It seems fashionable nowadays to criticise Class. As several newspapers have put it, to kick them when they are down. But what is the real issue here, is Class a convenient but innocent victim or is there lacking a redundancy to that particular link in the Intertanko ‘Chain of Responsibility’?
If the owner wants an amendment to the specification, the shipyard will charge sufficient to ensure its profit for the entire building deal remains, or becomes, positive.
The ship is classed on delivery as fit for purpose. But is it really fit? Is the engine actually powerful enough to push the ship through a Force 5 headwind? And are the holds actually suitable to load, carry and discharge the cargoes that such a ship would normally carry for the 15 to 20-year life of the ship? Or is the capesize bulker, for example, an ocean greyhound, to be handled with care, as one Class representative recently put it?
Class then acts for the Owner after the ship is delivered. Perhaps a difficult role for an audit body, to act for the supplier before delivery and then for the customer after delivery. Class also acts in many cases for the Flag State, auditing for statutory certification, but is paid by the Owner. Again, a difficult role: Class as the supplier of other services auditing a customer for statutory requirements.
Why has this difficult situation come about? Basically because there was no one else there. And why is Class now finding itself the victim? Perhaps because the role expected of Class has expanded but Class has not changed to fit that role. There has developed a gap between perception and reality as Class takes on more responsibilities, giving the impression of being able to guarantee something that is demanded of it by its customers and the general public. Something that it cannot, or is not yet prepared to, deliver.
It is interesting to see the Flag State of a ship recently detained in Cape Town apologising to the Port State, but it is disappointing to hear Class saying very little, sticking to the line that maintenance is the owners responsibility. It is also interesting to see in the press pictures of the Paris MOU rustbucket of the month, with Class denying that the certificates were valid when the ship was detained but admitting that they were acting in a consultative role for the owner.
And it is also interesting to see the differences in PSC detention statistics for the worst and best Flag States for which the same Class Society has performed the statutory and classification surveys.
This is a problem that the industry must solve. The general public and the industry expect Class to play a certain role in international shipping, and if Class is not prepared to undergo the massive changes necessary to be able to offer the performance required for that role then the industry must find an alternative to fill the gap.
Date: 15 July 2001