workload 600 Possible training costs for the shore personnel 3. Transfer watchkeeping activities from 1st off to the dual officer/ 2nd officer in 3-watch system Significant reduction in workload; Flexible 100 (based on 2 hrs) 4. Transfer administration activities to software in all watch- systems Significant reduction in workload, but with limitations none Significant (investment & training) 5. Transfer Organization & leadership Limited none activities from master to the engineer(s) in 2-watch system reduction in workload 6. Transfer Safety& Training activities Limited reduction in 25 from master to the 1st officer in 3-watch system workload 7. Implementation of Fatigue Management training modules in SMS (e.g. incorporation of fatigue management in the Significant effect because of more awareness 800 / ship for training of 1 person BRM, ERM training -group process). 8. Fatigue Incident reporting Limited time reduction 9. Implementing FAID (rostering analysis) software in the shipping industry Effect dependent of implementation on board Regarding measures 1-6, the transfer of loading and discharging activities appears to be the most effective delegation measure, also taken into account that good rest periods in port means a safe situation to start the forthcoming sea voyage. The need to have shore personnel (a super cargo- available in each port to control the actual loading and unloading of the ship means significant additional costs but has advantages from a fatigue point of view as well as cargo handling point of view. Other transferring measures are less effective regarding the total reduction in workload or time but if all of them can be applied, a significant improvement of the workload for master and 1st officer can be arranged. Extra costs by these measures are limited compared to the total costs per day. Reduction of administrative work on board will certainly reduce fatigue. Costs of development has restrained the development of automatic administrative computer programs and sensor equipment But nowadays there are already some good examples of administrative supporting programs. Also the use of broadband internet has become more and more common. In particular for this measure cooperation with Administrations and inspection organizations is essential.

13 TNO report R The incorporation of a super cargo is a valuable option to reduce fatigue on ships with a 2 watch system. If the super cargo is not an option, the cargo handling activities should remain with the 1 st officer. Then, in the 2 watch system, more flexible multitasking is required. This is an option for the smaller ships, e.g. carrying break bulk. In other situations with more complexity, the 1st officer in port should remain free from any other tasks as well as during the period before arrival and after departure. This means that either one 1 st officer extra is needed to take over watch obligations in these periods or tasks should be delegated to for example the chief engineer. This extra officer can also take over other tasks from the master and 1st officer. With the availability of this dual purpose officer, maintenance work on deck and in the engine room can be carried out as well. Theoretically, with a well considered effort of this extra dual purpose officer, the total cost of one extra officer on ship originally having a 2 watch system could be limited and even negligible compared to extra shore personnel for loading and discharging activities. Nevertheless, although the incorporation of an extra dual purpose officer may effectively reduce or prevent fatigue of master and officers, (senior) dual officers are hard to find at the moment and their availability will probably even be more limited in the future. Moreover, the issue of accommodation will be a problem on the smaller ships. NB: it is important to realize that transferring tasks can also be a way of shifting the problem of fatigue, e.g. when it leads to difficulties in (intercultural) communication. Therefore, monitoring these task delegations is necessary. Regarding measures 7-10 Transferring tasks/delegation or workload redistribution will be the most effective when it is contextualized as a part of a Fatigue Risk Management System (FMRS). A proper and effective FRMS identifies if the system is out of balance and if the reallocation of work may be necessary. A FRMS also gives an answer to the question of how to bring the system back in balance (risk mitigating). Measures 7 9 are recommended as fatigue management measures for the shipping industry. To combat fatigue related risks, it is important to define measures at all levels of the 5 level model of fatigue management. In the chapters on fatigue management we have given more examples of possible fatigue management activities that identify whether the system is out of balance, what the fatigue risks are, what the organization s S.O.P. s for managing the risk are, and how to bring it back in balance. Transferring cargo activities and integration of fatigue management issues into the BRM training is assumed to be most effective. To conclude: This study has given insight in how to handle fatigue risks in the shipping industry. The transfer or delegation of tasks can restructure crew members workload in such a way that major errors and incidents may be less likely to occur. This is also called workload re-distribution. The delegation or workload re-distribution will be the most effective if it is contextualized as a part of a Fatigue Risk Management System (FMRS). For a successful implementation of a FRMS. fatigue management has to be seen as a process, which starts with the discussion of when fatigue actually becomes a risk. The next step for the sector is the further exploration and exchange of (current) experiences, also abroad and in other sectors. This report gives the opportunity to share the (international) state of the art thoughts and ideas on fatigue management approaches. We hope this will encourage the sector to make use of them.

