MERCHANT NAVY - COULD IT BE SUPERMAN'S ALTER EGO'S PROFESSION?

"Do Thou, Whose countenance is turned to all sides, send off our adversaries as if in a ship, to the opposite shore: do Thou convey us in a ship across the sea for our welfare."

                                   - Rig Veda. 1., 97, 7 and 8

The recent few incidents have really inspired me to put my thoughts into this blog. The title of the blog stems from my recent thought process to decide a birthday theme for my son’s 2^nd birthday. I wanted the theme to be Sea or a Sailor, my wife and my daughter, Superman. Then I realized that if Superman’s alter ego Clark Kent, the News Reporter, was found out (fiction), possibly, he could have taken up another alter ego to work as a sailor. Because in ordinary life, a sailor is no less than Superman, multi-tasking most of his time, despite leading a lonely life, greatly misunderstood, works longer hours, gets exploited to the hilt, and well, leads an anonymous life. So much so, that the regular public views us with suspicion.

People do need to realize that a sailor is as much human, possibly more human than all other professions put together.

Look at Capt. Sunil James, who spent good 5 months in a obscure prison, of a country, half of India won’t even have heard of, where India allegedly does not maintain an embassy, in possibly deplorable conditions, as a common thief or worse. It took the loss of his infant son for people to realize that he also has a family back home. If not for the poor showing in the recent elections, our Government and PM would possibly do nothing even after this time. Just because, the media found this story interesting, that such a person is in a remote prison, while his only infant son is no more, and the family refuses to perform last rights, until he is back. Good story for media.

Capt. Prabhat Goyal of Dehradun, who was unfortunate to become a captive on Stolt Valor of the Somali Pirates together with his crew. Not until the family ran from door to door, when a section of the merchant navy joined hands, and media fancied a story in the making, that he was released. Fortunately in about 3 months.

Asphalt Venture, a vessel that was hijacked on 28^th September 2010, 13 returned home, released, while 8 are still held hostages, to my knowledge. Media possibly does not find this interesting enough anymore to take up this issue. Disappointment with Government notwithstanding, media has ignored this as well, and I don’t even hear anymore, if their has been any fresh attempts to liberate these poor souls.

In December 1999, a storm in the Bay of Biscay, a vessel called Erika foundered and broke, before sinking releasing heavy fuel oil into seas. The owner was a Italian, living in London. The ship was registered in Malta, carrying the class of Italian RINA, under a time charter of Total, a French company. The master, an Indian, Capt. Karun Sunder Mathur was put behind bars, and only let go in Feb 2010. The French, still want to extradite him to face trial in a French court.

And so on.

For some reasons, what really makes these events important? They are the faces of people, who have been penalized for actions of theirs and / or inactions of others including the Governments. These also highlight that the people entrapped in these events were as much human, as Ms. Devyani Khobragade, for whom, the current Government has taken up a fight with the Americans, though I feel, this is more to do with trying to shake off the “undecisive” tag and project a strong Government. Unfortunately, the sorry “cattle class” people will fall for this too.

Before, I proceed on, let me give you a glimpse of what the maritime industry in India is / was, the Shloka from Rigveda at the start notwithstanding.

Buddhist Jataka stories wrote about large Indian ships carrying seven hundred people. In the Artha Sastra, Kautilya wrote about the Board of Shipping and the Commissioner of Port who supervised sea traffic. The Harivamsa informs that the first geographical survey of the world was performed during the period of Vaivasvata. The towns, villages and demarcation of agricultural land of that time were charted on maps. Brahmanda Purana provides the best and most detailed description of world map drawn on a flat surface using an accurate scale. Padma Purana says that world maps were prepared and maintained in book form and kept with care and safety in chests.

Surya Siddhanta speaks about construction of wooden globe of earth and marking of horizontal circles, equatorial circles and further divisions. Some Puranas say that the map making had great practical value for the administrative, navigational and military purposes. Hence the method of making them would not be explained in general texts accessible to the public and were ever kept secret. Surya Siddhanta says that the art of cartography is the secret of gods. This being the general thinking at those times, yet, there was one group of people who realized that the maps or the secret texts that contained the geographical surveys will not last a very long time. Only cryptology using words and names would last longer than any.

1795 – British Hydrographic Office established by an Order in Council by George III. The Hydrographer to the Honourable East India Company, Alexander Dalrymple FRS, is appointed as Hydrographer to the Admiralty Board. Does this throw any light of the influence India had on the art of drawing charts?

