Julian Clark Global Senior Partner
Crew change process deteriorating once again as Covid-19 resurges
The crew change crisis, which reached a peak in the middle of last year when some 400,000 seafarers were waiting to embark and disembark, has been worsening once again.
The ITF have reported that there are still thousands of seafarers working beyond their contracted times. The backlog had slowly been reduced to about 200,000, but now it appears that this number is rising again. Many thousands of crew had now been at sea for more than a year, compared with the maximum of 11 months allowed under the MLC.
Stephen Cotton, General Secretary at International Transport Workers’ Federation, said that:
“The situation is going from bad to worse. We need more than lip service from governments, we need concrete action that allows crew changes to be carried out in a safe manner”. 
In my position as Global Senior Partner at Ince, I can not emphasise and support this message strongly enough. International Chamber of Shipping Secretary-General, Guy Platten, has said that resolving the crew change crisis would require all seafarers to have priority access to vaccines. Why can’t we facilitate this for our seafarers especially when continual high infection rates and subsequent domestic lockdowns are still challenging crew changes and causing disruption to crew movements. 
One example of the issue facing the sector is the position in the Philippines where there has been a decrease of daily inbound flights as well as a travel ban announced by Philippine government for seafarers traveling from the UAE, Oman, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. 
The leading maritime crew nations have continued to have low overall vaccination rates and we must call upon other international governments to support them.
Henrik Jensen, Managing Director at Danica, has stressed that with the summer holidays approaching, the situation could get worse. They added that the Eastern European crewing market was under extreme pressure as companies turn to places like Ukraine and Russia to replace officers and seafarers unable to travel from India or the Philippines.
Danica also stressed that with the summer holidays approaching, the situation could get worse. In addition, many seafarers want to be vaccinated before returning to the sea, and some of them were waiting for the second dose of vaccine:
“In places like Russia vaccines are generally available. However, in other countries, such as Ukraine, the demand for vaccine outstrips supply resulting in a longer waiting time. We are finding that seafarers, especially those who do not sign up immediately as their leave begins, are waiting 4-6 weeks to be vaccinated,” Jensen said.
“Once they get their first injection they have to wait a further 8-10 weeks for the second one, and then an additional 2-3 weeks for their immunity to be fully effective. This means many seafarers are now out of the loop for 16 to 20 weeks, which is about double their usual leave period and is compounding the global shortage of seafarers.” 
Support our Sing for Seafarers campaign
Recently, we launched our global virtual choir’s recording of Rod Stewart’s single ‘Sailing’. The single will raise money for four of the world’s leading maritime charities: The Mission to Seafarers, Sailors' Society, Stella Maris Org and The Seafarers’ Charity.
As part of the ‘Sing for Seafarers’ campaign, the single has been recorded in partnership with Royal Museums Greenwich and with the support of multi-platinum record producer George Shilling and award-winning film director Athena Xenidou.
For more information on the campaign, visit the dedicated page on our website here.
Related news & insights
News / Ince celebrates one year since Scotland office opening
23-11-2022 / Insurance, Maritime, Real Estate
We are pleased to be celebrating one year since opening our first Scottish office in the city of Glasgow. Stefanie Johnston, dual-qualified Partner and Head of Scotland, has worked tirelessly over the last year to develop our offering through the opening of an Ince office in what is arguably an established Scottish market. Starting from the ground up, Stefanie and her team have successfully gained an admirable reputation in the region and further afield in the maritime, insurance, real estate and regulatory sectors.
News / Shipping E-brief November 2022
17-11-2022 / Maritime
The Shipping E-Brief is a publication providing you with key information on legal decisions and developments in shipping and related business areas.
News / Appeals from arbitration: is reform required?
15-11-2022 / Maritime
In September 2022, the UK Law Commission published a consultation paper with provisional recommendations for updating the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act 1996). Amongst other things, the Law Commission considered whether any changes need to be made to: (i) s.67 of the Act 1996, which deals with jurisdictional challenges to arbitral awards; and (ii) s.69 of the Act 1996, which deals with appeals on points of law.
News / Owners not in breach of charter and entitled to claim demurrage
09-11-2022 / Maritime
CM P-MAX III Limited v. Petroleos Del Norte SA (MT Stena Primorsk)  EWHC 2147 (Comm) This recent laytime and demurrage dispute demonstrates that an owner can legitimately refuse orders where such orders may jeopardise the safety of a vessel.
News / Court of Appeal finds owner should have accepted non-contractual performance
09-11-2022 / Maritime
Mur Shipping BV v. RTI Ltd  EWCA Civ 1406 A majority of the Court of Appeal has held that the Owner under a contract of affreightment (COA) should have accepted payment of freight in Euros, rather than the US dollars provided for in the COA. Its refusal to do so meant that the Owner could not rely on the force majeure clause in the COA, in circumstances where US sanctions might have restricted US dollar transfers from or on behalf of the Charterer.
News / “Due” means due!
03-11-2022 / Maritime
Ceto Shipping Corporation v. Savory Inc (Victor 1)  EWHC 2636 (Comm) The Court in this case had to construe a purchase option clause in a bareboat charter. Specifically, it considered whether the fact that the charterer had not fulfilled certain payment obligations under the charter because it was disputing them in good faith meant that the owner was not obliged to transfer title to the vessel at the end of the charter period.