The Relationship between Motivation Factors and Unsafe Action on Passenger Ship Crews in Tanjung Pinang

Occupational Health and Safety or K3 is a science, art and technique to be applied in working so that the work carried out is free from risks that can result in health problems, work accidents, explosions, burning, and air pollution in the workplace. Or the essence of Occupational Health and Safety or K3 definition is accident prevention (Silaban, 2017). Work Safety described in RI Law No. 1 of 1970 that the protection of safety provided is not only aimed at workers but also for all people who are on the job site and that all equipment / machinery must be in good condition and used with care. According to RI Law No. 17 of 2008 the crew of the ship is a person who has a register book and is employed by the ship owner to carry out obligations based on his position.

The vital impact of a shipping accident is that many people are killed. Recorded in 2017 as many as 42 passengers died/lost two passengers injured (Media Maritim Online, 2018), in 2016 as many as 51 passengers died/lost 18 passengers were injured, in 2015 as many as 85 passengers died/lost two passengers injured, in 2014 22 passengers died/four passengers were injured, in 2013 65 passengers died/nine passengers were injured. Based on this data it can be seen that the death toll is still high, fluctuating and tends to increase from year to year (NTSC, 2016).
In 2016, Tanjungpinang there had been an accident with a type of boat accident reversed and resulted in the death of 10 passengers died, two passengers were injured, and five passengers were missing (KNKT, 2016). Data from Tanjungpinang Class II Port Health Office (KKP) In 2018 there were two cases of accidents, the first in May with a type of fire accident and no fatalities, the second in June with the type of wreck sinking with one person dead.

Unsafe Action
Unsafe action is a process of activity without regard to the element of safety thus the possibility of work accidents will occur (Ramli,201). Unsafe action is a mistake due to the inability of workers to carry out criteria and stages of work in accordance with existing standards to result in work accidents, such as: not having the authority or qualifications to do work, using damaged equipment, wrong or not using self-protection equipment and so forth. (Winarsunu, 2008).
Types of unsafe actions. According to Silaban (2017), the types of unsafe actions consist of the following: 1. Doing work that is not his job / without orders.

Training
Training is an effort to improve or maintain the ability of employees to produce effective work (Bangun, 2012). According to Sihombing (2015) training is an effort to increase the capacity of employees / workers in order to have better skills in terms of skills, knowledge and professionalism in working to add expertise in achieving company goals.
Technical skills were initially only given to workers or operational / field employees. But now training is also intended for administrative and managerial workers and even every employee in the company. For job transfers and longtime employees training is provided as a basis for adjustment and improvement. Thus it can be concluded that training provides benefits for employees and the company. Employees who have a greater workload and responsibility must attend training. The same thing must also be given to workers who experience displacement because workers will find it difficult to recognize and carry out their work (Bangun, 2012).
Training must use a rational training process, the standard is still a five-step ADDIE (analysis-design-develop-implement-evaluate) training process, namely training needs analysis, overall training program design, developing subjects, implementing training, and evaluating eye effectiveness the lesson (Dessler, 2016).
There are two training techniques namely off the job training method and on the job training method. Information presentation method with the aim of teaching various skills, concepts, and attitudes, to trainees is the off the job training method. Whereas the direct supervision method from professional trainers about the work of the trainees is on the job training method (Sihombing, 2015). According to Mathis and Jackson in Sihombing (2015) training can be designed and differentiated based on the desired goals, including: 1. Based on needs: Training for all new employees as an orientation to meet various applicable and required legal requirements. 2. Based on technical / work: Strengthening so employees can carry out their responsibilities and obligations properly. 3. Based on problem solving: In organizational work training is also intended to improve relationships and deal with interpersonal and operational issues. 4. Based on innovative and development: To improve organizational and individual capabilities in the future it is necessary to prepare focus in the long run.

Definition of the Crew
According to Law No. 17 of 2008 Ship Crew is a person who works or is employed on a ship by the owner or operator of a ship to carry out duties on the ship in accordance with his position stated in the register book. The crew consists of several parts each part has its own duties and responsibilities, the division of crew based on activities on the ship that is the deck and engine.
The existing organizational structure of ships is not a standard structure, because each ship's organizational structure can differ depending on the type, function and condition of the ship. Several types of crews' positions and responsibilities (Sasono, et al, 2014): 1. Captain: is the person responsible for carrying ships sailing from port to port or from place to place safely, safely to the destination of the passengers and all their cargo. 2. Mualim: The preacher is the person who is responsible for the deck and helps the skipper manage all the work and becomes a substitute for the skipper when the skipper is unable to do his work. The chief officer is also tasked with maintaining existing navigation and safety equipment. 3. KKM (Engine Room Head): Responsible for all the engines on board, be it a main engine, auxiliary engines, pump engines, crane engines, lifeboats, steering engines, freezer engines, etc. 4. Machinist: The crew of the ship is tasked with helping the KKM run and maintain the main engine, auxiliary engine, or pump engine on the ship. 5. Oiler: The crew of the ship is tasked with helping KKM run machine tools, especially in lubricating moving equipment. 6. Helmsman (Able Bodied Seaman/AB): The crew is in charge of observing deck hours, measuring air and sea phenomena, receiving signal transmissions, raising / lowering flags, sending messages, and so on. 7. Ordinary Seaman / OS: The crew in charge of carrying out the calculation of the load, maintain the cleanliness of the ship, arrange deck equipment, and guard duty at the port.

