Latest Posts

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>>

Edited: 06/11/2009 at 12:19 PM by ITFBlogStaff

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.

Edited: 05/05/2009 at 04:46 PM by ITFInspector

International maritime press giant Lloyds List News reports that Jorgen Hammer Hansen, new chairman of the European Maritime Safety Agency, is predicting an increase in ship incidents and pollution. The story notes companies are more likely to postpone maintenance and installation of new equipment and will jeopardise safety, security and the environment.

"There will undoubtedly be significant economic pressure," he said. "It is probably not too pessimistic to expect that the quality of shipping will come under pressure in the coming years when shipping companies must cut costs to survive."

So, as we predicted here on 27 October 2008, shipping will face some choppy waters. As we have warned, keep your eyes and ears open for any signs that your company is facing financial troubles. Also, pay attention to maintenance schedules and any structural issues on your ship. If your vessel is detained by Port State Control, this could lead to the owners allowing your wages to fall behind or even stop.

Contact us if you have any concerns – we will provide you with confidential advice and assistance if you require it.

For now keep your heads up and sail safe.

 

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

Upcoming changes to the Standard of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers convention have been in the news recently. During his opening address to the committee, International Maritime Organization Secretary General Efthimios Mitropoulos said that it was essential the convention and code be comprehensively reviewed to ensure they meet the new challenges facing the shipping industry. Admiral Mitropoulos said he hoped the committee might consider in the revision process "appropriate provisions to ensure that seafarers are properly educated to face situations whereby their ship is under attack by pirates".

While the Admiral has a point, what does he actually have in mind? Let us consider the facts: these pirates are equipped with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades. Should we be trained as weapons specialists or as improved operators of fire hoses? Should we learn to rig barbed-wire fences at the top of our bulwarks or just know enough to put the throttle down and run like hell? We as seafarers need to know what these folks who sit at the IMO in London are thinking. The only water many of these regulators, industry associations and politicians have seen in the past 20 years is that stretch of the River Thames between Westminster and the IMO headquarters on the opposite riverbank.

Surely it can't be right that on top of all the difficulties seafarers currently face, they are now expected to put up with the threat of piracy? To just accept they could be captured and languish while negotiations for their release ensue... or even worse.

We'd like to know your views: what do seafarers who are transiting hotpsots like the Gulf of Aden and the Malacca Straits think? What measures should the IMO be considering in the protection of ships, the global economy – and our hides? What should the United Nations do? Contact us.

I'll tell you what I'm thinking. First we have to consider the problem of that thrifty little item known as the flag of convenience. Why is that? Well, if you have a big expensive navy to maintain why would you want to assign it to a patrol that may be 10,000 miles away from your country? Why would you want to send your navy to protect shipping under the flags of Panama, Liberia and so many other FOCs? Wouldn't your first priority be to protect the ships under your own flag? Or, to protect ships under flags with which your nation may have a relationship? I have heard many people ask these questions, and we already know what the public and government think of shipowners, but our problem is the shipowners aren't on the ships. It's us seafarers that are on the frontline.

So, in the meantime, I'm thinking ITF inspectors and seafarers' unions should explain to the politicians of our respective nations that although many ships are flying flags of nations that have no navy to protect their shipping, we need to step up efforts to protect our men and women in merchant service. It is in our collective national interest. Also, a legal solution needs to be found: captured and convicted pirates must face the consequences.

Finally, here's an item that really made me angry. The owners of the Ukrainian vessel Faina, which was recently captured for about two months, deducted $200 from each crewmember for telephone calls while being held hostage. It is no wonder we ITF inspectors are so cynical about shipowners. Shame on these people. As ever, it is our intention to have the money returned to the crew. Wish us luck.

For now, safe sailing.

 

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

Hope everyone sailing in the northern trades is keeping warm and enjoying the arrival of some calmer weather – it's been an awful winter in the Northern Hemisphere.

I'm friends with a retired gentleman who was formerly a shipping executive in a very senior position. We have quite a few things in common and one of the biggest is the belief that going to sea is an honorable profession. Seafaring is vital to the global economy and those who undertake this work face many perils and make more than enough sacrifices in their personal lives. Well, because my friend cannot come to grips with retirement he continues to be of service to our industry and has become quite a resource person and lobbyist for seafarers' rights... and nothing outrages him more than poor treatment of the international seafarer.

Anyway, he recently sent me two stories that appeared in a major maritime publication. One was on piracy and the other was about the oil spill on the Hebei Spirit off the shores of South Korea.

In case you missed it, on 16 January 2009 South Korea's Supreme Court released Capt Jasprit Chawla and Chief Officer Syam Chetan on bail after an unprecedented and concerted campaign waged on their behalf by shipowners' groups and the ITF. They are free but must remain in Korea pending an appeal to the Supreme Court of their wrongful conviction.