Professor Max Duncker, author of History of Antiquity, says, that ship-building was known in ancient India about 2000 B.C. It is thus clear that the Indians navigated the ocean from the earliest times, and that they carried on trade on an extensive scale with all the important nations of the whole world.

Testimony to the flourishing condition of the ship-building industry in India is available in the description of the return journey of Alexander from India via the sea route. According to estimates of Ptolemy nearly 2000 vessels which between them accommodated 8000 troops, several thousand horses, and vast quantities of supplies. This vivid description speaks not only of the ready resources and expertise of the Indian craftsmen but also of the tonnage of the seaworthy ships estimated at about 75 tons (or 3000 amphorea) by Pliny. I’m sure, no one thinks, that Alexander asked for ships to sent to India to fetch him back to Greece.

Sir Charles Elliot (1862-1931), British diplomat and colonial administrator, a famous scholar and linguist of Oxford, observed on his book Hinduism and Buddhism observes: 

"This outgrowing of Indian influence, so long continued and so wide in extent, was naturally not the result of any one impulse. At no time can we see in India any passion of discovery, any fever of conquest such as possessed Europe when the New world and the route to the East round the Cape were discovered. India's expansion was slow, generally peaceful and attracted little attention at home.”

Francois Balazar Solvyns (1760-1824) a French maritime painter, wrote a book titled "Les Hindous" (tome troisieme) in 1811. He lived in Calcutta from 1791-1803 and he remarked: 

"In ancient times, the Indians excelled in the art of constructing vessels, and the present Hindus can in this respect still offer models to Europe-so much so that the English, attentive to everything which relates to naval architecture, have borrowed from the Hindus many improvement which they have adopted with success to their own shipping.... The Indian vessels unite elegance and utility and are models of patience and fine workmanship."

Alain Danielou (1907- 1994) son of French aristocracy, author of numerous books on philosophy, religion, history and arts of India has written:

"India's naval dockyards, which belonged to the state, were famous throughout history. The sailors were paid by the state, and the admiral of the fleet hired the ships and crew to tradesmen for transporting goods and passengers. When the British annexed the country much later on, they utilized the Indian dockyards - which were much better organized then those in the West - to build most of the ships for the British navy, for as long as ships were made of wood."

In the days of the sailing ships and oaken vessels, the naval engineering of the India was efficient and advanced enough to be drawn upon with confidence for European shipping. At Madapollum, for example, on the Madras coast, many English merchants used to have their vessels yearly built. The Indian ship architects could ingeniously perform all sorts of iron works, e. g., spikes, bolts, anchors, etc. "Very expert master-builders there are several here," says the English traveler, Thomas Bowrey in his Geographical Account of Countries Round the Bay of Bengal (1669-1675); "they build very well, and launch with as much discretion as I have seen in any part of the world. They have an excellent way of making shrouds, stays, or any other riggings for ship."

India became the first power to defeat a European power in a naval battle - The Battle of Colachel in 1742 CE.

A dramatic and virtually unknown past, in an area of bucolic calm surrounded by spectacular hills: that is Colachel, a name that should be better known to us. For this is where, in 1741, an extraordinary event took place -- the Battle of Colachel. For the first, and perhaps the only time in Indian history, an Indian kingdom defeated a European naval force. The ruler of Travancore, Marthanda Varma, routed an invading Dutch fleet; the Dutch commander, Delannoy, joined the Travancore army and served for decades; the Dutch never recovered from this debacle and were never again a colonial threat to India. 

The Battle of Colachel in 1742 CE,  where Marthanda Varma of Travancore crushed a Dutch expeditionary fleet near Kanyakumari. The defeat was so total that the Dutch captain, Delannoy, joined the Travancore forces and served loyally for 35 years--and his tomb is still in a coastal fort there. So it wasn't the Japanese in the Yellow Sea in 1905 under Admiral Tojo who were the first Asian power to defeat a European power in a naval battle--it was little Travancore. The Portuguese and the Dutch were trying to gain political power in India at that time. Marthanda Varma defeated the Dutch in 1741. He was an able ruler. He established peace in his country - Travancore. It was a remarkable achievement for a small princely state.

Right from the ancient Indus Valley civilizations to the present, where Indian navy is regarded among the finest in the world, the Indian Maritime History has added many chapters and pioneered many nations’ naval quest for adventure and trade.

With astronomers and mathematicians like Aryabhatta who was able to pinpoint exact naval routes to enable naval trade between India and nations like China and with the help of visionary kingdom like the Cholas and the Mauryas, actual Indian Maritime History did go places in the time where other nations were still trying to find and gain a foothold in the waters. But unfortunately, the Indians do not know this, they are not told of this, they do not realize this.

