Cheeki Rafiki yacht operator cleared over sailor deaths

[lpdsn]

That is not an easy one to answer because there is little agreement about how this sort of damage should be repaired, partly because there is a lack of guidance from the designers and builders, partly because relatively so few have been damaged and partly because each damaged boat has its own peculiar issues. Not sure there is any form of effective post repair structural testing - indeed AFAIK there is no testing of newly built boats. So repairs rely on the repairer assessing what the damage has been and repairing to the original specification.

I know we've discussed this before and have sort of agreed to disagree, but it is only an assumption that most other boats have not been damaged. Cheeki Rafiki survived damage and (possibly incomplete) repair for a number of years before being lost and the damage that caused her loss was not spotted before her loss, and was very likely not to have been spotted by the missed cat 2 interim survey.

A number, how many is a complete guess, could be carrying around damage of a similar or lesser extent without it being detected. CR appears to have had a level of wear and tear and heavy usage that is above that of the vast majority, if not all, of her sisters, so there is no indicator than less heavily used vessels have no hidden damage. In the absence of a reliable and rigorous means of checking boats of a similar construction it's hard to tell whether a similar event will happen in the future. Unfortunately, only time will tell.

 

[Tranona]

I know we've discussed this before and have sort of agreed to disagree, but it is only an assumption that most other boats have not been damaged. Cheeki Rafiki survived damage and (possibly incomplete) repair for a number of years before being lost and the damage that caused her loss was not spotted before her loss, and was very likely not to have been spotted by the missed cat 2 interim survey.

A number, how many is a complete guess, could be carrying around damage of a similar or lesser extent without it being detected. CR appears to have had a level of wear and tear and heavy usage that is above that of the vast majority, if not all, of her sisters, so there is no indicator than less heavily used vessels have no hidden damage. In the absence of a reliable and rigorous means of checking boats of a similar construction it's hard to tell whether a similar event will happen in the future. Unfortunately, only time will tell.

The point is that you can only learn from the ones that have been damaged and repaired and the owners are prepared to share. That is the base on which to draw experience is small - around 15 boats (out of 900 or so) from memory.

 

[lpdsn]

The point is that you can only learn from the ones that have been damaged and repaired and the owners are prepared to share. That is the base on which to draw experience is small - around 15 boats (out of 900 or so) from memory.

True. The big question is how many of the 'undamaged' ones have undetected damage. It would be nice if the builders or designers came up with a reliable test that wasn't cost prohibitive. I do feel there's a bit of an onus on them.

 

[zoidberg]

I, and several others working in the marine industry, am aware that a new Oyster 565 was run very hard onto a granite part of Scotland a few years ago. It was promptly lifted and returned by road to Ipswitch heavily draped in tarpaulins, where 'unspecified repairs' were carried out. The boat was refloated and moved swiftly out of the country to Oyster's Palma base, with a degree of secrecy around her movements.

I wonder who owns her now.

 

[JumbleDuck]

It wasn't work for free. There was pay for work done and free training.

In 2012:

Every September my company takes on a small number of Interns for a 14-month programme. During their time with us they work alongside our Senior Instructors and receive from us £20K to £25k of RYA and MCA qualifications, free of charge.

In answer to your question, that is the total price of all of the RYA, MCA etc. courses if you booked them as a paying customer. It is not an exact figure as different Interns complete a slightly different programme of course (depending on what they have done before and which areas interest them). There is no wage.

In 2013

It's that time of year again! We are now recruiting for the 2013 Internship Programme, which commences in September.

[Details deleted]

The programme costs £485 to join and there after all training is included. A full set of wet weather gear and other clothing is included in the course fee.

 

[Simondjuk]

In 2012:





In 2013

You've very successfully unmade your own point. Way above minimum wage in terms of the consideration provided and allowed a lot of people to get into an area they wouldn't have had the opportunity to otherwise.

 

[JumbleDuck]

You've very successfully unmade your own point. Way above minimum wage in terms of the consideration provided and allowed a lot of people to get into an area they wouldn't have had the opportunity to otherwise.

Those excuses are used for all exploitative unpaid internships. A lot more people would be able to get into those areas of work if they were paid for their efforts.

Since the main costs of RYA courses is seatime, which employees would get in the course of their work, the only real benefit was exam fees. Perhaps someone who took of these posts could let us know if they paid tax on £20;+ benefits in kind ...

 

[Sea-Fever]

.... His business is no more. Not Guilty is not the same as innocent......

Well actually, by definition, it is.

 

[Norman_E]

I do not think we should be commenting on any matter relating to the technical issues or Mr. Innes responsibilities as there may yet be civil actions, and no "All Clear" has been given by the moderators.

 

[Simondjuk]

Those excuses are used for all exploitative unpaid internships. A lot more people would be able to get into those areas of work if they were paid for their efforts.

Since the main costs of RYA courses is seatime, which employees would get in the course of their work, the only real benefit was exam fees. Perhaps someone who took of these posts could let us know if they paid tax on £20;+ benefits in kind ...

The Daily Mail would be proud of you for getting 'exploitation' in so quickly. Well done!

Can you please point me toward the positions you imagine exist where people are both being paid a living wage in an unqualified saving job AND simultaneously being trained and qualified to commercially endorsed YMO level for free in addition to that wage?

 

[Simondjuk]

The Daily Mail would be proud of you for getting 'exploitation' in so quickly. Well done!

Can you please point me toward the positions you imagine exist where people are both being paid a living wage in an unqualified saving job AND simultaneously being trained and qualified to commercially endorsed YMO level for free in addition to that wage?