14 TNO report R As was stated in the symposium which was held to discuss the present research findings with the sector: Maybe we are already managing fatigue but we are not aware of it. We have to make it visible! Nowadays, when a major shipping accident happens, people will ask: is there environmental pollution or not?. Should there be pollution, the first question should be: what have we done to prevent fatigue?. Then we have to be able to show society that we are dealing with it.. When there is a threat of regulation, fatigue management be a way to do it yourselves, and keep flexibility in the way how to do it. It is quite complicated. If there were already golden solutions, the sector would probably already have done it that way.

15 TNO report R Introduction and background As a follow-up to our earlier research on fatigue 2 in the shipping industry, the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management has asked TNO and the STC Group Rotterdam to do research on Fatigue Management Programs and other measures to reduce and prevent the risk of fatigue in the shipping industry. Fatigue is nowadays seen as an important issue in the shipping industry. Fatigue has been recognized more and more as a risk for safety in scientific publications, and it is clear that measures should be taken to prevent and reduce the risk of fatigue. The Exxon Valdez and Herald of Free Enterprise disasters already clearly illustrated the major impact of the human element and fatigue decades ago. Nevertheless fatigue related shipping accidents have continued to occur. Moreover the working environment in the shipping industry has undergone continuous changes in regulation, experienced large increases in the amount of paper work they are obliged to handle, new technologies have been introduced and finally the continuous growth of the sector plays a role in this respect as well. The human element asks for permanent attention in preventing accidents at sea in the future. Managing fatigue related risks in shipping is recognized to be an important avenue for improving safety and preventing future accidents in the sector. In the previous study on the relationship between fatigue, collisions/ groundings and the shift system, it is concluded that: Fatigue is related to an impairment of functioning. Fatigue is involved in 11-25% of the collisions and groundings in the shipping industry (conservative estimation). The literature on relation shift system fatigue/collisions and groundings is inconsistent. Period of 8 hrs rest/uninterrupted sleep is best. In the previous study, the following potential measures were mentioned to prevent fatigue: proper implementation of ISM-Code, optimisation of work organisation on board, lengthening of the rest period and reduction of administrative tasks. The study concluded that, replacement of a 2-shift system by a 3-shift system appeared to be too expensive and also has a major impact on maritime education. Additionally adding someone just for administrative tasks appeared not to be an option. Improvements in the delegation of tasks however could help reduce the risk of fatigue. Another interesting option was flexibility in the shift system, e.g. into 4 hours on, 8 hours off 8 hours on 4 hours off, which accommodates the advice to have at least 8 hour rest, 2 In this study, the use of the word fatigue does not refer necessarily to over-tiredness or exhaustion. As a definition of what characterizes fatigue, we use the same definition as in the former research on fatigue and as is formulated by the IMO, in which fatigue is conceptualised as a 'reduction in physical and/or mental capacity as the result of physical, mental, or emotional exertion which may impair nearly all physical abilities including: strength, speed, reaction time, coordination, decision making or balance'. Fatigue can be divided into categories in many different ways. However, systematic studies seem to find between three and five dimensions, including general fatigue (tired, bushed, exhausted), mental fatigue (cognitive impairment), physical fatigue, and sleepiness (tendency to fall asleep), and sometimes motivation or lack of activity (Akerstedt et al, 2004).

