Latest Posts

In an effort to get closer to the seafarers we aim to represent, last month the ITF held an Expo for Seafarers. And where better to host the first event of its kind than at Luneta Park, in the heart of Manila and at the heart of the crewing industry worldwide. The timing also seemed perfect – 2010 has been declared the Year of the Seafarer by the IMO.

The Expo brought together ITF staff, inspectors and local unions AMOSUP and PSU to introduce seafarers to the ITF family, and also – more importantly – to listen to what they had to say. 
 

And there was plenty to hear! More than 3,000 seafarers came.
 

As an inspector I learnt a lot in those three days. Many times I had read and listened to stories from seafarers about Luneta Park… with its many manning agencies… about how many seafarers visit there each day looking for a job... Seeing it first hand was completely different. 
 

Being away from the ship, the port, the employer, being on the seafarers’ home soil, we had a chance to speak a little more openly than normal. We inspectors had to adapt to being the visitors for a change. And getting a flavour of Filipino culture will, I’m sure, help us to build better links with Filipino crews we meet in the future.

During those three days we talked to the seafarers about lots of things – about the meaning of the Year of the Seafarer, about our worldwide piracy petition, about this website. 
 

But more importantly, we had the chance to get face-to-face feedback from seafarers. Your worries, questions, experiences. You told us the positive side of being a seafarer – the travel, the money. And you talked to us about the down side and some of the challenges you face – being away from home, missing family and friends, long contracts, piracy, difficulties finding work, age discrimination, working hours and fatigue, the many documents and certificates required.
 

One of the questions I heard over and over again that week was about how to become a member of the ITF. There is a simple answer to that question. An individual worker cannot join the ITF. The ITF is a federation of unions, so to become a member of the ITF you need to join one of its affiliated trade unions. If you are employed on a vessel that has an ITF collective bargaining agreement, you will be a member of the ITF union that holds the agreement. Find out if your vessel is covered and see which union covers it.
 

But there is a deeper question. Often, in my job, I have the feeling that many seafarers think of the ITF as some kind of emergency service. But in reality it is crews themselves who solve their problems, by coming together to give each other power, to have their voices heard, to defend their rights and win improvements. We are just there to support. 
 

For the ITF and its unions to remain effective for seafarers, you need to play your part too. As crew members you need to support each other and be prepared to stand up for your rights. That is your part of the bargain. And when you do, we will be standing right beside you.
 

For our part, we have to stop thinking that we know what workers want and listen. Just listen.
 

You never know, an ITF Expo could be coming soon to a town near you. But don’t wait until then to tell us what you think! Get in touch with us here, post a message on Crew Talk or a comment below. We are all ears!

View video of the Seafarers Expo event on YouTube here.

If you’re a seafarer reading this then you’re probably on leave. If you’re at sea then you’re probably on a vessel with enough crew to allow you a little time off to do something other than work. Maybe you’ve been able to get ashore for a bit and are in a seafarers’ centre somewhere in the world surfing the net.
 
But on many of the vessels we visit there is very little time for anything other than work, food and sleep. And in many cases the crew are clearly not being paid for all the overtime they do and aren’t even sure how they should be paid for it.
 
Most of the backpay I have recovered for crew over the past year has been unpaid overtime on ITF covered vessels. So it seems a good idea to try to provide some clear guidance, for those who are unsure, on how much overtime should be worked and how much you should be paid for it under the terms of your contract of employment.
 
Firstly, it is vital to know what your contract of employment says. Sometimes we find that crew haven’t seen a copy of their contract. And sometimes crew are issued with contracts (by the crewing agent) that give completely different terms and conditions to those of the ITF agreement that covers the ship. So, if you haven’t already got one, you should request a copy of your contract of employment immediately. You are entitled to it. Also, you should have access to the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). If you can’t get access to either of these documents – or if you think your contract is not in line with the ITF agreement – then contact an ITF Inspector. We can help.
 
The most common ITF agreement is the “ITF Uniform TCC Agreement”. (It’s not the only one, but more about that later). This agreement says you should be paid for at least 103 hours overtime every month at the rate set out in the agreement (for example, the rate is US$5.65 per hour for an AB; US$9.85 per hour for a 2nd Officer).
 
The normal working week is 8 hours per day Monday to Friday. Every hour worked above 8 and every hour worked on weekends is overtime and should be recorded as such (again, this is not the case in every type of ITF agreement).
 
This 103 hours overtime payment is guaranteed even if you work less than 103 hours overtime. If you work more than 103 hours overtime then you should receive the hourly overtime payment for each additional hour worked (quite often this is the overtime that we find has not been paid).
 
Obviously, therefore, it’s important to keep a record of all overtime hours worked. The agreement states that an agreed record must be kept and that each crew member should be provided with a copy of this record. If you are presented with a false overtime record then it is up to you to refuse to sign it.
 
For us, it’s pretty easy to spot a false record. A couple of years ago I inspected an ITF covered vessel where the guaranteed overtime payment was for 90 hours per month. When I looked at the overtime records on board, amazingly every person had worked exactly 90 hours overtime per month! I told the Captain this was impossible. He promised the records were accurate and that nobody ever worked more than 90 hours overtime. There was simply no need for it. And nobody ever worked less.
 
I asked for the log book and showed him that when the vessel was tying up in port one particular night, the overtime records showed that no-one had worked on deck during the mooring operation!
 
But the crew didn’t want to complain and all had signed the overtime records. So the Captain and the company were simply given a warning.
 
Six months later the vessel was back, this time under a different ITF agreement with 103 hours guaranteed overtime. Sure enough, when I checked the overtime records each crew member had worked exactly 103 hours every month. It was the same Captain. I said, “Captain, you must think we are stupid!” He admitted defeat and told me, “You must understand… I have instructions from my company that say they will not pay a penny more than the guaranteed overtime rate and so overtime above this figure is not allowed. Also, they say that since they are having to pay 103 hours overtime that everyone on board must work 103 hours overtime and not one hour less. So we have to record 103 hours every month or there will be trouble.”
 
Well, I can sympathise with the Captain and crew but the agreement is the agreement. And the company must apply the agreement correctly.
 
There are other ways for us to find the correct hours worked and we usually do. And where there is no record kept (or where it can be proved that it is false) then the agreement states that the company must pay a penalty. They must pay 160 hours overtime per month to each crew member. If they have already paid the guaranteed 103 hours then they must pay a balance of 57 hours overtime.
 
Even if you are being forced to accept a false overtime record, I would encourage you all to keep your own accurate records. This can be a big help when we Inspectors are trying to assist you.
 
Remember what I said earlier about knowing what contract you have and what agreement (if any) applies to your vessel? Well, this is important because there are many different types of ITF agreement. Some state that the guaranteed overtime payment is for 85 hours. Some state that the normal working week is 44 hours or 48 hours. Some have different pay rates so the overtime rates differ. Under the terms of many ITF agreements the Officers are paid fixed overtime rather than a minimum guaranteed amount. And so on. This is because different ITF unions in different countries will sign agreements that are considered most appropriate to the circumstances. But the same principles apply as I have outlined above.
 
