Issue 90 • AUTUMN 2015
BLOWOUT
!
s
t
c
e
p
s
o
r
Low in p
High in stre
ss!
65,000 jobs & £2Bn investment lost
RMT APPROVED
APPROVED
V D
ATTENTION
A TENTTIOON
ATT
The
e Specialists in Offshore
Offfshor
fshore Insur
Insurance
ance
ALL
A OFFSHORE
OFFS
WORKERS
LIFE INSURANCE PROVIDED
P
PR
ON STANDARD TERMS –
REGARDLESS
REGARDLESS OF YOUR
YO
Y
OCCUPATION. YOU ARE NO
LONGER
LONGER PENALISED
D FOR WORKING OFFSHORE & NOW
PAY THE SAME RATES
RA
AT
AS ONSHORE OCCUPATIONS.
s
s
s
s
s
7ORLD
7
7ORLDWIDECOVER
LD
D ID DWIDECOVER
!NYO
!NYOCCUPATION
CCUPATION
,IFEIN
,IFEINSURANCE
NSURANCE
#RITICALILLNESSINSURANCE
#RITICA
ALILLNESSINSURANCE
)NCOME0ROTECTIONn
)NCOM
ME0ROTECTIONn
protect
protec
ct income in case o
of
accident
accide
ent or sickness
&RACTURECOVERINSURANCE
s &RACTU
URECOVERINSURANCE
E
LIFE
insurance providers
The UKs largest provider
for the offshore sector
HAVE COVER
C
ALREADY..
ALREADY.....
... LET US
U REVIEW IT
After
Affter bein
being
ng appr
approached
oached b
by
y an
offshore
worker
life
offfshorre w
wor
orrker to
to rreview
eview his lif
fe
e
insurance,
were
increase
insur
rance, w
we
e wer
w
erre able tto
o incr
ease
cover
by
huge
£338,000!
the co
ver b
y a hug
e £338,0
00! He
was
paying
was pa
yin
ng £25 per month ffor
or
£40,000
cover
now
pays
£40,0
00 of co
c
ver and no
w pa
ys the
£378,000
same per month
m
for
for £378,0
00 of
cover.
Contact
co
verr. Cont
tact us for
for a rreview
eview and
how
drastically
improve
see ho
w we
we can dr
rastically
astically impr
ro
ove
your
offshore
life
insurance
cover.
your of
ffshor
fsho
orre lif
fe
e insur
rance
ance co
verr.
NO
occupational loading
Standard premiums for
offshore workers
INCOME
PROTECTION
Image courtesy of the
Professional Diving Academy
&ORANOOBLIGATIONQUOTEORTOREVIEWYOURLIFEINSURANCEPLEASECONTACTUSON
&ORAN
NOOBLIG
GATIONQUOTEO
Q
ORT
t: 001832
1832 734047 e: [email protected]
inf
w: www.candd.uk.com
Cozens & Dean
Financial
F
Services Limited
2 Bridge Street,
Strree Thrapston, Northants, NN14 4JP
Page 3 OGUK Safety report
further highlights SCE issues.
Page 4 Cut costs – or else! Cut
costs – but at what cost?
Page 5 Shell back in court
following North Sea spill.
Statoil may face prosecution
following spill.
Pages 6 & 7 Aviation news.
Pages 8 to 10 The death of a
RMT member.
Page 11 Technip fined
£160,000 for killing ‘Luey’.
Page 12 Pay heed to Jake
Molloy.
Page 13 The photo
‘inopportunity’!
First Minister challenges
Westminster.
Pages 14 & 15 The natives are
restless!
Stay safe
Editor:
Branch Editorial Committee
Production:
RMT Publications
Administration:
OILC Branch
Letters to the Editor:
Blowout wants to hear from its
readers and all comments are
welcome, member or not. Letters
must include writer’s signature and
address. Letters may be shortened.
Names will be witheld at writer’s
request.
Published by:
RMT 106 Crown Street,
Aberdeen, AB11 6HJ.
Tel: 01224 210118,
Fax: 01224 210095,
E-mail: [email protected]
Colleagues, the situation we face today
has been described as everything from a
slump to a 'period of change' to the most
coordinated attack on workers terms and
conditions in a generation! Whatever your
view, I've been around this industry for
almost 35-years and I have NEVER
encountered anything like it. I spent half
that time offshore and I know the pain of
redundancy, I was one of thousands
dumped in the 1986 downturn. With a
young family, my daughter was only
weeks old, it was devastating to join the
dole queue.
I did get back, but on significantly
reduced rates and in an environment
where you kept your head down for fear
of being run-off, or NRB'd. As well as the
culture of fear it was a ‘them and us’
world where contract workers were second
class citizens when it came to pay and
conditions. It was a bloody awful time,
the casualty and fatality rate reflected that.
But then something happened which was
to change all that; the Piper Alpha
platform blew apart killing 167 workers
in 1988.
Page 16 Offshore for three –
Fait accompli!
Page 17 Zero hours contracts –
Is this the future offshore?
Pages 18 & 19 Meaningful
consultation – What's meant to
happen!
Page 20 A decade of
discontent – our future under a
Tory government.
Page 21 State sponsored
blacklisting – our future under
a Tory government.
Page 22 Shell abandon Arctic
drilling programme.
Page 23 Environmentalists hail
victory!
Page 24 An industry faces
difficult times.
Pages 25 to 27 Shorts.
Page 28 Letters.
We've said all we have to about that
period, I'm not going over it all again. The
only reason I mention that time, is down
to the similarities I'm seeing today.
Thousands being made redundant and
those who remain living and working in
an environmenI where worker is pitted
against worker in a fight for survival,
while fear underpins everything you do.
During and after the ’86 downturn we
were totally isolated, no trade unions, very
few employment rights, no elected safety
reps, just a bunch of isolated vulnerable
individuals. It's different for you today,
you have rights and protections and you
have people who can assist you. Please use
those rights, if not to resist the attacks on
your terms and conditions then to keep
you and your colleagues safe. Be proactive,
question and challenge, don't let
standards drop. You owe it to yourself and
your colleagues, both the ones who have
gone and those that remain. Let's not wait
for another big ‘event’, let's ensure we
don't have one! Stay safe colleagues and
remember the line; don't let the b******s
grind you down!
Jake Molloy
RMT Regional Organiser
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Page 2 North Sea Crunch.
Visit www.oilc.org
1
C O N T E N T S
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Visit www.oilc.org
2
The North Sea
Crunch
OGUK Financial Report 2015 - Analysis
65,000 jobs and £2 billion of
capital investment have been lost
from the UK oil and gas industry in a
year, according to figures recently
released by Oil & Gas UK.
The latest financial report from the
industry trade group paints an
incredibly depressing picture – not only
of what has already gone – but also in
respect of what’s still yet to go. In fact the
crisis is deep enough to have been given
a label by the respected economic
journal, Financial Times, and apparently
we now find ourselves struggling through
what is known as the ‘North Sea Crunch’.
Research behind the latest report shows
that 15% of UK jobs which rely on the
oil & gas industry have already gone,
falling from 440,000 to 375,000 in just a
year. OGUK estimate that 6,000 jobs
have gone directly from offshore
installations, a further 30,000 have gone
from the offshore support and service
industries and the remainder is made up
from indirect workers that still rely on
income generated from the industry,
such as food suppliers, services and
transport etc.
We would argue that the figure of
6,000 job losses suffered directly on UK
offshore installations is a conservative
one – the figure is probably much higher
than this. The drilling industry alone has
seen thousands go already, and more go
‘down the road’ on a daily basis as rig
contracts come to their end.
On the sidelines of this year’s Offshore
Europe conference in Aberdeen, ‘crisis
talks’ have been held with top oil
industry bosses, HM Treasury mandarins,
and Andy Samuel – the newly appointed
chief executive of the UK Oil & Gas
Authority. One of the proposals being
mooted is ‘unitisation’. This is a
situation where oil companies pool
together their North Sea assets for the
greater good of the industry – as
envisaged by Sir Ian Wood in his
proposal to squeeze as much oil from
the UK sector as possible.
Sharing pipelines, warehouses, subsea
equipment, supply boats and other
facilities are some of the ideas being put
forward where oil
companies could collaborate more
effectively to cut costs together. This is all
very good of course, but doesn’t it make
you wonder why the industry hasn’t been
doing this all along? Would the current
crisis be as deep as it currently is if oil
companies had worked together like this
in the past? Probably not.
More standardisation is also being
called for. Well that’s just fantastic –
because so are we!
We have been calling for common
standards throughout the industry for
donkey’s years now. Everything from the
Permit to Work system, to pay rates, and
terms and conditions of offshore
workers. However bearing in mind the
decades it took to introduce a common
emergency telephone number for all
installations (and even then some
drilling rigs still don’t comply) we
wouldn’t hold your breath to see what
comes out of these latest proposals.
But something has to be done and it
has to be done quickly. As well as the
huge numbers of jobs currently lost, and
about to be lost in the near future, jobs
for the middle and distant future are also
in jeopardy. Capital spending in the UK
offshore sector, which was at £14.8
billion last year, is expected to fall by
between £2 billion and £4 billion each
year from 2015-2017. Cash available to
develop new fields is also expected to
plummet to as little as £3 billion over
the next two years – only a third of the
£10 billion invested on new fields each
year over 2011-2013.
Tax revenues have also taken a
battering with the exchequer expecting to
collect just over £2 billion in tax this year
compared to the peak of £14 billion
collected in 2008-09. Receipts are
forecasted to total just £500 million by
2021. Some might say ‘well that’s poetic
justice’ for successive governments that
have used this industry as a cash cow
and robbed it at every opportunity,
however we sometimes forget that it’s
our money they’re farting around
with. They killed the golden goose for
its last egg then bailed out the City of
London’s arse with it.
Nonetheless, that gives us the right to
continue to lambast their dreadful
mismanagement of this nation’s vital
resource; shame on all of them.
According to the OGUK Financial
Report, the industry will manage to
reduce the cost of producing a barrel of
Brent crude from the current cost of
£17.80 to about £15 by the end of next
year - after slashing 22%, or £2.1 billion,
from UK offshore operating costs. By its
own admission much of this saving has
been generated by sacking workers and
reducing the wages of those that are left
in the industry whilst asking more of
them.
It’s interesting that the workforce has
always had the; ‘it costs too much to
produce in the North Sea’ line - stuffed in
its face, yet it now transpires that much
more could have been done by big oil in
the past to reduce the production costs
of today if they had collaborated more
together.
If only JR Ewing & Cliff Barnes shared
the odd pipe yard in Aberdeen or a
subsea tree in the past we may have been
better placed to mitigate the
consequences of the current crisis.
All the same, it’s our jobs and terms
and conditions being attacked, and that
gives us the right to continue to lambast
their dreadful mismanagement also;
shame on all of them too.
T
he annual safety report released in July by OGUK also
reveals a depressing picture in terms of how Safety
Critical Element (SCE) maintenance is being managed on
UK offshore installations. The report highlights the backlog of
man hours required to complete the maintenance has grown
year on year since reporting began in 2009.
Another issue of concern to us is the manner in which data
relating to SCE maintenance is collected. Companies contribute
to the KPI-3 scheme on a voluntary basis. The Step Change
Asset Integrity Group has voiced concerns with the diminishing
level of participation in the scheme over the last few years. In
light of the lack of co-operation from operators the situation
may well be worse than is currently thought, and highlights
further that, when it comes to safety, voluntary arrangements
do not work with offshore companies.
OGUK have stated that work is currently being undertaken to
validate the accuracy of the data and to encourage all operators
to participate in the voluntary reporting scheme to give the best
reflection of how, as an industry, safety-critical maintenance is
being managed.
Level
Visit www.oilc.org
OGUK safety report further
highlights SCE issues
3
Although greatly played down by OGUK, we also have
concerns with the number of level 3 non-compliances found
offshore during the verification process by an independent
competent person (ICP). The job of the ICP is basically to
check that the performance standard of SCE’s is what the duty
holder says it should be as defined in their safety case
submitted to the HSE. Non-compliance findings are ranked as
levels 1, 2 or 3 using common definitions, as laid out in the
table below.
OGUK report that somewhere between 5 and 15 of these
level 3 occurrences were uncovered each quarter throughout
2014, yet the trade body plays down the figures stating, ‘such
findings are relatively rare and the number of Level 3 findings
per installation is so small that the total number across all
participating installations is monitored and reported’.
In our view, any non-compliance that involves multiple
failures of a performance standard, or standards, or presents a
significant threat to the integrity of the installation is
completely unacceptable and much more must be done by the
industry to address the situation on UKCS installations.
Current Definitions – Verification Findings
1
Performance standard satisfied, but an ICP may suggest
an improvement to the system or may request
additional information to demonstrate compliance with
a performance standard.
2
Single performance standard failure with no significant
threat to the installation.
3
Fundamental weakness of the safety-critical element
(SCE) assurance system that:
• involves multiple failures of a performance
standard(s) or
Safety critical maintenance
failings continue
Maersk Oil have been issued two Improvement Notices from the HSE
following an inspection of the FPSO – Gryphon A on 22nd May.
Inspectors found that the company’s system for deferring maintenance
schedules on safety critical elements was inadequate.
Inspectors found that a significant proportion of the maintenance work
orders were not carried out when they were due, and the work was
rescheduled by postponing it – usually for several months.
Maersk’s system was also found to be inadequate in terms of having in
place a formal procedure for deferring safety critical maintenance. There
was no written procedure describing in what circumstance rescheduling
was appropriate, including for safety critical elements, or how the impact
of rescheduling was to be determined, or who was authorised to make
rescheduling decisions. Also, Inspectors could not find any written
evidence that technical authorities/system responsible engineers
participated in the process of extending any pre-scheduled maintenance
orders.
Additionally, no risk assessment had been made taking into account
additional risk factors
that any maintenance
deferrals may introduce,
and no additional
necessary control
measures were
implemented – as is
required by law.
The HSE recently
warned duty holders
that the (all too
prevalent) culture
offshore of deferring
maintenance without taking into account the associated risk would not be
tolerated.
Susan MacKenzie, head of the Hazardous Operations Inspectorate said;
HSE Boss Susan MacKenzie,
“Delaying tactics are not
an acceptable way to
manage risk”
“Operators should continue to identify the key issues for safe operation of their
installations and take action to deal with outstanding maintenance. And I don’t
mean simply re-classifying or deferring the problem and putting it to one side,
“Deferments and other delaying tactics are not an acceptable way to manage
risk in the long or short term”
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
• presents a significant threat to the integrity of the
installation
Visit www.oilc.org
4
Cut costs – or else!
C
ut our bills by at least 20% or we won’t give you any
more business - and make sure the door doesn’t slam
you in the arse on the way out!
Although perhaps not as
succinct as our ‘summing-up’,
that’s basically the message
currently being sent by oil
companies to their service
providers in the UK. Blowout
has seen a number of letters
from some extremely
concerned service companies,
and they all deliver the same
message/threat.
Some of these companies
have already had their profit
margins squeezed below
20% on the back of
previous pressure from the
oil companies – and that
was prior to the oil price
going into free fall!