"Saving" should read "sailing" in the above, but if I edit it, the junk forum software will delete it, hence this addendum instead.

 

[Simondjuk]

Not Guilty is not the same as innocent.

So 'innocent until proven guilty' means what then?

 

[Elemental]

I'm not impressed by anyone who tries to exploit the enthusiastic by getting them to work for free. Cheapskate operation all round, it seems.

As the father of someone who was an intern at Stormforce I fail to understand why you're so against someone taking the opportunity to do something that they enjoy whilst gaining professional qualifications. No-one compels interns to take places. Small companies find it easier (possible) to reward in kind rather than in hard cash and I doubt that many would be abl;e to balance the clamour for cheaper courses and provide training and substantial wages.

I'm not going to comment on the company or staff except to say that after my offspring completed his internship, I went on to do my PWC, First Aid and Sea Survival courses with them.

 

[Simondjuk]

As the father of someone who was an intern at Stormforce I fail to understand why you're so against someone taking the opportunity to do something that they enjoy whilst gaining professional qualifications. No-one compels interns to take places. Small companies find it easier (possible) to reward in kind rather than in hard cash and I doubt that many would be abl;e to balance the clamour for cheaper courses and provide training and substantial wages.

I'm not going to comment on the company or staff except to say that after my offspring completed his internship, I went on to do my PWC, First Aid and Sea Survival courses with them.

Ah, but why let the facts get in the way of a good (in 'news' terms) prejudice?

 

[JumbleDuck]

Can you please point me toward the positions you imagine exist where people are both being paid a living wage in an unqualified saving job AND simultaneously being trained and qualified to commercially endorsed YMO level for free in addition to that wage?

I would expect that to be standard practice in any well run company in the field. Can you point to any others which expect their staff to work unpaid for over a year, in exchange for a few RYA exams?

 

[JumbleDuck]

As the father of someone who was an intern at Stormforce I fail to understand why you're so against someone taking the opportunity to do something that they enjoy whilst gaining professional qualifications. No-one compels interns to take places.

I don't blame the interns. I blame the companies which use them as cheap labour, and I wonder how financially sound those companies are if they need to do so.

 

[laika]

As the father of someone who was an intern at Stormforce I fail to understand why you're so against someone taking the opportunity to do something that they enjoy whilst gaining professional qualifications.

I suspect you're looking at this in terms of the benefit to your family alone. Although this argument has been had before, I think Jumbleduck's 2 main points are:
* Unpaid internships are only possible for those with parents who can afford to support them. As these "internships" become commonplace the experience level required for a first paid job in the yachting industry becomes impossibly high for a kid who has to support him or herself. So opportunities for careers in yachting become limited for those from poorer families
* The public purse is being dodged. doug_stormforce was publicly claiming that the reward for the "internship" was £20-£25k worth of courses. Jumbleduck is arguing that that is clearly a benefit in kind. Perhaps Sea_Spray can tell us how much was paid to HMRC on this benefit? This internship wasn't, IIRC, registered as an official apprenticeship which might have made free training untaxable, presumably because those have certain obligations on the employer attached. At the time I recall doug_stormforce saying that it was all within HMRC rules but we never established how it was within the rules.

Is this just thread drift? From the point of view of the original topic yes because that was about the case about Mr. Innes's personal liability and this is only about the company but it perhaps *is* relevant to the (entirely separate) company case: it has been shown that on at least one occasion Stormforce the company's interpretation of a government agency's rules were incorrect. I'm on slightly shaky ground because I can't find the source, but were they not also arguing that coding was not required because the passage was non-commercial and the skipper wasn't working, just doing some sailing in his spare time? I'll edit that out if no-one can find piece which references that argument. All I've found is the defence saying it was "non-commercial".

I think it would be no bad thing if the employment status of those in the yachting industry were more clearly defined so everyone was sure of who has what liabilities and obligations. I'm not arguing for more rules and regulations, just a clear definition of status. Companies interpreting rules as it suits them is probably not a good thing

 

[alant]

As the father of someone who was an intern at Stormforce I fail to understand why you're so against someone taking the opportunity to do something that they enjoy whilst gaining professional qualifications. No-one compels interns to take places. Small companies find it easier (possible) to reward in kind rather than in hard cash and I doubt that many would be abl;e to balance the clamour for cheaper courses and provide training and substantial wages.

I'm not going to comment on the company or staff except to say that after my offspring completed his internship, I went on to do my PWC, First Aid and Sea Survival courses with them.

Isn't that what apprenticeships used to be?

 

[savageseadog]

Isn't that what apprenticeships used to be?

Yes. There's so much politicisation and control over employment these days, bit by bit all the flexibility is being taken away. The Stormforce "apprenticeship" scheme has much to commend it, I wish I'd had the chance when I was younger. The fact that only kids with families that can support them is regrettable but a fact of life. I could never have done anything like that early in life, we had no money. If the Government were to assist in any way people would criticise the Government for subsidising sailing, a luxury pastime for rich people.

 

[alant]

Yes. There's so much politicisation and control over employment these days, bit by bit all the flexibility is being taken away. The Stormforce "apprenticeship" scheme has much to commend it, I wish I'd had the chance when I was younger. The fact that only kids with families that can support them is regrettable but a fact of life. I could never have done anything like that early in life, we had no money. If the Government were to assist in any way people would criticise the Government for subsidising sailing, a luxury pastime for rich people.

We (UK) supply many skills/people to the sailing/marine industry Worldwide, supporting this "luxury pastime for rich people".
It is a valuable industry, which should be supported.