A QMII alumni recently sought my opinion in interpreting the ISM Code with an interesting question. I am sharing my reply in generic terms for the benefit of my blog readers:
Does the ISM Code refer to a policy to Time Out For Safety (TOFS) or Stop Work Authority (SWA)? A reference of the same to the ISM code being implied by the the United States Department of
Justice
A stop work policy basically
requires any crew member on board to self-assess and if he/she feels an
operation is unsafe the crew member can stop it until further investigated and
cleared by the safety officer/TM. Although there is no specific mention
of a stop work policy in the ISM Code, it has its genesis in Clause 1.2.2.1 and
Clause 2.1 of the Code. In interpreting the ISM code implementation from the
company point of view the objectives & functional requirements are squarely
the company responsibility. If a company has any doubts about the
implementation of any policy likely to result in a lapse, it is imperative that
it make policies which clear this doubt.
Clause 2.1 in the tail end carries the sting asking “…how the objectives given in paragraph 1.2 will be achieved”. It is thus, in my opinion, incumbent upon the company to provide a policy on and encourage the stop work policy requirement to ensure the safety of operations and a safe work environment.
Clause 2.1 in the tail end carries the sting asking “…how the objectives given in paragraph 1.2 will be achieved”. It is thus, in my opinion, incumbent upon the company to provide a policy on and encourage the stop work policy requirement to ensure the safety of operations and a safe work environment.
I may add that, in general the ISM Code in itself is brief, flexible
and open to interpretation by the company and Flag State. IMO itself in Resolution
A.1022(26) provides the guidelines on interpreting the Code. These must be read
in conjunction with the code. In the introduction to the Resolution paragraph 3 requires
the Administration to ensure companies amplify on clause 1.2. The
next paragraph requires the “development of a safety culture…” implying
amplifying instructions, as for example TOFS, should be provided by the company.
As companies mature to the
development of the safety culture by welcoming NCs (Non-Conformities) as the
driving factor for Correction and Corrective Action (based on RCA- Root CauseAnalysis), the interpretation of the clause 9.2 of the ISM Code requiring
“measures intended to prevent recurrence” would necessitate the culture which
again encourages the stop work policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment