# Old R/O Unions



## charles henry

Income tax time and suddenly remembered that in the early nineties I was forced to contribute to the Radio Officers union (British ships).

Forget their name but my question is, am I due a pension from them?

Chas (Pint)(Pint)


----------



## Varley

REOU - and I am sure they had no pension under their own control. You might try suing them for ensuring that there were no more jobs for 'us' post GMDSS.

Pension was provided by MNAOA but in the 1990s maybe not compulsory for non UK ships (not quite the same as non-British) or even UK come to that - Ron's the man to answer this I'm sure.


----------



## Dave Woods

Varley said:


> REOU - and I am sure they had no pension under their own control. You might try suing them for ensuring that there were no more jobs for 'us' post GMDSS.
> 
> Pension was provided by MNAOA but in the 1990s maybe not compulsory for non UK ships (not quite the same as non-British) or even UK come to that - Ron's the man to answer this I'm sure.


Was the pension not the MNOPF


----------



## GBXZ

Charles
Contact the MNPA at www.mnpa.co.uk, you will need to find your membership number (!), you would have received a print-out with your contributions, or it may be in your discharge book. I found the MNPA very professional and helpful.
I only spend 2 years with MIMCO in the late 60's but they are paying me the small pension that I was entitled to.
Good luck
GBXZ


----------



## Ron Stringer

The ROU (Radio Officers' Union) and its development the REOU ((Radio and Electronic Officers' Union), collected subs and supported 500 kHz and did little else. Well, maybe it complained if the 4th mate on some ship had a bigger cabin than the R/O.

The pension provider was the MNOPF (Merchant Navy Officers' Pension Fund). I was a contributor through the 1960s, to about 1968. By that time I had been moved to Chelmsford and my boss and the personnel office assured me (wrongly) that as a member of the shore staff I could not continue in the MNOPF and should leave and transfer to the Marconi Pension Fund. I did as advised.

Many years later I found out that if I had continued in the original MNOPF I would have received about double the pension that I currently enjoy. Seems like the original MNOPF was highly profitable and the benefits were enhanced because relatively few of the members survived to an old age and so did not get the chance to draw their pension. 

Eventually (in the 1970s?) the MNOPF introduced a new scheme which turned out to be far less advantageous to the joining members, resulting in the trustees/admin making attempts to combine the two schemes by transferring assets from the original scheme to the new one - fiercely resisted by older members. There was talk of High Court action to prevent the assimilation, but I didn't keep track of the outcome (I certainly would have done if I had not already left the scheme).

But there will be SN members who can tell you more about that.


----------



## Troppo

Ahhh!

A wonderful topic!

The Aussie R/O union was dominated by the National Civic Council, a right-wing Catholic group that were virulently anti-communist.

They spent more time fighting the left than improving conditions.

Having said that, there were generally pretty good. They were up against some right bastards in shipowners and AWA (the Aussie Marconi equivalent).

We all got a very good redundancy payment or were offered retraining as mates.


----------



## Baulkham Hills

I was a member of the R.O.U. (R.E.O.U.) they fixed me up with a few freelance jobs and when I was on a ship where no wages were being paid for anybody onboard, they liaised with the ITF to blackban the ship until the wages was paid.
The REOU had no leverage with the owners who would have jumped at the idea of an exemption if they got too bolshy. They fought a rearguard action against the removal of R/O's. They lobbied for expanding the R/O role but there were many R/O's who did not want or could not change and they had to look after their interests as well. Most people stayed with Unions because of the legal assistance if something went wrong.
I joined Numast and its successor and it was the same just more impersonal.
The last Numast union meeting I was at was on an P&O ferry where some people were getting excited about an issue to the union organiser. Eventually he said to this group, "are you prepared to withdraw your labour over this" only to be greeted with total silence, he then said he knew what the situation was and would try and negotiate bearing that in mind.


----------



## Victor India Papa

Troppo said:


> Ahhh!
> 
> A wonderful topic!
> 
> The Aussie R/O union was dominated by the National Civic Council, a right-wing Catholic group that were virulently anti-communist.
> 
> They spent more time fighting the left than improving conditions.
> 
> Having said that, there were generally pretty good. They were up against some right bastards in shipowners and AWA (the Aussie Marconi equivalent).
> 
> We all got a very good redundancy payment or were offered retraining as mates.


The union was the Professional Radio & Electronics Institute of Australia (PREIA) and represented OTC Coast Radio, OTC Technical Officers, Marine R/Os, Dept of Civil Aviation technicians & Licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineers, Bureau of Meteorology Met observers and technicians, Radio & TV broadcast technicians and other areas I may have forgotten. 

It seemed to most members that the elected office holders spent 90% of their time fighting left vs right factional battles and it was only when the membership managed to shout above the din of the private battle were they heard and their needs met.

When I took voluntary redundancy from OTC Maritime in 1992 I walked away with a very nice payout. 

The PREIA had succeeded in having written into our award redundancy provisions that gave 5 weeks pay for each year of service up to 4 years, plus 4 weeks pay for each year thereafter to a maximum of 74 weeks pay; 5% of unused sick leave paid out; Long Service Leave paid out pro-rata in full; 4 weeks extra pay in lieu of notice - and all paid at maximum 15% extra shift penalty rates and 74 Saturdays (1.5 x) and 74 Sundays (2 x) pay rates in the 74 weeks pay. We also received 3.5 times what was in our Superannuation fund plus interest.

Because it was all an "eligible termination payment" the payout was only taxed at 15%.


----------



## Ron Stringer

Baulkham Hills said:


> They lobbied for expanding the R/O role...


