"The Engineer and Insurance"

"The Engineer and Insurance"

The world goes into utter chaos if the words "engineer" and "insurance" appear in the same sentence. On their own, these terms have definitions and justifications according to the people who put them in dictionaries. Each one is useful on its own until you put them together in a sentence or even on the same page. Although there was a period when this subject had no foundation, it is now clear that the terms "engineer" and "insurance" are not interchangeable.
Insurance is defined as "a thing providing protection against a possible event" or "money paid to insure against something or by an insurance company in the event of damage, injury, etc.". While it may be perplexing, at least it tells us something.

"A person qualified in Engineering" and "a person who controls an Engine or a Machine" are the two definitions of an engineer that we find in the dictionary. That concludes it. I wish there was a simple way to find out more about this by searching for "Insurance Engineer" or "Engineering Insurance," but alas, that is no longer the case.
Unfortunately, the comment made by an Engineering Superintendent to a Ships Engineer over a beer in a bar one night was the unintentional spark that ignited this subject. Of course, the Engineer was griping about how few spare parts are available for the ships he was working on. NB: No corporation wants to part with expensive spares if they can help it, therefore this is a common complaint among engineers and probably has global significance. In any case, the Superintendent concurred with the ship's engineer and, as is customary for him, laid the blame at the feet of the paper-pusher superiors upstairs, the present ship's budget, and the economy. The superintendent slipped out a word or two that he had overheard or been involved in since he drank too much beer and forgot he was no longer on the ships' personnel but was now on the office staff.
It is not our strategy to buy vessel spare parts; instead, we prefer to wait for equipment failure before claiming insurance on them. That's how the comment was transmitted.
The first word that comes to me is stunned. Outrage, shock, and disbelief might come next. Before going to bed and forgetting about it all, the Engineer and the Superintendent naturally moved on to other subjects, including critiquing other engineers and their shortcomings. No one could ever get the Superintendent's "slip" out of the Engineer's head, though. And who could blame him?
Engineers routinely face challenging situations and strict deadlines, but when provided with the necessary resources, they consistently deliver excellent work that meets or exceeds expectations in terms of both performance and safety. Engineers are qualified individuals who care for machinery, according to the dictionary. Engineers and sufficient replacement parts are essential for machinery in order to maintain a safe workplace and ensure that all equipment is in good functioning condition. Waiting for an insurance claim to be filed means the machine or engine isn't safe to work on, and the engineer hasn't done his job. From an insurance perspective, the "things" that offer protection against a potential catastrophe are an engineer and the necessary spares.
Spare parts are easily accessible in most ports around the world and modern communication systems have made it unnecessary for ships to keep extensive inventories of them. Both the engineering team and the office personnel often believe that when an engineer places an order for extra parts, it is because he really needs them. With the assurance that they will reach the next port of call, or at the very latest, within a month or two, he places spare parts orders with the company. Additionally, the Engineer anticipates a purpose for them, which is why he orders them. He has unknowingly implemented insurance on the machinery for which he has purchased spare parts by making such an order. As part of his job as an engineer, he guarantees that the machine or engine will continue to operate in a safe and effective manner by purchasing insurance against the possibility of a certain incident.
To review in a nutshell: In order to keep a piece of machinery in a good and safe functioning state, the engineer insures it by replacing worn or used parts as he thinks fit.
By withholding the components that the Engineer considers essential for carrying out his work, the Company has breached its obligation to the Engineer.
The complexity and scope of what is involved make insurance a pricey business, whether it's contributions or money paid to an insurer. The idea of waiting for equipment to break in order to save money on replacement parts, having the cost of repairs covered by the insurance company, and then having the ship's owner or manager approve must seem "great" to them. The people who sucked the lifeblood out of his budget are now giving it back to him, and the insurance company is footing the bill for any damages caused by the equipment failure, downtime, and replacement.
When working on a ship that cannot receive requested spare parts, an engineer's skills are rendered useless. Ideally referred to as a Caretaker, he lacks the knowledge and motivation to insure his property because he does not own any practical means to do so. As long as he has the essential spare parts on hand, an engineer is (was) insurance against equipment failure. Without these, the insurance is null and void. He has the skills to repair and service engines and machinery, but he can't become Insured (the "thing") without support from land. Eliminating that backup leaves us with an engineer who is competent but does not have insurance. He is a liability to everyone involved since he is unable to do his job adequately, guarantee that his machines will operate securely and effectively, and fulfill his duties in any way imaginable.
It hurts very much to use the words "engineer" and "insurance" together since an engineer has become, through no fault of his own, a liability to everyone involved in an insurance claim.
Oh my goodness!


Post a Comment for ""The Engineer and Insurance""