In this chapter we will discuss the preconditions for good implementation of fatigue management. In the interviews and in the literature, many preconditions are men- tioned. Moreover, it confirms that in every specific sector, i.e. the shipping industry, tailored solutions are needed.
3.6.1 Conditions for a successful implementation of fatigue management in the shipping industry
It is frequently mentioned that more regulation in working hours and shifts is certainly not a solution. There is so much regulation regarding related to fatigue, minimum rest hours, maximum working hours, ISM, voluntary systems. When problems with com- pliance to current regulations and the substantial individual differences in fatigue are taken into account it is doubtful that additional regulations will result in useful behav- ioural changes. Shipping has never been so much regulated as today. The advice is to stimulate a “goal-based” approach instead of adding more regulations. This supports the ideas of fatigue management as a part of a management system.
Implementing a fatigue management system is can only be successful a certain pre- conditions are e met. The implementation of a fatigue management will be confronted by the same difficulties that may arise when implementing any management system. Moreover all the aspects that make it difficult to implement changes in the shipping industry, also have to be dealt with when managing fatigue in a different way.
Still, this is no reason to be negative. In the interviews many reasons are given why implementing a fatigue management system in the shipping industry could be different - and harsher- than in other sectors. But often this is overestimated. It is a rumour that planes are regularly not allowed to take off because of fatigue. For example: in avia- tion, where the developments appear to be much faster when it comes to the prevention of fatigue (Dawson). Actually, a major airline has reported that in the last 18 years, it has happened two times that a plane has to be withdrawn. Also, at sea, there are op- tions to prevent fatigue induced incidents, as long as some preconditions are met. In the interviews a lot of aspects were mentioned that are seen as essential for a good implementation.
Some fatigue programs prescribe countermeasures, but these recommendations (e.g. when to see light, when not to see light) are very difficult to implement on your own. The organization has to provide a supportive environment for the worker, so that the worker can feel encouraged to perhaps change some of their bad habits. Fatigue has also to do with bad habits (watch TV late in the evening, drinking caffeine late in the evening). Interaction between the worker’s effort and organizational support is impor- tant.
Another problem faced in trying to prevent fatigue seems to be the (bureaucratic) cul- ture, everyone is waiting for the regulators. A lot of the shipping companies are just interested in complying with legislation. On the other hand one is aware of the fact that no regulation can, in and of itself, solve this problem and that it is time to do some- thing else. People should be actively involved in their own safety. It is important to give ship-owners and managers etc. tools to handle these issues, especially objective tools, like the computer program). If you want to change something, than you have to have the ship-owners with you, otherwise nothing would change. Therefore you have to give them tools from which they see the benefits.
The general feeling is that best practices are already performed by ship-masters and seafarers who are aware of the problem of fatigue and also are aware about the rules and regulations and comply with these rules. So, if you are aware of the issue and comply with the rules and regulations, fatigue does not need to be a problem anymore. Important is that the ship-master acts as a responsible managers, and that he gives the right to sleep when someone is tired.
To prevent “resistance to change”: you have to provide sufficient education so that the community starts thinking a little bit different. This takes some time. First, every member of the personnel should be involved, and there should be commitment from the management. Both employers and employees need to support the common objec- tives. They need to be educated about fatigue, it’s risks and the best strategies for how to prevent and manage it. Feedback from personnel is essential.
More than anything else, it is genuine commitment from the senior level in the compa- nies backed by adequate education of everybody who is in the program. They have to be convinced that fatigue is a problem to work on.
Finally,the program has to be evaluated and refined/adapted (if necessary) regularly. At last also assertiveness is important. You have to be able to say that you are fatigued. Recognition is one thing. But assertiveness is the second, you have to be able to say, look I have a problem. But if one person cannot do the job because of fatigue, another person will have to do a lot more work. In essence it comes down to the question of what is a safe manning level. You will always need to have sufficient people to cope with these issues.
Summarized, the following aspects are important for a good implementation of a fa- tigue management system:
− The system should be objective and credible in the eye of their users: people have to trust the system.
− The new way of working should be easily approachable and tools should be easy to use (short and simple), preferably by the employees themselves.
− There should be genuine support in the environment, especially management and senior management
− The system should not reflect and possibly overrule bureaucratic culture. − The involved employers and employees should be open for different thinking. − Very important is the integration in existing procedures and culture: Culture eats
strategy for breakfast.
− The program should be monitored, evaluated and refined
As a concluding remark, one can say that commitment, assertiveness and education (especially recognizing signs of fatigue in yourself and your co-workers) together could be the most important factors to start with. Commitment of top management is necessary to decide for structural changes that help fatigue. Therefore employees need to be assertive enough to be open and share moments of fatigue and near –misses. Above this it is important to feel responsible for each other and recognize signs of fa- tigue, together with being able to address it. This could be the beginning of a new way of thinking of fatigue, other than the inflexible regulation of working hours.