Not at any IMO or UK Department of Transport (later MSA/MCA) meetings that I ever attended (and there were many over a period of nearly 20 years). Leaving aside the fact that other members used to bet on how quickly the ROU rep at the meeting would fall asleep, he was always a strong opponent of any expansion of the R/O's role on the grounds that it would take the R/O out of the radio room and reduce the effectiveness of the watch on 500kHz.

We were in the business of supplying R/O's to the majority of British shipowners and were trying to add value to our "product" as well as maintaining the demand for their services created by legislation. So, at our cost, we put people on training courses for data-logging systems, electronic diplomas and all sorts of other things (including crane driving) in order that we could maintain and increase the skills and employability of the men that we were supplying. At every step we had to face the opposition of the ROU. 

Early on in the development of the GMDSS (and I attended IMO meetings from the very inception of FGMDSS - the *Future *Global Maritime Distress and Safety System - fore-runner of GMDSS and so named not to scare the horses or the shipowners that were always opposed to change) it was clear that there would be no opening for a purely watch-keeping R/O. So we tried to manipulate the way things were going to create a requirement for an electrical-/electronics-trained officer that would look after all such applications aboard ship. We were not doing this for altruistic reasons - we wanted to preserve our manpower supply business. But if we had been successful I feel that it would also have been beneficial to the shipping industry in general.

That we did not succeed was largely down to the resistance of the R/O unions of the UK and the USA whose opposition and lobbying were quickly seized on by those owners that simply wanted to remove another man from the compulsory manning scales. As the main objectives of the GMDSS were considered more important than the R/O's job, committee chairmen were unwilling to permit progress to be delayed by extended debate on the duties of one man. So whenever votes were taken on whether or not extra duties were added to the R/O's role, the support from those not wanting the man at all plus those that supported the unions in requiring a watch on 500 kHz, completely swamped all proponents of the enhancements.

Having shut off the route to role expansion, the unions found that they had painted themselves into a corner when some time later, and before the GMDSS was adopted, IMO removed the requirement for carriage of 500 kHz. We lost our R/O business *and *paid out the R/O's their redundancy money from the earnings of the rest of our business; the union reps retired on generous pensions and paid out nothing.


----------



## Treborvfr

Ron Stringer said:


> The ROU (Radio Officers' Union) and its development the REOU ((Radio and Electronic Officers' Union), collected subs and supported 500 kHz and did little else. Well, maybe it complained if the 4th mate on some ship had a bigger cabin than the R/O.


They may not have been as effective as some of the more militant unions out there, but I seem to remember them managing to negotiate a pretty good pay rise, well in excess of 30%, in the late 70s to bring the pay of R/Os more in line with other officers onboard. (I was working for BP at the time, I'm pretty sure the pay rise was for all British R/Os and not just a BP deal.)

Bob


----------



## andysk

Treborvfr said:


> They may not have been as effective as some of the more militant unions out there, but I seem to remember them managing to negotiate a pretty good pay rise, well in excess of 30%, in the late 70s to bring the pay of R/Os more in line with other officers onboard. (I was working for BP at the time, I'm pretty sure the pay rise was for all British R/Os and not just a BP deal.)
> 
> Bob


I don't think you will find that had anything to do with the REOU. In B and C we had a similar sort of pay rise,which was not limited to R/O's but was across the board for all grades in the company.

I found the REOU, from the very the few 'reps' I ever saw that is, obstructive and not really interested in the seagoing personnel. One such 'rep' visited Wray Castle when I was on a PMG Conversion to MRGC course who could not answer the questions I and a colleague (from BP as it happens !) put to him about what they actually did, apart from certificate protection, perhaps. All he could do was bluster about us having a 'moral duty' to join.

Later, not long after the course, I had a phone call from the company saying unfortunately I had to join the union, but that they would increase my pay by the subscription (plus the tax liability !) to ensure I wasn't out of pocket by the REOU blackmail !


----------



## Troppo

Ron Stringer said:


> Not at any IMO or UK Department of Transport (later MSA/MCA) meetings that I ever attended (and there were many over a period of nearly 20 years). Leaving aside the fact that other members used to bet on how quickly the ROU rep at the meeting would fall asleep, he was always a strong opponent of any expansion of the R/O's role on the grounds that it would take the R/O out of the radio room and reduce the effectiveness of the watch on 500kHz.
> 
> We were in the business of supplying R/O's to the majority of British shipowners and were trying to add value to our "product" as well as maintaining the demand for their services created by legislation. So, at our cost, we put people on training courses for data-logging systems, electronic diplomas and all sorts of other things (including crane driving) in order that we could maintain and increase the skills and employability of the men that we were supplying. At every step we had to face the opposition of the ROU.
> 
> 
> 
> That we did not succeed was largely down to the resistance of the R/O unions of the UK and the USA whose opposition and lobbying were quickly seized on by those owners that simply wanted to remove another man from the compulsory manning scales. As the main objectives of the GMDSS were considered more important than the R/O's job, committee chairmen were unwilling to permit progress to be delayed by extended debate on the duties of one man. So whenever votes were taken on whether or not extra duties were added to the R/O's role, the support from those not wanting the man at all plus those that supported the unions in requiring a watch on 500 kHz, completely swamped all proponents of the enhancements.
> 
> Having shut off the route to role expansion, the unions found that they had painted themselves into a corner when some time later, and before the GMDSS was adopted, IMO removed the requirement for carriage of 500 kHz.


Fascinating!

Yes, the inability of R/O's to think outside the square and move over to the maintenance role sealed our fate.

There were only a handful of GMDSS 1st Class Radio Electronic Certificates issued in Australia.

They ceased being issued about 10 years ago, alas...


----------



## Varley

Dave Woods said:


> Was the pension not the MNOPF


Of course it was (is - it's paying me now) sorry for the stupid mistake. David V


----------



## trotterdotpom

Troppo: "The Aussie R/O union was dominated by the National Civic Council, a right-wing Catholic group that were virulently anti-communist.

