Kuba Szymanski, secretary general of InterManager, weighs in on the latest appalling data surrounding crew abandonment. Every time a seafarer is abandoned, the industry performs the same ritual: statements of concern, condemnation of “unscrupulous owners,” praise for humanitarian responders — and then we move on. Meanwhile, thousands of seafarers remain unpaid, stranded on ships that go nowhere, relying on charities and unions just to get home. We treat abandonment like an unfortunate side-effect of global shipping. It isn’t. It is the predictable result of a system that refuses to make the right people responsible. Only around 10% of seafarers work directly for shipowners. The rest are employed through professional crew managers. When that layer is regulated properly, checks and balances work. Someone vets the owner, scrutinises the ship, ensures MLC compliance, and has a reputation to protect. If flag states were made financially responsible for abandoned crews, incentives would change overnight The real danger comes when seafarers are tempted by direct offers that look too good to be true: higher wages, fewer intermediaries, direct employment. In reality, many of these offers come from owners who view a ship — and its crew — as a one-voyage disposable asset. The pattern is depressingly familiar. First month unpaid. Then a promise: “It will all be settled next month.” Then silence. Eventually, the crew realises the ship has been abandoned. Some systems dramatically reduce this risk. The Filipino model does one crucial thing: it creates clear responsibility. Government-certified agencies must follow the rules and are held accountable. As a result, Filipino crews appear far less frequently in abandonment cases than many other nationalities. Now compare that with countries where seafarers can “self-employ” or sign on with anyone, anywhere. Ukrainians, Poles, Pakistanis, Indians, Sri Lankans and others often take the only offers available — especially if they are older, female, or considered less “employable” by the mainstream market. That is exactly the demographic unscrupulous owners and shadow fleets target. Shadow fleets have made the situation worse. Reputable managers and owners won’t touch these ships, but they still need crews. So the system quietly funnels the most vulnerable seafarers into the riskiest employment. Who is really at fault? Owners who game the system are certainly culpable. But if we stop the conversation there, nothing will change. The deeper problem is that flag states are not accountable for the ships they allow to fly their colours. Today, a flag state can collect registration fees, enjoy the business, and look the other way until disaster strikes. When a ship is abandoned, the humanitarian and financial burden falls on seafarers, their families, unions, charities — and the wider industry’s reputation. The flag walks away with clean hands. This is where a reset is needed. If flag states were made financially responsible for abandoned crews — wages, repatriation, basic welfare — incentives would change overnight. Approve a dodgy owner, and you pay when it goes wrong. After one or two high-profile cases, the “open door” approach to registration would suddenly look far less attractive. We don’t need more declarations. We need enforceable consequences. The MLC already tells us what should happen. What it does not do is pin the bill on the party with the power to prevent the problem at source. Abandonment exists in