India has always been a land of visionaries and looking back at some of the poignant Indian Maritime History records, it can be seen that the imagination and insight behind the creation of ships in those days were something that no ship building designer could ever visualize at that time. As a nation which has a very vast coastline, India had very successfully managed to adapt and fully utilize its marine borders for successful voyages across the world and manage to inspire Europeans to visit the nation with its rich and varied culture.

This inadvertent invitation also proved to be a costly mistake and from the time the Europeans managed to colonize India, this is where the Indian Maritime History starts to change and shows the European influence in the Indian culture.

Three European nations had colonized India – the British, the Portuguese and the French. And, even though the Portuguese and the French were curtailed to just colonizing only a limited part of the nation, they nonetheless created their own fleet of naval vessels thus vetoing the Indian naval fleet and adding yet another chapter to the Indian Maritime History. And since the advent of the two wars and the utilization of naval fleet extensively in both the wars, Indian naval fleet underwent yet another bout of revolution and there ended up a new chapter in the Indian Maritime History book.

The Indian rulers weakened with the advent of the European powers. Shipbuilders, however, continued to build ships capable of carrying 800 to 1000 tons. The shipbuilders at the Bombay Dockyard built ships like the HMS Hindostan (1795) and HMS Ceylon (1808), inducted into the Royal Navy. The historical ships made by Indian shipbuilders included HMS Asia (1824) (commanded by Edward Codrington during the Battle of Navarino in 1827), the frigate HMS Cornwallis (1813) (onboard which the Treaty of Nanking was signed in 1842), and the HMS Minden (on which The Star Spangled Banner was composed by Francis Scott Key). David Arnold examines the role of Indian shipbuilders during the British Raj:

Shipbuilding was a well-established craft at numerous points along the Indian coastline long before the arrival of the Europeans and was a significant factor in the high level of Indian maritime activity in the Indian Ocean region....As with cotton textiles, European trade was initially a stimulus to Indian shipbuilding: vessels built in ports like Masulipatam and Surat from Indian hardwoods by local craftsmen were cheaper and tougher than their European counterparts.

It is strange that the world knows of Industrial Revolution starting in England, but does not realize that the British suddenly became smarter only after coming, borrowing, demanding or thieving from India. And to keep this a secret, they destroyed, India, as best as they could.

Wadia oversaw the construction of thirty-five ships, twenty-one of them for the Company. Following his death in 1774, his sons took charge of the shipyard and between them built a further thirty ships over the next sixteen years. The Britannia, a ship of 749 tons launched in 1778, so impressed the Court of Directors when it reached Britain that several new ships were commissioned from Bombay, some of which later passed into the hands of the Royal Navy. In all, between 1736 and 1821, 159 ships of over 100 tons were built at Bombay, including 15 of over 1,000 tons. Ships constructed at Bombay in its heyday were said to be ‘vastly superior to anything built anywhere else in the world’.

Indian built ships continued to occupy an unequalled position down to the 19th century. In 1819, for instance, we get a revealing instance quoted by C.R. Low in his two-volume “History of the Indian Navy” : “Of the strength and superiority of the Bombay built ships, an unimpeachable witness, the First Lieutenant of one of them, the Salsette frigate, bears testimony in his letter to the builder, Jamshedji Bomanji. In his letter he points out that the Salsette with five other war vessels and twelve merchanmen was beset by ice in the Baltic Sea – the Salsette alone escaped shipwreck and saved all lives”.

This reputation was maintained for a generation more. The colourful history of the “Tweed” is perhaps the swan-song of Indian shipping. One of the most famous ships in the Indian Ocean, she was a creation of the Wadias. She began her career as a steam frigate in the old East India Company’s navy. She was one of the two frigates built in Bombay in 1852-54. As both ships were put into commission during the Crimean War and troops were badly needed to make good losses at Sebastopol, they began their lives as troop-carriers. This was in 1854. The following year both ships took active combatant part in the Persian War. No sooner was this Persian trouble ended, than the two ships were hurried back to take part in the Mutiny. In 1862 both ships were sent to England where it was intended to convert them from paddle to screw steamers. On their arrival in England, the Government changed its mind, and they were sold out of service to John Wallis, one of the best known ship-owners of his time. Her hybrid character – sail-cum-steam – did not appeal to him, so he had her engines removed and her rig improved. With a new figure-head and named anew as “The Tweed” she went to the sea once more, this time as a cable-ship laying the first cable in the Persian Gulf. The cable laying finished, she was converted into a passenger ship. Her remarkable sailing qualities aroused such widespread attention that experts used to copy her sail plan and other details of her design. She earned immortal fame as a record-breaker during her career as a passenger ship. “

But the competitively better built ships in India were proving too much for the British. Enactment of laws restricting trading of non-British built vessels was just one of these results.