III. Research Method
This type of research is an analytical survey using cross sectional design aimed at explaining a situation by analyzing the relationship between individual factors and work factors with unsafe action on the crew of passenger ships in Tanjung Pinang City. The study was conducted at the port of Sri Bintan Pura in Tanjung Pinang City. When the research will be carried out in October 2018 until June 2019.
The population in this study is the crew of passenger ships with the position of Captain, Mualim, KKM (Head of Engine Room), and Oiler in the port of Sri Bintan Pura Tanjungpinang City with the destination of Tanjungpinang to Batam. Shipping from Tanjungpinang to Batam consists of two shipping agents namely PT. Baruna Jaya and PT. Marinatama Gemanusa. The total population of 46 people, with the distribution of the crew as follows: In this study in determining the sample using a total sampling technique in which the entire population is used as a research sample. However, at the time of the study there was one crew member who was not willing to be a respondent in the study so that the total sample of the study was 45 people.      The knowledge variable questionnaire consisted of 12 questions, the highest value was given a weighting of 1 (one) and the lowest value was given a weighting of 0 (zero). Then calculated using the Guttman scale, namely: Score interval = (highest score -lowest score) / category = (12 -0) / 2 = 6 Standard score = highest score -interval score = 12 -6 = 6 From the above calculation, if the total score of answers ≤ 6 is categorized as less and if the total score of answers> 6 is categorized as good.
Motivational variables adopted a questionnaire that had been used previously by Syamtinningrum (2017) and modified according to research needs. The questionnaire consisted of 10 questions using a Likert scale for positive questions strongly disagreed choice (STS) rated 1 (one), disagree (TS) given a value of 2 (two), agree (S) given a value of 3 (three), and Strongly agree (SS) are given a value of 4 (four) while the negative choice questions strongly disagree (STS) are given a value of 4 (four), disagree (TS) are given a value of 3 (three), agree (S) are given a value of 2 (two) , and strongly agree (SS) given a value of 1 (one). Then the calculation determines the categories, namely: Score interval = (highest score -lowest score) / category = (40-10) / 2 = 15 Standard score = highest score -interval score = 40-15 = 25 From the above calculation, if the total score of answers ≤ 25 is categorized low and if the total score of answers> 25 is categorized high.
The training variable questionnaire consisted of six questions for the highest value given a weighting of 1 (one) and the lowest value given a weighting of 0 (zero). Then calculated using the Guttman scale, namely: Score interval = (highest score -lowest score) / category = (6 -0) / 2 = 3 Standard score = highest score -interval score = 6 -3 = 3 From the above calculation, if the total score of answers ≤ 3 is categorized as less and if the total score of answers> 3 is categorized as good.
The unsafe action variable questionnaire consisted of 15 questions for the highest value given a weighting of 1 (one) and the lowest value given a weighting of 0 (zero). Then calculated using the Guttman scale, namely: Score interval = (highest score -lowest score) / category = (15 -0) / 2 = 7.5 Standard score = highest score -interval score = 15 -7.5 = 7.5 From the above calculation, if the total score of ≤ 7.5 is categorized as low and if the total score of answers> 7.5 is categorized as high.

IV. Discussion
Univariate analysis was carried out to see the description of the characteristics of the respondents of the independent and dependent variables. At work, disputes between crew members often occur 6 13, 3 22 48,9 13 28,9 4 8,9 The company does not sanction lazy workers or make mistakes

Multivariate Analysis
To find out the most dominant independent variable with unsafe action on the crew of passenger ships in Tanjung Pinang, a multivariate analysis was performed using a multiple logistic regression test. Selection of variables as candidates. In this study there are eight variables thought to be related to unsafe action, namely individual factors including age, education level, years of service, income, knowledge and work factors including motivation, training, and supervision. For the selection of variables to be included in the prediction model of multiple logistic regression tests, the eight independent variables are first performed bivariate analysis with the dependent variable, namely unsafe action. After going through bivariate analysis, variables with a P value <0.25 are made as candidate variables that will be included in the multivariate analysis. The results of the bivariate analysis between the independent variables and the dependent variables can be seen in table 12. Modeling the most dominant factor. In this modeling all candidate variables are analyzed simultaneously. Variables are analyzed using the Backward technique by entering all the variables, then SPSS will eliminate one by one the insignificant variables and then process again without these insignificant variables, continuously, so that a model is found that is appropriate to represent the model. Based on the results of the study indicate that there is a significant relationship between motivation and unsafe action. In the multivariate test, it is known that motivation variable has an influence on unsafe action with p value = 0.019 and exp (B) value of 8.577, which means that the motivation variable in the low category will cause unsafe action to be high by 8.577 times compared to the high motivation category.

V. Conclusion
Based on the results of the study the majority of respondents classified as young, have a high level of education, a new tenure, have a high income, good knowledge of occupational health and safety, high motivation, and unsafe action. Based on the bivariate analysis obtained levels of education, years of service, knowledge, motivation, related to unsafe action.