16 TNO report R and preserves the regularity in shifts over 24 hours. Lastly setting up a Fatigue Management program in line with the implementation of the ISM code and as an integrated part of safety management was seen as an interesting measure. In this report we present the results of a follow-up study. In this study the focus is on delegation or redistribution of tasks and the potential effective design and implementation of a Fatigue Management System as promising measures to combat fatigue. 1.1 Research Questions and project activities. The research questions are based upon the conclusions of the former research, in which delegation of tasks and the design and implementation of a Fatigue Management System were recommended as a potentially effective measure to prevent or reduce the risk of fatigue. The research questions of this study are formulated as follows: 1. Which activities on board and/or in the port do seafaring officers perform, what time do they actually take, which of these activities take a lot of effort and which can be organized more optimally, e.g. by being delegated to other crew members, to lighten the master s and officer s workload? 2. What are potentially effective elements of a Fatigue Management System and what are the preconditions for implementing these fatigue measures, especially the measures that are compatible with the 'Safety Management System' that prevent or tackle fatigue effectively? 3. What is the expected effect of the most feasible fatigue (FMS) measures on the short sea shipping industry and maritime education in the Netherlands? To answer this research question, the study consists out of three phases: Phase 1: In the first phase, the first research question was answered. A time-use study was designed and conducted among masters, officers and engineers on board various ships. With this time-use study tasks and activities of the master and officers were identified, the effort required was assessed, and the possibility to organize these tasks more optimally, e.g. delegate to other crew members, to lighten the master s and officer s workload, was explored. STC-Group and TNO have asked shipping companies for their participation. Participating companies supplied job descriptions and/or completed time use studies by their officers. The result of phase 2 is an overview of activities that can be delegated in order to lighten the master s and officer s workload. Phase 2: In the second phase the second research question on Fatigue Management was answered. A literature and internet search was done and interviews were held with internationals experts. In this manner good practices of the implementation of a Fatigue Management System to prevent fatigue are identified. These could also be outside the shipping industry, for example in road transport, where these systems have been implemented regularly. Subsequently, Prof Drew Dawson has complemented the research as an international expert on 'Fatigue Management Systems' by reviewing these best practices and formulating preconditions for the implementation of such a system in shipping. Phase 2 resulted in a framework for a Fatigue Management System. Whilst answering the first two research questions a set of potential measures to manage fatigue were found. These preliminary results have been presented to and discussed

17 TNO report R with representatives of the Dutch shipping sector and some international experts at an invitational Conference. The input of the sector has been used to help define the final measures. Phase 3: in the third phase a set of potential measure was selected for further in-depth research into their financial consequences for the (short sea) shipping industry and consequences for maritime education. The consequences were assessed to answer the third research question. The following parties have been involved in the project: TNO Work and Employment: - Literature and internet search & experts interviews on implementation of Fatigue Management Systems. - Time use study. STC-Group Rotterdam - Time use study. - Consequences of the implementation of fatigue management measures. Professor Drew Dawson from the Centre of Sleep Research, the University of South Australia. - Review and advice on FMS. Members of the Sounding board committee: The Dutch Ministry of Transport DGTL, the Netherlands Shipping Inspectorate, KVNR (Royal Association of Netherlands Ship-owners, Nautilus (Seafarer s Union), NVKK (Dutch Master s Association), VBKO (Dredging company s association) and the Nova (maritime) college. In the next chapter the method and results of a time-use study among Dutch seafarers will be presented (phase 1). This gives insight into delegation or redistribution of tasks as a potential measure to prevent fatigue. In chapter 3 the research methods and results of both our literature review and our interviews with international experts on the implementation of fatigue programs within and outside the transport sector, will be presented (phase 2). This results in a framework for the implementation of fatigue management programs in the shipping industry. In chapter 4 the results of the in-depth study on consequences are presented (phase 3). The conclusions and discussion are presented in chapter 5.

18 TNO report R

19 TNO report R Phase 1: the time-use study 2.1 Introduction and goal The former report on Fatigue in the shipping industry (Houtman et al, 2005) suggested that task delegation is a potential measure - amongst others- that may potentially reduce fatigue-related risk. Especially since the administrative burden is considered a factor that contributes to fatigue in seafarers. The option of adding a crew member with designated tasks appeared to be unrealistic since the amount of tasks is typically not sufficient to warrant an additional fulltime job. Delegation may be a way to optimise the organisation of work on board vessels. The delegation of tasks can restructure crewmember workload in such a way that major errors and incidents may be less likely to occur. This is also called workload allocation. In our view, delegation permits the transferability of tasks to other ranks, as well as shifting tasks to shore or changing the nature of the task through the use of ICT/ automation. To examine the potential of delegation, a time-use study was designed that aimed to answer the following questions: 1. What activities do seafaring officers perform on board? 2. How much time and effort do these activities take? 3. Is it really necessary that these tasks are carried out by themselves, or can some of these tasks be delegated to other crewmembers, transferred to shore or took over by software? By answering these questions the aim of this part of the study is to identify the tasks and activities of the master and officers, to identify the effort required and the possibility to organize these tasks more optimally, e.g. delegated, with the result of enlightening the master s and officer s workload. The aims of this study were achieved through development of a task list, interviews with nautical experts, development of a time-use questionnaire and the analysis of the data from these questionnaires. The answers to these questions, as well as the research methodology, are presented in this chapter. Note that some parts of this study must be seen as an exploratory study due to the limited amount of respondents. 2.2 Method To obtain answers to these three specific research questions presented in paragraph 2.1, a questionnaire was developed that was completed by masters, deck- and engineer officers on board of ships within the short sea shipping sector. This paragraph deals with the development of the questionnaire, and the procedure of the study Target group The focus for the target group of this study was originally drawn to the master and deck officers from ships within the short sea shipping. After a meeting with the Sounding board committee the conclusion was drawn that it would also be very useful to in-