If you are not sure which agreement applies to your ship or if you are worried that it is not being applied correctly, then an ITF Inspector or the ITF London HQ should be able to find out for you fairly quickly.
 
Remember, it’s your money. You should be paid for all the hours you have worked. You should always work within the hours of work/rest limits in accordance with STCW stipulations. And you should know the terms and conditions under which you are working.
 
I’m sorry if I have taken too much of your free time with this. I hope you don’t come to me with an overtime claim! Don’t work too hard or for too long. And, if you get a chance, share your experiences by responding below.

In October last year a middle-aged British couple en-route from the Seychelles to Tanzania were taken hostage when their 38ft yacht was intercepted by Somali pirates. They have been held captive ever since. The incident made news headlines around the world and for many people who have little contact with the maritime world it was the first time they were made aware of the scourge of modern piracy.

Oh, but hang on, wasn't there another one earlier in the year? That American-flagged Maersk ship, where American forces ended up shooting dead three of the pirates whilst rescuing the Captain they had taken hostage?

Friends of mine outside the maritime world were shocked that this kind of thing could happen in this day and age.

But it was nothing compared to their shock once I started to explain what the real situation is for today's seafarers, particularly those trading through the Gulf of Aden.

People are simply astounded when I tell them that in 2009 there were actually 217 ships involved in piracy incidents; that there were 47 hijackings of ships and that 867 crew members were actually taken hostage. Some people simply don't believe me. They think I must be exaggerating. But the figures are not mine. They are from data produced by the International Maritime Bureau.

I ask my friends if they can imagine what would have happened if 47 commercial aircraft had been hijacked last year? If 867 passengers, flight crew and cabin crew were taken hostage? They all agree. There would be international outrage. It would be the lead story of every major news outlet. And there would be a concerted international response to deal with the situation.

Why is it that the safety of seafarers is somehow considered to be less important? (I suppose we should be used to that. A quick Wikipedia search shows that in 2009 there were at least 37 vessels and hundreds of lives lost at sea – and this is not a complete list. Imagine the outcry if 37 commercial aircraft came down in one year.)

Anyway, the point is that the lives of thousands of seafarers are being placed in danger every time a ship owner needs to move a cargo through the vast and ever expanding piracy zone. The reason the ship owner is moving goods through these areas is because we – the world's consumers – want them.
 
Some countries are making efforts to protect ships and seafarers trading through the affected area. But others – such as the major FOC flag states making billions from the ships on their registers – are doing absolutely nothing to protect them.

Last week I inspected a well-run vessel with a relatively happy crew. They were paid regularly in accordance with the ship's ITF agreement and their families received their allotments on time. Provisions were plentiful and of good quality and the accommodation areas were clean and tidy. The ship seemed to be well maintained. But there was something in the eyes of some of the crew that told me all was not right. I wondered if overtime was being paid but when I checked it clearly was. When I got talking to a few of the crew in the mess room I asked them what was on their mind. Was there something wrong I should know about? "No", they said. "It is nothing to do with how we are treated. It is our next port. We have to go through the pirates to get there and we are very scared."
 
Who can blame them? In February this year 17 Filipino seamen were part of a crew released after being held captive by Somali pirates for 10 months. The rest of the crew were made up of six Indonesians, five Chinese and two Taiwanese. A Chinese sailor and two Indonesians had reportedly died in captivity. What could possibly make this story any worse?

I'll tell you. The Chairman of the Manila Economic and Cultural Office had to call on the Department of Labour and Employment to ensure that the Filipino seamen receive their back wages for the period of their captivity.
 
In other words, their wages had been stopped once the pirates had captured them and their families had suffered not only the mental torture of not knowing if they would ever see their loved ones again but the cruelty of having their income stopped at a stroke, thereby seriously jeopardising their ability to survive financially. Not all employers act so callously but we have to make sure that none do.

And the international community has to do more to ensure that everything possible is being done to minimise the risk in the first place.

This week the ITF and a group of industry partners are launching a campaign to persuade all governments to commit the resources necessary to end the increasing problem of Somalia-based piracy. The growing number of incidents clearly demonstrates that the measures in place at present are wholly inadequate.

Much more commitment needs to be given to tackling the problems of Somalia and its people. Piracy has become a livelihood for a small number of Somalis. There is no easy solution to this. It will take a global effort and a careful approach to bring Somalia back from the wreckage. But unless the international community addresses the causes, piracy will persist and seafarers will continue to face the threat of attack.

If the world wants to continue to trade, and survive, then it should make it a priority to protect those of you whose job it is to transport the goods from A to B. In this, the Year of the Seafarer, it is the very least it can do.

We hope to deliver half a million signatures by World Maritime Day, 23 September 2010, to make it clear to governments that they should close the circle on protection of ships. And those states now ducking their responsibilities need to stand up and follow the example of those actively involved in combating the threat.

The petition will call on nations to:

• Dedicate significant resources and work to find real solutions to the growing piracy problem.
• Take immediate steps to secure the release and safe return of kidnapped seafarers to their families
• Work within the international community to secure a stable and peaceful future for Somalia and its people

We all have a responsibility to sign the petition and to convince as many people as possible to add their signatures too. An electronic web-based petition has been set up and can be accessed by clicking here. So, do your bit – visit www.endpiracypetition.org, sign the petition, get your family and friends to sign it and spread the word.

Register on the Crew Talk forum and you could win a laptop computer or one of five second prizes of a solar powered charger.

To enter the competition, just:

1. Register on the ‘Crew Talk’ forum
2. Join a discussion and post a comment
   

Prizes:
One Dell Laptop worth up to £500 – the winner of this prize will be the best post on the forum by a registered user between 01 May 2010 and 31 May 2010. The ITF will inform the winner of the prize on 02 June 2010.

Five runner up prizes of a FreeLoader Pro solar powered charger (for mobile phones, MP3s etc) worth up £70 – the winners will be picked at random from all entrants made from 01 May 2010 to 31 May 2010.

You accept these terms and conditions when you enter the competition, together with any specific terms for such competition which may be mentioned in any messages or on this website. If you do not agree with any of these terms and conditions then you should not enter the competition.

I am hoping my title here is self-explanatory – regular readers may remember an earlier blog entry on the same subject – so I will come straight to the point on this.

Nowadays, and especially with the aftershocks of the credit crunch still being felt, seafarers are increasingly being asked to lash or unlash cargo. And employers are becoming more and more inventive in avoiding potential “interference” from dockers' unions in those ports where there is an active union.

Seafarers are often requested to unlash prior to arrival, or to lash cargo after leaving berth, when the ship is at sea. And sometimes these forms of cargo handling are even done inside the port, while the vessel is still berthed or while the vessel is shifting, with cargo ramps or holds closed for unwanted visitors. Reports from dockers and seafarers to the ITF Inspectorate confirm the above.

When cargo handling by seafarers is ascertained, the master of the vessel will receive a warning from the ITF Inspectorate and/or the local ITF-affiliated dockers’ union. In some ports the vessel may even be subject to actions from ITF-affiliated dockers’ unions who want to protect the jobs of their members.