Inevitably it’s the smallest companies that now find
themselves under the most strain and some fear that the
current demands from the oil giants will drive them out of
business for good. Further delays by the majors in paying their
bills applies further pressure as liquid cash for the payment of
wages and raw materials dries up. The inevitable result is
further lay-offs throughout the wider industry and the wages
of those who remain are cut whilst more labour is demanded
of them.
Meanwhile, the insane profits of the oil giants are sustained
enough to keep their shareholders happy through the troubled
times - and board room butchers get all the fatter for trimming
so much from the bones that supported the business through
the good times. Of course, those insane profits will become
even more crazy when the oil price rebounds again, and it’ll be
cheers all round to the Fatties for a job well
done – along with some more
juicy bonuses.
Make no mistake,
as we’ve said all
along, oil price crash
or not, this has been
a business strategy for
some time in the UK
oil industry and was
only exacerbated by the
publication of Sir Ian
Wood’s report that serves
to maximise profits of oil
companies in the UK
sector. These oil
companies now see the oil
price crash as a perfect
portal to launch their slash
and burn business model and
they feel wholly vindicated in reducing costs with impunity
following years of their own mismanagement when they
splurged cash in order to compete with each other.
As one oil industry commenter recently said; The UK Oil
Industry has done incredibly well – despite itself!
Cut costs – but at what cost?
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
I
t’s not just the small players in the offshore service sector
currently worrying about their very existence, but also the
largest companies. The helicopter operators are as good an
example as any. They’ve also been given ‘the message’ by the oil
giants and this threat is placing further pressure on a sector
already trying to steer itself through turbulent times on the
back of an abysmal safety performance.
Any UK helicopter operator that protests against the demands
will be reminded by their pay masters that a Dutch Helicopter
company currently operates out of Wick airfield, and has been
providing services for the Captain field and drilling rigs on
Chevron contracts for some time now – at a much reduced rate
compared to UK operators.
Concerns regarding these commercial pressures placed upon
the helicopter operators by the oil giants, and specifically how
much impact those pressures have on safety, were highlighted
during the recent investigation into Offshore Helicopter Safety
by the UK government.
A Transport Select Committee heard submissions from
industry stakeholders in the House of Commons throughout
last year. In its conclusion, the Committee was critical of the
Department for Transport and the aviation regulator noting
their “failure to ask searching questions about the wider commercial
culture in the North Sea operating environment, particularly
concerning the pressures on operators and their contractual
obligations to customers.”
The Committee ultimately called for deeper investigation
concluding that, “Only a full independent public inquiry will have
the resources and powers adequately to examine those issues”, and
we at RMT continue to support that conclusion.
However, given the fierce opposition to an enquiry mounted
by the oil companies via the OGUK lobby, it came as little
surprise when the Tory led government ‘rubber lugged’ the
Committee’s recommendation.
But that was back then. It’s incredibly worthy to note that; on
the day the recommendation was published by the Transport
Select Committee last June, the price to buy a barrel of the
black stuff was $112.36.
And this is right now. As Blowout goes to press the oil price
continues to flirt with $40 per barrel prices. As a result, UK
helicopter operators (along with all other service providers) are
under even greater pressure from oil companies than they were
then to massively reduce their costs – or risk their contracts
being revoked.
You can dress it up any way you like but safety performance
can only be impacted as a result of this push for a ‘race to the
bottom’, and the contempt being shown by the oil companies
to everyone around them will not be forgotten.
As commercial pressures now reach the cockpits and UK
pilots demonstrate strong support for industrial action, surely
the House of Commons Select Committee is now vindicated in
its call for a public enquiry. An opportunity has also been
missed to ring fence offshore flying from the industry’s
vultures.
S
hell has been prosecuted by the
Department of Energy & Climate
Change (DECC) following an
environmental incident on the Brent
Bravo two years ago.
Senior Managers of the oil giant were
back in Aberdeen Sheriff Court on 1st
July where they were found to be in
breach of the Offshore Petroleum
Activities (Oil Pollution Prevention and
Control) Regulations 2005 for pumping
15 tonnes of diesel oil into the East
Shetland Basin.
The incident took place whilst the
platform was involved in bunkering
operations with a Supply Vessel
alongside during the hours of darkness.
Shell claimed that the bulk transfer
hose was inspected before being put
into operation with only ‘general wear
and tear’ noted, but about an hour after
the transfer had begun the Chief Officer
on the Supply Vessel saw a plume of
discoloration in the surrounding sea indicating a loss of containment from
the system. The operation was
immediately halted and the installation
was made aware of the incident. When
the deck crew began retrieving the hose
back to the platform diesel could clearly
be seen escaping from the transfer hose.
Despite tight environmental control
measures required for offshore
operations, spills of varying volumes
happen regularly and as a result it’s
generally rare for DECC to bring about
a prosecution – they simply wouldn’t
ever get out of the courts. However,
when DECC inspectors visited the
installation following the incident they
inspected the burst transfer hose and
found 2 of its sections to be “bulging
and deformed in places”, with “handsized” areas clearly revealing damage
that would warrant removing the hose
from service.
Prosecutors stated that, “In DECC’s
opinion, the defective areas of hose
could not have been missed had there
been an adequate visual inspection of
the hose prior to the bunkering
operation.”
Although these ‘porkies’ will have
annoyed DECC, it’s more likely that the
company was prosecuted for choosing
to ignore the findings of a DECC
inspection carried out only three
months earlier on the Bravo. Inspectors
were concerned to find bunkering hoses
kinked during their inspection and
ordered Shell to carry out a review and
take appropriate corrective action,
however the company ignored the order
and continued to operate unsafely until
the incident took place.
Prosecutors also argued that concerns
with the bunkering hose arrangement
had been well communicated to Shell
over a period of many years - being first
highlighted by a worker on Bravo back
Visit www.oilc.org
Shell back in court
following North Sea spill
5
in 2004.
The Solicitor Advocate representing
Shell admitted the incident amounted
to a “failing of the company” and better
inspections should have taken place but
added,
“that was not known to the relevant
decision makers within the company”.
How far up the decision making tree
are we talking here? - It might be an
idea for the Bravo nightshift to give Ben
van Beurden a call before passing a
hose to the supply boat in future.
The court was also told that the
company now has its environmental act
together and a number of measures
have been implemented to prevent
recurrence, including investment in a
hose-reel system.
Sheriff Kenneth Stewart fined Shell
£6,650 (a reduction from the maximum
imposable fine of £10,000) for
admitting their guilt early in the case not even an hours wage for Shell CEO Ben
van Beurden, who picked up a juicy salary
of 24 million last year – that’s more than
£17 million!
The company was prosecuted
previously under the Prevention of Oil
Pollution Act 1971 following another
offshore environmental incident in May
2003. The company was infamously
fined a record £900,000 for killing 2
workers, Keith Moncrieff & Sean McCue
on Brent Bravo in September 2003.
The Norwegian state owned oil
company, Statoil, is potentially facing
prosecution following a 250 Barrel spill at
its ageing Statfjord field in the Norwegian
sector of the North Sea.
Norwegian Environmental Group,
Bellona, is threatening to file a police
complaint against the company following
the discharge of crude oil into the
surrounding environment.
The leak, which was discovered on 8th October, is believed to have
come from a flange in a loading hose as crude was being pumped into
the shuttle tanker Hilda Knutsen via the OLS B loading buoy near the
Statfjord A platform.
According to Bellona front man, Frederick Hague, this is the third time
since 2007 that a spill has occurred in the field. Mr Hague said in a
statement that this was ‘a further example that Statoil fails to learn from
its previous mistakes’, before calling again for tighter environmental
controls to be employed by the company.
“This could prove to be an environmental crime for which Statoil
should be fined,” he added.
The environmental group said it was in the process of contacting the
company and relevant authorities to clarify the cause of the incident.
Norway’s Petroleum Safety Authority (PSA), which is the equivalent of
the HSE in the UK, has stated the incident is currently under
investigation.
In 2007 Statoil was fined Nkr25 million (£2 million) following a
massive 27,675 barrel crude oil spill. That incident also took place in
the Statfjord field during a transfer operation during adverse weather to
another tanker, Navion Britannia, which resulted in the rupture of a
loading hose.
The Statfjord field - often compared as Norway’s equivalent to Shell’s
Brent field in the UK sector - is now nearing the end of its life. The field
still holds the record for the highest daily production ever recorded for a
European oil field (outside Russia). An amazing 850,204 barrels (crude
oil plus natural gas liquids) were produced on January 16, 1987.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Statoil may face prosecution following spill
Visit www.oilc.org
6
6 Killed in Bristows helicopter crash –
Offshore Nigeria
“Jay” Wyatt of Oklahoma, U.S., and First Officer Peter Bello, of
Nigeria. The names of the deceased and injured oil workers has
not yet been released and their nationalities are currently
unknown. Many UK workers are employed within the African
offshore drilling sector and a number of those are RMT
members. Our thoughts at this time are with the families and
friends that have suffered loss through this tragedy.
Bristows Helicopters
‘One Mission, One World, One Team’
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Wreckage of the crashed S-76 is gathered for investigation
A Bristows S-76 (C+) helicopter ditched offshore Nigeria on
12th August resulting in six fatalities. Four offshore workers
and both air crew and were killed as a result of the incident,
whilst six of the ten passengers on board managed to survive
the impact and received treatment for their injuries in local
hospitals.
The aircraft is believed to have been completing crew change
operations for Transocean’s ultra-deep-water semi-submersible
drilling rig Sedco Express when it ditched into a lagoon offshore
Lagos whilst making an approach towards Murtala Muhammed
International Airport.
A local who witnessed the ditching told a Nigerian news
channel that a loud noise was heard before the chopper was
seen nose-diving into the water near a bridge that links Lagos
Island to the mainland.
It seems the six surviving oil workers owe their lives, in great
part, to local divers who sped towards the crash site in motor
boats and canoes. Adedayo Hassan, recalled his efforts to the
local press after seeing smoke when the S-76 hit the water;
“We were rushing and it was sinking. People were shouting
for help,” he said.
Upon reaching the scene, he and others dove into the water
and managed to gain entry into the sinking aircraft where they
were able to cut the surviving offshore workers from their
harnesses before pulling them to safety. After arriving with the
injured back onshore, Hassan said he simply ‘flagged down a
taxi’ and delivered the men he rescued to a nearby hospital!
It would seem that the absence of an official rescue effort
initially is more down to the fact that locals happened to be in
the right place at the right time - rather than incompetence on
the part of any of the Nigerian national rescue agencies. In any
event, the locals performed a very effective rescue for some –
and very well done to them!
All Bristow S-76 aircraft operations were suspended following
the incident until an ‘enhanced inspection’ could be carried out
by the company. They announced two days later on 14th
August that operations in the region has been resumed to
normal.
Bristows have named the deceased air crew as Captain Joseph
The ditched Bristows Super Puma being salvaged offshore Nigeria in 2009
Following the recent S-76 crash offshore Nigeria, Captain
Abioye Babatunde of the Nigerian National Association of
Pilots and Engineers told the Associated Press that this was the
‘first time a Bristow chopper has crashed in 50 years of
operations in Nigeria’.
Yet, Blowout knows of at least 2 incidents in recent times
involving Bristows Helicopters in Nigeria that would imply Mr
Babtunde is perhaps, ‘misinformed’.
In December 2009, a Bristows Super Puma was forced to
ditch into the sea offshore Nigeria whilst heading for the
Agbami oil field. Fortunately all 14 passengers and 2 air crew
were quickly scooped from a liferaft by a Norwegian survey
vessel working in the vicinity.
A couple of years previously, a Bristows Training Pilot was
killed when his Bell 214 aircraft crashed into the Eket-Qua
Ibom terminal in Nigeria. He was the only occupant of the
aircraft. Subsequent investigation by the Nigerian authorities
concluded he committed suicide.
We would argue that both of these events ticked the ‘Bristows
Chopper Crashed’ box.
In any event, the most recent tragedy involving a Bristows
aircraft is generating a lot of discussion on professional pilots
forums, such as the PPRuNe (Professional Pilots Rumours
Network). Speculation as to what might be at the root of the
incident will no doubt continue until data recovered from the
black box recorder is analysed and a robust and transparent
investigation is carried by the Nigerian authorities - taking into
account all the factors.
One argument on PPRuNe questions the level of Nigerian
standards compared to those applied o ffshore UK.
Considering the level of risk involved with aviation, surely the
operating standards of a global aviation company would be the
same throughout all of their operations, the world over? Well
at least one pilot with apparent experience commenting on
PPRuNe disagrees, stating;
“I have worked for Bristow in both places and I can tell you
this is a fact. If you took away the common colour scheme and
company name in all the helis (both in Nigeria and the NS)
you definitely would not feel like you were flying for the same
operator. Although Bristow's brochure says One Company One
World, nothing is further from the truth. The way day to day
operations are carried out in Nigeria is nothing like the way
things are done in the NS”
(Ed - We think this pilot is referring to the statement, ‘One
Mission, One World, One Team’).
At the end of the day you can have all the corporate
statements and standards and procedures in the world you like,
but more often than not, it’s adhering to them that seems to be
the issue.
‘Gold’ standard?
outcry following the succession of helicopter incidents, and
moreover the massive increase in offshore aviation fatalities.
Consequently, CAP1145 falls short of the required mark.
Notably, the Commons Select Committee was concerned with
the failure of the CAA to adequately address commercial
pressures placed upon helicopter operators by oil companies
and the ultimate effect that this squeeze has on safety.
The current squeeze being applied by the oil companies upon
their contractors is explored in greater depth in this issue along
with the impact.
Visit www.oilc.org
7
Super Puma returns to Dyce on
one engine
A CHC operated EC225 Puma with 4 passengers and 2 air
crew on board made an emergency landing at Aberdeen Airport
on 4th June. The aircraft was returning to base with only one
of its two engines operational.
The air crew responded to an engine warning light in the
cock pit and as per procedure shut down the engine before
informing Aberdeen tower of the issue and requesting an
emergency landing. The helicopter landed safely with three fire
appliances in attendance.
One of the passengers on board the flight told the offshore
news site, Oil & Gas People, they were returning ashore from
the installation when a change in engine sound was audible in
the cabin due to loss of power. The offshore worker stated,
“The captain gave us as much information as he could while
also dealing with the problem. He advised what he thought
went wrong and that there was a new flight plan that would
involve a priority landing at Aberdeen”
CHC later told Oil & Gas People that the aircraft returned to
service following a full inspection and the incident was
reported to the Helicopter Safety Steering Group as per current
protocol.
Bristows Helicopters boast that they operate to a ‘Gold’
standard in aviation, which is essentially the set of standards
applied in the Norwegian sector, and before the introduction of
CAP1145, was widely acknowledged as more robust than those
in place by other helicopter operators in the UK.
In its submission to government at a recent investigation into
Offshore Helicopter Safety by a House of Commons Select
Committee, the RMT campaigned for this standard to be
applied throughout the UK sector. We submitted that, If this
“gold standard” in inspection, operating procedures, training
and maintenance had been in place throughout the UK sector,
we believe that four out of the five incidents since February
2009 potentially could have been avoided, including the fatal
incidents on 1st April 2009 and 23rd August 2013, which
claimed a total of 20 lives.
