Where is your convenience ?

There are two interpretions of the word 'Convenience' in the seafaring
and the Management vocabulary. Interpretion (1) is that if u see
something wrong then somehow make-do during your tenure and leave
quietly without disturbing the peace of others most of whom are on top
of you.
Interpretation (2) is to report and inform when something is faulty
-the concerned people thereby protecting your convenience.
If u r type (1) person, u are the more liked of the other people, and
because, with you, the ships appear to keep running smoothly without
apparent hiccups, until its doomsday day arrive, if at all it does,
when tricks to making-do run dry. And after that, poor legislation,
weak governance and corruption lighten up the path for you during
doomsday day.
Interpretation (2) people save their convenience , with the belief of
getting the fault repaired and corrected. But are charged of 'covering
their @@@@ (CYA)', and disliked for 'giving work' to their seniors.
They mostly do not succeed in career and thus create a personalised
doomsday.
Statutes typically favour, in their spirit, the followance of
interpretion (2), whereas in practice, the world is filled with
category (1) guys. If a big damage happens everyone looks to hire a
category (2) guy to show to the world their 'sincere' workforce, until
the incident fever wears out from the public.
The general expectation of a senior office staff who has come from
Interpretation (1) group for a ship staff who's caught in a trouble
which is a consequence of category (1) is to show his smartness by
re-applying the category (1) definition. such situations, as a matter
of fact,are the episode of evaluation for an Appraisal report. The
circumscribing feature of Category (1) people is to have enough smartness to be able to
switch to category (2) as and when needed.
 Clearly, there is more discomfort at personal level in the
Interpretion(1) of the word 'convenience'. But the hidden discomfort,
as would it be attempted to be justified by its practitioners, would
be that it is the cost for rising career which is nothing undue and
unnatural.
 Interpretation (2) practitioners are mostly the senior level and high
age seafarers whose children have brighter and Independant future, and
the seafarer has no liabilities. They see the purpose of coming to sea
in such age and condition as pleasure trip of making money to do
another family holiday when returned from sea. However hedonistic this
may sound, but such people have stronger adherence to the core
philosophy of shipping - safety. They avoid to risk of getting
involved with the government authorities as well, which may come even
for the faults of a junior ship staff. ' I don't want to see myself in
prison after having earned so much, for a fault of yours', is their
explanation. However 'what inconvenience behind their salaries' is
answered through the natural discomforts of seafaring- bad weather and
vagaries of sea life.  Their age help justify their reasoning and rule
out the applicability of the common criticisms of Interpretion (2).
   In a more diagnostic view, in truth, always the senior staff
switch over to  Interpretion(2) after having practised Interpretion
(1) in their young years. This is  a normal practise in all societies
- the older people have best conveniences in less amout of work, while
bulk of work is passed to the younger generation.
Thus, Interpretion (1) and Interpretion (2) are essentially the
Generation Wars- between the youngs and the olds.
Regulations which are basically written for the holy purpose of safety
of life, become the weapons of political battles between the young and
the old.