Afterwards begins a kind of “shift-the-blame” game. The captain is normally the person that decides if the crew will handle the cargo. But he, in turn, receives orders from the owners, operators, customers, charterers and agents; or perhaps the crew handled the cargo without asking the captain. Owners are pointing fingers at charterers. The credit crunch and poor economy is often used as an excuse. Charterers point fingers at agents. And so it goes on. Everybody is blaming somebody else.

But that does not change the fact that if the vessel is covered with an ITF-approved collective bargaining agreement (CBA), or in some cases with a national CBA, there is a breach of agreement. Under the terms of this agreement a ship’s crew must not undertake “cargo handling and other work traditionally or historically done by dock workers without the prior agreement of the ITF dockers’ union concerned”. This includes lashing and unlashing, loading and unloading.

The same goes for almost all national flagged vessels – a dockers’ clause similar to the one in the ITF CBAs prevents crew from handling cargo.

And to complete it, some countries have a law for cargo handling and others countries may have ratified ILO 137, the Dockwork Convention. So if the seafarers are handling cargo, it means even more breaches have taken place.

Whatever the excuses and reasons used to justify cargo handling by seafarers, what’s in it for the seafarers?

Not a lot. For this job, seafarers are paid peanuts – if they get any extra pay at all. Every time they do it they jeopardise their health and risk their life for the benefit and profit of the ones above them. Not to mention the stress and fatigue this extra non-seafaring work brings them. At the same time, dockers are losing work.

Both seafarers and dockers are losing out. The only winners are the bosses, the employers, the shipping companies and the port operators who will do what they can to squeeze another dollar of profit at the expense of the workers.

Crew cargo handling is an area in which the maritime industry and its shareholders have already been busy for many years, trying to find ways to boost their profits and to breach one of the strongest bonds of solidarity that exists among the working class.

In Europe, for the last few years, dockers have been winning the fight for their jobs against two European directives also known as Port Package I & II. But now it seems the game has been brought to the waterfront. It begs the question: Is the industry trying to pit these two natural allies against each other?

A lot of seafarers are working under the terms and conditions and the protection of an ITF CBA. In some cases the CBA came into place with the support of dockers.

The dockers have supported you, now it is time for you to support them!
 
As an ITF Inspector I ask you to please ensure that you do not undertake any cargo handling or related work that should be done by dockers. If you have any experience or knowledge of this practice, please advise us or notify your union. Alternatively you could also inform the dockers working on board your vessel. They will do the rest.

Dockers and seafarers, together we are strong!

Help us to help you! Respect the dockers' clause!
 
Thank you for your understanding. If you have any comments, please react below.

For now, safe sailing!

Recent experience leads me to believe that seafarers need to be warned about the risks they face on sailing into a country when they have in their possession material that is considered to be culturally and legally unacceptable in that country.

Over the past couple of years I have come across several cases where crew have been arrested, imprisoned and deported for having indecent or obscene material. Sometimes this is quite right, for example when a seafarer is clearly found with images of child pornography. But sometimes it is not so clear-cut.

Let me give some examples. On one ship that arrived in my port, the authorities found a quantity of cigarettes along with some magazines and DVDs containing child pornography in an overhead air duct. They identified the engineer responsible for maintaining the air duct and arrested him. Initially he admitted the cigarettes were his but protested his innocence regarding the other material. He subsequently changed his plea to guilty and was jailed for six months and then deported. 

Another crew member was arrested because they found images of child pornography on the hard drive of his laptop computer. He said that he recently bought the laptop in a market in another port and he did not know the images were there. He was held in prison for several months awaiting trial. Eventually – according to his lawyer – he changed his plea to guilty in order to receive a lighter sentence and get home quicker.

On another ship, four crew members were arrested. Illegal images were found on laptops, DVDs and even mobile phones. The Captain was furious that one of them had been set up. He explained that a Customs Officer had started a conversation with the crew member about the sport of cock-fighting and had given the impression that he, too, was a fan. He had asked the seafarer if he had any DVDs of the sport he could have. The crew member had given him one and was promptly arrested. The Captain couldn’t understand how this guy could be arrested for this when the sport was popular and acceptable in his own home country. How could he be expected to be aware that this sport was unlawful in my country?

I think this is a valid point. The authorities should give ships agents a list of unacceptable/unlawful things, to be passed to the vessel prior to its arrival, so that everyone is aware of the rules in any particular country. That way, no-one should be arrested due to their ignorance. If a crew knows beforehand exactly what is prohibited then there can be no excuses if someone is caught with something they shouldn’t have.

And every seafarer should know what is on their personal laptop computer. In the most recent case I dealt with, a crew member was arrested because of unacceptable images found on his laptop and on a memory stick that was still attached to his laptop. He maintained that crew members would “borrow” laptops from each other to send emails home etc., and someone else must have downloaded the images to his laptop. Why, he argued, would he leave a memory stick in his computer during a customs search if he was aware that there were such images saved on it? The court took a different view and jailed him for six months for “importing with the intention to distribute” obscene material.

His situation brought further consequences for his family. They had not known for three weeks what had happened to him. They thought he must have fallen overboard or died because all communication just stopped. In fact the crewing agent and ship owner had gone broke, so nobody had thought to tell the family he had been arrested. Eventually he had made contact from prison. What is more, although documents showed that everyone had been paid to the end of the month before the company’s collapse, the crewing agency had not transferred his wages to his family because he had been arrested. In effect they had stolen his wages. But we could do nothing about this because they had since gone bust. Also, between the customs authorities, the prison and his embassy his belongings had been lost, including his passport, seaman’s book, driving licence and national ID card. Because his family did not have any of these, it was impossible for them to claim any benefits because they couldn’t prove who he was, who he had worked for and so on.

All because, he claims, he let his shipmates use his laptop.

The point is, try to be aware of the laws and customs of the countries you are sailing to. 

The authorities in my country do a good job trying to protect the rest of us from the unpleasant things we don’t want coming into our country. We have asked them to do this job for us and we support them. It is the same for other countries. 

I don’t want this disgusting material coming here. But neither do I want any innocent crew member to find themselves in situations like these because they haven’t been careful. If you are aware of the rules you can act accordingly. If you are still caught with unacceptable material there is really no excuse.

As you know, this part of the website offers seafarers up-to-date information on real issues and covers our experiences as ITF Inspectors working on your behalf.

So, here is something that crossed my desk a couple of weeks ago.

How many of you have heard about seafarer recruitment scams using internet websites? Usually, these target seafarers from developing countries or prospective seafarers who are often quite desperate and have little knowledge about how a person really secures maritime employment.

The website usually appears to be legitimate – it might have a postal address in the United Kingdom, Canada or another western country. And these sites often require the employment-seeker to send some money for entry into the database. This may be disguised as an ‘agency’ or ‘registration’ fee or, increasingly, as payment for a medical examination, visa, or passport processing. It may be made to look like something you have to pay to a government department, clinic or bank. Or you may be asked for money to cover airfares to join a ship and then promised you’ll get the money back when you arrive.
 
You won’t.

These are the details of the latest scam, as described by a seafarer who sent me a full report on how he was cheated. They are his words, although I have deleted any identifying names.

