M2491 - Crew Abandonment

Initial Report

CHIRP received a report from several crew members who were abruptly dismissed from a 24m vessel after raising repeated concerns about living conditions and on board safety. The captain, who was also the vessel’s owner, terminated their contracts without notice, support, or provision for repatriation. It was only after intervention from an ITF Inspector that assistance was provided. This incident appears to meet the criteria for abandonment under the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC).

The crew had previously reported a persistent spider infestation in the accommodation spaces. One crew member required hospital treatment as a result. Alongside this, there were ongoing concerns about black mould, poor ventilation, and unsanitary accommodation. A heavily stained and damaged mattress was only replaced following a formal request. A missing toilet seat was replaced only after a complaint was lodged. There was no privacy in cabins due to the absence of curtains, and bathrooms were described as damp and poorly ventilated. These conditions made the crew quarters uninhabitable. The crew were relocated multiple times, including to a hotel, student dormitories without hot water, the captain’s private home, and other guest spaces.

In addition to the living conditions, serious safety concerns were raised. The vessel was reportedly operating in violation of SOLAS and Flag State safety requirements. All fire extinguishers were either expired, corroded, or inoperable. No flares were carried on board, and there were no life jackets available in the crew or guest cabins or anywhere within the vessel’s interior. Despite these critical deficiencies, the vessel continued to operate at sea, placing both crew and passengers at risk.

CHIRP Comment

This case highlights a broader concern regarding vessels operated solely by their owners, where the usual checks and balances provided by an independent management structure may be absent. When command and ownership are combined, especially on vessels under 30 metres, external oversight is often limited and accountability difficult to enforce.

CHIRP shares this report to encourage greater scrutiny of crew welfare and vessel safety on owner-operated yachts. It is essential that crew members feel able to raise concerns without fear of retaliation, and that enforcement mechanisms are strong enough to prevent recurrence of such incidents. Safeguards must also be in place to ensure that new crew are not recruited under false pretences, and that international standards such as MLC and SOLAS are consistently upheld.

CHIRP advocates extending MLC protections to all yachts, regardless of size or tonnage, because working conditions can vary significantly between MLC-compliant vessels and those that are not. The same applies to SOLAS: vessels not obligated to comply may operate under lower safety standards, and seafarers should be aware of these differences when seeking employment.

CHIRP encourages prospective crew to ask clear questions during recruitment and urges owners and management companies to take greater responsibility for ensuring compliance, transparency, and fair treatment across all vessels under their remit

Communications – Crew concerns were often ignored or dismissed, and formal complaints were needed to prompt basic responses (e.g., mattress and toilet seat replacement). Are your concerns truly heard when you raise them?

Pressure – The crew were placed under pressure to remain in unsafe and unfit conditions without repatriation or protection of their welfare.

Complacency – The continued operation of the vessel despite expired fire extinguishers, the absence of lifejackets, and the lack of flares indicates a command that does not appreciate the risks regarding practical safety and compliance with safety regulations.

Local Practices – Unacceptable standards appear to have become normalised (e.g., operating with no lifejackets or uninhabitable cabins).

Key Takeaways

Seafarers – Know your rights, speak up and retain supporting documents.
Seafarers should document unsafe conditions and report them through formal channels. Understanding your rights under MLC is vital, especially regarding health, safety, and repatriation. If internal reporting fails, seek help from unions or ITF inspectors without delay.

Managers – Safety concerns are not insubordination.
Dismissing a crew member for raising valid concerns undermines the safety culture and breaches international obligations. Managers must ensure compliant living conditions, maintain safety equipment, and respond constructively to crew feedback.

Regulators – Where there is smoke, act fast.
This case highlights serious SOLAS and MLC violations. Regulators should prioritise oversight of vessels with combined owner-captain roles and act swiftly on signs of abandonment, poor habitability, or safety equipment failure.