They spent more time fighting the left than improving conditions."

Sounds like you've been talking to "PB"! He got his mailbox blown up because of that kind of talk! I think the National Civic Council folded when Bob Santamaria fell off the perch.

I never could understand all that stuff anyway. The PREIA never did anything for me - everything I ever got was on the coat talis of the other maritime unions.

As far as I'm concerned, all the unions sold Australian seafarers down the river. ROs never had any option of increasing their "maintenance role" - the Australian shipowners decided that Engineer Cadets were "trained in electronics" (of course, they never saw them squirting WD40 into VCRs!) and that was all they needed - that was the reason they got rid of Electricians, even before they dumped us. Presumably they realised that it was just a waiting game for us.

Funny thing is that nowadays there is virtually no Australian shipping industry, but the unions are still there and so are a lot of the Officials who oversaw the collapse.

John T

PS I've never even heard of a "GMDSS 1st Class Radio Electronic Certificate".


----------



## sparkie2182

"the inability of R/O's to think outside the square and move over to the maintenance role sealed our fate"

Virtually the only thing i can recall WAS the maintenance role.

Watchkeeping was just what you did in between.


----------



## Duncan112

As ever you only realise how valuable a person was once they have been dispensed with..

I sailed with two Radio Officers in (I think) P&O who managed to get out of paying the union subs - the first cited religious objections and said that he would give the subs to charity (I believe that was an option) but the charity was his beer fund!! The second simply ignored all the letters insisting that he continued paying his subs until eventually he got a letter saying that as he obviously wasn't employed at sea any more could he please tell them what he was doing as times were hard for Radio Officers and any news of shore side employment would be welcomed.


----------



## Varley

I am sorry to say it but when I was in the recruiters chair (having long thought and acted outside that particular box) I had almost no succesful candidates until we started taking the youngsters directly after their MRGCs. Those of the old stock that were capable were few and were taken up very quickly(perhaps I should say willing rather than capable). Of course the supply of youngesters dried up as soon as GMDSS caused the grant givers to starve colleges of MRGC students. 

I cannot speak of the owning companies with in-house R/Os already who may have had some committment to their further utilisation. We were establishing an in-house environment starting in 1981 where recruitment was largely from RAMAC leavers and free-lancers.

Of course the MRGC was only required when the E/O (ECO/ETO whatever) had to be the communicater as well but, regardless, it did provide some assurances as to a general electrical competence.

So where were the courses providing a suitable marine electrical course (articulating with the end of secondary education and grant supported) after MRGC finished?

Colleges did and still do provide marine electrical courses - mostly aimed at students already seafaring. Most companies expect the education of their joiners to be a done deal - meaning paid for by general taxation and not out of the industry directly (we now pay some service to continued professional development but generally this is not to provide essential underpinning knowledge but'refreshment'. 

We are all aware that any class I or II engine certificate tests the candidate electrically at a level higher than MRGC or the collection of C&G one could have taken to get the AMEC (T4 short of full tec in my case) - when they are forced to practice without an E/O of their own then I am equally sure they will do so adequately. What I am talking of is the humble specialist who wants fill the E/O slot and may want to articulate with a shoreside electrical skill structure or higher education - or, indeed, remain happily seafaring.

This creature - as such I would have been - would seem to have to fork out a lot of his own money to get to the point where he could be entertained as having proven competence to fill that slot reputably.

(My apologies to the exceptions - they are quite big headed enough to know they are, and to the use of 'he' - one of my best ETOs was a young lady. Unfortunately others, in what is called management, made her life far too unpleasant to stay).


----------



## Duncan112

Varley said:


> We are all aware that any class I or II engine certificate tests the candidate electrically at a level higher than MRGC or the collection of C&G one could have taken to get the AMEC (T4 short of full tec in my case) - when they are forced to practice without an E/O of their own then I am equally sure they will do so adequately. What I am talking of is the humble specialist who wants fill the E/O slot and may want to articulate with a shoreside electrical skill structure or higher education - or, indeed, remain happily seafaring.


Yes but unfortunately your average Class I or II Certificate holder's practical experience will be considerably less than the time served E/O and let's face it Engineering at sea is a largely practical occupation, adequate is a polite description of my electrical competence and I could by no means find a problem as fast as a professional E/O and time is money (Especially when the cargo gear is down!!) I regret the loss of experienced professional men at sea, justified by the chorus "You covered it in your ticket, you can do it!!" from management. High Voltage bow thrusters particularly gave me the willies, especially on one ship where there were no interlocks preventing access whilst the system was energised!!


----------



## Treborvfr

andysk said:


> I don't think you will find that had anything to do with the REOU. In B and C we had a similar sort of pay rise,which was not limited to R/O's but was across the board for all grades in the company.


From what I can remember the R/Os got at least 10% more than those in the MNAOA at the time. ISTR having discussions in the bar about it with the Deck and Engine room officers. There again my memory isn't the best!

Bob


----------



## Troppo

Duncan112 said:


> I sailed with two Radio Officers in (I think) P&O who managed to get out of paying the union subs - the first cited religious objections and said that he would give the subs to charity (I believe that was an option) but the charity was his beer fund!! The second simply ignored all the letters insisting that he continued paying his subs until eventually he got a letter saying that as he obviously wasn't employed at sea any more could he please tell them what he was doing as times were hard for Radio Officers and any news of shore side employment would be welcomed.


Both of those bludgers would have been very quickly sorted out in Australia. Turfed down the gangway.

No union ticket, no sail.


----------



## Ron Stringer

Baulkham Hills said:


> Finally I never realized that Marconi was a charity, the few people I met who received redundancy from Marconi complained that they got the very lowest the law allowed.