"After applying to the manning agency website advertisement, I was given a short phone call interview by a Captain from a well-known cruise line. Someone from the agency notified me the next day saying that the company had hired me. She then emailed me my employment contract and information.”
 
“The contract was for five months on board one of this company’s cruise ships as a Junior Officer. The pay rate was to be 3,100 Euro a month, with a bonus of 1,300 Euro when the contract was finished.
 
“She informed me that the company wanted me, as well as all others hired, to take anti-terrorism, drug, alcohol management and crowd control courses. The courses were to be taken in Naples, Italy, and paid for by us; our fees would be paid back to us after spending 21 days onboard the vessel, as would the cost for our flights. The agency then organised flights for all of us, although we paid for them. We were emailed contracts to sign and sent them back to the agency, which then forwarded them to the cruise line.
 
“Our hotels were paid for in Naples, and when we arrived we learned that the courses would be taught in the conference room of the hotel. When we met with the man from the cruise line, he informed us that the ship had broken down, and all passengers disembarked, but that we had been assigned to a different vessel.
 
“The other vessel was said to be departing from St. Tropez, France, two days later, and there were not enough flight seats available for all 15 of us. The man known as ‘Rudy’ gave us our train tickets for France and two contact numbers for our arrival. He informed us that our courses would now take place onboard the ship but that these still had to be paid for in Italy.
 
“We had to sign new contracts as the vessel had changed, fill in our banking information, and pay ‘Rudy’ for our courses (670 Euro for Jr. Officer, 780 Euro for hotel staff who required STCW 95 basic safety). We were given visas for France as well as vessel orientation booklets. Twenty-four hours later we arrived in St. Raphael, France, to find no cruise line employee waiting for us, and the contact numbers we had been given went straight to fax machines.
 
“We went to the local police department and found out that the ship we were to join would not be sailing to France. Right away we contacted the manning agency, which had no idea that this was a scam. They helped us contact the embassy but other than that left us on our own to find accommodation and flights home. They have informed us we will not be reimbursed for any flights, meals, or accommodation.

“From what I have learned now, the cruise line had nothing to do with any of this – it was entirely created by Italian organised crime. All of our contracts seem very legit, and I can forward them to you if necessary. I hope that this gives you a better idea of the situation, if you require more information you can contact me.”

I don't know what the ITF could do for these young people, all of whom lost thousands of Euros. This scam was extremely sophisticated. It is the first time we have heard of people actually flying to join ships on the other side of the world. The money lost was not just the ‘course’ fees – these went into the pockets of the fraudsters – but also all of the travel costs these people paid for upfront.

I forwarded this information to my national maritime regulatory authority. They have made some inquiries about the agency but nothing has come of it. It would seem that the agency was also caught up in this ploy to steal from young job-seekers. At this time there is no international mechanism to deal with this matter. The criminals sent the crew from Italy to France after they had taken their money. The French police were not interested; the Italian police only had a foreign citizen on a telephone with nothing concrete to investigate.

We have previously widely publicised recruitment scams – in fact, we have even taken action with foreign authorities and pressed them to shut some of these rackets down – so please spread the word and pass these stories around.

Thankfully, the ITF and the International Shipping Federation have worked long and hard at the International Labour Organization on the new Maritime Labour Convention. Those folks had the foresight to recognise the complexities of recruitment scams. The Maritime Labour Convention will come into force very soon. And on this subject the convention states in clause 1.4 c (vi): “…establish a system of protection, by way of insurance or an equivalent appropriate measure to compensate seafarers for monetary loss that they may incur as a result of the failure of a recruitment service or the relevant shipowner under the seafarers' employment agreement to meet its obligations to them.”

So, there you have it. In future more seafarers and would-be seafarers will have some protection from the kind of complicated fraud described in this post.

The ITF takes these issues very seriously. Unfortunately, we are not always able to provide direct assistance in cases of criminal fraud. This isn't an employment matter. It’s a regulatory and public awareness matter. We are doing what we can with the marine authorities – we put seafarers in touch with the correct authorities and we work hard within our own national maritime administrations to put into effect the ILO language I have quoted above.

The rest is up to you. You know the world of shipping is fraught with deception and peril. Be careful. Share your stories and experiences with your fellow workers and with us. Together we look after each other.

For now safe sailing.

The other day I came across a really interesting story – one that touches on so many of the issues we ashore often preach about. You know what I mean: whether it’s the ITF, IMO or a shipowners' association, concerns are constantly being voiced about the shortage of skilled crew, the marine environment and the thorny issue of criminalisation of seafarers.

In fact, the IMO has decided that 2010 will be the International Year of the Seafarer.

Can anybody see where this is heading? Yes, I have another complaint to make about those who govern and operate the shipping industry. So, here goes...

Recently I was out checking conditions aboard the ships in my port. On the last ship of the day, I was greeted by a young master. I joked, "who promoted you to Captain?". He smiled and when I asked his age he said he was 37 years old. It was his second command. He had received good training and served with a couple of fine mentors who had helped accelerate his career path.

But sadly, he also said that he planned to retire at 40. I scratched my head and asked why he would cut off his career at such a young age. He cited several reasons.

1) Worsening sea conditions and intense pressure.

2) Salaries that do not make it worth spending so much time away from home. (In his case 9-10 month contracts are normal.)

3) A young family that wants him home, and isolation and lack of communication with them.

4) Lack of support from maritime authorities and the industry in general.

He related a few stories, but none were more harrowing than what had just occurred while he was in transit to my port. Here's what happened…

While inbound, the bulker was ordered to wait at anchor for a berth. She was assigned an anchorage in a remote location. When the crew let go the anchor in 30 metres of water, the pilot remarked that they should be alert for the rest of the night. Ballast had been pumped, in line with the charters’ requirements for the "Notice of Readiness" to load. Gale force winds were forecast and the approach to the anchorage was exposed. As the night wore on, the wind speed increased and they started to drag anchor very fast. Crew were quickly ordered to their positions and engines were readied.

The Captain advised the port of the situation and said he was trying to avoid colliding with one of the nearby islands, now less than less than three cables off. They dropped more chain, and a second anchor but the vessel continued to drag. At some point the stern caught the back-eddy of the tide, due to the narrow mouth of the channel. At this point the captain requested the assistance of tugboats but, unfortunately, help was about two hours away. A tug was dispatched but they were on their own; the sea was now running at about four to five metres.

The ship was in a perilous position and the Captain radioed a request to heave anchor and steam out of trouble. After being told to "stand-by for one minute", the response came that the ship would be contravening regulations if it heaved anchor without a pilot onboard – but that if the Captain wished to do so for the safety of the vessel it was his choice.

They began to heave anchors, drifting sideways towards the narrow channel and abeam to the wind due to the tidal current. The Chief Officer and crew up on the forecastle – hanging on in the wind – and the Captain on the bridge relaying messages back and forth.

Still the ship continued to head towards a small island – in danger of wrapping around it like a car hitting a lamppost. They tried to control the drag but, due to the conditions, things remained difficult. They were unable to raise the anchor. The Captain ordered full astern and the ship finally avoided collision by a whisker – the bow missing the island by metres. It was such a close call, none of the crew I talked to thought they were going to make it.

