Zodiac Maritime

Team Ship sent me to Zodiac. I worked for three months as a Third Officer on chemical tankers and had no complaints. The crewing manager was responsive.

I worked one contract for Zodiac Maritime on a container vessel. It was the worst contract of my career. The crew was mixed, there was a lot of paperwork, and overtime was expected. Food and supplies were poor, drinking water and internet had to be paid for, and tank-cleaning work was paid at only $1 per hour. The contract lasted more than seven months.

I worked for Zodiac Maritime and found the internet service very limited and expensive. In my case, the allowance was 500 MB, with an additional 500 MB costing $40. The company appeared to encourage crew members to communicate less with their families and spend more time with the crew.

I completed Zodiac Maritime's engine cadet programme on an LPG vessel. The interview was an easy 10–15 minute conversation with a manager from the main office, and basic English was sufficient. Cadets were treated as officers and could usually eat with them, although this depended on the crew. I was able to choose the tanker fleet, and the crew was generally respectful and cooperative. The main problem was the poor quality of provisions; in my experience, captains sometimes limited purchases to about $6 per person even though the company allowed up to $8.50.

I worked in Zodiac Maritime's LPG fleet. Supplies were very poor, and I joined an old, heavily worn vessel with a very small operating budget, so something was almost always missing. There was a lot of paperwork, and the safety system sometimes made work more difficult rather than safer. Promotion from cadet to third officer was possible if you performed well and demonstrated your knowledge, but further promotion was slower and junior officers' pay was below average. Overall, I consider the company below average.

I worked with Zodiac Maritime and experienced rigid hierarchy and poor onboard management. On one vessel, the crew had to wait for the captain before eating, and if he was late, they had to wait for his permission; they also had to wait for the boatswain before eating in the mess room. There were only a few senior officers whom I considered reasonable, while some others created a difficult working atmosphere.

I completed a contract with Zodiac Maritime and later worked on their chemical tankers. The food was quite modest, with a provision budget of about $7 per person, and a new system replacing PMS and MMS was unpopular with many crew members. The crews were mixed, with many Asian seafarers and a sufficient number of Russian-speaking crew. Salaries were paid through MarTrust, and the company could distance itself from personal issues such as seeing a doctor or receiving payment outside MarTrust. I also completed an interview with a Ukrainian chief engineer, which was mostly a conversation rather than a demanding technical assessment.

I worked for Zodiac Maritime on a Capesize vessel trading between China and Australia. The vessel was in good condition, while supplies and paperwork were average. Food was provided at about $8 per person, and there were around 14 checklists on the bridge in addition to familiarisation requirements. Tank-cleaning work was always paid. The company is not bad, but it is not a top-tier employer and promotion is not straightforward.

I worked for Zodiac Maritime for 14 years. I had about ten recommendations from different chief engineers for promotion to second engineer, but when it was time to move up, the office introduced an interview with someone who had no relevant engine-room experience, and I failed it. This was not an isolated case in my view; it seemed that the company deliberately blocked promotions. The company used to be good, but it has declined badly.

I have worked for Zodiac Maritime since 2016, mainly on container vessels. Basic salaries were around the market average, with bonuses potentially making the total pay higher. I had no problems with stores, and food depended heavily on the captain and cook. I progressed from cadet, so career development is possible, although moving from the ratings to the officer ranks is not realistic in my experience.

I worked for this company a long time ago (2004-2006) and I want to say that it mostly depends on the captain and the cook. There was always plenty of food, the fridge in the mess room was always full, and there were lots of fruits. The ship was in very good condition with excellent living conditions. I was on two cape-sized vessels built in Korea. I tried to return to this company a couple of years ago, but it didn't work out, maybe it's for the best.

The company buys worn tonnage and restores it with the crew's hands. My contract was on one of those ships: no internet of any kind, and no willingness to install even a basic antenna during dry dock; paid internet exists in the fleet but is expensive. The gym doubled as storage for deck equipment until a single treadmill surfaced near the end. Budget the isolation into your decision.

I spent years here and walked the whole ladder from ratings on dry cargo to officer on LPG. It was slow and often dispiriting, but the company never cheated me: no placement games, tonnage is respectable, and the cadet programme is a programme — assignments and a record book, not a deckhand at half pay. When I had taken what I came for I left on good terms, and the Odessa office writes honest references. Not the bottom by any measure; it only feels that way from inside.