It may seem odd that we’re writing once again about what’s wrong with the Filipino seafarer factory. The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) has, after all, conducted at least four inspections since 2006. The deficiencies in the country’s maritime education and training (MET) set-up should be pretty clear by now. But lest anyone believe that the reforms are working and things are getting better, we list here five oustanding problems:
1. Lack of rational criteria for the evaluation of maritime schools
2. Absence of detailed guidelines for the assessment of seafarers’ competency
3. Lack of in-house maritime expertise on the part of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), which has direct control over ship officer schools
4. Continued over-reliance by the State on private individuals as technical consultants and inspectors
5. Lack of State incentives for MET institutions to improve
These are all practical problems. They have to do with systems and procedures. As such, they can be easily addressed given a fair amount of clear-sightedness and will power on the part of the factory managers.
Much harder to deal with than the procedural issues—and certainly beyond the scope of EMSA inspections—are the corruption that permeates the whole system; the commercialisation of education in general; the Filipino “it-will-do” syndrome; the hunger of many maritime folks for recognition; the oneupmanship prevalent in the manning and training sector; the fervid chasing after money; and the commodification of seafarers.
Let us not despair. There is hope for the Filipino seafarer factory. What is needed, to borrow a line from W.H. Auden’s poem Petition, are “new styles of architecture, a change of heart.” ~Barista Uno