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) did go some way towards
raising the bar in the UK with the introduction of CAP1145,
but the over-worked, under-staffed HM dept. was under great
pressure to cobble together an expedient response to a growing
One of the most telling indicators of the slowing activity in
the North Sea is the falling number of offshore workers flying
out of Aberdeen Airport.
Passenger numbers travelling through Dyce by helicopter
between August and September fell by 7,200 according to
figures released recently by Aberdeen airport – equating to a
drop in traffic of 14%.
Aberdeen International Airport managing director Carol
Benzie said, “Domestic and helicopter traffic continues to be
impacted by the lower oil price”.
Along with helicopter traffic, domestic flights are also being
affected. These flights are normally used extensively by
offshore workers who live in parts of England either travelling
to Aberdeen for work offshore or back home again following
their trip.
The Airport MD added however that international passengers
were higher than normal. The airport saw a 0.5% increase in
these passenger numbers which was boosted by the bi-annual
Offshore Europe oil conference.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Helicopter passenger numbers
declining
Visit www.oilc.org
8
The Death of a
T
he 1st April 2009 will be remembered as one of the darkest days in the history of extracting oil and gas from the North
Sea. For on that day there were two fatal incidents which resulted in the untimely deaths of 17 offshore oil industry
workers.
Following extensive media coverage at the time, even those without any direct connection to the industry may well
remember the Bond 85N disaster, when a Super Puma crew change helicopter returning from the BP Miller platform suffered
a catastrophic gear box failure and crashed into the sea off Peterhead killing all 14 passengers and the two air crew on board.
However, much less will be aware of the second fatal incident that took place that day. Just a few hours later, as bodies and
wreckage were being recovered from the 85N crash site a few miles up the coast, another life was tragically lost on the Diving
Support Vessel (DSV), Wellservicer. That life belonged to our fellow RMT member, David Stephenson, or ‘Luey’ as he was
better known by his many friends. It is easy for the memory of Luey to be lost within the sheer magnitude of the 85N
disaster, but we remember him again here as we revisit the circumstances and events which tragically led to his early demise.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
The Wellservicer
The Wellservicer is a multi-purpose DSV owned by Technip UK
Ltd. Her main functions are to provide diving support services
and offshore heavy lift facilities - her ‘bread and butter’ is
essentially installing and maintaining subsea equipment for the
oil industry. She has the capability to operate with up to 18
saturation divers using two independent diving bells and a
capacity to carry 130 personnel at any given time. Luey was a
Rigger with 18 years’ experience and had worked for Technip
on Wellservicer for 6 years. He was 44 years old and had a wife
waiting for him to come home.
The Norwegian Standard
The events that led to Luey’s death can be traced back more
than two years previously. In February 2007 the vessel was
working in Norwegian waters for NorskHydro. An audit of the
ship uncovered an anomaly in her design that placed her at
variance with the required Norwegian standard. Specifically,
this related to the provision of emergency recovery facilities for
her forward diving bell, the Norwegian standard required what
is known as an ‘active cursor assembly’ to be installed.
Wellservicer already had such a system in place for her aft
diving bell but the forward bell had a ‘passive’ system in place.
Active cursors have their own dedicated winch for use in an
emergency. In such a situation, the cursor can attach to the bell
by means of ‘latch hooks’, and carry it aloft in the event of
failure of the bell’s winch system. To achieve this, the bell has
first to be recovered to the moonpool by separate ‘clump wires’.
To meet the standard, extensive modifications would be
required and a temporary measure was installed until
permanent modifications could be completed when the ship
was in dry dock. These modifications were taking place at the
time of the incident.
In March 2009, work on the vessel’s diving bell emergency
recovery system began during a scheduled dry docking period
in Vlissingen, Holland. This included the installation of a new
winch and alterations to the diving bell’s docking cursor and
trolley arrangement.
The Docking Cursor and Trolley
The docking cursor is a large 4 tonne tubular frame with a
shape not dissimilar to a bird cage - but without a base. Its
purpose is to allow the diving bell to pass safely through an
opening in the ship’s hull called the ‘moonpool’ without the
diving bell ever coming into contact with the ship as it pitches
and rolls. The dive bell is run and retrieved to and from the
sea bed by means of two overhead wires. Following a dive, the
bell is winched back to the ship at the surface and as it reaches
the ships keel its top section marries into the docking cursor
and they are latched together by ‘bell locking pins’. The bell
then becomes one with the ship – pitching and rolling in
unison with its movements. The docking cursor is fixed within
a vertical track and trolley arrangement and the cursor is able
to roll up and down these tracks whilst under the control of
the winch above.
Work carried out by a specialist winch modification team
from Micron Eagle and additional Technip personnel
progressed well in dry dock. Significant modifications were
made to the cursor, and the new winch was installed and first
functioned tested on 27th March. Various modifications were
also made to the hydraulic operating controls and electrical
circuitry although the new winch was not yet fully
commissioned.
Aberdeen Bay
On completion of the dry dock operation, Wellservicer arrived
in Aberdeen Bay on 30th March where work on the emergency
recovery system was scheduled to be completed. New cable was
spooled onto the winch drum, and whilst this was ongoing
one of the modification team noted that the brake ram of the
winch did not fully apply when the local winch handle was
released. This was remedied by the winch operator wiggling the
control lever, and highlighted to him that the brakes would
require adjustment as part of the system’s commissioning.
Buoyancy blocks attached to the bell were also removed for
modification. This required Riggers to be working at height
underneath the cursor and it was suspended accordingly by
slings. The modified buoyancy blocks were replaced, and the
new wire was connected to the cursor. The safety slings were
removed from the cursor and the new winch was function
tested by hoisting the cursor up and down several times. This
done, and appearing to be satisfactory, the safety slings were
not re-applied.
On the 1st April with the buoyancy blocks replaced on the
bell, it was noted that they were catching on newly fitted latch
hooks. It was decided they would be altered when the winch
had been fully synchronised. The winch synchronisation was
completed by the Dive Technician Supervisor (DTS) from the
Dive Control Room soon after 17:00 and now the remaining
work on the buoyancy blocks could continue.
The Incident
At about 17:20 the bell was lowered to working height in the
moonpool and the cursor was raised a few feet from the bell to
allow access to the buoyancy blocks. Because hydraulic power
to the winches was not expected to be needed for several hours,
Diagrammatic representation of a passive cursor system
Diagrammatic representation of an active cursor system
it was switched off from the control room and the Hydraulic
Engineers were instructed to finish for the day. Riggers
mounted the top of the bell under the cursor suspended by its
new wire, and unbolted the buoyancy blocks to remove them
for the modification. They noted that the cursor would be
required to be raised further in order to remove the blocks and
pass them onto the deck so the Hydraulic Engineer was called
for again. Power was reapplied to the new winch from the dive
control room and under guidance from the Rigging Foreman,
the Hydraulic Engineer proceeded to lift the cursor. When at
the required height, the foreman indicated to cease lifting. The
team confirmed that the height was suitable for the buoyancy
block removal and hydraulic power was shut down again in the
dive control room. Neither cursor supports nor securing
devices, were applied between the cursor and the trolley.
The DTS left the control room to go down to the hanger deck
after shutting down hydraulic power, and the hydraulic
engineer left the local winch control to return to his cabin.
Luey, being a particularly safety conscious individual, was
already on top of the bell with his inertia reel fall arrester
attached to his safety harness as the cursor was raised. There
was another 6 individuals in the area with 120 years experience
between them, they had all worked together with Luey for a
number of years.
A few seconds later, and without warning, the winch rendered
and the cursor fell uncontrollably. This was seen and heard by
Luey’s shipmates, who screamed at him to get off the bell.
Luey attempted to get clear of the falling cursor but, as he did
so, his inertia reel fall arrester locked in place, preventing any
chance of escape. Ironically, the safety device prevented him
getting to a place of safety and the cursor continued to fall –
only stopping when it had trapped him between it and the
diving bell. The 4 tonne weight severely crushing his upper
torso.
Post Incident
On hearing the winch render (pay out wire), the DTS ran to
the bell hanger. Upon seeing Luey trapped under the cursor he
immediately ran back to the dive control room to activate the
winch, and then hurried on to the mess room, knowing most
of the crew would be assembled there for their evening meal.
The talk in the mess hall that evening was all about the
terrible helicopter incident that had taken place that afternoon.
Due to the close proximity of the Wellservicer to the 85N crash
site, radio traffic relating to the incident would have been heard
on the emergency channel of VHF radios located around the
ship. Those sitting down to their meal were blissfully unaware
that another fatal incident was unfolding in the bell hanger
outside.
The DTS shouted to those assembled in the mess hall that an
accident had taken place in the bell hanger and that a Medic
was needed urgently, before running back to assist. The Master,
who was in the mess room at the time, rushed towards the
bridge and, as he did so, heard a request for a Medic being
made over the vessel’s public address (PA) system. Upon
arriving on the bridge an immediate medevac by helicopter was
requested of the coastguard.
The Hydraulic Engineer had also heard the winch render and
the shouts of his colleagues. He ran back to the local winch
control station, reaching it before power came back on. As
soon as power for the winch was resumed, he lifted the cursor,
and as he did so a seal on the forward winch motor ruptured,
causing oil to spray from the forward end of the winch.
However, this did not prevent the winch from operating. On
Visit www.oilc.org
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
RMT Member
9
Visit www.oilc.org
10
Riggers on top of the bell, under suspended cursor
Rigger working on cursor latch hooks under suspended cursor
Bell top showing GRP buoyancy blocks
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
A few seconds later, and without warning,
the winch rendered and the cursor fell uncontrollably
lifting the cursor, he released the control lever, and the winch
started to veer again. The Hydraulic Engineer immediately
recognised that the winch brakes were not applying on release
of the control handle (as designed) so he raised the cursor
again and held it in place by feathering the power. When the
cursor was lifted clear of Luey, his colleagues rushed to his
assistance and dragged his broken body from the bell top while
the cursor was surging up and down above them. They carried
him to the hanger deck, where first-aid was administered by
the Medic who had quickly arrived on scene.
The Hydraulic Engineer had neither sight of the crisis below
his feet, nor communications from anyone at hanger deck
level. He kept feathering the winch until he saw someone being
carried away on a stretcher. At this point he attempted to bend
down under the winch control console to remove a solenoid
coil, which he hoped would cause the brakes to be applied.
However, as he did so, the ship rolled, causing him to stumble
and accidently release the winch control lever. When this
happened, the brakes applied to the winch and held the cursor
in place.
Within 30 minutes of the accident, Luey was airlifted to
Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, where, soon after 18:45, tragically, he
was pronounced dead.
Following the incident the Rev Andrew Jolly, chaplain to the
North Sea oil and gas industry, paid homage to all the victims who
were killed on 1st April and paid a special tribute to Luey, stating,
“While his death might be overlooked by some as they focus
upon the helicopter tragedy, we must not overlook it because for
his family, for his friends and for his colleagues it is every bit as
painful and sad.
The UK oil and gas industry grieves for those who perished
offshore and for their families.
We cannot begin to imagine the pain and sorrow their loved
ones feel at their loss. But I am sure we would want them to know
that they are not alone and that their loss is our loss too, their
sorrow our sorrow, and because we share that with them, they can
look to us for comfort, love and support.”
We shall continue to remember Luey and all the others who
were tragically taken on that ill-fated day in 2009.
Rest their souls.
•
•
•
The team performing the work did not exercise a reasonable
duty of care by failing to apply the most basic of safety
principles while working under a suspended load.
The winch rendered due to a single point of failure in an
un-commissioned hydraulic system, which prevented the
winch drum brakes from applying, thus allowing the winch
to render under load, and,
The Modification project lacked direction and focus from
inception, and evolved randomly without adequate
supervision from management ashore or on board
Wellservicer during the installation.
A further 27 underlying safety factors were identified in the
investigation report. The MAIB found procedures or safety tools
in place to ensure safe working were either “not applied or
were applied
ineffectively, to the
extent that no one
recognised the risk
posed by the
suspended cursor.”
There was poor
leadership with
disparities existing
between marine and
operational practices
and lines of
responsibility between
the vessel and shorebased staff had become
“confused,”
investigators found,
causing overall
management of the
project to lack
“direction and control.”
Technip’s technical and management of change procedures
were not understood and/or not followed, nor were external
contractors procedures.
In house expertise was not utilised and the correct
commission process was not followed.
Technical failures and design flaws were also identified in the
winch’s hydraulic system.
There was ineffective safety auditing and no permit to work
was in place for the task. Investigators also found a poor
culture in terms of the permit to work system with those issued
previously throughout the project always being signed by the
wrong authority.
A post mortem examination concluded that Luey had died
due to severe crushing injuries and chest asphyxia. Defence
advocate, Gavin Anderson, told the court that Technip sincerely
regretted the fatality and offered condolences to his wife,
friends and family. Mr Anderson informed the court that the
accident had been caused by the failed winch, and the crew
had a ‘misplaced reliance’ on the new winch after apparently
being told by manufacturers it was ‘failsafe’. He also told the
court that the company had since made improvements to its
safety management system and had not had a serious accident
since. This was taken into account by Sheriff, Graham
Buchanan, as he passed sentence.
Following the ruling, a spokeswoman for the company said,
‘Technip accepts it made mistakes, has taken action to remedy
those, and continuously invests in and develops its HSE
practices to ensure it provides a safe place of work“.
MCA Head of enforcement, Jeremy Smart, said,
“This was a tragic incident which should never have
happened and our sympathies go out to the family of Mr
Stephenson.
This incident clearly demonstrates that proper risk
assessments need to be conducted before any operation is
undertaken and the appropriate safety measures put in place.
Safety failings like this are not acceptable in any industry.”
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
T
he Diving
Support
specialist Technip, was fined
£160,000 at Aberdeen
Sheriff Court on 20th
June for negligence
that led to the death
of Rigger, David ‘Luey’
Stephenson, whilst he
was working aboard
the DSV Wellservicer
on 1st April 2009.
The company plead
guilty to failing in their
duty of care under
regulation 5 of the
Merchant Shipping and
Vessel (Health and
Safety at Work)
Regulations 1997.
They did not recognise the significant hazard of riggers
working underneath a 4 tonne load – which was suspended by
a not yet fully commissioned winch, and a suitable and
sufficient risk assessment (taking into account all the factors)
was never carried out.
Had a robust risk assessment taken place, the need for an
additional securing mechanism such as strops or preventer pins
would have been recognised and introduced as an additional
control measure. If those pins had been in place, it’s likely the
load’s descent would have been arrested very soon after it had
begun and the fatal incident would have been avoided.
An extensive investigation was launched following the
incident by the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB),
Grampian Police and the Health and Safety Executive.
A detailed investigation report was released by MAIB four
years later and although the intention of any marine
investigation is to never apportion blame, the Marine
Investigator highlighted a catalogue of errors in the incident
report, specifically there were three significant failures which
investigators concluded that led to the incident;
Visit www.oilc.org
Technip fined £160,000
for killing ‘Luey’
11
Pay heed to
Jake Molloy
Visit www.oilc.org
12
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
I
f you live in NE Scotland you’ll
undoubtedly have seen him on the
telly and anyone who’s been offshore
for half a trip knows his name, but does
David Cameron know who Jake Molloy
is? . . . ”Jack who?”