The anchor came free as they were dragging towards deeper water. Then it was up to the Captain and his officers to turn the vessel back into the wind and manoeuvre it between the islands into more open water. Eventually, they managed to get the bow around and into the wind. The tug finally arrived and stood by for about two hours while they waited for a pilot.

It was truly remarkable that the Captain and crew were able to save the ship that night. Honestly, looking at the chart and the conditions they faced, it's a miracle the vessel didn't hit that small island.

The local coastal area features well-appointed homes, parks and thriving marine wildlife – this really could have been an environmental disaster. But what really makes me mad is that when I did a bit of research, I found that the same thing happened to another ship in the same anchorage only two months before. Luckily in that case the vessel settled softy on a reef and on a rising tide.

So, the question is: at a time when there is such a shortage of skilled young seafarers, why do we let them down so badly by ignoring such incidents? Why do we anchor a vessel in an exposed anchorage away from any assistance in deteriorating weather conditions? Why do the charters place the vessel at risk so that it can be ready to load? Why don't the owners support the crew instead of signing a charter party agreement that can place the vessel and her crew in danger for economic reasons?

Are we learning nothing about cases such as the Hebei Spirit in Korea, the Full City in Norway, the Prestige off the coast of Spain? In every one of these incidents the vessel was left or placed in a situation beyond the control of the Master and crew. The Full City case, in particular, is quite similar to the one described above: anchored in an unsafe location – storm brewing – the ship dragged anchor until it ran aground.

Every time one of these cases crops up I hear platitudes from the industry about the crew and their efforts. Hell, we even dedicate a whole year to them. But when it comes down to it, apart from having a ceremony, how far is the industry really prepared to go to support these men and women they supposedly honour?

Why do we allow them to be put in situations like this? I suspect it all comes down to money and shoreside "risk management". Shipowners, charterers and customers are looking to cut costs and cut corners wherever they can. Maritime authorities are always under stiff pressure from the industry to make requirements less stringent.

We let this ship and her crew down! Then we did nothing to help them! They saved the ship all by themselves and averted another massive clean-up operation; they avoided another black eye for an industry that constantly complains how it is so hard done by. If they hadn't saved the ship, the Captain and officers would probably have been arrested, and armchair mariners the world over would have been passing judgment on what the crew should or should not have done.

It's time for the industry to step up and be counted; to put its money where its mouth is and make this career a more rewarding choice for young seafarers, make it safer for them. It's up to governments, owners and labour to do this. If we don't all pull together, we will get what we deserve. I can tell you that this Captain was truly grateful that I came on board, listened to his story, wrote a letter to my authorities and wrote to the company to commend the valiant efforts of this crew. Nobody else seemed to care.

An old ITF inspector friend of mine likes to say, "What you brew today, you drink tomorrow". Damn right.

So, well done, Captain, I hope you do stay in a shipboard career – this industry can't afford to lose workers like you and your crew.

For now, safe sailing all.

Happy New Year to you all – may it be a safe one.

It still amazes me that many of the seafarers I try and help don’t have anything in writing that could be used as evidence to support their case.

Often there has been an ongoing disagreement between a crew member and a captain, or ship manager, or crew manager, and you find that most of the discussions have been verbal, which makes it impossible to show who said or promised what to whom, and when.

Here is a good example: an Eastern European officer called me from the mid-Atlantic. He explained that when he was offered his current position, he had told the company that he didn’t have a visa for the United States. This was because on a previous visit to the US, his visa had expired during his stay and he had been deported. The company, however, said this would not be a problem since the vessel would not be sailing to the US.

During his contract, the ship received instructions to pick up a cargo destined for the East Coast of the USA. Again the guy told the captain he didn’t have a US visa, who in turn informed the company. The captain was told by an agent that the guy could be repatriated from the loading port, but despite every effort this could not be arranged. So the ship eventually sailed to the US with him still on board and still visa-less.

On arrival, the US Coast Guard requested security to guard the visa-less crew member. The same thing happened at the next port.

The next month the crew member heard from his family that his allotment of wages hadn’t arrived. When he questioned the company he was told to check with his bank. Later, they told him his salary would be paid with the following month’s wages.

This went on for two and a half months before the crewing agent finally told him the company was withholding his money to pay the security bill in the US, totalling over $12,000.

By this stage, his contract had expired, but the company still refused to repatriate him. They said they would transfer him to a different ship until the “debt” had been paid off.

When I heard this story I asked the officer to send me any documents that proved that he had informed the company about his visa situation. He had nothing. Most of the communication had been verbal. The master apparently had communications about the requests to the company and the agent about repatriation, but he refused to provide any of these, arguing that he was acting under instruction from the company.

I told him he must try to get something in writing that supported his claims, otherwise the company could argue he never told them about his visa situation and that he had put them in the position of having to pay for the security guards.

A day later I called him again and he reported that the company had said they would pay his salary and repatriate him from the next port.

When I asked if he had this promise in writing, he said no! Once again he was relying on them keeping to their word.

Let’s see if the company will keep their promise. If they don’t, how do we prove that he notified them that he had no US visa?

For an inspector trying to assist you, having something in writing that supports your claim can really help us to get a case resolved. At the end of the day, it will be helpful to you.

With that in mind, here are my top tips for keeping a record:

• Make sure communication with the vessel operator, manager, owner, crewing agent, etc., is in writing, especially if it’s about an important issue.
• Even if written communication is only one-way (from you to them) it will demonstrate that you made every effort to communicate with them.
• Keep a copy of anything you send or receive.
• If they respond verbally (by telephone for instance), write to them again and ask them to kindly put their response in writing. Keep a copy.
• If you don’t have access to email or fax, and communication is via the captain, ask him for copies of any relevant correspondence in or out.
• If this is refused, put your request in writing, keep a copy and ask the master to sign and date it, confirming receipt of your request. If he doesn’t want to do this, try to get a fellow crew member to sign as a witness to the date that you made the written request.

One of the reasons the ITF started this Inspector's Blog is to use it to communicate our thoughts about our work as Inspectors, about how we view the industry and the people in it, and also to allow us to share our experience with seafarers so that you are able to protect yourselves from unfortunate circumstances.

Over the past five years, it has been my experience that our industry is getting better. It seems like the ITF and industry have found ways to work closely on many common issues. This has been very rewarding for those of us in the ITF, and has had a direct effect on the lives of the seafarers – through improved safety practices, improved pension and disability schemes, enhanced training and better retention of staff. Whenever relationships are strengthened, rewards follow.

Even the banks that hold the industry mortgages seem to be improving their practices and are doing a better job in accepting their responsibility when a shipping line is near collapse or has gone bankrupt due to market conditions. These days, these big mortgage lenders are often ensuring the crew are paid their wages while the ship's arrest and auction winds its way through the legal process.

But while I am throwing bouquets to the industry in those areas, there is one area I think needs some real attention. Actually, I can think of more than one item in need of attention and better practices but, for now, I am concerned with this: shipowners who find themselves in a position of conflict between their hired labour supply and basic human rights.

