Νέα

Select a news topic from the list below, then select a news article to read.

I owe to my insurance agency. How can I deal with the KEAO?

Αποτέλεσμα εικόνας για Κ.Ε.Α.ΟThe failure to pay contributions to the insurance funds is only an aspect of the general weakness in the settlement of fixed financial obligations. However, it was not expected conflicts to arise between the insured, who has debts, and more than one institution- representatives of the social security system, who can at any time claim the social security payment by all legal means.

Read more: I owe to my insurance agency. How can I deal with the KEAO?

Collaborations

 

A B C  Advisory & Business Consulting Group

 

  

  

 

  

   

 

  

Useful Links

 

Arbitration

 

Banking Sector

 

Competition

 

Corporate

 

Courts

 

Economics / Taxation

 

Independent Administrative Authorities 

 

Copyright

 

International Organizations 

 
 
Investments
 
 
Labour 
 
 
Employee Federations 

 

Professional Associations & Organizations 

 

Public Sector

 

Real Estate

 

Transparency

  

Corporate Networks

 

Bilateral Chambers

CriticalReviewoftheConsolidatedMaritimeLabourConvention

CriticalReviewoftheConsolidatedMaritimeLabourConvention(2006)oftheInternationalLabourOrganization:LimitationsandPerspectives

IlianaChristodoulou-Varotsi*

Maritimelabourrepresentsthehumanelementofshippingandassuch,itdeservesspecialattention.1Maritimelabour-relatedissuesalsoconstituteanimportantparameterofmaritimecompetition.2Qualitativeshipping,i.e.safeshippingthatisrespectfulofthemarineenvironment,wouldnotbefea­sibleintheabsenceofqualityworkprovidedbycompetentmaritimelabour,enjoyingdecentworkingandlivingconditionsaboard.Morethan1.2mil-lionseafarersarecurrentlyemployedintheindustry,andtheparticularitiespertainingtothissectorofactivity,realisticallymoreobviousinthepast,yetstillexistingatpresent,havebeenrepeatedlystressed.3TheInternational

*Dr.Jur.,Attorney-at-Law(MemberoftheAthensBarAssociation,Greece),AssociateProfessoratDEREE-TheAmericanCollegeofGreece(SchoolofBusinessAdministration).Maîtrise,D.E.A.,DoctoratinEuropeanandMaritimeLaw(UniversitédeParisIPanthéon-Sorbonne,France).Email:This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..IlianaChristodoulou-Varotsiprovidedlegalassistancetothemaritimeadmin">This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..IlianaChristodoulou-Varotsiprovidedlegalassistancetothemaritimeadmin­istrationoftheRepublicofCyprusintheframeworkoftheratificationofMLC2006inCypriotlegalorder.

Thepresentpaperisacontributiontothe7thInternationalConferenceonMaritimeLawon“ComparativeandInternationalAspectsoftheLegalStatusofSeafarers,”PiraeusBarAssociation,Greece,September30-October2,2010.

1NotablyseeDEIRDREFITZPATRICKandMICHAELANDERSON(eds),SEAFARER’SRIGHTS(OxfordUniversityPress,2005),ILIANACHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandDMITRYA.PENTSOV,MARITIMEWORKLAWFUNDAMENTALS:RESPONSIBLESHIPOWNERS,RELIABLESEAFERS(Springer,2008)ILO,Theimpactonseafarers’livingandworkingconditionsofchangeinthestructureoftheshippingindustry,2001(JMC/29/2001/3),Geneva,ProdromosMavridis,Laprotectionsocialedesmarinsdansledroitcommu­nautaire,3REVUEDEDROITDEL’UNIONEUROPEENNE,647-685(2003).

2SeeIlianaChristodoulou-Varotsi,AmaritimecompetitionreadingofRegulation1408/71/EContheco-ordinationofsocialsecuritysystemsintheEuropeanUnion:Isthecurrentregimeout-of-date?,inCompetitionandRegulationinShippingandShippingRelatedIndustries,ANTONISANTAPASSIS,LIAI.ATHANASIOUandERIKROSAEG(eds)(MartinusNijhoffPublishers,2009)207-222.

3Seewww.ilo.org(underLabourStandards/MaritimeLabourConvention)(lastvisit31.1.2012).AlsoseePatrickChaumette,Del’évolutiondedroitsocialdesgensdemer:Lesmarinssont-ilsdessalariéscommelesautres?-Specifités,banalisationetimbricationsdessources,XXVIIANNUAIREDEDROITMARITIMEETOCÉANIQUE471-500(2009),PatrickChaumette,Lestransformationsauseindelamarinemarchande:Unerelationdetravailsansattaches?,XIXXXVIIANNUAIREDEDROITMARITIMEETOCÉANIQUE53-93(2001).

