Feral Jundi

“We took the decision three to four months ago that we could not defend our ships without contracting-in armed guards with light machine guns and who will shoot back,” said Per Gullestrup, CEO & Partner of Clipper Ferries/Ro-Ro.
“I hear that 60% to 80% of owners are in favour of arming their ships, which is a lot, and if you figure out that every time you do, it costs an owner between $30K and $50K to put armed guards on each passage then you are talking about a lot of money,” he said.

I had to post this, just because it is such a startling quote. And if the figures of $50,000 per passage is true, then anyone with any business sense will know that this is going to be one heck of a market.  I have mentioned this in the past, and will continue to say that the maritime security market is seeing some rapid growth right now and will only go up.

Of course this will only snowball on itself, just because no shipping company will want to be the ‘undefended low hanging fruit’ that could be easily taken by pirates. And believe me, there are plenty of ways for pirates to figure out what shipping companies are using armed security, and which ones are not. Pirate investment companies have elaborate intelligence collection operations going on, and they will find you if you are ‘easy money’.

The other thing I was wondering is that if PNC’s are making $50,000 per voyage, then how come we are not seeing salaries reflect this rate? These companies that are making this much money per trip, should definitely ensure that their contractors are getting paid well to put their lives on the line. For that fee, contractors should have the best equipment, weapons, and leadership on those voyages. We should also see health coverage as a mandatory benefit, just because there is no DBA out on the high seas. So if you get your leg blown off by an RPG round, I certainly hope that your company covers that? And if contractors are not able to receive these benefits because the rate is too low, then that $50,000 per voyage fee needs to go up.

I would also hope that companies are investing in good legal help, and offer their contractors full coverage if they happen to get caught up in some legal issues. There is so much that could happen out there, and there are no legal protections whatsoever. Please do not throw your contractors under the bus, and you have a responsibility to take care of them out there if they get into trouble. Especially if they are in ports of countries that have really shady laws.  There is no SOFA to protect or give guidance to these contractors out there, so a company really needs to be on the ball with this stuff.

Let’s talk about salaries. I believe salaries for maritime security should reflect the danger that those crews are up against. If pirates are using wolfpack tactics and heavy weaponry, then that ups the danger level tremendously. Not to mention that if pirates manage to sink a vessel, that the crew is now in danger of drowning. I make this point, because it is a requirement for most of these contractors to have STCW certifications. So contractors are expected to get this certification (on their own dime usually), so that if the vessel catches fire or sinks, that they will know how to survive. Why then are the salaries not reflecting this reality of sea life in pirate infested waters?

Not to mention that the value of the ship and it’s goods, and it’s safe delivery, is extremely important and vital to the world markets. Those armed guards are crucial to the safe delivery of those goods, and yet pay structures do not reflect this great responsibility? Stuff to think about, and I certainly hope that the companies remember who their most important asset is out there, and that is their contractors. –Matt

Up to 80% of owners want their ships armed

As many as 60% to 80% of ship owners are in favour of arming their vessels even though the cost can be as high as $50,000 per passage, a leading Danish ship owner has claimed.
“We took the decision three to four months ago that we could not defend our ships without contracting-in armed guards with light machine guns and who will shoot back,” said Per Gullestrup, CEO & Partner of Clipper Ferries/Ro-Ro.
“I hear that 60% to 80% of owners are in favour of arming their ships, which is a lot, and if you figure out that every time you do, it costs an owner between $30K and $50K to put armed guards on each passage then you are talking about a lot of money,” he said.

Mr Gullestrup has built up first hand knowledge of dealing with pirates after he negotiated with Somali pirates over the release of the CEC Future back in 2008. Pirates held the CEC Future for 71 days, and only released the ship after negotiations and the payment of a ransom of nearly DKK 9 million.
Per Gullestrup was heavily involved in negotiating with the pirates in 2008. A Somali pirate now faces a 25 year prison sentence in the US after he was convicted. “Despair is a good word,” to describe the way ship owners feel about the whole piracy issue, he told SMI.
“It is a hard word but there are times in a quiet moment when you say, look what is going on here. It is 2011 and we are five years into this and we are still being run around by a bunch of criminals because that is all they are – extortionists, murderers and criminals. And even the largest naval powers in the world haven’t been able to do anything about it and they won’t until we do something fundamentally ashore in Somalia. Until then, we will not solve this problem,” he said.
“We now have the monsoon season and this will have a strong reflection on the level of activities going on. But even when the monsoon settles down, I suspect you will see a lot of the ships being armed now. But what will that do to the equation? Hopefully it will put a dampener on activities but it won’t solve anything. Because the pirates might start to lose too much money and the investors will stop getting the returns they want, they will retrench and ease off. The naval forces will then say the situation is better and the pirates will be back in action and we will be back where we started. We as ship owners are very frustrated. If this kind of criminal activity happened anywhere else on this scale something would have been done about it but 94% of the seafarers involved in this are from developing countries and that is the reason. If the 94% of seafarers were from Europe or the US, I guarantee we would not have been talking about it now. It is a disgrace,” he added.
Story here.