A seafarer can spend Four to Nine months running a company’s ship, carrying its cargo, dealing with customers and authorities, managing emergencies and protecting the company’s interests—and yet, after signing off, sometimes feel as though he is no longer part of the company.
Why is that?
Is it really because seafarers are difficult to retain?
Or has the industry itself created a system where seafarers are treated as temporary manpower rather than permanent members of the organisation?
Why do so many shipping companies treat their seafarers differently from their shore-based employees?
Are seafarers really considered part of the same team?
Or are they simply the people who will be available when a ship needs to sail?
I have often heard the argument:
“Seafarers earn more.” “They don’t have to pay much tax.” “They can change companies whenever they want.” “They don’t stay with one company.”
But have companies ever looked inward and asked why this situation exists?
Who introduced the system of short-term contracts?
Why did permanent employment of seafarers gradually disappear from much of the industry?
Historically, state-owned carriers such as Shipping Corporation of India (SCI) employed many seafarers on long-term or permanent arrangements, with greater continuity, seniority and benefits.
If long-term employment was possible then, why has the industry moved so far towards contract-based employment?
WHAT SHORE MANAGEMENT OFTEN SEES
A salary figure.
A seafarer may appear to earn a large monthly amount compared with a shore employee.
But that comparison often ignores the conditions under which that money is earned.
WHAT THE SEAFARER ACTUALLY EXPERIENCES
1. Insurance and family protection
In some companies, insurance coverage may be limited or may not continue after signing off, and family coverage may be inadequate or unavailable.
2. Repatriation and emergency expenses
During emergencies, seafarers may face complicated repatriation arrangements and, in some cases, unexpected expenses.
3. No guaranteed annual increment
Unlike many shore-based employees, there may be no predictable annual salary increment.
4. No annual bonus
Many seafarers do not receive the type of annual performance or company bonus commonly available to shore employees.
5. Waiting for the next ship
After signing off, a seafarer may have to wait indefinitely for the next assignment.
In some companies, relationships with the office can influence who gets preferred vessels or assignments, while others may be left waiting.
6. Unofficial employment-related payments
Illegal or unofficial payments for employment or joining continue to be reported in parts of the industry.
The most troubling part?
A seafarer may still sign a declaration saying that nobody demanded money—because refusing to pay could mean losing the next job.
7. Internet and communication
Internet connectivity is still treated by some companies as a luxury.
A few GB of data can be presented almost as a welfare benefit.
But for someone who is away from home for months:
Communication with family is not entertainment. It is part of mental wellbeing.
Why should a shore employee have unrestricted connectivity at home and in the office, while a seafarer may be questioned about how much data he needs to speak with his own family?
8. Medical care
Medical consultations may sometimes be delayed or discouraged because of cost considerations.
9. Welfare
Welfare facilities may be provided simply to meet the minimum regulatory requirement rather than because the company genuinely wants to improve the crew’s wellbeing.
10. Shore leave
Shore leave can become a cost calculation.
Launch charges, transportation and other expenses may be used as reasons to discourage shore leave—even when crew members may have spent months without stepping ashore.
11. Food and fresh provisions
At expensive ports, companies may try to minimise fresh provisions or leave victualling arrangements to the crew without adequately considering nutrition and wellbeing.
12. Fresh water
Even fresh water can sometimes become a subject of cost-saving and rationing.
13. Speaking up can have consequences
Perhaps one of the most serious concerns is the fear of being blacklisted or losing future employment after raising legitimate concerns, questioning procedures, refusing an unlawful act or speaking against unsafe practices.
A seafarer who depends on the company for his next contract may therefore remain silent—even when he knows something is wrong.
BUT THERE IS ONE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE
The two jobs are not lived under the same conditions.
A shore employee normally finishes work and goes home.
A seafarer does not.
A seafarer works, eats, sleeps, exercises and spends his free time in the same environment where he is responsible for the safe operation of the ship.
And the ship operates:
24 hours a day. 7 days a week. 365 days a year.
The workplace never really disappears.
10 hours of work onboard ≠ 10 hours of work ashore.
The psychological burden of remaining in the same environment after working hours—knowing that an alarm can call you back at any moment—is something that can be difficult to understand from the shore office.
SO WHY DO SEAFARERS FEEL ABANDONED?
Perhaps the industry needs to look beyond the seafarer’s salary and ask a different question:
What does it cost a seafarer to earn that salary?
Months away from family.
Missed birthdays.
Missed festivals.
Missed weddings.
Missing the birth or growing-up years of children.
Living with the possibility of accidents, illness, piracy, conflict and severe weather.
Working in an environment where a mistake can have consequences for the entire vessel.
And then, after signing off, sometimes having to wait and hope for the next ship.
This is where the insecurity becomes particularly painful.
A seafarer may spend months protecting a company’s ship, cargo, reputation and commercial interests—and then suddenly become “available manpower” once he signs off.
That should make the industry think.
THIS IS NOT SHORE VS SEA
The shore office is essential.
Without competent shore management, ships cannot operate safely and efficiently.
But without competent seafarers:
There is no ship operation in the first place.
This should not be a competition between “shore” and “sea.”
Both are part of the same organisation.
The question is whether the company treats both groups with the same sense of belonging, dignity and respect.
THE QUESTION WE SHOULD BE ASKING
If shipping companies genuinely consider seafarers to be one of their most important operational assets, why are so many employment and welfare systems built around keeping them temporary, replaceable and insecure?
Why not provide:
Fair employment conditions. Better continuity of employment. Proper insurance and family protection. Transparent promotion and assignment systems. Meaningful welfare—not just regulatory compliance. Reasonable internet connectivity. Access to medical care. Real opportunities for shore leave. Adequate fresh food and water. Protection for those who speak up about unsafe or unlawful practices. Recognition for performance.
And most importantly:
A sense that the seafarer belongs to the company even when he is not physically onboard.
A ship may be made of steel.
Cargo may be worth millions.
But it is the people onboard who keep that ship moving.
Seafarers are not just crew numbers on a manning list.
They are employees.
They are professionals.
They are human beings.
And perhaps it is time for the industry to stop asking:
“How much does a seafarer cost us?”
And start asking:
“What are we doing to make sure the people who run our ships are treated as part of our company?”
When will seafarers receive the same dignity, security and basic consideration that shore employees expect as a normal part of employment?
A seafarer should not have to wait for the next contract to know whether he still belongs to the company.
#Seafarers #SeafarerWelfare #MaritimeIndustry #ShippingIndustry #MerchantNavy #CrewWelfare #SeafarerRights #LifeAtSea #MaritimeSafety #HumanElement #MaritimeLeadership #Shipping #DGShipping #IMO #ILO