So, you ask: What is the Inspector talking about today?

Well, I’ll tell you. 

When a major foreign shipping company hires a crew out of a country like Burma or China or any other less-than-democratic country, what happens when the crew have a legitimate complaint about safety, food, overtime, or any range of issues and they need somebody to help them? What happens when they feel like the only person that can really help them resolve their issue is the ITF Inspector? And what happens if their call to the ITF Inspector means the manning agency in Rangoon or Shanghai is going to come down on their head like a ton of bricks?

What can the seafarer do?

I fully understand the shipowners' arguments. With a shortage of manpower, they need to exploit all sources of seafarer labour supplies to keep the world's merchant fleet manned, they say.

But when seafarers were originally recruited from countries like China, Vietnam and Burma, shipowners were simply recruiting cheap and compliant labour. It was very clear and very stark. The intention was to avoid any ITF problems and to avoid having to conclude an ITF-acceptable CBA. Or, in some cases, it was to protect the shipowner who had an ITF CBA but was unwilling to actually pay those salaries. That’s the dirty little industry secret known as double bookkeeping.

More recently, the wage expectations of crew from places like China and Burma are increasing. There was a time when an Able Seaman from those countries made $100 a month and a Chief Officer could be had for $700. Today, those same salaries are more likely to be in the range of $700-900 and $4,000, respectively. These days, many shipowners sourcing crew from these countries are probably even paying the ITF rate – maybe not to the crewmembers assigned the wage, but a portion to the agency and government authority that is responsible for deploying that seafarer. A lot of this remains unclear and is, quite frankly, very difficult to audit.

But there is something that bothers me even more than where the salary goes.

What really makes me angry is when a ship with a Burmese crew calls in a cold-weather port and is suffering in the freezing cold without proper winter coats, gloves and hats. And on top of this, they are not provided sufficient nutritious food to keep them strong while they fight off the effects of the weather conditions and their hard work.

What happens if they have already complained to the Captain and the company and those requests are ignored? When the crew are suffering so badly that they are crying, what goes through their minds when the only hope is to call an ITF Inspector – knowing full well that they will be severely punished by the manning agency and the maritime administration in their home country?

This is equally difficult for us ITF Inspectors. We know that we can force the company to bring aboard extra provisions and cold-weather clothing. But we also know that it is extremely hard to do anything about the sanctions the seafarer will face in his or her home country.

All we can do is make the shipowner and flag state responsible for the seafarer’s human rights. And really, this is the conclusion I have come to. My position is quite simple – and it goes something like this:

If the shipowner insists on securing his maritime labour from countries where seafarers' rights are impaired and threatened by the state and where seafarers are not allowed to contact any foreign trade union or other organisation for immediate assistance, then that shipowner must make a guarantee to us, the ITF. It must guarantee that when a seafarer finds it necessary to seek ITF intervention and when that intervention is warranted and the complaints have been sustained and corrected, the shipowner will bear the primary responsibility of ensuring that manning agencies and/or the maritime administrations do not interfere in any way whatsoever with the life of the crew who may have requested such assistance!

We all know these countries that have no laws to protect seafarers' rights in their home country. Until shipowners who hire labour from these countries condemn the practice of employing sweatshop labour, I think the shipowner must be held responsible for safeguarding such rights and protecting seafarers from punishment once back home.

Until that happens, ITF Inspectors will remain sceptical of the corporate policies and recruitment practices of such owners.

In the meantime, I hold the view that if anything happens to any seafarer I have assisted, then I have a score to settle with that shipowner!

I know my fellow ITF Inspectors feel this way – and this is how we are able to sleep at night after we have helped you, knowing that our help could cause you additional problems. This is how we make sure that the shipowners and agents do not ruin your career.

I think this is a very important subject and I’m expecting that you will have a lot of stories and opinions to share with us. So please write using the comments option below. We really need your anonymous feedback on this issue.

For now, though, safe sailing – and stay warm and dry.

The ITF today threw down the gauntlet to those flag states and shipowners who have not taken action to fight Somali piracy to act now... Read more here>>

Greetings, Brothers and Sisters

This edition, I bring you a gripping story of how the recession is taking its toll on seafarers – and how maritime labour is standing strong to defend them.

It’s been a busy year for the ITF globally. More and more shipping companies are defaulting on bank payments, and banks and other creditors are scrambling to cope without setting off mass bankruptcies in the global fleet. The situation is complicated by a shipbuilding boom launched five years ago. Orders were placed when times were good, but new-builds are hitting the water in a market that doesn’t need them.

All of this has a significant effect on freight rates, with every market affected. Daily rates and long-term charter rates are low – and the prospects for some segments of the industry continue to weaken. As you might expect, seafarers are caught in the bight. While some companies are shorting crew on salaries, others are simply walking away, leaving us at the ITF to sort out with creditors how to deal with the abandonment, maintain the ship, get the seafarers’ salaries and then return them home.

In a recent case, a vessel owned by the president of a major shipowners’ association – a body that’s done a lot of bragging about its progressive crewing and environmental practices – ignored stated commitments when it came to his own company.

A few months ago a bulk carrier sailed in for a load of grain. The Filipino crew contacted my office on behalf of wives and family back home, who had stopped receiving their home allotments from the company. 

When settlement negotiations began with the company and during my investigation, I found the crewing agency in Manila had also stopped receiving funds from the company and was laying out cash for the allotments on its own – an unusual and admirable step, and something I have never seen before. When the crew threatened to strike to support the claim, the company found the $71,000 and we settled the onboard portion of the outstanding salary. The company promised it would settle up accounts in the Philippines in the coming weeks, as the vessel was heading to China with a load of grain and then onward. The crew and the crewing agency in Manila stayed in contact with me for the next couple of months – through a drama that would play out in the far-flung ports of the world.

Just before the vessel arrived at its next port, I was contacted once again by the agency and crew, who were now owed more than $140,000 in onboard wages. I advised them to contact the local ITF inspector who had been briefed and who took charge of negotiations. The agency advised that the total tally for its money and the families at home was $350,000. We also learned there was money owing on two other ships in the fleet – sums of $170,000 and $120,000, respectively. All told, we needed to recover more than $850,000.

The company was not going to roll over easily. It tried a number of tactics, which included supplying a set of fake documents purporting to confirm the international wire transfer of funds. Company lawyers threatened the crew, who staged a six-day strike. The ITF was threatened repeatedly with legal action, as was the affiliated union. At one point in an email communication with the captain, who had become a friend, I wrote: “Hold fast! I have been closely following your struggle. I want to congratulate all of you for your commitment to receive the justice necessary. I know it has been a difficult fight, but these cases always are.”

Days turned into weeks; emails and calls flew back and forth between continents.

In the end, due to the hard-fought agreement put in place by the ITF inspector and the continued threat of job action on two other continents, the company agreed to pay up.

Who won this fight? The crew of the ship that had taken the original action – the very seafarers who stood firm and fought for their lawful wages and started the ball rolling. They learned – as many of you have – to use collective strength. They learned that if they were brave, they would be supported by dockworkers in the ports they visited.

