Akademi Laut Malaysia

No sea going personnel or any other people involved in maritime industry needs introduction about Malaysian Maritime Academy or Akademi Laut Malaysia or known as ALAM.


The story of the Academy began in 1977. The need to train and prepare Malaysians for the existing maritime industry was addressed with the establishment of a non-profit making body called MATES (Malaysian Training and Education for Seamen) Foundation. Consisting of the Malaysian International Shipping Corporation Berhad (MISC) (now known as MISC Berhad), International Shipping Carriers Hong Kong and the Malaysian Ministry of Transport as their main promoters, the foundation soon pioneered the Maritime Training Centre (MTC) in 1977.

On 15 August 1981, MTC was subsequently upgraded to academy status and thus named ALAM, short for Akademi Laut Malaysia (Malaysian Maritime Academy). On 1 January 1997, ALAM was privatized to Malaysian Maritime Academy Sdn Bhd (MMA). (source ALAM website)

It is the only academy in Malaysia and one of the kinds in the region with a complete training structures and facilities for all the maritime studies especially when it comes to merchant marine or cargo ships. When a shipping company or any other organization such as FPSO, FSO, O n G, ports, terminals and so on want to send their trainees for a short term or a long term course or trainings, STCW or Non-STCW courses all they have to look is for ALAM for suitable courses. ALAM is also flexible and an expert in preparing for courses that suits these organization's need.

Full information on ALAM and course schedule can be viewed here.

ALAM is operating directly under MISC Bhd which in turn comes under PETRONAS. Even as an entity under a profit making based organization such as MISC, ALAM's management never deviate from their main objective of producing good quality seafarers for future of our maritime industry. It will not be exaggerating if we are to say that nearly all the personnel holding high offices in nearly all the shipping companies, maritime training centers, marine departments and many other organizations here in Malaysia and maybe in a few other countries around the world are products of ALAM in one way or another.

At present ALAM is led by CEO Mr.Daivd Fredrick who is committed like his predecessors and even more into making ALAM a leading 'World Class Maritime Academy'. ALAM training staffs are consists of mostly ex-ALAM students who have completed their assignments at sea, reached the highest level in their rank such as Master Mariners and Chief Engineers and vastly experienced in many other sectors on shore based companies before joining ALAM to contribute for future of ALAM and future seafarers. Some of the trainers and lectures have also excelled academically and achieved their Masters and Doctorate. As a future plan ALAM is in the process of offering degree courses for students who has passed their Class one Deck or Engine so that they will be well prepared if they want to quit their sea life and start working on shore based companies. As preparations ALAM encourage the lecturers and trainers to further their studies and achieve an academic degrees in any field that they are interested in so that they can be among the best.

ALAM is open for new applications for 2012 cadetship program and students with good SPM results can apply using the applications form in the website. Students waiting for SPM results can also apply using the trial exam results. All information is in the website. I would like to encourage eligible male and female candidates who are interested in joining a sea carrier to apply before 23rd Dec 2011 as mentioned in the website.

MLC 2006 - A view

Maritime Labour Convention

The ILO's Maritime Labour Convention (MLC), 2006 provides comprehensive rights and protection at work for the world's more than 1.2 million seafarers.  The Convention aims to achieve both decent work for seafarers and secure economic interests in fair competition for quality shipowners. An estimated 90% of world trade is carried on ships and seafarers are in this sense essential to international trade and the international economic and trade system.  The new labour standard consolidates and updates more than 68 international labour standards related to the Maritime sector adopted over the last 80 years. 

The Convention sets out seafarers' rights to decent conditions of work on a wide range of subjects, and aims to be globally applicable, easily understandable, readily updatable and uniformly enforced. It has been designed to become a global instrument known as the "fourth pillar" of the international regulatory regime for quality shipping, complementing the key Conventions of the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

The decision by the ILO to move forward to create this major new maritime labour Convention was the result of a joint resolution in 2001 by the international seafarers’ and ship owners’  organizations, also supported by governments.  They pointed out that the shipping industry is “the world’s first genuinely global industry” which “requires an international regulatory response of an appropriate kind – global standards applicable to the entire industry”.

Full content of the MLC can be viewed at the ILO website here

The list of countries that has ratified are as in this list.


We should know most of the countries have not ratify the convention and my not ratify at all since they never have ratified the ILO in the 1st place. The ships flying flags of these countries can be assured they will face scrutiny from the inspectors after the MLC 2006 come into force fully probably in 2012. The loosers will be the shipping companies since they will have to compete with the companies of which countries have ratified the MLC 2006.

Please read here the interview with Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry, Director of the ILO's International Labour Standards Department for the benefits of MLC 2006 and the ILO members function.


