Suzun Marine Fuels Integrates Seafarer Welfare into Bunker Contracts

Suzun Marine Fuels, a bunker supplier based in Gibraltar, has adopted a novel approach to bunker trading by integrating seafarer welfare directly into its commercial terms. The company has introduced a clause that allows it to decline supply and cancel agreements without penalty if a vessel or operator has been reported to organisations such as the International Labour Organization (ILO) or the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) for issues including unpaid wages, poor working conditions, forced labour, or modern slavery. Should a supply be cancelled under this clause, buyers are required to compensate Suzun for any resulting losses, according to Splash 247.

Can Besev, Chief Executive and Credit Manager at Suzun, stated that this measure transforms an issue typically confined to corporate responsibility statements into a transaction-level decision. He highlighted the bunker industry's significant leverage, given that ships cannot operate without fuel, and suggested this leverage should be utilised for ethical reasons. Besev emphasised that crew welfare also serves as a crucial credit signal.

Credit Risk and Operational Implications

Besev argues that unpaid wages can indicate an owner's financial distress before it impacts banks or major bunker suppliers. Smaller creditors, such as chandlers, repair firms, and crew members, may experience pressure sooner due to weaker claim enforcement capabilities. Crew costs can represent approximately half of a vessel’s daily operating expenditure, making an owner's inability to meet these obligations a red flag for bunker credit departments.

Furthermore, Besev described unpaid seafarers as an involuntary source of interest-free finance. He estimated that three months of wage arrears, based on an illustrative daily crew cost of $3,500, could amount to roughly $315,000 retained by the operator. For bunker suppliers, ship arrests become problematic as crew claims can rank ahead of bunker and other unsecured supplier debts, potentially reducing recovery rates.

Broader Industry Discussion

Besev also linked crew welfare to operational risk. He suggested that owners cutting crew costs might also be reducing expenditure on maintenance, spare parts, repairs, and training. Prolonged wage arrears can heighten stress on board, diminish morale, and, in extreme cases, increase exposure to issues like theft, corruption, quantity disputes, and safety failures. This makes crew welfare relevant for both compliance and counterparty assessment, according to Besev.

He contends that the industry's modern slavery declarations need to move beyond procedural exercises. Seafarers who are unable to leave a vessel due to withheld wages, with departure potentially meaning the forfeiture of outstanding pay, can become trapped. Despite this, vessels facing such allegations can still secure charterers, suppliers, and bunker counterparties. Suzun's response is to reserve the right not to participate in transactions with such vessels.

Besev and business partner Selçuk Mehmet Uzun are advocating for a wider industry discussion on this matter and have reportedly engaged with the International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA). Their objective is not to create additional compliance documentation but to integrate crew treatment into the commercial decision-making process itself, Splash 247 reported.