I worked for Marconi for over 42 years and never, ever, considered that they were a charity! However they were in business (like all other businesses) to make profits for their shareholders - the people that provided the money to create and run the business - and not for the employees. They paid their employees what the market required and where there was national legislation concerning pay (e.g. NMB rates of pay) or redundancy payments, they complied to the letter.

My post was in response to your painting of the ROU as innovators trying to expand the role of the R/O at sea. My experience was so far removed from that picture that I felt I must respond. Marconi tried to create a greater role for the R/O in the form of the Electronics Officer while I was still at sea in the early 1960s. Selected people were sent on courses at manufacturers of various types of automated products then beginning to be fitted in engine rooms and on ships' bridges. They were paid more (and Marconi charged more to the owners of the ships to which they were assigned). That was an achievement on its own since there were no NMB/industry rates for the newly-created post and no carriage requirements. In an industry (in)famous for its reluctance to accept new ideas, especially ones involving pay increases, I have only admiration for those who brought this about.

The ROU's contribution was to lobby the GPO and the BOT to ensure that no work was done outside the radio room within 500 kHz watch-keeping hours. That delayed progress (officially) for several years, although I believe that most of the guys involved (I was not one of them so can't speak personally) took the regs with a pinch of salt and got on with the job. To me it made no sense that the Auto Alarm could be relied on to keep 500 kHz watch for 16 hours a day but not during any of the watch-keeping hours for an H8 ship.

When it eventually became clear that they could not stop the trend, the ROU then put in for much higher pay rates for the Electronic Officers and insisted that any work done outside statutory watch-keeping hours be paid as overtime. The union had contributed nowt, had opposed the creation of the job by others and then wanted to price them out of existence.

When it comes to redundancy payments, as always the Company followed the law to the letter. The money did not come from an amorphous pot of taxpayer's contributions via the Treasury, nor did it come from the union funds. It was provided by the profits generated by those people remaining in work within the Company. The Company, like the union, did not cause the loss of jobs in the British Merchant Navy but, unlike the union, had to fund the people who lost their jobs. That was the law, not charity or philanthropy and I know no one that claims otherwise.

My experience of the ROU as a member, a colleague in negotiations with the authorities and an opponent in management, was of fuddy-duddy general incompetence. Generally they were semi-retired in spirit and spent far more time putting on a face for their members than promoting members' interests. One honourable exception was George Mochrie, an ex-BR ferry man. He made genuine efforts to bring the union to life (not great for me as the man sitting on the other side of the table), gained great popularity amongst the members but generated much opposition within the union hierarchy. After a relatively short time he gave up the struggle as a hopeless cause, resigned and went to work for the Dept. of Transport - poacher turned gamekeeper. Unfortunately he died at a relatively early age.

At no time did I see the ROU/REOU as innovators or job creators. I hope that I have made it clear that Marconi were not knights in shining armour, defending the R/Os against all comers in order to protect their human rights. When they promoted the R/O and his many qualities and sought to further enhance his prospects, it was in the interests of the Marconi Company. But neither were they cloven-hoofed and horned, always trying to rip the guy off. The Company never denied me a penny that I was due. If there was a grey area, the admin would haggle hard - but that was their job- what *they *were paid for. In contrast, I never felt that I was receiving anything of value for my union dues, especially so in later times when I watched the (non-)performance of the union rep at IMO/ITU meetings and conferences in Geneva and elsewhere. At least by that time I was not paying for them.


----------



## charles henry

Have read with amazement the postings that followed my initial question. I feel that like Alice I have inadvertantly entered a strange and difficult land where people talk in code. NOPE MANOP CDE FO .........

Didnt understand a single abbreviation and even if I had I rather doubt if it would have answered my question.

Anyway, thanks for the effort but now I really feel OOOOOOOOOOOOOLD

Chas


----------



## Varley

Duncan112 said:


> Yes but unfortunately your average Class I or II Certificate holder's practical experience
> 
> Duncan, I take that as a compliment. David V


----------



## Varley

Ron Stringer said:


> I worked for Marconi for over 42 years and never, ...
> 
> Ron, agree with everything you have said. Your experience ashore starting much earlier than mine, of course. Pleased to see you giving George the honourable mention.
> 
> Retrospectively I think I could have got the late great David Underwood to accept the prospect of 'if carried' then 'must be Certificated' but still allowing those who did not want E/Os to not have them, unfortunately I was too stupid to think of it at the time and merely followed the line that the UK industry must resist all regulation not also applied to the competition. David V


----------



## andysk

sparkie2182 said:


> ..... "the inability of R/O's to think outside the square and move over to the maintenance role sealed our fate" .....


Wasn't the R/O's, well not all of them anyway, it was the intransigent REOU.


----------



## Naytikos

I would like to thank Ron for his, as ever, lucid and detailed contributions.
As one who generally spent more time fixing things elsewhere than in the radio room I cannot comprehend the tunnel vision described.

I was accosted by an ROU rep. on my visit to MIMCO's East Ham depot when reporting for my first ship. He pushed a form across the table and told me, "sign there". When I asked "why?" he became rather uncomplimentary, and then blew a fuse when I told him I had a fundamental objection to the existence of trade unions at all. In the approx. 18 months I spent under the UK flag I never encountered another such creature; perhaps the word went around.........!


----------



## Shipbuilder

Moving out of the radio room into the greater role of electronic repair and maintenance was not necesarily all that straightforward for some.
I freely admit that modern electronics were well beyond my capabilities by the mid 1970s. I was sent on college courses (MED etc) that meant absolutely nothing to me. I couldn't follow the maths or the theory no matter how hard I tried so in the end gave up and walked out. Anything I could do (and it was quite a lot) was done by experience and common sense, but I was always uneasy about it all. When I was able to take voluntary redundancy in late 1992, it came as a blessed relief and I never regretted leaving (32 years). If I was leaving school now, I wouldn't stand a chance at qualifying in electronics. 
I still dabble in electronic design & construction, but only with valves, and as a hobby. 