Perhaps the Prime Minister lauded the
hard work of our Regional Organiser as
he rubbed shoulders with Roustabouts
in the tea shack on BP’s ETAP
installation when he put on a hard hat
(but didn’t bother with safety glasses)
and went on a ‘jolly’ last February in the
run up to the Scottish referendum?
Then again, perhaps not.
Anyhoo. The PM may now be more
familiar with our Regional Organiser, as
government are currently being ‘urged’
to put on their listening lugs by a
Member of the Scottish Parliament and
hear the sense that’s been coming from
Jake for some time now. Following
Jake’s comments in the Aberdeen press
calling for greater government support
to combat the current offshore crisis,
Kevin Stewart – MSP for Aberdeen
Central, has lodged a Parliamentary
motion (S4M-14290) titled:
“UK Government Should Pay Heed to
Jake Molloy”
The motion text calls for, “Parliament
to note the comments of the RMT Regional
Organiser, Jake Molloy, who has said of the
UK Government’s attitude to the oil and
gas sector that, what they need to do is
bring about incentivised tax breaks which
will ensure we maximise recovery, breaks
which will ensure the infrastructure is
maintained as fit for purpose, breaks which
will bring about more exploration”;
Kevin urges the UK Government to,
“pay heed to Mr Molloy’s comments, which
have been echoed by many others involved
in the oil and gas industry;”
His motion concludes,
“Action must be taken to secure jobs and
maximise recovery in the North Sea basin,
and calls on the UK Government to
undertake the work that it considers it
committed to 10 months ago and
immediately begin consultation on
providing fiscal incentives for exploration,
infrastructure and late life assets”
Kevin has also given the offshore
workforce a pledge of his fullest support
. . . Jack Who?
Government are currently being ‘urged’ to put on
their listening lugs by a Member of the Scottish
Parliament
Cameron’s Jolly to the ETAP – without the safety
glasses this time
Kevin Stewart – MSP,
Aberdeen North
in government where he will continue
to do all he can to “lobby, cajole and
fight” in order to bring about these
changes that will secure jobs.
This is exactly the type of
representation in parliament we need
right now - from passionate politicians
who really care. Kevin sees, as we do on
a daily basis, the increasing damage and
suffering that this crisis is doing to UK
offshore workers & their families, as well
as the wider communities they live in.
We wholeheartedly thank Kevin for his
support.
room” about life on BP ETAP’.
pic.twitter.com/18qMXEV2Dz
Don’t Chris and Dave look truly
thrilled by Cameron’s presence? It looks
more like they’ve just been told they’re
doing an extra week and it’s all his
getting back to work.
The Tory PR engine nonetheless posted
the moment on David Cameron’s
official twitter page under the banner
‘Talking to Chris and Dave in the “rec
room” about life on BP ETAP’. Of course,
. . . Dave Who?
doing. In fact Chris looks like he’s about
to knock the PM out! We wouldn’t
advise it Chris – that would be one
helluva disciplinary hearing to defend.
The PR people usually have these
photo opportunities all mapped out and
gleeful Tory supporters are happy to
assist in their droves wherever David
Cameron lands. But as it transpires, your
average punter offshore isn’t really all
that interested by the PM’s presence and
would probably have rather been left in
peace for that last five minutes before
the snap has earned the PM no end of
dog’s abuse from the British public,
some of which is hilarious and can be
viewed on Cameron’s twitter page if
you’re interested.
As an aside; did any of you offshore
workers attend your survival training on the
same course as Mr Cameron? It’s a
mandatory requirement for everyone wishing
to travel offshore by helicopter… right?
(If you were a fellow survivor in the
PM’s liferaft at ‘the RGIT’ – please – no
snaps of Dave in his Speedo’s - thanks)
Scottish Government calls on more
support from Westminster
Nicola Sturgeon addressed the OGUK annual conference this year calling for more
support for the oil industry from David Cameron’s government.
The First Minister demanded that the Tory’s do much more to encourage exploration. She
said that financial incentives such as a new exploration tax credit or an expansion of the
investment allowance is what the industry needs to regenerate jobs in the drilling sector and
secure future oil reserves.
She also didn’t miss the chance of putting the boot in to Westminster following the tax
raids carried out by successive UK governments of the past. She called on George Osborne to,
“make a commitment that there will be no tax increases for the industry for the whole of this
UK Parliament”.
Never trust a Tory Nicola.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
P
icture the scene. You’re offshore
and you’ve just had a hard
morning out on the decks and
your legs are burning from climbing
all those stairs - lunch time brings a
much needed break. Following a
quick meal you grab those last five
minutes of peace in the rec room and
finish recharging the battery before
heading for the stairs again. You’re
finishing your last fag for a while and
minding ‘your own’, when who walks
in?
Only David Cameron!
Who, the Night Steward? NO - the
Prime Minister!
Awkward.
Although Cameron refused to visit
Scotland and meet the Scottish people in
the run up to the recent independence
referendum, he did visit BP’s ETAP
installation to reassert Westminster’s
claim on North Sea oil and gas reserves.
You can just imagine the PR wheels
churning and the ensuing bullshit that’s
uttered during planning meetings;
Of Course! An event like this presents an
excellent photo opportunity where capturing a
‘man of the people’ moment might be possible
after all. Besides, who needs to pad the
streets of Glasgow - dodging eggs, when you
can be seen mixing with hairy arsed
commoners on North Sea installations? Loads
of those bloody rig types are Glaswegians
anyway! We can even bring along a
photographer to memorialise the moment and
‘prove’ things like this happen all the time.
We’ll post it on Twitter - It’s perfect!
Ah but on offshore installations are
offshore workers and in line with the
old adage about mice ‘n’ men ‘n’ best
laid plans ‘n’ all that, things didn’t go as
swimmingly as first envisaged by the PR
people – see the snap.
‘Talking to Chris and Dave in the “rec
Visit www.oilc.org
The Photo InOpportunity
13
Visit www.oilc.org
14
The natives
As Blowout goes to press it seems that just about every
collective bargaining agreement serving offshore workers in
the UK is under some level of tension.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
This is hardly surprising given the level of attack that workers
are currently facing – as highlighted again throughout the
pages of this edition. With the caterers, divers, pilots &
production platform workers threatening to ‘hit the cobbles’
we examine the pressure each sector is currently under.
COTA - Caterers protest
As reported in the previous edition of
Blowout, a proposed ballot of the
catering workforce has now taken place
following an attack on their wages.
54.2% of Unite members employed
under the terms of the COTA agreement
have returned a ballot in favour of strike
action, with 67.2% supporting action
short of a strike. The RMT ballot
returned a virtual 50/50 split on strike
action with just one vote making the
difference. There was a 60% majority in
favour of action short of strike, however
the total number voting was low (only
around 25%) which is a reflection of the
fear members feel in the current
employment climate.
The caterers are angered by their
employers who earlier in the year
announced they would no longer be
honouring the 1.3% pay deal won by
offshore unions (RMT & Unite) in 2014.
Ironically, the COTA companies stated
that tearing up the deal was the only
option left open to them in order to
‘preserve jobs’ - yet they now state as
many as 500 catering workers could be
sacked as a result of the current industry
downturn. This is a huge proportion of
the catering staff population and we
believe the figures have been deliberately
inflated by the COTA companies in an
attempt to scare the caterers’ currently
threatening to go on strike.
Peter Bruce - COTA Chairman, has
stated that contingency plans are in
place to deliver a ‘basic service’ during
any disruption offshore. This will no
doubt see Chef Managers (who are not
covered by the terms of the agreement)
having to cope on their own serving
microwaved TV dinners to the general
offshore population. The COTA Chief
has done a sterling job of
scaremongering and misinforming
offshore staff and especially with the
line; “taking a pay freeze will help to
save jobs”. To use a common
Aberdonian expression in response
we would say; ‘away and give yirsel a
shak!’ Peter. Pay freezes and pay cuts
across the sector have not saved a
single job.
OCPA - Unite members reject ‘improved’
OCA offer
The savage cuts imposed upon the
15,000 or so engineering and
maintenance workers contracted on
production installations has been well
documented in this and previous
editions of Blowout. As well as deep cuts
to wages and benefits, the real bitter pill
for the workforce to swallow has been
the attack on working time, most
notably, the move to a 3:3 rota.
A referendum ballot of GMB & Unite
union members was called to stand
against the changes earlier in the year,
and both unions returned strong
majorities in favour of taking on the
employers.
This prompted those companies’
signatory to the Offshore Contractors
Partnership Agreement to return to the
negotiating table with a revised offer.
The OCA claims the improvement was
worth up to £7,000 per worker over the
course of a year, although we dispute
this. In any event there was no
movement on working time but both
GMB and Unite officials returned to
their members and recommended
acceptance of the deal. This
recommendation to accept by union
officials was prematurely welcomed by a
spokeswoman (most likely Deirdre
Michie) at Oil & Gas UK, who also had
the cheek to tell the Aberdeen Press,
“to secure the future of the industry, it’s
important that we resolve issues by
working together – companies,
workforce, regulator, unions and
This is a dire situation in
how solid the workforce
home waiting on the indu
government.”
This of course follows the issue of an
arbitrary diktat to anyone working for
OGUK oil companies that they should
massively reduce their costs and move
their offshore employees onto a 3:3 shift
pattern. So much for ‘working together’
then Deirdre.
The offer was accepted by GMB
members, but rejected by a 63.5%
margin of Unite members participating
in the ballot. We believe Unite are
preparing to ballot for industrial action
but at the time of writing the result is
not known.
BALPA – ‘Pilots heads not in the cockpit’
Relations between North Sea Pilots
employed at Bristows & CHC
helicopters and their bosses are also at a
low point following announcements of
major staff cuts at the Aberdeen
heliports. Bristows have announced they
will be sacking 130 workers and CHC
hold a similar fate for 50 of their staff,
about half of those affected are believed
to be pilots.
The British Airline Pilots Association
(BALPA) has expressed deep concerns
with the way the helicopter companies
have treated their employees in terms of
consultation, and selection for
ndeed. It doesn’t matter
is if they’re all sat at
ustry to pick up again
redundancy. The Pilots union is also
concerned that the current situation is
having an impact on safety as Pilots
struggle to concentrate with the threat of
redundancy looming over them.
Pilots want their employers to improve
the voluntary redundancy arrangements
on offer and work harder at mitigating
job losses, they also feel the value of
experienced senior pilots is not being
regarded enough in deciding who is
going to face the P45 bullet.
BALPA General Secretary, Jim
McAuslan, said: “We are not being
unreasonable. We know the downturn in
the North Sea is going to hit jobs, but
the way the companies are going about
it is causing massive frustration”
We at RMT join our colleagues in
BALPA in their concerns, particularly
over safety. Pilots reported that the
threat hanging over them, their families
and their colleagues, was having serious
unintended effects on their ability to
sleep and concentrate.
Pilots have stated that they are missing
radio calls and their “heads are not in
the cockpit”. Air Crews voiced concerns
that the way they are being treated has
led to distractions and an increase in
mistakes has been noted. One pilot
stated, “The threat of being ‘at risk’ is
ODIA and the race to the bottom
The Offshore Divers Industry
Association (ODIA) agreement is also
under threat of action following a
move by the employers to cut divers
wages by 10% this year, followed by a
wage freeze until 2017.
In typical solidarity, the divers are
having none of it, and have demonstrated
how to return a ballot that sends a clear
message to the employers. An impressive
70% of those eligible to vote participated,
with an overwhelming majority (99%)
voting to reject the ODIA proposals,
amazingly, only 11 of the 980 papers
returned were in agreement with the
ODIA offer.
The situation currently facing the diving
sector presents a clear warning for
offshore workers working within all
offshore sectors. The divers have been hit
particularly hard throughout the
downturn and RMT knows that
companies including Subsea 7, Technip,
Helix Well Ops & Bibby will collectively
lay off 1,100 UK dive crew between them
this year - and it’s inevitable that more
will follow them. Diving companies’
signatory to the ODIA agreement are now
also facing cut throat competition from
other EU companies, who are now
making moves into the UK sector and
winning work where they pay their crews
less than 50% of the ODIA established
rates. One company in particular,
‘Boskalis’, is marketing itself as ‘the
company of choice’ for UK oil companies.
This is a very worrying situation and
gives a clear indication of a ‘race to the
bottom’ emerging within the UK diving
industry. We fear that other sectors, such
as the drilling and service sectors, will
inevitably follow. There will always be
some outfit willing to push a business
model where workers’ wages, and their
terms and conditions are squeezed until
they squeak and cost is considered before
safety. Watch this space.
The only saving grace for the divers
might be the divers themselves. They are
an incredibly solid group, they’re very
well organised and that stoic solidarity
has rewarded them well in the past. In
2006 the RMT negotiated a pay rise of
more than 45% on the back of our diving
members’ action – but that was when the
industry was ‘on the up’. Of course, the
current situation is somewhat different,
in fact it couldn’t be so polarised. Whilst
back then there weren’t enough divers to
fulfil the contracts, there’s currently very
little future work scheduled in their order
books, in fact, some companies simply
don’t have any work planned at all for
next year.
This is a dire situation indeed. It
doesn’t matter how solid the workforce is
if they’re all sat at home waiting on the
industry to pick up again. But pick up
again – it will, and the divers have made
it very clear that they will not forget 2015.
When the industry rebounds they will
claw back what they’ve lost and what’s
more they’ll get a premium on the
previous rate as well. They’re able to do
this because their solidarity is so great
that their collective co-ordinated action
can shut down their entire sector - should
they find they’re being treated
disrespectfully. We know they can do this
because that’s exactly what they did
before.
Offshore workers must unite now
Other offshore sectors can learn a lot
from the foresight and solidarity of the
divers. Whilst they realise little can be
done to protect themselves from the
current situation, they know they’re
organised for the future and are already
planning a sensible strategy for their
return.
Other sectors can, and must, organise
themselves much better now for that
same future. Just as Sir Ian Wood calls
on better collaboration from employers
to buck the current trend and get more
of a return, so must we, it’s time for all
offshore workers and their unions to
work together to make sure that, just like
the divers, we all remain in this industry
and are rewarded accordingly for our
sacrifice and personal risk.
Visit www.oilc.org
dominating the mind-set of the
majority of our pilots.”
Another said, “Do we really want
pilots to be worried how their
training costs and mortgage will be
paid on a dark and stormy night?”
Jim McAuslan commented, “Safety
must come first. We are not saying
that helicopter companies are
indifferent to these issues, but we
would be remiss if we didn’t
highlight the stress and pressure that
pilots are feeling. We will be passing
these concerns on to the Civil
Aviation Authority who regulate
aviation in the North Sea.”
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
are restless
15
Offshore for three –
Fait accompli!
Visit www.oilc.org
16
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
S
companies, such as Shell &
hell and BP have now
Chevron, will only be required
both announced that they
to work offshore for 161 days
are changing the work
per year, and although 3 week
patterns of their offshore
trips are now a requirement
workforces. Along with
within the mix, Chevron have
everyone else offshore, workers
announced they will operate to
employed directly by the oil
a 3 on 3 off, followed by 2 on 4
giants will now be required to
off system.
work offshore for longer.