In 1800 “Cornwallis”, a frigate of 1363 tons with 50 guns was built in India. It was owing to the agitation in England against Indian ship-building and the taunts which were made about him as being a native that led Jamshedji Wadia of Bombay Dockyard to inscribe the words : “This ship is built by a d—d black fellow, A.D. 1800.” on the keel of the “Cornwallis.”.

Aptly as Gandhiji summed up : “The tragic history of the ruin of the national village industry of cotton manufacture in India is also the history of the ruin of Indian shipping. The rise of Lancashire on the ruin of the chief industry of India almost required the destruction of Indian shipping.”

Indian Seamen distinguished themselves by their bravery in the war of 1914-18. 3427 of them lost their lives as a result of enemy action and 1200 were imprisoned in enemy countries. “The lascar’s sobriety and his calm demeanour in emergency and philosophic endurance of catastrophy were beyond all praise.”(Lord Inchcape). Lascar was a term used by the British for Indian Crew onboard their ships, believed to be derived from the Persian word, Lashkar, meaning an army, a camp or a band of followers.

The political and economic awakening in India during the war years and immediately after them made the people conscious of their complete dependence on foreign shipping and made them anxious to develop Indian mercantile marine. The success of the Scindia Steam Navigation Company helped to crystallize that feeling. It was voiced with growing clarity and firmness in the newly organized Central Legislature.

In pursuance of a Resolution moved by Sir P.S. Sivaswamy Iyer in the Legislative Assembly and adopted by it on the 12^th January, 1922, the Government of India on 3^rd February 1923 appointed the Indian Mercantile Marine Committee with Mr. Headlam, the director of the Royal Indian Marine, as the chairman and the Consulting Naval Architect to the India Office, a representative of British Shipping interests, two representatives of Indian shipping Interests and a member of the Legislative assembly as its members. The committee reported in March 1924. Its report was unanimous except for an important dissenting minute from the representative of the British Interests.

The committee recommended maintenance by the Government of a Training Ship for nautical training of Indian youths. They further recommended compulsory employment of Indians, so trained, as officers by the companies engaged in our coastal trade. A far-reaching scheme for Indianizing the coastal marine in a period of 25 years was also suggested by the Committee. Ship-building was to be revived and encouraged by payment of suitable bounty by the Government.

This report, if implemented, would have gone a long way in resuscitating Indian Sipping. The public however had grave doubts about the recommendations being implemented. “The simple appointment of a committee will never satisfy the Indian public. It always happens that when the recommendations of a committee do not suit the Government no action is taken to enforce such recommendations.” Events proved Mr. Lalji Naranji’s pessimism justified.

The Government took nearly two years to study the various implication of the Report. In 1926 the Commerce member under-scored and emphasised every point of the dissenting minute of Sir Arthur Froom. The commerce member went further and characterise the committee’s scheme for the progressive Indianisation of our coastal marine as savouring of expropriation and flag-discrimination. He played on provincial jealousies by saying: “As the principal Indian shipping company has its headquarters in Bombay, the monies of Burma, Bengal and other provinnces would be drained into Bombay.” With such a speech Sir Charles Innes, the then Commerce member, disposed off the report of the Mercantile Marine Committee.

The training Ship was not set up till 1927. “Unless the Government of India  make it obligatory by statute, as recommended by the mercantile marine committee in their report, on the ships plying on the coast to recruit at least 50 percent of their officers from those who obtain the necessary certificate of competency after undergoing training on the Training Ship, I feel certain that the proposed Training Ship will defeat its own objct.” These words of Mr. Narottam Morarji proved prophetic. The British Companies employed less than 25 of the “Dufferin” cadets. The P&O Company has employed four as against forty employed by the Scindia Steam Navigation Company! Sir Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, Commerce member, admitted in 1936 that “it is correct that a large number of ex-Dufferin cadets have not found employment” and that “it might to some extent, have discouraged youngsters from taking up that career.” Instead of taking steps to remedy this situation, the prospectus of the cadet ship was suitably altered. The provision : “The following Shipping Companies have agreed to accept as apprentices, youths who have completed the course of the Training Ship, and the Government of India consider that the apprentices who gave satisfaction should be able to obtain employment on the ships belonging to these and other companies,” was altered to read as follows :”The Government of India have arranged with the principal shipping companies operating on the coasts of India to grant facilities to Dufferin cadets to proceed to sea “as vacancies occur…” Engagement of apprentices and the employment of officers in after life is, however, dependent on many factors, such as conditions of trade, number of vacancies and “the rules and regulations of each individual company”.” Comment is needless.