Regarding the ROU, I do recall that in the latter part of the Falklands (1983), I was the only one aboard still getting the £6 a day bonus. The mates, engineers, pursers and crew lost it in late 1982! I believe it was the ROU that negotiated it. The rest of them did get it back eventually though!

We can't all be electronics "whizz kids" 

But I did note that towards the end, I was working harder than ever, 8 hours in the radio room and off duty time often spent trying (and often succeeding) to fix equipment that had never worked from the start (new ship), whilst at the same time being told that I was "none-essential personel" and would soon be dispensed with . Thank goodness it was true. Leaving at the age of 48 was like suddenly recovering from a long-standing, non-terminal, illness that I had become accustomed to! 

Bob


----------



## Troppo

I find the hostility towards unions in this thread somewhat puzzling.

If it was not for unions (at least in Oz), we would have been royally screwed over by rapacious shipping companies and the Aussie version of marconi (AWA).

AWA were renowned for all kinds of tricks, like trying to pay you general cargo rates of leave when you had just come off a tanker, etc.

Moreover, the union ensured that we got a decent redundancy payout or the opportunity to retrain as mates when the axe fell.

I was critical of the PREIA in an earlier post, but they were certainly better than no union at all...


----------



## Steven Lamb

Let down twice badly by the Union (REOU) in the late 70's / early 80's over two moderate grievances that they were capable of sorting. From thence on stopped payments & ignored their begging letters. Got sick of reading about their "fancy-dan" lunch meetings with Ship Owners reps in upmarket London restaurants. Thought the money saved could be better spent on my kids feet !

Rgds
Lamby


----------



## Shipbuilder

I could never understand the attitude of "I don't want to be a member of the Union - it is against my principles!" It didn't bother me one bit if anyone took that attitude though. I always felt that it was a bit like insurance - you hoped you would never need it. But if you did get in a scrape involving that involved legal matters that could end in losing your certificate, at least they would foot the legal bills.

It never came to that with me, but I always felt that if it did happen, at least someone would be helping in some way!

Bob


----------



## Shannoner

Shipbuilder said:


> I could never understand the attitude of "I don't want to be a member of the Union - it is against my principles!" It didn't bother me one bit if anyone took that attitude though. I always felt that it was a bit like insurance - you hoped you would never need it. But if you did get in a scrape involving that involved legal matters that could end in losing your certificate, at least they would foot the legal bills.
> 
> It never came to that with me, but I always felt that if it did happen, at least someone would be helping in some way!
> 
> Bob


Spot on, I have been a member of a few unions over the years, over here, in the UK, and in the USA. And in my experience they are all the same. But if the excrement really hits the fan, at least you have someone to stand by you. The insurance analogy is a very good way to describe it.


----------



## ex ro

I cannot believe what I am reading on here I have been a union member for over 40 years REOU, MNAOA, NUMAST and latterlly Nautilus have worked for Marconi been Freelance getting my work through the REOU and directly employed I personally know some of the R/O reps who worked tirelessly to try and safeguard the role of the R/O by doing more and more work both electronics and non electronic outside the Radio Room to no avail . I can still see the gleeful headline of the Telegraph "Its over and out for R/Os " yes we were sold down the river by our own colleagues and by our own shipmates. After the loss of the Radio watch I was employed as a seagoing ETO this was supposed to be a privelege a reward for my hardwork there was only one catch I took a drop in salary of £7k a year and after 12 months was told that employment contracts were to change and that if I wanted to stay I would lose my built up redundancy fund. I fixed a main boiler electrical problem and walked down the gangway never to return to sea after 22 years. The R/O or EO or ETO could easily have been redeployed it was malice on behalf of some shipowners Masters and Superintendents and spineless shipmates who put an end to the R/O who was always good enough to stand up for himself and his shipmates who were often too scared of losing their place in the line for promotion to say too much at meetings regarding pay and conditions, I still remember the whispered instructions to second mates to curtail their leave to attend GMDSS and R/T courses they took their fifty pieces of silver and didnt give a hoot for anyone except themselves. It is a bitterness I will take to my grave.


----------



## Peter Eccleson

The REOU was a great letdown in the mid 70's when the British crew of Cunard Countess went on strike in Barbados in protest over a move to re flag Cunard Countess and Cunard Princess to Bahamas to 'save' QE2 from the same fate. The ships officers were effectively held to ransom by the seafarers union and the REOU took a very unrepresentative view of the situation and of the views of the Radio Officers serving on both of those ships. 
In essence they were dictatorial and told us to 'tow he line' with the NUS 'or else'! 
As others have said - where we hey when GMDSS replaced the R/O. 
Yes, I am all for progress but having completed the MRGC and other marine electronics courses, he demise of he R/O,ETO, Electronics Officer call t what you will was very short sighted.
*The views expressed are personal and not necessarily he views represented. Y the shipowners ... As if you couldn't guess!


----------



## Peter Eccleson

Footnote to above. - Cunard Countess remained UK flag, Cunard Princess transferred to Bahamas - a classic compromise. But guess which ship left he fleet first?


----------



## Troppo

We got a good deal in Australia when they shot the R/O.

Golden handshake or retraining as a mate.

*And *we got this because of the union.