While it is important for us to celebrate this small victory, it is also important, as seafarers, that we keep our eye on the ball. So while everyone was fixated on the "Hebei Two", the various legal teams were circling one another, sizing up the situation. On 9 February, the owners of the Hebei Spirit and their insurer launched a multi-million-dollar action against Samsung Heavy Industries, owner of the crane barge which struck the laden tanker in December 2007 causing the major oil spill. A spokesperson for the insurer is reported to have confirmed the legal action is under way to recover "up to $400 million" for money already paid out or to be paid out in future.

Samsung will have to defend itself against this action, so might it have been convenient that there were foreign seafarers on the Hebei Spirit to perhaps share the blame and liability?

We need to remind ourselves that we remain pawns in the bigger game – that when disasters occur, nations need someone to pin the blame on. And in the case of the Hebei Spirit spillage, Samsung Heavy Industries is relying on obscuring the facts by apportioning blame to the officers of an anchored ship. Just because these two seafarers are free to move about in Korea doesn't mean they are not still in jeopardy while a much larger financial game is played out way above their heads.

Food for thought.

 

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

Are you on a ship without an ITF collective agreement? Or are you a deck or engine-room rating working on a cruise ship? Maybe you work on a national flag vessel – in other words a ship that isn’t a flying a flag of convenience? Or perhaps you are working aboard a South Korean beneficially owned ship?

If any of the examples above fit, then perhaps you are being paid in accordance with ILO wage levels – amounts recommended by the International Labour Organization (ILO). Actually, in practice, the ILO just makes a recommendation for the basic salary for the rank of Able Seaman. For many years the ITF used the ILO rate and formulated a wage scale for all ranks of seafarer pro rata to our collective agreement differentials. We called this the ITF Interpretation of the ILO Recommended Minimum Wage for an AB. Okay, are you with me so far?

More recently we have agreed on a joint interpretation of the ILO rates with our industry counterpart, the International Shipping Federation. And just like any bargained agreement, we had to meet the shipowners somewhere in the middle. This is done within the framework of the ILO Joint Maritime Commission.

So for your information, attached to this post below, are copies of the latest ILO wages and a link to our ILO resource page, which includes a more formal explantion.

The primary point to understand is that the basic salary covers a 48-hour working week. The wage scale also includes a fixed overtime column, which requires the seafarer to work 104 hours of overtime before any additional overtime is payable. So the total hours worked before any additional overtime is payable would be 312 hours per month. That is 48 hours per week x 4.325 weeks per month = 208 + 104 = 312 hours. Incidently, the total hours one must work before additional overtime is paid under an ITF CBA is 276. So under one of our agreements you are already 36 hours per month better off and that's not counting the higher salary to begin with.

Clearly the ILO wage scale is not a good deal for seafarers. It allows companies to work you more than 10 hours a day, seven days a week. But slowly and surely, the final column of the salary scale is coming up. In 2009, the total monthly salary inclusive of leave pay is $957 for an AB or Oiler and $712 for an Ordinary Seaman and Wiper. These are the primary positions on a vessel to which a shipowner would be likely to apply such wage levels.

As far as I am aware, Korea is the only country where the government, the shipowners’ group and seamans’ unions have actually agreed the ILO wage is enforcable. If you work on a South Korean ship and have not recieved a wage increase this year or last year you are entitled to a backdated wage claim. If you have not received an increase, contact your local ITF Inspector.

It will be very interesting to see where all of this goes in the future when the ILO Maritme Labour Convention comes into force. This is expected in 2011 or 2012.

For now, all the best and safe sailing.

 

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

Here we are, well into January 2009. At this time of year there are many crew changes so if you have just joined your ship, welcome aboard, and for those reading from the comfort of their hometowns, I wish you a well deserved rest.

We are nearly six months into the global financial meltdown, but as far as I can tell the shipping industry has not yet gone into total collapse. A few companies have failed but so far most of the industry seems to be keeping its head above water.

Freight rates have plummeted, however, and now one of the biggest problems for shipowners seems to be that charter party agreements are being torn up by shippers and receivers of cargo. This is causing great uncertainty in the market and, as usual, leaves the men and women who crew the ships in a precarious position.

Today, I nearly fell out of my chair when I heard brokers are now talking about a lack of respect for contracts – as one even put it, "the industry has lost its morality”.

This leads me to a theory I hold regarding the criminalisation of seafarers, particularly for marine pollution issues. We have now all heard about the two Indian officers from the Hebei Spirit, presently in jail on trumped-up charges. You have also probably heard of the Prestige and Captain Mangouras, who was held in Spain for nearly two years after his vessel sank. What about the dozens of ship crews who have been arrested and charged in the United States for non-compliance with MARPOL regulations?