Shell plan to operate a 3 on 4
Shell are the latest, and just
off system, but how this is
about the last of the majors, to
going to be managed is
nail their colours to the mast anyone’s guess!
announcing in August that
BP employees so far seem to
offshore workers can expect to
be fairing best, and will remain
be working offshore for 3 week
on the current standard of 154
trips come the New Year. BP
days per year, but with an
announced at the end of May
additional 7 days clawed back
that they are doing likewise
from the company at its
and will work to new rotas in
discretion. The UK major plans
2016 also.
to operate a 3 on 3 off,
The move follows earlier
followed by 3 on 4 off, then 3
announcements made
on 5 off rota system - which
throughout the year from just
seems like a hell of a lot of
about every other oil company
palaver to pay a bit less for
and major offshore contractor
bums on chopper seats.
working in the North Sea. Each
So that’s it. This move by the
announcement has been
biggest of the oil majors must
delivered with the same general
surely now be seen as fait
mantra, i.e.
ANOTHER OIL & GAS UK PRODUCTION
accompli for this industry in its
“We’re not making enough
Starring BOB KEILLER : DEIRDRE MICHIE : TREVOR GARLIC
drive to reduce the wage bill.
money. We need to improve
PAUL GOODFELLOW and JAMES HOUSE
They have also been incredibly
efficiency, cut costs, and increase
Directed by SIR IAN WOOD in DECKNOCOLOR
crafty in their efforts to divide
production (whilst maintaining
the offshore workforce again –
safe and efficient operations of
using working time once more as a wedge. These ‘perks’
course), but our biggest problem is the UK offshore workforce – far
afforded to the company staff will be used for leverage to keep
too expensive compared to other regions where we’re better placed to
them out of any industrial action that might arise in the future
exploit local labour. UK workers were getting far too much ‘holidays’
as was done in the past.
as it was anyway – bloody cheek they’ve got!
And of course, this won’t be the end of it.
No but really, we’re so sorry about all of this, we will of course be
The CEO of the largest offshore contractor in the UK, Wood
having ‘meaningful’ consultations (We’ll sack you by phone - You’ll
Group PSN, gives a good insight into the current mood within
understand we’re very busy).
the industry. After sacking 1,000 UK workers, Bob Keiller has
If you end up sat at home on the bones of your arse, please don’t
told the Aberdeen press that he’s still looking at other areas to
have a heart attack when our massive profits flash up on the telly, as
wield the axe, and at severe risk of sounding like he’s casting
this profit has absolutely nothing to do with our UK operations.
this time for a spaghetti western film, he’s quoted as saying
At the end of the day, we simply have had to do this, in order to
he’ll,
compete you see, market farces – oops …forces – and all that – it’s
“spend every dollar required – but not a dollar more!”
not our fault, yadda…yadda...yadda.”
You know he means it as well. You can see the steely
However, whilst workers employed directly by the oil giants
determination in his eyes – shaded from the hot mid-day sun
now also face cuts to their terms & conditions, it transpires
by the brim of his leather Stetson hat.
they’re not to be hammered as hard as the contractors working
So how many dollars are you worth? Will Bob and his
alongside them on the same installations.
buddies be able to squeeze a few dollars more from you yet,
On production platforms, contractors, who account for the
and then another?
vast majority of the offshore population, were previously only
How many more dollars will they be able to take from you
required to spend an average of 154 days offshore but are now
before you decide to ‘go for your gun’?
required to work a minimum of 183 days on an even 3:3
The RMT foresees further relentless attacks on offshore
schedule. They will not be paid anything extra for the
workers terms & conditions which will be defended by the
inconvenience. In some cases, wages have been cut.
union at every possible opportunity.
Yet workers employed directly by a number of the oil
Is this the future offshore?
Work Cycle - You will work wherever &
whenever we like!
This clause clearly dictates zero-hours
terms and conditions, declaring that the
number of days spent offshore ‘may be
varied at the sole discretion of the
Employers are using the
current situation to
hammer workers further
and are now issuing
zero-hours contracts with
additional clauses
And now we’re back to where we were on
183 days.
We always warned that the employers
were only buying their time before they
found a situation where they could
legitimise reneging upon the deal - and
now they’ve got it. The RMT has also
always maintained that following the legal
collapse the only route to securing paid
holidays would be to win them following
an industrial fight with the employers.
employer’. This is reinforced further on
where the contract states,
‘the employer reserves at its sole discretion,
the right to change work cycles for any
assignment, either permanently or temporarily,
as and when operational, client or other
business considerations require or dictate. This
includes…a right to increase or reduce the
length of the time spent working offshore, to
impose an unequal working time cycle’.
13. Lay Off – You can be ‘Not Required
Back’ (NRB) and placed in a no-pay
situation.
The Salamis contract also states;
“The employer reserves the right to lay off the
Employee without pay…due to a requirement or
request by a client or operator that the
Employee not remain engaged on any
assignment or at any particular location”.
The industry has defended itself for many
years claiming that the NRB situation no
longer exists offshore. Yet here we have it
as a legal clause in an employment
contract – forcing workers to accept the fact
that if their ‘face does not fit’, for whatever
reason, then they can be removed from an
installation without any legal recourse.
Annual Leave – You don’t have any!
The Salamis contract states that the
employee is entitled to 28 days paid annual
leave (as per the terms of the Working Time
Regulations) however, it then states;
‘Annual leave must be taken only from time
that the employee is not scheduled to work
offshore.’
So, just like the Monday-Friday worker
ashore who’s forced to take their annual
leave at the weekends - you simply don’t
have any leave. As was argued extensively
by RMT and the former OILC all the way
from the Aberdeen Employment Tribunal
right up to the Supreme Court;
Leave cannot be leave unless it is taken
from a time that the employee would
otherwise be working.
This logic was lost upon the Supreme
Court however, and considering the
amount of legal might the oil companies
threw in defence of our valiant challenge
over many years - it’s hardly surprising.
There’s also little doubt that the powerful
oil lobby held over successive governments
has played its part in achieving the
employers desired outcome. At the very
least, the Blair government delayed the
process for five years by introducing the
Horizontal Amending Directive.
Oil workers were also appeased en masse
at the time with an ‘enhanced’ rotational
requirement which saw the bulk of the
offshore workforce move from an annual
working requirement of 183 days, to 154
days. This was awarded with the proviso
that all claims before the court be retracted.
The bulk of the claims were retracted
leaving only a handful of drilling and
catering workers heading up the challenge.
16. Monitoring & Communications – We
can spy on you if we like.
We have always been aware that
communications are monitored offshore,
particularly if an individual is identified as
a union activist. This clause states that;
“The Employee agrees that the Employer and
its employees and agents may, at any time and
from time to time, intercept, record and/or
otherwise monitor all their communications
made using the Employers equipment, including
telephone calls, e-mails, voicemails, mobile
phone calls, use of the internet and faxes”.
19. General – We will change your Terms &
Conditions as we please.
And finally, it doesn’t really matter what
you sign up to now because, “the employer
reserves the right to make reasonably required
variations to the terms and conditions of the
Employee’s employment where required for good
business reasons or to meet operational or client
demands!“
If you have been issued a new contract of
employment which has changed
significantly we would like to hear from
you. The offshore energy branch of RMT
will continue to do everything within its
reach to fight against these unscrupulous
employers who are evidently using the
current bleak situation offshore as an
excuse to rattle through anything they want
- at the detriment of our members.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
T
he Office for National Statistics
(ONS) released data this month
which shows that the use of ‘zerohour’ contracts continues to rise in the UK.
A total of 1.5 million workers were
employed under the terms of these
contracts at the start of the year – a rise of
6% compared to the same period in 2014.
A fair amount of media miles has been
given to the problem in recent times with
large multinational corporations, such as
Amazon, Sports Direct & McDonalds
rightfully coming under regular attack from
the press for their exploitation of workers.
The ONS found that companies with
greater than 250 employees are most likely
to use zero-hours contracts.
Burger giant McDonalds even argues that
their employees prefer to work under these
terms; where the individual is employed
and legally bound - yet isn’t guaranteed any
work! Of course this is nonsense. Who
wouldn’t rather have the security of the
benefits and legal protection that a standard
employment contract provides? It simply
doesn’t make any sense.
The general offshore population might be
surprised to learn that zero-hours contracts
have in fact been used offshore for some
time. It makes sense for some consultants,
specialists and some small companies (who
are only able to provide sporadic work) to
use them, and generally these workers are
fairly well remunerated for the times they
are required to work. The offshore catering
sector also has a number of caterers
working to zero-hour contracts but these
numbers are strictly monitored by the RMT
& Unite under the provisions of the COTA
agreement.
Along with the recent change to offshore
work patterns comes a requirement to issue
new contracts, and if this were a fair world,
only clauses directly relating to work
patterns would be altered. However, Blowout
is very alarmed to note that some of the
biggest offshore employers are using the
current situation to hammer workers
further and are now issuing zero-hours
contracts with additional clauses that only
serve to further exploit, control and even
spy on employees.
A classic example is the new contracts
being issued by Billfinger Salamis. A few
choice elements of this contract are
scrutinised for you here.
Visit www.oilc.org
Zero hours contracts
17
Meaningful
Visit www.oilc.org
18
T
he high volume of calls we’re
receiving in the Aberdeen office
from frustrated members
(currently going through a redundancy
consultation process) has prompted us
to provide an outline on what you
should be aware of in terms of the law.
Although the Tory government is
currently doing everything possible to
smash workers’ rights, thankfully, the
protection offered by some employment
law (and certainly the bulk of UK safety
legislation) is ring fenced to a degree – at
least it is whilst the UK remains part of
the European Union (EU).
Of particular current relevance to the
offshore workforce is the European
Collective Redundancies Directive. It
underlines minimum standards for all
EU member states to comply with in
relation to information and consultation
with workers - where a significant
number of those workers will be affected
by any proposed redundancies.
In UK employment law, the
requirements of the EU directive are
translated into the Collective Redundancies
and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of
Employment) (Amendment) Regulations
1995.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Individual or Collective Consultation
Specifically, the regulations require
employers to enter into a period of
‘collective consultation’ with affected
employees where 20 or more of them are
facing the bullet in any 90 day period.
If less than 20 employees are involved,
then the employer need not enter into
collective consultation. They must still
however provide ‘individual
consultation’.
In any situation where collective
consultation is required, individual
consultation must also still take place.
Employee Representation
If a trade union is recognised for
collective bargaining by the company
then union reps must be involved in the
collective consultation. If no union is
recognised, then the workforce has the
right to elect individuals from their own
peer groups to serve as employee
representatives for them throughout any
statutory consultations with the
company.
As the oil companies do not recognise
any of the offshore trade unions, and no
effective collective bargaining mechanism
exists within any of them, workers
employed directly by the oil majors have
been required to elect their own
representatives throughout the current
crisis.
Elections
The rules around elections are very
rigid and should be strictly adhered to.
Employers must ensure that:
• As far as is reasonably practicable,
the election is fair.
• They must ascertain the number of
representatives to be elected so that
it is sufficient to represent the
interests of all affected employees.
In other words, the oil company
concerned should ensure there are
sufficient reps in place to address all
trade groups involved on the
installation and that both day and
night shifts are covered, as well as all
offshore rotas. Essentially, reps
should always have access to
affected employees, and vice-versa at any time throughout the
consultation period.
• In advance of the election, an
employer must state a term of office
as employee representatives that
allows pertinent information to be
conveyed and consultations
completed. Basically, this dictates
the length of time which an elected
individual is expected to be a
representative, and can therefore
exercise their statutory rights as one.
• An employer must ensure the safety
and security of the vote. A
mechanism needs to be in place to
allow participants to vote in secret.
Their votes should be accurately
accounted for and obviously
witnesses from both the employer
and the employees should be
involved in the count. The
employer should play no part in
promoting individuals for election
(it wouldn’t be the first time a drill
crew were ‘told’ how they should
vote by a Toolpusher!)
• The workforce must be given
adequate time to actively participate
in the election process, taking into
account all shift rota patterns.
SI971 elected offshore Safety Reps
should not be parachuted into the role
simply because they already represent
workers in another sphere - unless of
course that individual wishes to fulfil
both functions. In any event, the correct
election process must be followed.
Representatives Rights
First and foremost, it is vitally
important to note that no employee can
suffer any discrimination whatsoever for
standing to be elected, or for carrying out
the function of an employee
representative.
Elected employee representatives must
be given ‘adequate time off’ from work to
attend to their function, as well as
adequate facilities in order to carry it out.
For example, they might be given access
to a telephone to speak with a chosen
trade union, or other source of legal
expertise for advice - should they wish.
This is just one example, any reasonable
request from a rep to fulfil their function
should be seriously considered by the
employer.
Sufficient Time
The period of consultation should last
for a minimum of 30 days before any
lay-offs take effect, or for a minimum
period of 45 days if more than 100
employees are affected.
Consultation must start in “good time”
and take as long as required. As a
minimum, the consultation must
consider:
• Avoiding dismissals
• Reducing the number of planned
dismissals
• Mitigating the consequences of
dismissal.
Reps must be given adequate time to
consider any proposals presented to
them by the company. These proposals
might outline:
• The reason for any proposed dismissals
Dialogue
Employers must also take into account
any of the reps suggestions made during
the consultation and respondwith “a
view to reaching agreement”. In order to
reach agreement, the consultation must
therefore be ‘meaningful’.
Redress
Workers who feel they have not been
consulted accordingly as per the above
can seek redress through an employment
tribunal - but there’s the rub.
Whilst we opened this article pointing
out that some employment law is
protected from the current Conservative
government, unfortunately the
Employment Tribunal is a government
office and the previous Tory led coalition
has already made it a nightmare for
employees to lodge complaints. Most
notably, employees claiming unfair
dismissal can be required to pay a
massive £1,200 in order to see their case
through the tribunal. That is unless you
are a member of RMT of course. At the
time of the changes to the system in
2013, Bob Crow pledged that no RMT
member with a legitimate case would
need to pay a penny - despite the
anticipated massive cost to the union.
This promise continues under the
leadership of Mick Cash.
Nonetheless, if you do get into the
tribunal there are volumes of case law
out there – it seems failing to consult
employees appropriately is a general
issue for UK business. For example,
simply providing an employee with
notification of intention to declare
redundancies is insufficient.
If an employee has been selected for
redundancy without consultation they
may succeed in claiming for unfair
dismissal unless, in exceptional cases,
consultation would have proven futile –
i.e. the outcome would be the same.
Tribunals can reduce the compensation
awards in these circumstances. However,
further legal decisions have challenged
this ruling in favour of employees not
having their awards reduced.
Another legal decision found that
tribunals should consider all aspects of
redundancy, including whether there was
unfair selection, lack of consultation, and
failure to seek alternative employment in
claims for unfair dismissal due to
redundancy. However each case has its
individual merits and rulings in law can
never be predicted. Ultimately it will be
down to the quality of your legal
representation, and as a member of RMT
you can be rest assured that you will
have the absolute best in the business
behind you.