While the Cadet Ship idea was thus emasculated, every solicitude was shown towards British shipping. Rs 15,00,000 continued to be paid without any condition to the P&O and BISN companies for mail contracts. In 1934, the Government issued a circular requesting officers entitled to Lee Commission passages, to travel by Empire Ships – thus assuring to the British Lines an annual bounty of Rs 55,00,000 from the Indian tax payer’s money. In 1935, the Government of India addressed a circular to all Provincial Governments directing them to ask Municipalities and other local bodies to import their good and materials by Empire vessels. But the same Government could not ask the shipping companies to employ the Dufferin Cadets!

The claims of Indian Shipping had the honour of being the only industry to be included among Mahatma Gandhi’s Eleven Points epitomising India’s National Demand in 1930.

This above information, I came across through a number of sources, including a book, which I read, while I had taken admission in Delhi College of Engineering. The book was written by Mr. Asoka Mehta in October 24, 1940, but had no opportunity to revise the manuscript, as he was arrested and imprisoned, in the Satyagraha movement, before he could see the book through the press.

What got me inspired enough to join Merchant Navy is still a riddle to me, and choosing T.S. Rajendra, the same year the batch started with T.S. Chanakya, over DMET (MERI) was definitely not difficult to me. I wanted to associate with a history.

In 2003, I too could have left the merchant marine, as by good / bad luck, I had to face a question regarding my own future. But I decided, that pursuing an education outside what I’ve spent 10 years of my life in, was not worth it. I would rather want to continue in it, then outside it.

In the overall context of the seafarer in port, the only thing often highlighted to form a poorly formed “public opinion” (a term I read in my class 9^th Civics), though offers grudging respect to them, but does not hesitate to highlight in the same breadth of the drinking dens and brothels.

Why is it that the industry has never bothered to change this perception positively?

Why is it they have never tried to carry forward the work of rejuvenating India in the maritime sector, the effort that possibly never came to the fore fronts after independence?

The present problem of Indian Shipping, manpower, Ship building, in my opinion can be solved by doing at least some or all of the following :

1)         Form a better public opinion – we need a strong presence to do this, to be able to be seen as normal people.

2)         The industry, should only bank on people from within. If it remains under the illusion of Government domain, it will serve no purpose.

3)         India should work on developing own tonnage, by opening / allowing more shipyards, relaxing taxation, if required by opening Open registries in Andaman Nicobar, Lakshwadeep Islands etc.

4)         Indian industry majors, particularly the likes of Tatas, Birlas etc should be approached and encouraged to enter into Shipping WHOLEHEARTEDLY. It may be worthwhile to remind Tatas that they were once a Shipping Company, TATA LINE with four ships in the 1893’s to operate the Japan line to support their Swadeshi Mills, but because of the British approach of preference to British company, they had to close down. I must mention that the Tata NYK arrangement is as old as 1893 formed by Mr. J.N. Tata, then.

5)         Indian Shipbuilding industry needs to be rejuvenated and brought back, modernized where required and expanded to best capabilities.

6)         Research in ship-building, case studies, failures, legal or material should form part of the industry as much as elsewhere.

7)         Ancillary industries, such as engines, pumps manufacturers etc should be promoted.

8)         The Shipping ministry should be headed by a team of professionals, not state actors, who really understand, what it would take to build up the industry.
9)         Establish Admirality or dedicated Maritime Courts in India.

But most important change that needs to be brought about is to change the public opinion. If need be, be aggressively visible. Instead of being defensive about our professions, we need to showcase, what we undergo. We need to make public realize, how important we are to them to deliver them their basic necessities. We need to glorify the profession as one of the best, to make it attractive. Media should be invited, to discuss agenda and put it on the national slate.

MARITIME TRAINING IN INDIA :

Has anyone ever done a root cause analysis of the poor situation of maritime presea / postsea training in India? This is what I found.