In the above cases and many others too numerous to mention, seafarers are the ones taking the direct blame. Stuck in custody on trumped-up charges in a foreign country with the hardship of being away from their families and no wages – all for doing their job…

So, just what is our job? It is to facilitate the movement of global trade on ships. And for this we constantly get it in the neck from maritime authorities and our employers.

This brings me back to the broker’s statement. Has the industry lost its "morality"?

I think this broker is quite correct; in fact, I have thought this for a very long time. I believe the shipping industry is still full of rogue players. There are still far too many shipowners playing fast and loose with safety, hours of rest, crewing levels, improper discharge of shipboard waste, non-payment of wages and overtime, provisions, and medical issues such as personal injury. I think these are the same types who cheat their charters on fuel tank soundings; who load too fast. The same ones who have the Classification Society argue with Port State Control regimes when they find their vessels detained.

Yes, these are the same kind of vessel operators that the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is describing when it states:

"substandard ships carry with them a higher than normal risk of being involved in serious incidents, which impose large costs on communities, including loss of life and environmental damage. This is a situation which should not be tolerated by governments, shipowners, shippers and the maritime industry generally."*

So, while our industry associations rightfully join together with maritime workers’ unions and criticise governments for heavy handed abuse of seafarers’ rights, let us also call upon the shipping industry to do something positive and police itself to the extent that substandard ship operators and owners are thrown out of the industry. Let us call upon those who charter ships to use only those that carry with them an ITF Acceptable Collective Agreement and comply with this contract.

I firmly believe that only when the shipping industry has sufficiently demonstrated to the nations of the world that it is truly a responsible industry, will seafarers no longer be at the sharp end of the stick when something goes wrong.

It is time for all of us to grow up and make sure we do things the right way: to comply fully with all regulations; to ensure that when accidents occur we learn from them and don’t make the same mistakes over again. Then we will once more be able to recruit quality seafarers in order to ensure on time, safe and efficient delivery of cargos, regenerating an industry where all participants are proud and not thought of only as a potential risk.

The onus is on us to prove to national governments that our industry can be accountable. When we do that we will see fewer knee-jerk reactions from them.

Until then, keep your heads up and sail safe.

* Download a PDF of the full OECD Policy on Substandard Shipping here.

 

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

Lately, I've noticed that more email requests for assistance have been coming from crew members' families.

Sometimes it's a seafarer's father, but more often than not it's a wife or daughter.

Remember the old saying, 'A life at sea is like going to prison, but with the chance of drowning'? When I used to swing my sea bag over the rail and set foot upon the cold steel of the deck, I used to put on what I called my 'boat face'. I put up a little barrier around myself in order to deal with all of those things that cause discomfort and aggravation aboard ship. This helped me to maintain a constant level of performance and cope with stressful situations during my time at sea.

I think most seafarers have coping mechanisms. But sometimes the way we cope interferes with our better judgement. With improved communications such as SMS texting and email in the family home, crew can more easily stay in contact with loved ones. Now we can count on our family to support us while we are away. And sometimes it is our family that can see when we are in distress or even peril.

Two recent cases:

I received an email from the father of an Electrical Officer. His son and shipmates' contracts had expired nearly two months previously and still the company would not repatriate them. With a simple call to the company, they started repatriation arrangements for those crew who had reached the end of their contracts. Problem solved.

I was sent an email from a Bosun's daughter. Her father told her he was concerned about the maintenance of the vessel. He cited issues with the lifeboat and radar. This 27-year-old bulk carrier had recently undergone an inspection and was supposedly seaworthy. Despite the fact that she had passed this recent check-up, I requested she be re-inspected under the Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control. Mid-voyage she encountered a vicious storm. Her turbo-charger packed up and she made for the nearest port, under 4 knots. When government ship safety inspectors boarded, they found three cracked frames and a fourth one bent. Those inspectors said that if the fourth frame 'let go', number one cargo hold would have flooded and the vessel would, in all likelihood, have foundered. If left un-repaired this ship would have faced certain trouble. I wrote back to the bosun's daughter and congratulated her for saving this ship.

Some years ago, I remember another bosun who was badly injured. The insurance company gave him a cheque for $30,000, or half of what he was entitled to. The man's daughter telephoned me and asked if this was correct. In the end we made the company pay the full amount, $60,000.

So when you are out there with your shipmates, but still feel alone, it pays to be honest with your family. When you get that chance to make a call home or send an email, tell them what's going on, tell them if something is bugging you. Chances are they will see the problem or the danger and they will help to do something about it.

For now, safe sailing.


Got a point you'd like to make about this post? Please login or register at the top of the page to leave a comment.

Edited: 11/25/2008 at 11:41 AM by ITFInspector