Captain Pradeep Chalwa, CEO and Founder of MarinePALS, writes on a key issue being discussed right now at the International Maritime Organization. Over the years, the industry’s safety record has improved significantly. We have made major advances in technology and equipment, from GMDSS, ECDIS, ENC to satellite communications, AIS, EPIRBs We have introduced new regulations such as the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) to improve the lives of seafarers and Ballast Water Management requirements to protect the seas. Conventions have been revised and expanded; SOLAS, MARPOL, and STCW are now far more detailed. Monitoring regimes have also become stricter. Port State Control, SIRE, RightShip, CDI inspections, and terminal vetting processes all scrutinize compliance. However, the associated documentation such as logbooks, checklists, and reports has significantly increased the workload on board. While intentions were good, the simultaneous reduction in crew numbers (justified by claims that improved technology increases efficiency) has brought the debate on manning scales and fatigue once more into focus. At the upcoming IMO HTW 12 meeting, discussions have taken place on a Scoping Exercise and Enhancement of the Effectiveness of Provisions on Fatigue and Seafarers’ Hours of Work and Rest. A correspondence group is expected to be formed, followed by a working group at HTW 13. Numerous studies show that seafarers openly admit to taking liberties with recording work and rest hours. The reason is simple – there are simply not enough crew onboard to complete all required tasks within regulatory limits. The message from seafarers worldwide is clear: “Enough is enough.” Their perception is that the priority must always be adherence to the schedule. Ports, charterers, and other stakeholders dislike delays with the justification that “Time is money”. Whenever the Principles of Safe Manning resolution is reviewed, the same debates recur with a reluctance to engage with the issue. Countries with high crew wages resist discussions on increasing manning levels citing the need to compete with rail and road transport. Local laws such as employment protections further increase crew costs. Flags compete to be attractive and are therefore reluctant to insist on higher manning levels. While NGOs and associations struggle to adopt strong, unified positions. As a veteran of 50 years in working in maritime at sea, and ashore leading QHSE and Training, I have attended IMO and industry meetings, spoken directly with seafarers, and conducted accident investigations. Proving a direct correlation between fatigue and major accidents is difficult to establish conclusively. Yet surveys and firsthand accounts make one fact undeniable: ships are frequently operated by seafarers who have worked beyond regulatory limits, sometimes with minimal rest in 24 hours. With fatigue now under discussion in the context of STCW and ISM revisions, there is hope that the matter will now receive serious attention. This hot potato must be handled calmly and maturely, avoiding repetition of the old arguments. This is not a simple issue to resolve – fatigue varies by ship type, trade, and operating profile. A VLCC or VLOC on long ocean passages faces different challenges to a chemical tanker in short-sea Northern European trade. A 20,000 teu container vessel on long-haul routes is not comparable to a feeder vessel making seven port calls in five days. Trading area matters. Ships navigating th