The 2nd Annual Capital Link Hong Kong Maritime Forum (1 December) provided a venue for a clash of consciences between ship managers. Hong Kong’s relative failure to ease the woes of international crews was also raised at the session, reports Hong Kong Maritime Hub.
Virtual Session
A virtual session entitled “Seafarers and Crewing in the COVID 19 Era & Beyond – Hong Kong Initiatives” brought together Bjorn Hojgaard, chief executive of Anglo-Eastern and chairman of the Hong Kong Shipowners Association, Columbia Shipmanagement president, Mark O’ Neil, Stephen Cotton, general secretary, International Transport Workers’ Federation and Captain T T Chung, general secretary, Merchant Navy Officers Guild, Hong Kong.
Peace initially reigned on the proceedings as unions’ representative Mr. Cotton praised all parties, including shipowners and their representative organizations, as well as the unions, for collaborating to find solutions to the COVID-19 crisis. And ensuring that “maritime survives” in the face of the inability of governments to react flexibly.
Issues faced
According to the mountains of feedback that Mr. Cotton has received from seafarers revealed increasing stress among the workforce from endless uncertainty.
The lack of clarity surrounding a seafarers’ disembarkation date was seen as the most serious source of frustration. A survey has revealed that just 8% of seafarers consider they are valued.
Against this, it was somewhat surprising to hear from Mr. O’ Neil that the morale of Columbia Shipmanagement’s crew had never been higher.
He put this utopian state of affairs down to a program of communication introduced across the company, ahead of the unexpected COVID-19 disaster.
Among the initiatives introduced into the company have mental health support and a special dietary regime. “We have spent months identifying with our people as a whole. Problems only occur when there is a lack of communication,” he said.
Crew change with restrictions
According to the latest data, some 40 countries now allow crew change at their ports to some extent or another, but there are often restrictions. When Hong Kong opened up in early June this year. It was the only port in Asia to do so.
This resulted in the port inundated as ships herded toward the safe haven. The enlightened regime, worthy of an international maritime center, was revoked around six weeks later.
In the case of Hong Kong, a minority of miscreant agencies and seafarers did not follow the guidelines which resulted in everybody losing out. The first thing that should have been assured was that seafarers followed the same protocols that were in place for everybody else. Why would seafarers come to Hong Kong and not be PCR tested when everybody else is? That was the first mistake.
The stress-inducing uncertainty continues. After the curtailment in Hong Kong, crew change can only be achieved at the port when a vessel is discharging or loading cargo. In China, only the Chinese crew can embark or disembark. In Korea, crew change is only possible after two weeks of quarantine for joiners of the ship. In Japan, only after two weeks at sea for the ship.
Cost for a crew change
And Anglo-Eastern has been walking the walk, while its chief executive has been talking the talk in his role as chairman of HKSOA.
With 650 ships under management, the company has managed 32,000 crew movements since 1 April. “We have five or six ships left with two dozen people on board and have been on the ships for more than 11 months,” said Captain Hojgaard. “We shall also get them relieved soon.”
Anglo-Eastern estimates that owners have had to step up with an additional US$30,000 per ship annually to achieve crew change, equating to US$20m for a fleet as large as Anglo Eastern’s.
“For many companies that is not possible,” Captain Hojgaard explained. “That is why to this day you continue to see as many as 400, 000 people stranded at sea because companies say, can’t do it [crew change] here. Let’s wait four weeks and see if it gets better, but unfortunately, it doesn’t.”
Communication is a key problem
Mr. O’ Neil, meanwhile, continued to insist that communication was the answer. He said COVID-19 was a war that all were fighting together: giving the example of his not seeing his daughters for five months as an example of solidarity with seafarers.
At this point the tension in the session became discernable. While agreeing that communication was a vital tool in the extraordinary circumstances, Captain Hojgaard insisted, “At the end of the day we have to get them home! This is not something that can be postponed.”
“The best thing that could have happened was that all shipowners got together and said we shall stop for two weeks until we get a pass for seafarers. Or the seafarers said, ‘it’s over’. We don’t want to do this anymore. Seafarers should be able to get off. It’s what we signed up for.”
Did you subscribe to our daily newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Hong Kong Maritime Hub