20 TNO report R clude the officers from the engine room department. The reason for choosing the target group within the short sea shipping was based on the fact that within the short sea shipping the turnaround time in the port is short and the time on sea is limited to short sea voyages. Within this compressed time a lot of activities have to be conducted The time-use diary questionnaire By performing a time use study an integrated picture is established of how the various activities are integrated in the time spent on working and living on board. In this timeuse study the activities and tasks of the master and the officers were documented. By way of a time use diary questionnaire, the participants were asked to report their activities themselves. Respondents recorded their activities in time-use diaries, using a list of tasks added to the questionnaire. The diary covered 24 hours. Each respondent was asked to fill out the diaries for four diary days, when possible two days in port and two days at sea. For an example of the questionnaire see Annex E. In this table the categories of the time use study are described. Activities within these categories are analyzed by their time use, their effort and their transferability. Table 1 Categories of the time use study Categories Time Effort Transferability 1= Command & Control General overview and responsible for safe operation of the vessel Voyage planning Routinely monitoring all shipboard operations Overall responsible for the effective and efficient operation of the technical systems, especially the propulsion plant Responsible for technical department on board (fairly engine room) Overall responsible for safety and environmental aspects of the technical operation Long term maintenance planning Directing and deciding in emergency situations/search and rescue operations etc. Control and supply of matters regarding deck department (inventory, supplies, etc); 2= Organization & Leadership Daily management of the ship Organize and manage the crew Daily work planning meetings Meetings with crew and officers Meeting safety committee Planning daily work of all technical crew/officers, taking into account the requirements of the legislation on hours of work/rest Provide work directions for Oiler s, Wiper s and general marine helpers in the repair and maintenance of the engineering plant operations. Supervising and directing all technical matters Inspection of the ship Monitoring shipboard operations Check loading, tank cleaning and discharge plans Ensure compliance with all applicable laws, federal and company regulations Plan and schedule operations Outsource maintenance and repair work Supervise executed work by contractors

21 TNO report R Categories Time Effort Transferability 3= Administration Preparing masters standing orders Maintaining/filling in Night Order Book Complete port entry/clearance documentation (arrival and departure checklists) Maintain all documentation, certification and other paperwork Writing End of Term Report Monitoring documentation of fleet manual Maintaining dock list Sign and check logbooks (e.g., radio logs, cargo record book, oil record book) Filling in logbooks (e.g., radio logs, cargo record book, oil record book) Filling in work order lists Administration of all radio and other communication Administration of safety exercises/safety committee Administration of daily work meetings Administration of ship management meetings Administration of crew lists, certificate lists Dangerous cargo administration Special cargo administration Administration of ship board accounts Ship s total budget administration and reporting to owners Regulate cash advance to avoid deficits Writing conduct reports of all crew members Voyage performance administration and reporting Supervision over all catering and steward matters, incl. monthly reports and requirements Ship s weather and current observations records Order supplies Correcting and keeping up to date charts/pilots/tide tables Overall administration of engine room matters: Keep required records, logs and reports Voyage reports, administration of bunkers consumption etc. Plan, direct and keep records of the maintenance and repair Maintaining logs on all operating machinery while on watch 4= Communication Internal communication with crew members Ship to ship Ship to shore Contact with pilots Communication with port state control, coastguards All required communication with port authority Contact with customs, immigration officers Contact with agent Arrival/departure/canal transit Contact about cargo matters with master Contact with charterers/cargo owners and cargo receivers Communication about discharge plans, loading plans, tank cleaning requirements Routing voyage via shore weather stations ISPS code Bunker suppliers Reporting to the ship owner, regarding the technical installations