A: key stake-holders & drivers :

1)         Government (includes mmd, shipping ministry & imu)

2)         Training institutes and

3)         Shipping companies

B: key-problems :

1)         Government apathy

2)         Mis-governance & short-sightedness

3)         Economy and profit driving the training institutes, not standards

4)         Unavailability of good faculty

5)         Lack of transparency in placements

6)         Poorly trained candidates being churned out

7)         Attitudes of trainees reported to be bad

8)         Lack of owning up the trainees by shipping companies

9)         Trainees are viewed as feeder man-power rather than future masters / chief engineers as well as seamen.

C: what is being talked about, needs to be done :

1)         Reduction of training facilities

2)         Reduction in number of trainees

3)         Enhance training efforts

HOW?

NO CONCRETE ANSWERS FOR “C”.

For C1, A1 has no will, A2 has no intention and A3 are least bothered, since they are not responsible.

For C2, A1 can only frame policies, A2 has no will and A3 are detached, the lesser the merrier, but its anyways not their concern

For C3, A1, A2, A3 talk of this, but it is like one of the numerous committees formed by government, where the committee members also make money and pass time. So do we. No concrete proposals.

RESULT :

BAD REPUTATION.

What is also missing :

1)         A standard in maritime training in india. No institute has managed this to be that standard, like IITs for engineering & IIMs for management.

2)         A maritime training body represented by the stake-holders, like erstwhile mmert (not sure if it still exists).

PROPOSAL :

1)         Lets not talk of reducing intakes or manning institutes. We all agree that there is, and will be a shortage of able / quality manpower for shipping in future. So this should be the last thing to do or be considered. Besides, shoddy institutes will shut down themselves, if a standard practice for maritime training is developed in India.

So, including all the stake holders, and identifying, nearly all the key problems, what can be done about C3, namely to enhance training efforts, my 11 pointers as follows.

1)         A maritime training body should be formed or made effective, if it exists(?)

2)         Every institute should have a documentary evidence, that the trainees being passed out from their institutes would be absorbed by some shipping companies. Understand, this already exists.

3)         In order to comply with 2 above, the shipping companies giving such undertaking should also appoint at least one faculty member for each 10 cadets they undertake to employ from their own company.

4)         The development of cadets will be the responsibility of this faculty member. [this will ensure that the shipping companies have an actual say in the training & development of candidates, and if they complain that the trainees are bad, they need to look no further then changing their faculty member, as they are responsible to shape them]

5)         Every company to have the right to use the training institute facilities for carrying out short term, value added training of their officers, as available, any basic charges could be set-up / agreed between the company and the institute during providing undertaking stage. [this will ensure, poorly equipped institutes do not get undertakings, and also provides a value to the shipping companies]

6)         IMU should only limit itself to maritime training guidelines, which should be broad, but not necessarily minimum standards. Grading of institutes to be conducted on these guidelines. Actual running of the institutes should be a look-out of the institutes and the maritime training body comprising of the stake holders.

7)         Indian navy officers have been accepted to join merchant navy, after a period of service in navy. A system of reciprocation should be in place, whereby merchant naval officers / crew should be able to take up jobs with indian navy, coastguard etc. Provided they meet the minimum standards that these institutions set up.

8)         RPSL requirements should be looked at facilitation of recruitment and placement, not as a impeding piece of legislation, so that candidates who may have entered the profession through non-RPSL companies are able to get recognition and are able to undertake examinations, courses etc, if successful in their ventures. It should be looked from the point of view of such candidates who took such risk, when no other avenues were available. Experience and knowledge should be given the weightage, not how it was achieved.

9)         Many amongst the new generation are being reported to leave shipping and find other avenues. This should be looked as a favour done on the profession by them. Who do we think are these people. Aren’t these the people who had the different attitudes, weaknesses that we blame for. Only the strong survived.

10)       Public Opinion towards the profession needs to be changed. Visibility of the human element in this profession should be brought out. Issues affecting shipping should be debated in National forums, with Media coverage. A Ram-Setu story should be first looked at from maritime perspective then religious or political perspective.

11)       Shipping companies should involve Cadets of the relevant institutes in dialogues with their Superintendents, who could visit the campuses to briefly explain the roles they play and invoke the interest into shipping beyond just being treated as a quick way of making money in the short-while. It would be interesting for the cadets to know, what horizons they are entering into, real-time experience, when their ships arrive. Sometimes organize seminars in the campuses as well, using their facilities, for their purpose, however, simultaneously invoking the recruits to think, beyond the Fall-ins, cleanship and Marching drills.

Best regards,

Rajesh