More often than not, if an employer
finds itself facing a redundancy situation
then workers will inevitably go down the
road as a result. But the rules around
consultation at least give workers a bit of
time to prepare themselves for the future.
As pointed out previously, between 30
and 45 days extra wages can mean a huge
difference to redundant workers trying to
find alternative employment and it’s that
lost payment (that should have been
paid throughout a required consultation
period) that employees can make
compensation claims for. Even though
jobs cannot be saved (whether
consultations take place or not) the
affected employees would still have been
entitled to that money anyway, and
awards are generally made to this effect.
The Current Situation Offshore
More and more of our members are
informing us that viable suggestions
presented by the workforce and their
representatives at these consultations are
being ignored. Obviously, the first thing
any company should do in a redundancy
situation is call for volunteers. Some
personnel, especially those coming close
to retirement age, would be willing to
hang up their hard hats now and take the
pittance in redundancy as something
towards a retirement - rather than slog
out the end of their days offshore
working a minimum of 21 x 12 hour
shifts in a row. In fact, various workers
will volunteer for a plethora of personal
reasons.
In the main, offshore companies are
refusing voluntary requests from their
employees to be made redundant the rationale for which is explored
further on.
‘Job sharing’ has also been proposed
by the workforce as a viable option. In
this situation, some workers might prefer
to spend less days working offshore and
of course accept a reduction in salary
accordingly.
Individuals opting to work a 2:4
schedule is an excellent example where
one job could be saved for every three
workers willing to reduce their working
time in this manner. The response from
the companies? …“oh no, that would be
a nightmare to administrate – sorry”!
A nightmare to administrate? Absolute
nonsense!
Sorry, but we’re sorry! This is a
perfectly viable option that would save
jobs and MUST be considered by the
North Sea employers if they are to be
given any credibility.
However, the reality we are seeing
more and more is that these
‘consultation’ processes are paying little
more than lip service to a workforce who
is either about to be told ‘take your gear
ashore’, or forced to give much more
offshore - for much less.
It’s clear that the oil companies and
their contractors really aren’t interested
in anything other than their intention to
slash and burn. Without calling for
voluntary redundancies they can get rid
of more ‘undesirables’, such as those
workers who stop the job ‘too much’, or
have the balls to stand up for
themselves, then there are those that
might have had an accident at some
point, or are simply disliked by the
Supervisor who happens to be scribbling
numbers onto a performance criteria
sheet.
So if you feel you have not been
properly consulted you might be able to
launch a legal challenge at the
Employment Tribunal. At the end of the
day it’s all about getting over the hurdle
of initial payments and then having the
very best legal representation you can
afford.
No need to worry if you’re a member
of RMT. As stated previously it won’t cost
you a penny if you have a legitimate
claim, and what’s more you will have the
very best in the business behind you
with our sister in law Christine
McCrossan who has all the experience in
the world in dealing with those
unscrupulous offshore employers. If
you’re not a member of RMT you really
have to be asking yourself –
“Why not?”
Visit www.oilc.org
• The number and different types of
employees proposed to be made
redundant
• Why individuals have been selected
• How the selection process will be
conducted
• The timescale for the process
• How redundancy payments will be
calculated
• Any of the company’s proposals in
relation to avoiding, reducing or
mitigating redundancy
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
consultation
19
Visit www.oilc.org
20
A decade of discontent
I
n terms of
developing
workers’ rights the
recent election of a
majority Tory
government can only
be viewed as a total
disaster. Now
unshackled from the
previous coalition
Business Secretary – Sajid Javid
with their Lib Dem
partners, the Tories in
majority government have been given
carte blanche to further dismantle the
respect and rights achieved by
generations. And now, following 5 years
of torture, we can expect even more tightening of the
thumbscrews throughout this current term of government amounting to a decade of discontent for workers in the UK.
Anti-trade union laws, at levels not seen since the days of
Thatcher and Tebbit, are currently being pushed through
parliament at an accelerated rate following the unveiling of the
Trade Union Bill last month by Tory zealot, Sajid Javid. Mr
Javid, who rather aptly bears an uncanny resemblance to
Thunderbirds baddie – The Hood - set about smashing workers’
rights the moment he was appointed Business Secretary.
health, education, fire,
transport, border
security and the energy
sector - including
nuclear
decommissioning. It
is not yet known if the
offshore oil and gas
industry will be tagged
under the same energy
Thunderbirds Baddie – The Hood
sector banner –
although we’re fairly
certain it will be when industrial
action becomes a threat in the future.
Separated At Birth?
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Scab Labour
Most controversial within Javid’s Bill are proposals allowing
employers to hire agency workers to replace strikers – a move
which has been outlawed in the UK for more than 40 years.
Trade unions must now submit ‘protest plans’ giving employers
and regulators a fortnight’s notice before any strike commences
– thus affording bosses ample time to make arrangements for
any scab replacements. As a result, the already restrictive rules
around strike action will be rendered far less effective, and
replacement of skilled workers with scab labour raises real
concerns in terms of safety – especially in industries where site
specifics, familiarity, and human factors are particularly relevant
elements of the work.
Unnecessary Administrative Burdens
Administrative burdens placed upon trade unions under
current UK trade union laws are already incredibly heavy but
new proposals requiring unions to submit protest plans stretches
bureaucracy to even greater levels. Unions will be required in
future to give 14 days’ notice specifying the amount of strikers,
specific timings of the action, locations, and even any equipment
that might be used - such as, “loudspeakers, props, banners, etc.”
There will even be a requirement to report on how the union
intends to utilise websites and social media such as Twitter &
Facebook. Getting any of this wrong on the day - even the
smallest of infringements - can lead to a strike being declared
illegal and any picketing will be halted through court injunction.
Additionally, the trade union at the heart of the action will be
liable for hefty fines of up to £20,000. This is wholly
disproportionate when considered against the level of offence.
Balloting Rule Changes
The result of postal ballots will only be considered binding if
50% or more eligible union members participated in the vote.
Additionally, a minimum of 40% workers in ‘important public
services’ must now vote in favour of strike action before it can go
ahead. Important public services are defined as sectors covering
Important Public Services
All public sector workers, but particularly public sector union
reps, are being targeted with the introduction of this Bill.
Workers in the sector will no longer be able to pay union dues
by ‘check-off’ through their salaries, and public sector employers
will have to publish detailed information on how a rep spends
their time and government will be able to mandate a cap on the
amount of time a rep spends on that union work. This will
restrict reps and their members in resolving issues with
employers before they escalate, which ironically will only fuel
the fires of industrial dispute further.
It’s also notable that our RMT brothers and sisters working on
the railways, and particularly the London underground, are also
being specifically targeted by the government through this Bill.
The Business Minister claims these reforms are ‘sensible and fair’
and in an attempt to garnish general public support he claims
it’s all about, ‘balancing the right to strike with the right of millions
of people to go about their daily lives without last minute disruption.’
Nonsense. What he really means is; our colleagues working in
the railway sector are incredibly well organised and well placed
to damage the economy when they are treated with disrespect by
their employers. At the end of the day, if employers were fair,
employees wouldn’t have grievances and there’d be no need for
industrial action – in fact there’d be no need for trade unions.
But of course we all know that the employers of our industries
are far from fair, and our membership database - swelling on a
daily basis - pays testament to that reality.
The real reason behind the introduction of the Bill is this; the
railways and other key services in the public sector is exactly
where union density sits strongest in the UK. These sectors of
high organisation pose the greatest threat to the Tories plans to
push workers in Britain back to times analogous with the darkest
chapters of a Dickens novel. Just as Thatcher made it personal
when she locked horns with the Miners, Cameron is doing the
same with our Railway workers, teachers, and nurses. This is his
and Javid’s pet project and it’s all part of the Tory psyche; smash
the workers as much as you can, then off to the Lords for a
Sherry, and of course, ‘The Day I Kicked a Workers Arse’ makes a
great chapter for that book!
The UK already has in place very strict rules around protesting
and picketing. The increase in bureaucracy and eye watering
fines that are to be introduced on the back of this Bill is simply
to punish workers and their unions further for democratically
exercising our human rights.
No worker ever wants to go on strike, but we shall continue to
reserve the right to withdraw our labour and ‘hit the cobbles’ in
protest when all other means have failed, for it remains a
fundamental civil liberty which generations before us fought,
marched, starved, and all too often - died for.
blacklisting
Visit www.oilc.org
State sponsored
21
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
F
urther moves being legislated on
construction and offshore contracting
the back of the Trade Union Bill
companies. Subsequent
is the criminalisation of
investigations also revealed that the
picketing and the requirement for
police and UK secret services
official ‘picket supervisors’ to be in
colluded with the Consulting
place at all times on lines. Both of
Association in compiling a database
these changes pose real threats to
of undesirables such as trade union
individual workers directly involved
activists and safety representatives.
with picketing.
Respected members of the
A RMT Picket Line during a London Underground Dispute –
The Bill also proposes that
academia were also targeted. Victims
Strikers could be criminalised in future
‘unlawful’ or ‘intimidatory’ picketing
such as Prof Charles Woolfson –
should become a criminal - as
formerly an economics an industrial
opposed to civil - offence. But what exactly is to be considered
relations expert at Strathclyde University, had a file held in his
unlawful or intimidatory? No matter how well behaved he or
name by the Consulting Association. Prof Woolfson is an old
she may be, one extra picket on the line is an unlawful act.
friend of the union and worked extensively with us in research
Could an error like this lead to arrest and subsequent criminal
for his book, Paying for the Piper – a study of capital and labour
prosecution? Probably.
in the UK offshore oil and gas industry. Extracts from his file
And what of strikers standing in silence with placards in hand
suggested that research funding would be stopped by oil
watching scabs cross their lines? Could a ‘look’ be considered
companies if Prof Woolfson continued activities with the
intimidatory? Probably. The point is; the police can use these
former OILC.
mad untested laws to get heavy handed with strikers if they
The construction workers union, UCATT, are currently
want to and there’s little doubt they’ll be under instruction to
embroiled in high level compensation claims for their
set examples fitting with the tone of the new legislation members who have suffered detriment in the past following
whenever the merest of opportunities arise. No one needs
monitoring and blacklisting by the Consulting Association. We
reminding how situations panned out on the miners picket
share UCATT’s concerns that the current proposals will only
lines in the 1980’s.
lead to further blacklisting. National secretary, Brian Rye, said,
The Bill also proposes that scabs who choose to cross lines
“Ordinary workers acting as picket organisers will be targeted
are afforded extra protection. Again this is reminiscent of the
and, no doubt, blacklisted by employers”. The union goes
miners’ disputes when scabs were bussed through picket lines
further to state that the requirements of the Bill could, “open
flanked by hundreds of police officers. The additional
them up to a lifetime of blacklisting by their employers”.
protection will no doubt involve far more police than required,
Keith Ewing, Professor of Public Law at King’s College,
which in itself can be viewed as menacing and will only serve
London, highlights the fact that the police are being asked to
to place further tension between strikers and scabs.
become agents for the employer; while the employer is being
A named official will be required to register their names and
asked to become an agent for the police.
be available to the police at all times to oversee the picket.
The academic added: “The police would now be empowered
This will include the numbers of strikers on the line (currently
to have picketing stopped by triggering civil liabilities, at the
set at six). These individuals must wear identifiable armbands
initiative of the employer – even though the picket is peaceful
and carry a letter of authorisation from their union at all times.
and no offence has been committed”
These requirements only serve to single out and intimidate
Professor Ewing highlights that this is an ‘extraordinary
organisers, and risks effectively creating a state sponsored
provision’, stating:
‘blacklist’. Collusion between the police service and business
“Here we have the Government imposing a duty on picket
against trade unionists is incredibly dangerous - as has been
supervisors to produce their letter of authorisation to anyone
proven in the past.
who reasonably wants to see it. Presumably this will include
Regular readers of Blowout may remember the coverage we
employers. The risk is that this information will then be easily
gave to the issue of illegal blacklisting following a raid by the
distributed in construction and other industries. In the light of
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) in 2009. In an
the recent scandal and the unresolved business of blacklisting,
unregistered manky little office up an alley in Droitwich, West
workers will rightly be cautious about giving any information
Midlands, the ICO unearthed files containing information
to employers about picketing”, he said.
relating to the activities of former OILC & RMT executive
This Bill effectively enforces a police state on workers in the
members and activists. These files were held by the
UK and must be fought at every opportunity by trade unionists
‘Consulting Association’ – a spying outfit funded by major UK
across the length and breadth of Britain.
Visit www.oilc.org
22
Shell abandons Arctic
drilling programme
Following years of controversy and resistance from
environmental pressure groups Shell has announced it is
now waking up from its Arctic drilling dream.
he Anglo Dutch oil giant will now pull the plug and
leave the region following disappointing results from its
Burger J wildcat well in the Chukchi Sea offshore Alaska.
The prospect, drilled by Transocean’s semi-sub Polar Pioneer,
did reveal the presence of hydrocarbons but these were ‘not
sufficient to warrant further exploration in the Burger prospect’
according to a statement released by the company. The well
will now be plugged and abandoned as per US regulations.
Shell has bought 100% interests in 275 outer continental
shelf blocks in the Chukchi Sea, but states that further
exploration activity in the region will be shelved ‘for the
foreseeable future’, and together with the poor shows from the
Burger core samples, they blame the high operating costs for
drilling in the region as well as ‘the challenging and
unpredictable federal regulatory environment in offshore
Alaska’.
As a result of the failure, Shell will now have to write off a
massive $4.1 Billion. Having already lost $3 billion on the
project, the supermajor also owes a further $1.1 billion in
future contractual commitments that require to be honoured.
There’s little doubt the massive white elephant must be
bearing heavily upon the shoulders of Shell boss, Ben van
Beurden, whose coat is surely now hanging from a very loose
peg following his lack of commercial wisdom. There was
always massive risks surrounding this project both in terms of
finance, but more so, in terms of the environmental aspects
which drilling operations could have impacted upon one of the
most sensitive regions in the world. In light of the resistance
from environmental pressure groups and massively growing
public distaste for the venture, the bad PR risk to the company
was also huge and should have led Shell management to avoid
exploring in this region.
Shell’s ‘keystone cops’ mismanagement style of the project
has also done little for their reputation. They purported to be
the responsible oil company of choice following the BP
Macondo disaster but have nonetheless demonstrated
recklessness throughout their Arctic campaign resulting in a
string of incidents and violations. Their drilling contractor,
Noble Drilling, was fined $12.2 million and placed on
probation for 4 years following a ‘litany of malfunctions,
hazards, misdeeds and deceptions’ uncovered during an
inspection of the drill ship Noble Discoverer. That drill ship
also ran aground whilst working for Shell during an Arctic
storm in 2012.
Most notable within the Shell cluster was their decision to
move the drilling rig Kulluk out of Alaskan waters during the
dead of Arctic winter - in an attempt to avoid paying taxes. The
Master of the towing vessel sternly advised against the move
and warned Shell in an email that attempting the operation
during Alaskan storms ‘guarantees an ass kicking’. Shell
ignored his wisdom and did indeed get their ass kicked when
the Tow Master’s premonition became a reality. During a
storm the rig broke free from its tow bridle and ran aground
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
T
No reward
without risk!