22 TNO report R Categories Time Effort Transferability 5= Safety, Security and Training Maintain discipline on board, ensure compliance with company regulations Planning safety/security exercises Organization of safety/security exercises Safety drills and exercises Monitor security system Inspection and maintenance safety equipment Monitor and control safety regulations Monitor and control environmental regulations Organize and manage the provision of medical care on board Review safety practices and conditions in the department and other parts of the ship and recommend improvements Ensure safe working practices Provide on-the-job training and guidance to (other) assistant engineers 6= Navigation 7= Loading & Discharging 8= Maintenance Supervising navigation Supervising the preparation of the passage plan Preparing passage plan Manoeuvring the ship In Command on Bridge during arrival/departure/anchorage/heavy traffic conditions/reduced visibility conditions/difficult passage etc. Analyzing passage (Supervision of) loading (Supervision of) discharging (Supervising of) bunkering Cleaning tanks/holds Stability calculations Ballasting/deballasting instructions Ballasting/deballasting operations Maintenance and checking of cargo reefer containers Shifting hatches Supervising/controlling maintenance and repairs Supervising/controlling maintenance and repair when in dry dock or in yard Organization and execution of maintenance on ship Execution of technical/er maintenance Cleaning ER spaces Maintenance deck on chief engineer orders Maintain required formal equipment and spare inventories Control/order supply bunkers Control/order supplies and spare parts Start up and shut down main propulsion and auxiliary machinery, including associated systems Operate main and auxiliary machinery and associated control systems Operate, monitor and evaluate engine performance and capacity Operate pumping systems and associated control systems Perform or prepare specifications and estimates for major system modifications and overhauls Fabrication and repair operations

23 TNO report R Categories Time Effort Transferability 9= Watchkeeping Bridge watchkeeping (at sea) Bridge watches to release other officers/master Watch in engine-room on arrival/departure Watch in engine-room at sea when required Engine room duty (in port) Duty on deck during cargo operations Responsible for the operation of all engine room machinery while on duty and complete any routine service, minor repair work and adjustments that are necessary during the watch 10= Offduty activities Sleeping Resting, but not sleeping Personal care (e.g. taking a shower, eating) Exercising Low-effort activities (e.g. reading a novel, listening to music, watching TV) Social activities (e.g. making a phone call to spouse, socializing with colleagues) Shore leave NB: Note that watchkeeping includes watchkeeping activities at sea and in port as well. When watchkeeping activities are combined with activities like navigation and/or loading & discharging, the more active activity (i.e. navigation) is and should be chosen before the passive activity (i.e. watchkeeping). This has consequences for the interpretation of the results regarding watchkeeping Development of list of activities After collecting job descriptions from personnel officers employed by ship owners, these descriptions were analyzed to identify the different tasks on board that the masters, deck- and engineer officers have to fulfill. From this analysis an initial list of activities was created describing the different tasks. However, the results of these initial job descriptions did not appear to be specific enough. To come to a more specific list of activities, the researchers interviewed five experts in the shipping industry. Four maritime experts were also asked to give their written comments to the list and added specific tasks. The final list of activities (see Annex D) was again checked by persons from the shipping industry and by the Sounding board committee. The list of activities was the core supplement of the questionnaire, used to rate their activities. In order do a final check on the clarity, usefulness and user friendliness of the questionnaire and list of activities, a pilot was performed using the crew of one ship, before sending out the questionnaire to other ships Participation by ship owners Our main aim was to send the questionnaires to officers on board of ships within the short sea shipping sector. In order to do this the co-operation was needed from the ship owners. In order to get co-operation from the ship owners an (see Annex C ) was sent to introduce the project and to inform the ship owners about the fact that they would receive an invitation by telephone to participate in this project. The was sent in the Dutch language because our main target group was the Dutch ship owners. Where needed some text was rephrased into English. One week after this the STC-Group started to contact the ship owners by telephone. Information was given to them with regard to the project, and their commit-