So, there’s a story of what a dedicated group of workers under the gun can achieve with collective courage and dedication – not just the ITF inspectors, but also the crews who worked closely with us on each of the ships, every step of the way.

A tip of the cap to the former captain, officers and crew of that bulk carrier. And a tip of the cap to our fellow ITF inspectors who took the ball as it was passed to them, and to the dockers who supported the campaign. It was a big job and a big haul of wages.

Following on from last week’s blog post about the Japanese anti-union company Dowa Line, you too can lend your support to the campaign by sending a letter directly to Dowa.

Let Dowa know that there is worldwide interest in how they are doing business!

ITF-affiliated trade unions in Japan, Korea and Taiwan are today beginning an East Asian maritime week of action (7 to 11 September).

Read the full press release here>>

The ITF contracts enjoyed by seafarers around the world are not always won without a struggle. And we Inspectors are currently engaged in one with Japanese company Dowa Line. Unlike the vast majority of Japanese ship-owners operating FOC ships, Dowa does everything it can to avoid giving its seafarers the security and dignity of an ITF Collective Bargaining Agreement.

By dodging ITF agreements, Dowa exposes all seafarers working for Japanese companies. It pushes down wages and conditions and makes it more difficult to maintain hard-won high standards on other fleets.

ITF Inspectors have got together and created an exciting worldwide campaign to help Dowa crews get the wages, conditions and respect they deserve. You can read more about this campaign here.

Last week a group of trade unionists in Canada made a show of solidarity by braving some harsh weather conditions and holding a rally in St John, New Brunswick. On 11 September, ITF unions will bring this struggle to the company’s doorstep for a rally at their headquarters in Japan.

We are not afraid of Dowa, and seafarers don’t need to be either if they stick together. With your help, we can bring justice to all Dowa crews. If you work for Dowa or know anyone who does please talk to your shipmates and build solidarity onboard so we can help you.

Dowa’s bulk carriers mainly trade in the Americas and among these are many older ships that make life at sea hard for the workers. The company may tell crew members that they don’t need a union, that it will take care of them and even hire their friends and family, but seafarers are smarter than that. They know that companies like Dowa only pay the rates they do because the ITF is out there fighting for good wages and conditions.

We Inspectors will keep visiting these ships. We will make sure that the Japanese authorities, Dowa customers and other people that Dowa deals with know what kind of company it is. We will keep the pressure on them to do the right thing for their hard-working crews. We hope you will do your bit too.
If your ship is tied up next to a Dowa line ship, please go and talk to the crew about joining the ITF family of seafarers.

And if you work for Dowa, contact your nearest ITF Inspector to talk in confidence about conditions onboard and what you can do to help with this campaign.

Remember: an injury to one is an injury to all! Seafarers stand stronger together.

Solidarity shipmates, and safe sailing.

Death is something that a lot of people don’t like to talk about, or even think about. But as a seafarer you really should take a moment to consider what would happen if you were to die on board ship.

We all know that a seafaring is a tough and dangerous career choice. But I recently saw a very shocking statistic, that if you work at sea you are 50 times more likely to die at work than people in other occupations. Apparently, 1 in every 2,000 seafarers and 1 in every 1,000 fishermen will die on the job.

Of course we should do whatever we can to make seafaring a safer profession and get companies and regulators to improve health and safety standards for crews. But until the statistics improve, you should find out what would happen if you were to lose your life at sea.

Many of you go to sea to support your families, and in some cases extended families. Some of you are the only wage-earner. Your nearest and dearest probably depend on your pay packet to put a roof over their heads, a meal on the table, shoes on their feet. Not to mention other essentials such as medical care and education.

Too often at the ITF we have seen families suffering a double tragedy – the loss of their loved one and at the same time the loss of their only source of income and means of survival.

One of the most important reasons you should try and get yourself covered by an ITF Collective Bargaining Agreement is that it contains important benefits for a seafarer and their family in case they die or become disabled through an accident. Under an ITF agreement the next of kin receives a lump sum of $89,100 compensation. A sum of $17,820 each is also paid to up to 4 dependent children.

I am not a big fan of the word compensation. In these tragic cases, nothing is going to compensate for losing a husband or son or father. But what the money will do is help the people left behind to survive. It will give them the space to mourn, without having to worry about how they are going to pay the next electricity bill or mortgage payment. And in time it will give them the chance to plan for the future.

Maybe you took a job at sea because you had a dream of providing a better future for your family. A better home. A university education. Security. You might not be around to see it all come true, but if you do end up as one of the unfortunate statistics, whatever you do don’t let those hopes die with you.

Greetings friends,

If you happen to call for an ITF Inspector this week you will probably find there is nobody immediately available to render assistance. That's because the world's ITF Inspectorate, all 140 or so of us, will be gathering with the ITF Secretariat, affiliated unions and guest speakers for the ITF Inspectors Seminar. If you need urgent, immediate assistance please call our head office in London or the ITF affiliate in the port your ship is located. Rest assured, someone will be available to help.

The Inspectors get together every three or four years to go over new practices and procedures, maritime labour education and to renew acquaintances with our fellow Inspectors and relate our experiences. These seminars give us a chance to meet the new Inspectors, say goodbye to those who are leaving our ranks and build bonds of trust and solidarity between ourselves as we strive to work for you, our brothers and sisters of the global marine transportation industry.

This year we are meeting in Istanbul and our primary focus will be the new International Labour Organization convention commonly known as the Maritime Labour Convention. This huge undertaking agreed by shipowners, trade unions and governments should come into force within the next 18 to 24 months. First, we will try to understand how this comprehensive new convention can be applied to improve your life aboard ship and at home. We will also try and figure out how the role of the ITF Inspector might change with the existence of a convention that is enforceable by Port State Control. Surely this will have an effect on how problems aboard ships are resolved. We can only hope that this will be beneficial to seafarers, but personally, I am concerned it will become a shield for owners to hide behind the mass bureaucracy of Port State Control.

We ITF Inspectors will be relying on your feedback as the vessels you are working on become "labour certified". I suppose this will be somewhat similar to the International Safety Management system of audits. So the question will be: If the ship has been certified compliant with the ILO Maritime Labour Convention will the ITF Inspector have the authority to resolve issues that may exist on board? I think this will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

For now though, while we are all away filling our heads with new ideas, be careful and sail safe.

Be the first to leave a comment on this post – please login or register at the top right of the page.

The two officers have been found not guilty of destruction of the tanker Hebei Spirit by South Korea's High Court and are expected to be allowed to return to India soon. The lesser charge of not doing enough to prevent an oil leak was not overturned, despite the worldwide condemnation
of it... Read more here>>

Last week, while checking our ITF database, I noted a ship in port that needed a follow-up inspection because of problems found at the previous port. Another inspector was called to assist a second engineer who had to go home. There were also questions regarding his performance and salary. At the time of vessel's departure from the port, the 2/Eng had not been repatriated due to the vessel requiring his licence to meet the Safe Manning Certificate.