“To be blunt I believe that this length of tow,
at this time of year, in this location, with
our current routing, guarantees an ass kicking.”
requiring 18 offshore workers to be rescued by a US coastguard
helicopter.
Workers employed on Shell contracts in the UK will be
rightly justified in their growing feelings of anger when they see
these billions being splurged by Shell on unviable projects whilst all the time they’re being made redundant or forced to
spend more time offshore - for less pay. Shell should never
have been drilling in the Arctic in the first place, no one should
ever attempt to drill in the Arctic again. There are more than
enough hydrocarbon producing regions already, and in their
attempt to dominate the market some are already producing
far too much as it is.
But Shell will be back when that oil price rebounds, greed
will grip them again. Marvin Odum - Director for Shell
upstream Americas, has stated, "Shell continues to see
important exploration potential in the basin, and the area is
likely to ultimately be of strategic importance to Alaska and the
US. However, this is a clearly disappointing exploration
outcome for this part of the basin.”
One saving grace for the thousands of workers already sacked
by Shell this year might be the impending fate of Van Beurden.
This is the CEO who stated, “There are no guarantees in life”,
when questioned about the possibilities of further
redundancies for UK workers. Well Ben, let’s leave your pearls
of wisdom aside for the moment and reflect upon some of the
facts relative to your achievements thus far as Shell CEO.
You’ve spent $billions and managed to drill a duster. Your
company has demonstrated yet again that it still can’t get its act
together in terms of robust risk management when there’s too
much money involved or taxes need to be paid, and more of
the general public dislike Shell all the more for it. Great work
Ben.
It’s true, there certainly are no guarantees in life mate, but
you can guarantee we’re hoping your P45 chickens are coming
home to roost.
Now wouldn’t that be just deserts?
They had a budget of
billions – we had a
movement of millions!
he press release from Shell
following a similar move carried out
announcing their Arctic roll has
earlier in the year when the Polar
been met with jubilation by
Pioneer drilling rig was similarly
environmental activists across the
delayed in its departure by kayakers.
planet. Greenpeace consider the
Evidence posted on social media
announcement as an outright victory
clearly demonstrates heavy
in their battle with the oil giant over
handedness by the US authorities in
drilling in the US sector of the Arctic region, which has waged
dealing with what was seen as a peaceful protest - albeit
on now since 2012.
persistent. One twitter posting shows a Kayak being rammed
The environmental pressure group is now rubbing a custard
and overturned by a police river vessel before the previous
pie into Shell’s face with Greenpeace Executive Director, John
occupant is placed under arrest by a police officer diving into
Sauven claiming,
the water. The
“Big oil has
activists on the
sustained an
bridge supporting
unmitigated defeat.
the abseilers hanging
They had a budget of
below were also
billions, we had a
arrested, but were
movement of
later released.
millions. For three
Two abseilers were
years we faced them
eventually
down, and the
‘persuaded’ by Police
people won.
to cease the protest
The Save the Arctic
and lowered
movement has
themselves to a
exacted a huge
recuse vessel below,
reputational price
but one who refused
from Shell for its
was forcibly
Arctic drilling
removed from the
programme. And as
bridge to allow
the company went another year
sufficient space for a safe passage of
Kayaktivists take to the river in protest with
without striking oil, that price finally
the vessel below - whilst the other
the drilling rig Polar Pioneer in the back drop
became too high. They’re pulling out”.
ten protesters remained dangling
Greenpeace have been a particularly annoying pebble in
from their ropes. According to Greenpeace, the protestors were
Shell’s Arctic shoe, having co-ordinated some fairly effective
willing to stay suspended for much longer.
action recently in attempts to hamper the super major’s
Shell had Greenpeace in court as soon as the protest started
progress. Environmentalists were outraged in June this year
where a Federal Judge ruled that Greenpeace’s actions were
when the US government rubber stamped drilling permits
unlawful. She warned the organisation they would be held in
allowing Shell to continue with their Arctic drilling
civil contempt if they continued with their plans and fined
programme. However, the licence was only granted with the
accordingly at a rate of $2,500 per hour, rising in $2,500
proviso that an icebreaking ship carrying equipment to be
increments per hour, each day the protest continued up to a
utilised in the event of a spill be stationed at the drill site
maximum of $10,000 per hour on the 4th day, and subsequent
before any drill bit commenced turning.
days thereafter. Greenpeace, who is by no means short of
Shell chartered the MSF Fennica to fulfil that requirement but
funding, said ‘fine’ to the fine and resolved to continue - taking
an Achilles heel in their plan presented itself when the vessel
whatever penalty on the chin. Individual abseilers were also
was forced to berth in Portland, Oregon for repairs. Activists
fined $5,000 each.
seized the opportunity, and in perhaps some of the most
The protest may have only pushed Shell’s plans back a couple
daring efforts seen yet, thirteen abseiling protestors hung
of days, but every day in the Arctic cost the company millions.
themselves from the St John’s Bridge which spans the
The main victory for the protestors though was a symbolic one.
Wilamette River in Portland, while another thirteen monitored
When they saw that ship turn round and head back to the dock
their ropes above. The Fennica, which was required to safely
on the evening of the first day, their morale was boosted
navigate the river running under the bridge before embarking
enormously, they felt a real victory and this will have given
upon the open sea on its voyage to Alaska waters, was blocked
them the strength to dig their heels in. The latest turn around
for two days as the protestors hung from ropes with large
by Shell will also have galvanised the movement further and
colourful streamers flying in the breeze. An armada of
extensive media coverage portraying a David v Goliath scenario
individual activists in kayaks also hampered the vessels
in Portland will have undoubtedly augmented their cause
headway, earning them the catchy title of ‘Kayaktavists’,
across the globe.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
T
Visit www.oilc.org
Environmentalists
hail victory
23
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Visit www.oilc.org
24
As industry faces difficult times
workers need to look after their mental health
A
s everyone is aware
Neil Murray (left) with Tony McLaren,
the oil and gas
Breathing Space National Coordinator
industry is facing its
greatest challenge since the
discovery of oil in the
North Sea and the
expansion of the industry as
a significant contributor to
the UK economy. Whilst
industry leaders are focused
on breathing life into the
sector the work force,
including those who have
already left, should focus
some of their efforts and
attention on looking after
their mental health and
well being. There, I’ve said
it, used the words “mental health” which will probably cause a
number of readers to close the page and move to the next
article: but stop, please bear with me, this is important. Did
you know that on average, one in four of us experience mental
health problems at some stage in our lives and that’s without
facing the prospect of redundancy or the frustration of looking
for a job in a difficult market? Ah you say, I can cope I’ll just
plough on and I’ll be fine: well yes, you may be but there’s a
good chance you will not and you need to do something now
to build up your resilience for what lies ahead.
Your mental health is as important as your physical health
and we, particularly men don’t give our wellbeing the attention
it deserves.
Your body is like a modern car, it needs well looked after,
fuelled and used regularly to keep the system at optimum
efficiency: again you might say that is all well and good when
things are running along fine in my life but when there are
problems you need to cut costs and the service and long runs
are often the first to go.
Some of you may have spoken to me at the recent Oil and
Gas PACE event at the Beach Ballroom in Aberdeen. I was
struck by the number of people who told me their exercise
regime was the first thing to go when the work routine ended. I
can understand why people do this as the main focus shifts
from a balanced life to a headlong rush to the job pages on the
internet. Just when our body needs the benefit of regular
exercise to help control stress, circumstances force us to do the
opposite. Some people also spoke of the tendency to become
isolated and lose vital connections with other people. If you are
unfortunate to have lost your job you have probably moved
from a busy interactive environment to one where you are in
the house most of the day, probably on your own sitting at the
computer and before you know it its evening and the day has
gone.
Your mental health is affected by everything and everyone
you have contact with. That means everything in your life can
have a positive or negative effect on your mental health or
emotional well being.
Reducing stress is probably the most important (and
difficult) challenge when unemployed or facing redundancy.
Here are some tips on keeping stress under control and
hopefully getting through what for some will be the biggest
upheaval in their lives:
Eat well – a good balanced
diet will make sure you have
all the essential nutrients
needed for your body and
mind to function well.
Get Active – regular physical
activity has been proven to
have a positive effect on
your mental health and
wellbeing. It doesn’t mean
you have to run a marathon;
30 minutes of moderate
exercise at least 3 times a
week will help you feel good
about yourself.
Stay connected – it’s
important to stay connected with friends and family, especially
if you’re feeling down. Even if it’s just having a chat over a
cuppa, talking can help lift your mood.
Do something you are good at and enjoy – we all have talents in
different areas. Find time to play a round of golf or read a book
to take your mind off your situation.
Find time to relax – relaxation exercises are a good way to reduce
stress.
Whilst these tips can make a difference there are times when
we need extra help to get through and that’s fine. Hopefully the
message is getting out that its ok to ask for help, even for men
to say they need someone to talk to. If you find it’s difficult to
talk to someone close to you like your partner or other family
member talk to someone you can trust. It’s unlikely they will
be able to solve your problems but the very fact you have
spoken to someone who is willing to listen will make you feel
better. If you find you would rather talk to someone you don’t
know that’s fine too and very natural: organisations like the
Samaritans are there 24hrs a day, every day just to listen if you
want to talk; they can be contacted on:
08457 90 90 90
they will not even ask your name or where your calling from.
If you don’t feel comfortable talking to them on the phone,
you can email them on:
[email protected]
You will always get an answer.
If you find that things have really got on top of you and you
need to speak to a professional but don’t wish to visit your
Doctor you can always phone Breathing Space. They are part of
NHS 24 and are experienced in giving advice and help on
matters concerning your mental wellbeing. They can even
arrange for you to be given further help on the phone and
everything is confidential. They can be contacted on:
0800 83 85 87 (Mon-Thurs: 6pm-2am, Fri- Mon: 6pm-6am)
It is really important people are aware of the help available
through organisations like Breathing Space and Samaritans. It
really is ok to ask for help.
Neil Murray
Scottish Association for Mental Health
From the Wages . . . to the Size of the Coffee Cups!
In these austere times it seems anything appearing anywhere
on an oil company expense sheet is liable for the chop.
Offshore workers in the UK are only too aware now that
everything from smoko shack rolls, to sky TV, is fair game it
seems.
Oil companies across the globe claim they’re incredibly hard
up at the moment as their profit sheets reveal that they’re
making less $millions now – but still making lots and lots of
$millions nonetheless. Canadian companies with interests in
the country’s tar sands claim they’re particularly hard up - due
to very high costs associated with extracting the heavy oil
which the tar sands yield. As the high investment required to
keep the lights on dries up, somewhere in the region of 36,000
Canadian oil industry workers have thus far been sacked. And
because viable production from tar sands really requires an oil
price in excess of $80 per barrel, it’s unlikely the majority of
those workers will be back at work any time soon. We can
empathise with the unfortunate position our Canadian
colleagues must now find themselves in.
However, the largest independent operator in the country,
Canadian Natural Resources (CNR) has managed to buck the
trend and claims none of their staff have thus far been given a
P45. The company which operates a number of ageing
installations in the UK has however been forced to cut wages
by 10% - and it has to be commended that everyone, from the
executive board down, is taking the same hit.
But the secret surely lies in the pennies, not the pounds. CNR
have introduced a host of cost saving measures that must surely
be making all the difference to those balance sheets.
Apparently, the only microwave oven at the CNR office in
Aberdeen has been running red hot ever since the company
stopped providing meals in the cafeteria. To add insult to
injury, the hungry workforce suffered a double whammy as the
price of sandwiches were increased simultaneously in an
arbitrary two pronged attack by the bosses. Those T’s & C’s
would have been hard fought for as well.
Incredibly, even the size of coffee cups have apparently been
reduced in order to cut costs – which would imply that CNR
are still providing their employees with tea bags and sugar
then?
Lucky bastards!
CNR caught fiddling with
safety limits on the Southern
Canadian Natural Resources (CNR) have been served with
an Improvement notice following an inspection on the Ninian
South platform in April. Inspectors found that plant safety limit
switches had been inhibited or over-ridden 4 times in 3 days
and no suitable and sufficient risk assessments had been
carried out to manage the risks to personnel associated with
plant operation without the protective devices being in place.
This was the second Improvement notice served on the oil
company this year. In January during an inspection of the
Murchison platform, the HSE observed deck crew working
underneath suspended loads whilst bulk transfer hoses were
being handled. Again, the company was found to have failed to
perform a suitable and sufficient risk assessment of the risks to
persons arising from this type of operation.
There has been a number of serious injuries and fatalities
throughout the history of the industry resulting from
suspended loads falling onto workers below.
Ninian South
Hundreds of Sullom Voe
workers jobs at risk
260 jobs are currently under threat at the BP operated
Shetland Sullom Voe Terminal.
Major contractors to BP - Wood Group PSN, has confirmed
that it is in talks with unions and staff about reducing numbers
at Sullom Voe, it is expected that 90 of the 250 Wood Group
workers at the Shetland terminal will be sacked.
Bilfinger Industrial Services (BIS), has also entered into staff
consultations, “as a result of a reduction in seasonal workloads
due to winter working conditions and some changes to work
scopes”. It is expected that BIS will sack 170 workers at the
terminal – over half of its total workforce of 290.
A BIS spokesperson said, “Unfortunately, this may result in a
number of roles being made redundant. We are continuing to
work closely with trade unions during discussions and effort is
being made to find alternative solutions where possible. As
consultations are ongoing it would be inappropriate for us to
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
CNR cuts everything!
Visit www.oilc.org
SHORTS
25
Visit www.oilc.org
26
SHORTS
comment further at this stage.”
A Unite regional officer highlighted that a reduction in
manning was expected at the terminal anyway due to the onset
of winter, however any additional work that would normally be
carried out in order to keep staff ticking over during the slack
period is not being offered this year as BP tightens its belt.
The union official added, “We have been involved in the
consultation throughout the process. We’ve basically agreed
what the selection criteria are, and over the next couple of
weeks we’ll be having one-to-one meetings with the individuals
to let them know whether they’ll be made redundant or not.”
Consultations are due to conclude on the 30 October, with
workers potentially being laid off in November. However local
Sullom Voe employees who live in the isles are less likely to
lose their jobs under the terms of the ‘Shetland Islands
Agreement’.
Maersk delivers more grim news
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Maersk Oil have announced that the Janice Alpha platform
is to shut down. The announcement is grim news for about
200 Maersk workers, located both on and offshore, who now
join the growing list of those facing redundancy in the UK oil
industry. The company already announced its plans to cut 35
jobs in April from its UK workforce of about 850.
Employees were informed at a ‘Town Hall’ meeting in
Aberdeen on 25th August that the company will be making an
application to the Oil and Gas Authority to switch off the
Janice lights in the second or third quarter of next year,
following 20 years of production.
Although obviously worried about what now lies ahead, no
doubt some offshore workers on Janice will be glad to see the
back of her. The converted semi-submersible drilling rig’s
accommodation and facilities provided little luxury, and the
ageing tub has proven difficult to maintain over the years –
having had her fair share of troubles. Most recently in 2013,
the production riser of a live well fractured during a North Sea
storm. It was incredibly fortunate that the riser only contained
water at the time but the potential for a hydrocarbon release
under different circumstances was enough for the HSE to issue
an improvement notice.