----------



## ex ro

Hi Peter thanks for your posts , firstly the REOU was defunct when GMDSS came in to force we were merged with the MNAOA thence NUMAST and as anyone who was at sea at that time knows it was a period of great flux regarding manning levels and cost cutting, and in my opinion in the UK there was a complete lack of thought or care as the future of the R/O or indeed any seagoing staff who were thrown on the scrapheap, and looking at the crewing of ships today from what I can see the industry has never recovered it has just got worse. 73 ex ro


----------



## sparkie2182

To be honest..........the REOU was defunct when i first joined.

Early 1970's.


----------



## ex ro

The main function of the REOU for me was as an employment agent , as a freelance R/O they were very good at this. Reg White was a legend and any problems with pay bonuses contracts etc., were soon sorted out, I have no complaints abouit them they always had good contracts at the Hull Office.
I think the start of the demise for us was when the REOU merged with the MNAOA the writing was on the wall then unfortunately.
73 ex ro


----------



## Peter Eccleson

Gents, I am sure that as with all organisations, some people have good experiences others bad! 
Speak as you find......and I found the REOU ineffective and a total waste of a contribution.


----------



## BobClay

Have to say I had to call on the REOU twice with problems and both times they came through, in particular with regard to freelancing as mentioned earlier.
Blaming the demise of the RO on the union seems a bit far-fetched to me. Technology moves on, end of story. 
As for qualifications I never received any help from any marine company I worked for, I did both the MED and Full Tech C&G off my own bat, and paid for them myself. Likewise with the OU degrees, (although I did sell out near the end, and let GCHQ pay for the last few credits, but that came with stipulations.)
I too find this anti-union attitude peculiar.


----------



## Varley

I am sure that technology that could do away with an operator was attractive and encouraged the owners' to support the change (although one should not discount entriely CIRM's "Please Mr IMO look what we've done that you can make mandatory". After all the GMDSS kit is still made by the same corporations as served the industry before). 

It was the intractable attitude of 'oppose' instead of 'adapt' that denied those R/Os capable of adaption a job and the MN in general a source of 'electrical types' (who cares what they are called) certificated as to their technical education (which hopefully would then have become more fully relevant). 

As one who was happy, I presume, with a listing in the RadioSpy's catalogue I am not sure what role would have been as fulfilling for you afloat. I did have one refugee from there who did (and does, I think) very well however that he had fled in the first place seems significant.


----------



## charles henry

In Canada in the fifties there were not a lot of deep sea vessels sailing under Canadian flag. I was on one, it was a happy vessel (like the other three of that company.
A fellow named Hall Banks ujnionised Canadian vessels. Immediately all Canadian deep sea ships went under foreign flags..
I should add that prior to that happening without a union canadian merchant seafarers appeared to be amongst the best treated and paid in the world. In general, happy ships to sail on.

I realise the need for unions but only where required. The company that I eventually joined as one of the first empoyees was a happy one. It grew and prospered with all employees being well treated and contented. Over the years there were many attemps to unionise that company, all attemps failed because there was no requirement or need for a union.

I am neither for nor against unions, if I cut my finger I bandage it, if it is not injured I dont need a bandage......

Chas


----------



## trotterdotpom

Yes Chas, but it's not a great idea to wait for the cut before you buy a bandage.

John T


----------



## Troppo

AND you were obviously employed by a good shipping company...who cared about its employees...

Rare...in my experience.


----------



## charles henry

Troppo said:


> AND you were obviously employed by a good shipping company...who cared about its employees...
> 
> Rare...in my experience.


Totally agree with you. Going into the wireless room was like entering a museum, will not go into details and the radar had been purchased when the broke up Noah/s ark. on my first trip I managed to get the radar going. 
I was given a $50 raise to my salary when we returned to Montreal.

Chas (Pint)(Pint)


----------



## Peter Eccleson

Interesting how the REOU 'morphed' into an employment agency for foreign flag. My recollection is that they opposed any FOC (as experienced with 'Cunard Countess). 
The more interesting area and comments are around the demise of the R/O. One would have forecast greater automation and hence more technology on ships thus requiring more skilled staff with electronics experience. 
It was 1983 when I last commissioned a radio station on a merchant ship at Appledore Shipbuilders before finally cutting the link and drifting into military communications but I still fail to understand the logic of the shipowners in respect of the serviceability of onboard electronics!


----------



## Varley

Peter, Perhaps some of it remained "fixable" in real terms when it was first introduced but how much of it did a short time later? What continues to interest me (but, no longer worry me) is that an ever increasing amount of unfixable electronics is now built in to the 'stuff' that keeps the ship operating.

In our day the electonics was compulsory only because of its ability to summons help when the ship was no longer an operating concern. SOLAS concerns itself too much with getting out of the **** and not enough with avoiding it.


----------



## trotterdotpom

Much of the Freelance work offered by the REOU was on British flag ships. Much of the opposition to it was from the MNAOA ... sour grapes because the ROs were finally getting a decent crust, not helped by some ROs bragging about it. In actual fact, the deal wasn't all that good because there was no leave element, everything was built into the salary.

John T


----------



## cajef

I remember the ROU rep. in Liverpool, he appeared to spend all his time in the Marconi depot, when i approached him about going freelance he started to give me all sorts of reasons why I should stay with Marconi, I am sure he was on a kick back from them.


----------



## sparkie2182

You are quoting the wrong man. Andy.

That was one of "Troppo's"


----------



## Ron Stringer

As one of two junior R/Os on my first ship, we sailed from Avonmouth and came back to Southampton one month later. Almost as soon as we docked, the ROU man came aboard to invite me and the other junior to join the union. The Chief R/O said it was not compulsory but very, very advisable. So we both signed.

Never saw another ROU man in the rest of my 6 years at sea in spite of visiting almost every port in the UK.

ps: In Southampton the ROU man had an office with a very attractive secretary/typist who, regrettably, had no interest in junior R/Os - well not this one anyway.