So, off I went down to the harbour to meet the ship to make sure he had been repatriated as requested, and that he had received all his legal entitlements as per the collective agreement in place on the vessel. From the content of the previous inspection report, I was not sure what I would find or if the company was in compliance with the CBA in force on the ship. When I boarded and asked a few probing questions of the Filipino crew at the gangway, I was quickly able to determine this was not a crew who were under the thumb of the owners and it was unlikely they were being cheated. These men were open, honest and even cheerfully cracked a few jokes between themselves. I asked them about the Captain’s nationality and they replied that he was also Filipino. With that I set off to the Captain's office to meet with him and examine the ship’s employment and payroll records.

When conducting an examination of working conditions, we ask lots of questions – cargo details, charters, next port and payroll documentation. The Captain was extremely professional and cooperative. When I asked him how long he had been aboard, his response was one year. I raised my eyebrows and had to ask: "Why so long aboard with no holiday?". He told me he had completed six months as Chief Officer and now another six months after being promoted to Captain. I congratulated him on his promotion and then asked how long he had been a Chief Officer. He told me 14 years! My jaw dropped so far in shock I think it bounced off the table in front of me: 14 years as a Chief Officer and now finally a Captain! I asked him why so long and he told me he had been satisfied as a C/O. He had felt no real desire to take the next step, but that with the shortage of senior officers, it was time for him to meet his responsibility to the industry that had given him and his family so much. He accepted the position, and the responsibility and the rewards that go along with the job.

I enquired as to his next port of call – something we always ask – and he told me the cargo would be discharged in the Philippines. He added that this was the first time in his whole career that he’d call at a port in his home country and now he was bringing this ship in under his command. The Captain went on to say that he would probably sign off there as the port was only 60 miles from his home town.

Can you imagine what the odds are on all these things happening? Consider time, place and personal and professional factors... to sail to your home port in a remote part of the world on a vessel under your command after 14 years as a Chief Officer and nearly 25 years at sea – well, the odds seem incalculable.

So, it occurs to me that since the shipping company will not have to pay for taxis, hotels and airline tickets to get the Captain home for a well deserved rest, the least it can do is hire a private jeepney to drive the Captain the last 60 miles to his home.

To me, this is just good karma.

Congratulations Captain! Well done, sir, and thanks for running such a good ship where your crew feel proud to serve with you.

Now I'm going to write to the company in question and ask about that jeepney for hire.

Keep your heads up, stay alert and safe sailing.

Be the first to leave a comment on this post – please login or register at the top right of the page.

Anyone following the maritime press will know that despite the current downturn in every sector of the shipping market, one thing remains constant: the shortage of skilled seafarers continues. Latest estimates still project a shortfall of nearly 84,000 officers by 2012.

So, what's going on? Why have the present shortages and projected increased shortages not been addressed – even though we have known for many years that they were coming?

To get to the bottom of this and to finally begin to seek solutions, the ITF and shipping industry association INTERTANKO recently hosted 20 seafarers for a round table discussion on issues affecting job satisfaction. We looked at a number of areas and – having now reviewed the findings of this discussion – I thought I would offer an opinion, as a former seafarer and a longtime ITF inspector.

Just like you, I strongly believe that everyone knows what improvements need to be made in order to recruit and retain more seafarers. It's just that it will cost a bit of money and it will mean those dinosaurs that still exist in some shipping circles must back down from their age-old hatred of decent conditions for seamen.

First, let us realise that shipping companies have scoured the globe for the cheapest seafarers. Once one nationality makes inroads to better wages and conditions, the shipowners move on to the next-cheapest supply. Well, shipowners have now gone to the ends of the earth; they have found all of the cheapest seamen. And guess what? Hand in hand with globalisation, greater opportunities have come for educated workers in their home countries. It's pretty difficult to attract a young educated worker in the Netherlands, for example, to go to sea. And now it's getting pretty difficult to attract a young educated worker in India or coastal China to go to sea as well. Why take all that education and throw it into the brutal world of international shipping when you can stay ashore and enjoy a career at home with your family?

One thing is clear from the findings. Seafarers get very little respect from any quarter. It doesn't matter if it's owners, charterers, port operators, government authorities or the courts. Seafarers often find themselves at the head of the chain of blame.

Seafarers are feeling like criminals. In many countries, they are not allowed shore leave. And although the United States gets most of the criticism for this, it is not the only country giving us grief. There appears to be a lack of uniformity in the application of the ISPS Code. In fact, one of the suggestions by seafarers is that a complaints system be established so that countries violating the spirit of the code are held to account at the International Maritime Organization. Personally, I think that's an excellent suggestion. These nations know who they are, just as we do. If they cannot allow us ashore and allow us our dignity, then it is time to name and shame them.

I can tell you that in my own country, we have about three regional interpretations of what the regulations on port and ship security mean. And in one of those interpretations, the ITF inspectors' access to you has been curtailed by shipping interests. Can you imagine? Shipowners complaining about recruitment and retention, while their peers in the shipping industry are using the ISPS Code to shield themselves from those who will stand up to the exploitation of the seafarers aboard? Can you imagine a nation that will allow a substandard shipowner to use ISPS so that it can save on wage costs, medical expenses and victualing allowance?

At every shipping meeting or conference I attend, I hear shipowners lament, "we need to improve the image of our industry". Sadly, most seem to mean that they need to do a better public relations job rather than actually cleaning up the poor practices that still exist.

Regular readers will know I have written extensively on the perils of criminalisation. You, as seafarers, know better than anybody that if there's a pollution event on your ship, it's you that will get locked up and hauled off to the courts. Yes, the designated person ashore will get a nasty wake-up call, but they are not going to get locked up. I hope that our campaign with like-minded industry associations will start to pay off and governments will start to roll back much of the regressive legislation that traps seafarers in a legal net. This fight continues at the highest levels but also, just as importantly, in many of the countries that have regressive laws that unjustly persecute innocent seafarers.

Yes, life at sea is getting more difficult – everything aboard is more complex and procedures are endless – yet crew sizes are not increased. The burden on each seafarer has dramatically increased over the past 10 years and yet the wages have hardly been raised at all. Only a couple of months ago, the International Shipping Federation refused to increase the International Maritime Organization's recommended minimum wage for seafarers. Presently, that wage scale recommends a minimum wage for an AB of $957, inclusive of leave pay and overtime. This is for a 312-hour month – that's nearly 10.5 hours a day for this pathetic salary. Yet the leading industry association says this is enough and it is not willing to allow the ILO to recommend even a small increase.

That's not all. The ITF also recently asked the International Maritime Employers' Committee to sit down and renegotiate its collective agreement. Guess what the answer was? There will be no increase to the salary this year.

So, I ask you, our most valuable resource (that's what human resource professionals like to call us workers when they have nothing to offer): what do you think of our roundtable discussion with 20 seafarers? What do you think will help shipowners recruit and retain highly skilled workers in the future? Will you recommend a life at sea for your son or daughter? What is it going to take for the shipping industry to actually make that final step to ensure all seafarers enjoy decent work in decent conditions and to take the brutalisation out of this industry?

For now, brothers and sisters, safe sailing.

Be the first to leave a comment on this post – please login or register at the top right of the page.