Among  the Asian countries Singapore has become the 1st country to ratify the MLC convention and missing as mentioned above Malaysia will not ratify the convention. They normally will come up with their own set of procedures based on Merchant Shipping Ordinance 1952 that complies as close as possible to MLC 2006. But nevertheless the Marine Department and Ministry of Transport shall know that the life onboard Malaysian flag registered vessels will be difficult especially at the initial stages of full implementation of the convention. Charterers wants to make sure our vessels have set of rules that comply to MLC 2006 or risk of loosing business. Good quality seafarers from another country may not want to join Malaysian registered vessel for the fear of not being treated as per MLC 2006 requirements.

For all the seafarers who still involved in the industry somehow i would advise to go through MLC 2006 and understand them fully.

Good luck

Capt.Murali Subramaniam

MLC 2006 - Seafarers complaint

Maritime Labour Convention, 2006:
Handling of Seafarer Complaints by Recognized Organizations
The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, Regulation 5.1.5 requires an Onboard ComplaintProcedure to be established and made available to each seafarer onboard the ship. The convention also provides seafarers with the right to complain directly to the Master, and where they consider necessary, to appropriate external authorities. These external authorities may be the shipowner and the competent authorities in the flag State, the port State, or the seafarer's country of residence. In addition, Onboard Complaint Procedure should contain the contact information of relevant external authorities as designated by the flag State for handling of seafarer complaints.
MLC, 2006 Guidelines for flag State Inspections, Para 63, clearly specifies that it is the
responsibility of the flag State to receive, investigate and take appropriate enforcement action for seafarer complaints. Accordingly, a flag State is expected to have in place procedures for receiving and responding to such complaints and ensuring the necessary confidentiality. A Recognized Organization may in some circumstances be specifically authorized by the flag State to carry out an inspection following a particular seafarer complaint. However, the responsibility for resolution of a complaint remains with the flag State.
Where a vessel is inspected under the MLC, 2006 by a Recognized Organization (RO) on behalf of the flag State, a seafarer or seafarer representative may contact the ROto register a seafarer complaint. Verbal Complaints Where a RO receives a verbal complaint, the complainant should be referred to the Onboard Complaint Procedure and encouraged to seek resolution of the complaint at the shipboard level. If the seafarer feels unable to use the complaints procedure (perhaps for fear of victimization or lack of faith in its effectiveness) the ROshould point out that the Onboard
Complaint Procedure (a copy of which should be in the seafarer's possession) contains
contact details of the competent authority in the flag State and, where different, in the
seafarer's country of residence, and the name of a person or persons on board who can
provide confidential assistance. If the seafarer insists that he/she does not want to use Onboard Complaint Procedure and would like to register the complaint with the RO, as the flag State's representative on board, the RO should not refuse to pass on a complaint to the flag State. However, the seafarer should be advised that the RO can do so only if the complaint is made in writing and signed by the complainant. Verbal complaints may be retracted or altered later giving rise to arguments about what was said and can lead to an unacceptable outcome for all parties involved in handling the complaint.
Written Complaints

Written complaints that are received should clearly specify the sourceof the complaint
including identifying information of theshipowner, seafarer(s)andthe shipinvolved.
The following scenarios describe the measures a RO should take subsequent to receiving a written complaint from a seafarer on a vessel that has been inspected and/or certified under the Maritime Labour Convention.

1 Complaint received during a MLCInspection
If a seafarer written complaint is received during a MLC inspection, the inspector should not intervene to resolve the complaint but instead check to see if the seafarer is aware of the Onboard Complaint procedure and whether the seafarer has made use of the procedure.
Additionally, the inspector should conduct the inspection taking into account the seafarer complaint(s) by selecting the appropriate sample size for the inspection and areas to be inspected in order to ascertain if the seafarer working and living conditions on board comply with the requirements of the Convention and the national requirements of the flag State, and whether the Onboard Complaint Procedure is effective. Any non-compliance discovered during the inspection, including deficiencies pertaining to the seafarer complaint should be documented in the inspections report keeping in mind the confidentiality requirements of the Convention.

A written complaint provided by the seafarer should nevertheless form a part of the report to be submitted to the flag State. Where the working and living conditions are alleged to be defective to the extent that a clear hazard to the safety, health or security of seafarers exists, the written complaint should be forwarded to the flag State without delay.

2 Complaint received by the RO other than during a MLCinspection
A written complaint received by the ROother than during a MLC inspection should be
forwarded to the competent authority in the flag State for resolution. No further action by RO is required unless instructed otherwise by the flag State. In summary, ROs should concem themselves only with matters of regulatory compliance that can be substantiated by objective evidence. This includes verifying the existence and satisfactory operation of Onboard Complaints Procedures in accordance with the flag State's national requirements implementingthe convention. ROs should not discuss or attempt to resolve allegations of harassment,victimization and other complex matters or personal disputes. These should be passed to the flag State for resolution, but only when the complainant has put them in writing.