----------



## Moulder

R651400 said:


> The ROU reps I was referring to, if I have the right terminology, were actual sea-going R/O's who may have had some geographical coverage by virtue of the shipping company they were sailing with but that doesn't seem to ring true with my previous reference to one solitary freelance rep.


I believe they were referred to as Honorary Delegates (HDs) and were listed on the back pages of 'Signal'.

(Thumb)


----------



## ex ro

With regards to previous posts there was no logic in the shipowners attitude to electronic servicing of equipment onboard ship the more work the R/O did outside the radio room the less expense there was to the shipowner , but the truth of the matter was that the shipowner often had no idea of just how much work was done onboard (I am referring to class 1 passenger ships) to get rid of a full department onboard ship was an accountants dream , even though we kept extensive records of the work we did there was no interest whatsoever it was a fait accompli carried out with indecent haste by some British and Scandanavian shipowners. 
I remember visiting the last ship i sailed on as R/O to get some paperwork signed or something and I was approached by a very harrased looking new CH.Eng and an electrican(alleged ex RAF battery boy) asking me to help them with the power supply for the 10 cm Radar they had not got a clue, I think you can guess my response


----------



## Varley

The majority of our fellow seafarers considered that it was the E/O who was more valuable. And, let us face it, in terms of graft they were right!

A radar only 'keeps the ship going' as a result of the fashionable concept that ships can never navigate safely without. I am not sure what a 'battery boy' was but if he knew how to safely operate a switchboard or find a simple fault on an alternator rotor then he was also more useful in actuality.

The greatest pity was that we had a better technical education, by certificate, than many (not all) E/Os and we could have been the start of a cadre of certificated E/Os. The ROU and MNAOA (the latter in the unenviable position of representing both streams - the former simply corporately stupid) set their faces firmly against this.

One also has to ask how many of us actually wanted this (far more interesting and valued) role. My experience, from an employers point of view, was "not very many".


----------



## ex ro

Having worked in both Roles ie R/O and ETO i cannot agree with your view , that the EO worked harder than an hardworking R/O, indeed on some ships i sailed on he(the EO) was the only man who had a guranteed 8 hours in his bunk every night !!!!
It is a fact that it is unlawful for a ship to proceed to sea without one working Radar and that the vast majority of R/Os had a certificate of competency in the maintenance of this equipment and that is not a fashionable concept.
As I have said in previous posts I and my colleagues fought tooth and nail to try and keep the R/O in a job taking on all the work that the EOs did not or could not do, so in the end it became a question of keeping the RO or EO and the EO won ._._. ..._._
As an aside i did standbys in the control room safely operated switchboards plugged in fridge trucks , tested steering gear worked on passenger lifts fixed all the bridge gear and engine control systems, changed sewage pumps, and everything else that was asked of me, but the fact was as an ex ro and having cut back from two leccies to one and me sailing as ETO I found that I was working in a very hostile envoirement the engineers quite justifiably resented the fact that they had lost one of their own. It was time to move on


Arte et Labore


----------



## Varley

Come on ex ro, you are trying to kid another one of your own.

George Mochrie (one of the few Union good guys) and I both claim the invention of the term ETO. Poor George is dead and cannot defend his claim!

It was coined to make the distinction between someone 'doing' E/O with a radio ticket (which retained the slot as mandatory) and those that did not. In my case the intention was that the term was to have reverted to E/O once the need for a W/T ticket had gone. Before that there had been the ECO but being paid a 2.5 ring rate when those on a 2 ring rate could do the same thing they were 'priced out' (not that the rate was unfair. A good E/O is always no. 3 in the engine room team but the market is the market).

When I jumped to E/O from ECO it was because there were no more visible positions for the "Compleate Electrician" I didn't much mind what the rank was called but what the job was. I had no unhappy 'cultural' issues, a little ribbing at being a 'Paper Lecky' - but then it was the era when time served was still in the majority and 'Paper Engineers' got the same.

I suppose it is possible that when we were recruiting ETOs from the R/O stock in the early 80s others might have been offering so much more that we saw so few willing and able candidates. Sorry. It wasn't. There were just too few for critical mass. Taking newly qualified guys (and gals!) from college before thay had learned any bad habits was much more hopeful but the end of the W/T certificate dried this stream. Of course the industry COULD have arranged for proper education/training of existing or new entrants but the attitude than was that education was duty of the state and we expected it to be provided out of general taxation (LA Grants etc.). As there was no statutory requirement for electrical certification outside of the senior Engineering tickets this simply wasn't a starter.


----------



## znord737

During my time at Sea (1960/s) I never once saw an ROU Representative visit a vessel that I was on . Having said that as the ROU were the only recognised mouthpiece for RO/s I still paid my subs every month.

At the end of a Voyage I always went to the ROU Office to collect a Rail Voucher.

Certainly for Free Lance work the ROU had their usefullness and contacts within the Shipping Industry as well.

I am not sure what % of the R/O's were actual Members of the ROU but I guess that it may have been extremely low. Hence there was no impetus or very little at all to negotiate for some options especially as the the demise and requirement for R/Os became null and void. 

There was no re-training package either for an ETO or as a Deck Officer . If one wanted to remain at Sea as a Career then you had to fork out the funds for re-training out of your own pocket. 

Very sad in the end as the Marine Industry lost a great number of excellent chaps with a multitude of skills that would be hard to replace.

All in All I believe that the ROU were more of a figurehead for R/O's rather than an effective and strong negotiator's. Thats my personal opinion anyway.