In announcing the redundancies, a Maersk Oil spokesman
has said, “All options will be explored through consultation to
minimise impact on positions”, however if Maersk’s
consultation process is anything like the rest that are currently
ongoing we don’t expect to see any real result coming from it.
Janice A
The blaze on Abkatun Alpha being fought by attendant vessels
Multiple fatalities in another
Gulf of Mexico platform blaze
At least 7 offshore workers have been killed and 45 others
are believed to have been injured - 16 seriously, following an
explosion and fire on the Abkatun A gas separation platform
operating in the Bay of Campeche in the Gulf of Mexico. 300
other workers were evacuated from the complex to adjacent
installations according to Pemex – Mexico’s state-owned oil
company.
It took 8 firefighting vessels to bring the blazing platform
under control following the explosion on 1st April. The fire
broke out following an explosion in a gas separating unit and
pumping module of the platform.
According to ASEA (Mexico’s version of the HSE), the
explosion was caused by a leak in a rarely used gas fuel line in
the area, which showed an ‘unusual kind of accelerated
corrosion due to the presence of microorganisms and sulfuric
acid within the gas’, said ASEA Director - Carlos de Regules.
‘The two elements caused a rupture in the line and the
escaping gas ignited’, de Regules said, before adding that
measures are being put in place to prevent a repeat of the
accident, including a revision of dozens of miles of similar gas
lines.
But wait a minute, doesn’t this ‘unusual’ corrosive situation
that ruptured the gas line sound like ‘common old’ sulphide
stress cracking? - a well known factor that must be considered
in fields which produce H2S.
In any event it was only little over a month later, on 6th May,
before another 2 drill crew were killed and a further 10 were
injured in a separate incident in the area, when one of the legs
collapsed on the Troll Solution jack up drilling rig.
Pemex said the rig, which is owned by Typhoon Offshore,
was manoeuvring to perform offshore maintenance on a fixed
installation in the Bay of Campeche at the time of the accident.
Another 101 personnel were evacuated following the collapse
of the rig, which fortunately didn’t sink but was listing heavily
as the evacuation took place.
Mexican conglomerate Grupo Salinas, the parent company of
Typhoon Offshore, said in a statement,
"Unfortunately, despite safety measures, accidents happen."
Oh well, that’s fine then!
An investigation is currently under way by the Mexican
authorities, and company officials ‘promised to cooperate’
apparently (Susan MacKenzie of the HSE would have a field
day in this region).
Most recently, this month, Pemex had to evacuate 85 workers
from the Sihil-A platform in the Bay of Campache, offshore
Mexico, due to a gas leak.
Pemex have an appalling safety record - having killed 70
workers in 3 separate incidents in as many years. In 2012 an
Troll Solution listing heavily with
life raft launched alongside
following the collapse of one
of the rig’s legs
Service sector announces
thousands more jobs to go
As they released their 3Q 2015 financial reports, the big
four oil services companies (Halliburton, Baker Hughes,
Weatherford and Schlumberger) all announced news that more
jobs are to go from the service industry sector. The North
American region is expected to be hit hardest but thousands
more job cuts are expected across the globe.
Dave Lesar, Chairman and CEO of Halliburton, who has
already sacked 18,000 of its global workforce said,
“In my 22 years in this business, I've never seen a market
where we've had less near-term visibility. In reality, we are
managing this business on a near real-time basis, customer-bycustomer, district-by-district, product line-by-product line, and,
yes, even crew-by-crew.”
Baker Hughes, which is currently being acquired by
Halliburton, announced in its 3Q 2015 results that earlier this
year it aimed to cut 16,700 jobs worldwide and as of 30
September it had eliminated some 13,100 positions, leaving
another 3,600 left still to be sacked by the end of this year.
Schlumberger’s CEO Paal Kibsgaard has also stated that more
job cuts are to be expected in 4Q at his company, although he
did not specify how many positions would be eliminated.
Weatherford announced that it has completed its previously
announced 11,000 job cuts and now plans to sack another
3,000 position by the New Year. The service company said the
new cuts will be focused on support positions. Additionally,
Weatherford has closed five of seven manufacturing and service
facilities, with one more to close by the end of 2015.
Weatherford plans to close 90 operating facilities by the end of
the year.
All in all it’s a particularly grim outlook for the service hands.
Kittiwake
Gas leak went undetected
for over an hour
In the last issue of Blowout we reiterated the stern warning
given to the oil industry by HSE boss, Susan MacKenzie. She
cautioned North Sea duty holders that the HSE, ‘will not
hesitate to take action if standards slide’. Well, some of those
standards have indeed been sliding since the last issue was
published and true to Susan’s word, there’s been some ‘action’
in return.
Duty Holder, Petrofac, has been in the firing line following a
gas leak on the EnQuest operated Kittiwake platform that went
undetected for an hour and a half on 20th March. Almost a
tonne of gas was released and failed to be detected by the
platform’s fire and gas detection system.
In this instance it is believed that the gas was dispersing as it
was escaping and insufficient concentration of hydrocarbons
around the detection heads is thought to be the reason why the
alarm system did not activate. The leak was ultimately detected
by an offshore worker on the platform who could smell it.
Investigation later revealed that small bore stainless steel in
the platforms gas compression system had fractured due to
vibration fatigue.
The Improvement notice issued by the safety regulator states,
“You failed to take appropriate measures to detect an
accumulation of gas following a major release on Kittiwake
platform. Your current estimate of the release is 1,670 kg.
“Your flammable gas detection system failed to detect the gas
release in the early hours of 20th March 2015 over a period you
estimate to be 84 minutes. One of your employees was able to
detect the release by sense of smell.”
Petrofac said it accepted the HSE recommendations and was
working on implementing improvements.
A spokesman for the company said, “Safety is our numberone priority and we take any occurrence of this kind extremely
seriously.
“We fully accept the HSE’s recommendations and are working
in conjunction with them to further develop and strengthen
our small-bore pipe work management and fire and gas
detection systems.”
Petrofac has until 30th September to comply with the
instruction or face a prohibition notice.
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
explosion and fire killed 26 workers at a Pemex natural gas
facility in northern Mexico. The following year another 37
workers were killed following a blast at Pemex's Mexico City
headquarters.
The last major blowout in the Campeche area was in 2007
when equipment failed on the Kab 121 rig during offshore
storms. High seas impacting the rig caused a crane boom to
crash into a valve assembly containing hydrocarbons. The
incident killed 21 offshore workers and crude oil spilled into
the surrounding sea for almost two months.
Despite oil industry lay-offs occurring on a massive global
scale, we expect there’s probably a skilled labour shortage in
Mexico - given that Pemex are killing everyone.
Our thoughts at this time are with our international
colleagues and their families.
Visit www.oilc.org
SHORTS
27
Letters
BLOWOUT: The OILC Magazine • AUTUMN 2015
Visit www.oilc.org
28
• SEND YOUR LETTERS OR EMAILS TO BLOWOUT: 106 CrownStreet, Aberdeen AB11 6HJ Tel: 01224 210118, E-mail: [email protected] •
Reality check!
Dear colleague, as a very long time
member of OILC/RMT, I thought I would
share one view of reality offshore, this is
part of the reality of working offshore but
by no means a complete reality check.
The following is a reality check from an
offshore worker currently working on a 2
weeks on 3 weeks off rota. The reality is I
work a minimum of 12 hours a day or
possibly night if on nightshift, 7 days a
week for 2 weeks. The reality is, I actually
end up working more and do not get paid
overtime as overtime is ‘built in to my
wages’. So in effect I am in reality working
over 200 hours for my 2 weeks. Does this
happen onshore?
The reality is I go to work on a
helicopter, crammed in usually with 18
other colleagues, the whole industry is
concerned about the safety record of
these machines. Does this happen
onshore. The reality is we are living 24/7
on a potential bomb, does this happen
onshore?
The reality is when we are at work we
spend the whole time away from our
loved ones and live in cramped
conditions, sharing cabins with strangers,
with nowhere to go to be alone, have very
few facilities for entertainment and can’t
get away from our fellow workers at the
end of a day. Does this happen onshore?
We can’t go home, go for a game of golf,
spend time in the garden, spend time
with our wives and kids etc. Does this
happen onshore?
The reality is my daughter was 5 years
old before I spent a Christmas at home
with her, does this happen onshore? I
have missed family weddings, funerals,
special occasions, wedding anniversaries
etc due to my job. Does this happen
onshore?
The reality is we offshore workers get
paid a fraction of what the companies we
work for charge for us being offshore
which is why the companies are doing so
well and we are just earning a decent
living. Wood Group for example have
done rather well from the fruits of our
labours, how much of a salary and bonus
are the top Wood Group management
team on (getting home every night),
rather more than us I imagine!
The reality is that at the end of a 2 week
trip offshore I return home mentally and
physically drained after working such
long hours without a day off for 2 weeks,
God knows how I will be after 3 weeks
and working 21 days straight for over 300
hours for my 3 week trip. Safety is
supposed to be number 1 priority, how
safe is it to expect a person to work 21
days in such an environment for such
long hours? I hope that nobody gets hurt
or worse due to the fatigue of being
forced to work these long shift patterns.
The reality is we are required to attend
many courses to work offshore, these
courses are always attended during my
leave in my time, never on company time.
We might get paid for these courses but it
eats into my leave time. Do people
onshore do their training at weekends?
The reality is that we are at the mercy of
the companies we work for and they can
do what they want with us. We will not
be given a thought by governments who
could step in and stop this equal time
rota happening and allow us to continue
with our current rota. It has been proven
in the past that a person’s level of
concentration and ability to remain task
focused deteriorates after 10 days and a
worker is more at risk of injury between
10 and 14 days, what will it be like
working 21 days straight?
The reality is the Norwegian sector
workers work a 2 weeks on 4 weeks off
rota and will be continuing to do so,
what kind of reality check do they
require?
I don’t think we are the ones that need
a reality check.
Yours Sincerely, An offshore worker,
living the reality. CHECK.
Wake up people and stand together
Dear Blowout, do these people who
make these decisions for cost saving not
realise the safety implications, stress,
fatigue of workers doing 3-weeks of
twelve hour shifts/night shift. Also
getting held offshore because of weather
sometimes for up to a week is possible. Is
a month offshore in the North Sea
acceptable, as everyone struggles at the
present on a 2/2 rota given some of the
conditions on some of these shitholes.
Sleep fatigue, low morale, over crowding
and bullies are just some of the
conditions to put up with.Time for
unions to show paying members what we
pay our dues for and stand up to these
oil companies. Have worked in the North
Sea for seventeen years and I am gutted
to see it getting to this stage. When prices
were at record high for years we got
nothing but 10 percent pay cuts, wake up
people and stand together because there
will be no going back when they get
what they have always wanted.
Unfortunately I'm just a sud contract
diver. Been out of work since June so we
have felt it quite early. Made a conscious
decision to pack it all in and look at
something else. So all apologies but I
have left the union now. I guess you see
what's coming. Lower wages a worsening
of working conditions and a step back to
the bad old days. Problem with my
industry is everyone will get so desperate
they will accept it take it and just moan
about it. I bet there are lot more young
divers now working on trainee rates than
a year ago? History doesn't repeat itself
for nothing.
Good luck, I'm off to Aldi for a job lol.
Name provided.
What is going on here?
Blowout, what is going on here, they
are going backwards to the dark ages? It's
the same old story about saving money
“so they say”. Talisman never said
anything about this when they were
clawing in 120 dollars a barrel not so
long ago. It's just typical greed again by
these unscrupulous oil companies, with
the little people always getting it up the
a*** when these companies are not
maximising PROFIT. It is time for the
men to stand up to these Draconian
changes to their work cycles, because if
you don't when the oil price does go up
which it will they will not give you back
what they have stolen from you. They
will just make you bend over even more
if that is possible.
Member No M0105547.
Have they forgotten it?
Dear RMT, Just some information I'd
like to provide maybe for further
investigation. I worked on a Talisman
platform in 2011 namely the Fulmar
when everyone was requesting 3 weekers.
They were denied due to the fact that
they had looked into an increased
amount of first aid and injuries on the
platform and when they looked at trends
most of the incidents happened to
workers who were doing 3 weekers. Have
they ignored this study or have they
forgotten it? I thought I would bring this
to your attention after the news report
today that they were contemplating
bringing a shift change.
Name provided.
NATIONAL UNION OF RAIL, MARITIME & TRANSPORT WORKERS
Unity House, 39 Chalton Street, London NW1 1JD
APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP – please complete your application along with either the
attached Direct Debit or a separate paybill mandate form.
P l e a s e u s e B L O C K C A P I TA L S.
1
S100
PERSONAL DETAILS.
Surname*
Moisten along edges and fold to seal
BRANCH NUMBER
* Information that must be provided.
Address*
Forename(s)*
Home phone
Mobile phone
Postcode
Email address
Date of Birth*
2
National Insurance Number*
Your Employment.
Employer*
Location*
Part Time
Job Description*
3
4
5
Sex.
Male
NO
Female
Ethnic Origin.
White
Black African
Pakistani
Indian
Black Caribbean
Black Other
Chinese
Bangladeshi
Irish
Other (please state)
How do you wish to pay.
Your Pay Number
Direct Debit (you must complete form below)
6
YES
Paybill Deduction (complete separate form)
I confirm my paybill mandate has been sent to my pay office.
Phone Freephone 0800 376 3706 to confirm your company offers paybill facility.
I undertake to abide by the rules now in force or those that are adopted.
Your signature
Date
Instruction to your Bank or
Building Society to pay by Direct Debit
Please fill in the whole form including official use box using a ball point pen and
Send to: RMT, 39 Chalton Street, London NW1 1JD
Name and full postal address of your Bank or Building Society
To: The Manager
Bank/Building Society
Originator’s Identification Number
9
7
1
7
4
5
Reference Number
Address
Your National Insurance Number
Postcode
FOR RMT OFFICIAL USE ONLY
This is not part of the instruction to your Bank or Building Society.
Name(s) of Account Holder(s)
Bank/Building Society account number*
Branch Sort Code*
Normally your payments
are made once a month
to RMT.
If you prefer to pay 4
weekly instead please tick
Instructions to your Bank or Building Society.
Please pay RMT Direct Debits for the account detailed in this instruction subject to the safeguards assured by the
Direct Debit Guarantee. I understand that this instruction may remain with RMT, if so, details will be passed
electronically to my Bank/Building Society.
Signature(s)
Date
Banks and Building Societies may not accept Direct Debit Instructions from some types of account
The Direct Debit Guarantee
This guarantee is offered by all Banks and Building Societies that take part in the Direct Debit Scheme.The efficiency and security of the scheme is monitored and protected by your own Bank or Building Society.
If the amounts to be paid or the payment date changes, RMT will notify you 10 working days in advance of your account being debited or as otherwise agreed
If an error is made by RMT or your Bank or Building Society, you are guaranteed a full and immediate refund from your branch of the amount paid
You can cancel a Direct Debit at any time by writing to your Bank or Building Society. Please also send a copy of your letter to us.