Znord 737


----------



## ex ro

I am sorry Varley I am not trying to kid anyone I was there and I did the jobs and what i am trying to put across is the truth I agree with you that the late Gerge Mochrie was a good union man and I am sorry to hear of his passing. I must say that I find your threads very difficult to understand. 
73 ex ro

Arte et Labore


----------



## trotterdotpom

LOF developed their own version of Electronics Officer (if that is what the term "EO" stands for). R/Os did about 6 months at South Shields studying power electrical stuff, then a year as 2nd Electrician, then completed the Electronics Certificate. Electricians had some sort of extra training to enable them to become Electronics Officers also. I applied to do the course but was too late, it had been cancelled because so many of the people who did it got so well qualified, they disappeared ashore into what they considered better jobs.

I mentioned before on a similar thread, in Australia, Electricians were dumped before the ROs, because the companies decided that the Engineers were trained well enough in electrical subjects and specialist Leckies weren't required. I imagine the ROs remained temporarily because of legislation and the employers knew it was only a waiting game anyway.

Australian ROs were offered re-training as Mates and I was tempted because I enjoyed the sea life, but saw the writing on the wall and took the money instead. A few took up the offer and I hope it worked out well for them, but I suspect a lot of them will be living in cardboard boxes now.

John T


----------



## ex ro

hi john in this topic EO refers to electrician


----------



## Troppo

trotterdotpom said:


> I mentioned before on a similar thread, in Australia, Electricians were dumped before the ROs, because the companies decided that the Engineers were trained well enough in electrical subjects and specialist Leckies weren't required. I imagine the ROs remained temporarily because of legislation and the employers knew it was only a waiting game anyway.
> 
> Australian ROs were offered re-training as Mates and I was tempted because I enjoyed the sea life, but saw the writing on the wall and took the money instead. A few took up the offer and I hope it worked out well for them, but I suspect a lot of them will be living in cardboard boxes now.
> 
> John T



Yes....engineers mucking about with 415V 3 phase....a very good friend of mine (my last Captain) lost his son, who was a 5/E, to this....the poor sod bypassed the interlocks on a pump controller and went across the mains....there is no second chance with 415V...

An ex-R/O friend is old man on rig tenders now. Another one is an old man on tankers.

It was very tempting to retrain, as I was always a frustrated mate - I had the 500 hrs bridge understudy time by then and was doing meal reliefs for the mates...but the golden handshake was just too good for a 31 yo with a young family...

And the reason we got a golden handshake? A strong union.


----------



## trotterdotpom

Troppo: "And the reason we got a golden handshake? A strong union."

Maybe, but it probably had more to do with the other unions .... they were preparing precedents for their own members and they did consolidate into one or two unions shortly after that. I was never that impressed with the PREIA myself. 

John T

PS Sorry to hear about your friend's son.


----------



## Troppo

Indeed - but it demonstrates, beyond doubt, the value of a strong, united industrial stance...

Yes, very sad...


----------



## Varley

ex ro said:


> I am sorry Varley I am not trying to kid anyone I was there and I did the jobs and what i am trying to put across is the truth I agree with you that the late Gerge Mochrie was a good union man and I am sorry to hear of his passing. I must say that I find your threads very difficult to understand.
> 73 ex ro
> 
> Arte et Labore


ex ro. Unfortunately my style (or lack of it) has raised the same complaint from my colleagues wherever I have worked.

All I can add is that the only reason I was not able to have 8 hours in my pit (before I had a proper job) was because the bar was in the way.


----------



## Peter Eccleson

Dave - I note that you haven't changed, despite the passing of many years! I thought the only bar that interested you was Mersey Bar &#55357;&#56835;


----------



## Varley

Peter Eccleson said:


> Dave - I note that you haven't changed, despite the passing of many years! I thought the only bar that interested you was Mersey Bar ��


Peter, That should read bars on the Mersey, or anywhere else for that matter. Smoking ban and the universal introduction of the smell of chips has somewhat tempered my enthusiasm.


----------



## Peter Eccleson

Dave - depends on the quality of the chips! I declare that I prefer the round ones with a certain gambling value. As for the smoking ban - ah well! The lingering smell of pipe tobacco in the local bar has been relegated to the history books. Smoking ban never bothered me as a non smoker but smell of pipe tobacco nostalgic.


----------



## Varley

Peter,

If I'm eating the smell of beer is no distraction. The other way round it is.

Couldn't remember if you smoked or not. Would you believe I am down to one Havana or one fill of the pipe per day - who would call that a habit?

Am tired of waving at every aeroplane that flys over. You'd better be more precise.

David V


----------



## richardwakeley

David,

Have followed the recent posts here with interest, although it's slightly off the ROU thread. I went the same way as you - became Electrician (not ETO) in Jardines after some time as "REO" (assisting electrician), then a trip as 2nd Lekkie. And definitely did not always get 8 hours in my pit on Gantry Crane bulkers.

Richard


----------



## Varley

Richard,

I was going to say that work rarely interrupted sleep because I was good! Then I saw your mention of cranes and realised how unjust that would have been!

A great pity - an opportunity to have a cetificated electrical race (this is no criticism of others) with the advantages that that would have brought the industry and, for the individual, the ability to articulate with suitable alternative industries ashore.

I think it remains on thread as it was the union that was one of the principal objectors - what mandate did they have for that? I cannot say too much here as I don't remember ever trying to put them right. 

David V


----------



## Troppo

The pit (engine room) was the absolute last place I would have wanted to work...


----------



## richardwakeley

Thanks David,

When I first went "down the pit" it was on Mitsui-built Gearbulkers with Mitsui-Paceco cranes and, like you, if I did the maintenance ok they never woke me up. But later, on the Canadian Transport ships - "City of New Westminster" etc, with Tsuji cranes - oh dear! When I go on a gantry crane bulker now for a shore tech job, I never look out of the wheelhouse windows.

Richard


----------