467

LabourOrganization(ILO),aUnitedNationsspecializedagencybasedinGeneva,istheprincipalforumfortheestablishmentofinternationalnormsontheprotectionofmaritimelabour.4Thisisachievedviatheadoptionandreviewofmaritimelabourstandardswhichareincorporatedintointerna­tionalmaritimeconventionssignedbymemberStates.TheframeworkwherethisprocesstakesplaceaccommodatesatripartitestructurewiththeuniquefeaturebeingthatequalvotingrightsaregiventomemberStates,totherepresentativesofemployersandtotheworkers’organizations.5MorethansixtyinstrumentshavebeenadoptedbythemembersStatesoftheILOsincethe1920s,coveringnearlyallaspectsrelatingtomaritimelabourworkingandlivingconditions.ILOMerchantShipping(MinimumStandards)ConventionNo147isprobablythemostwellknowninstrumentinthisrespect.6TheconsolidatedILOMaritimeLabourConvention(here­inafterMLC2006ortheConvention)whichwasadoptedinFebruary2006bytheILO,7andwhoseentryintoforceisexpectedfor2012,or,inanycase,intheverynearfuture,8canalreadybeconsideredanimportantdevelopmentoftheinternationalregulatoryframeworkonseafarers;itisnoteworthythattheConventiongaverisetoasmoothadoptionduringILOdeliberations,whichissignificantoftheconsensusachieved.9

Inacomprehensivemanner,MLC2006statesseafarers’rightstodecentconditionsofwork.Itaspirestobecome“globallyapplicable,easilyunder­standable,readilyupdatableanduniformlyenforced.”10TheadoptionoftheMLCalsoprovidedauniquepossibilityforbringingforwardtheroleofthe

4Id.

5ThistripartismisenshrinedintheILOConstitution.ItisfurthermorereflectedinthethreemainbodiesoftheOrganization,namelytheInternationalLabourConference,theGoverningBodyandtheOffice.Tripartitecommitteesarealsoestablished.NotablyseeArticles2,3(1)and4oftheILOConstitution.

6TheConventioninquestionprovidesfortheminimuminternationallyacceptablelabourandsocialsecuritystandardsforallmerchantvesselsregardlessoftheirregistrationcountry,including,butnotlim­itedto,vesselsflyingflagsofconvenience.SeeCHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandPENTSOV,supranote2,17

seq.

7SeeJohnIsaacBlanckJr.,ReflectionsonthenegotiationoftheMaritimeLabourConvention2006attheInternationalLabourOrganisation,31TUL.MAR.L.J.135-56(2006),MarieMarinandAlexandreCharbonneau,Uneconventioninnovantepourletravailmaritime?LesapportsdelaConventiondutravailmaritime(CTM)de2006,XXVIIANNUAIREDEDROITMARITIMEETOCÉANIQUE445-469(2009).

8TheConventionwasexpectedtocomeintoforcein2011.SeeILO,MaritimeLabourConvention2006,Actionplan,www.ilo.org(lastvisit2.2.2012).

9AccordingtotheILO,“theConventionwasadoptedbyarecordvoteof314infavourandnoneagainst(twocountriesabstainedforreasonsunrelatedtothesubstanceoftheConvention),afternearlytwoweeksofdetailedreviewbyover1,000participantsdrawnfrom106countries.”Seewww.ilo.org(lastvisit3.1.2011)underMaritimeLabourConvention/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.

10Seewww.ilo.org(lastvisit2.2.2012)underLabourStandards/MaritimeLabourConvention.

ILO,whichwasprobablyperceivedasdeclining,11andtheopen-endedissueofthestrengtheningofthelegalstatusofseafarers.AsofJanuary2012,MLC2006wasratifiedbytwenty-twoStates.12Formally,thecriterionofentryintoforcerequiresratificationbythirtycountriesrepresenting33%oftheworldtonnage.WhiletheEuropeanCommunitycannotratifytheConvention,theanticipatedratificationofMLC2006bythememberStatesoftheEuropeanUnionthathavenotratifieditsofar,willactasacatalystfortheentryintoforceoftheConvention.13

TheentryintoforceofMLC2006willdramaticallychangetheinvolve­mentofanumberofmajorstakeholdersintheshippingindustry.Themech­anismonPortStatecontrolwillalsobeaffected.StatesconcernedwillbeinspectingforeignshipscallingattheirportstodeterminetheirconformitywithlabourstandardsstipulatedinMLC2006;thelattershouldalsoberespectedbynationalflaggedvessels.Itbearsrepetitionthatsofar68instru­ments,namelyConventionsandRecommendations,haveconstitutedthereg­ulatoryframeworkofreferenceadoptedoverthelast80years.TheConventiondoesnot,however,includetheSeafarers’IdentityDocumentConventionswhichwereadoptedonlythreeyearsbeforetheadoptionofthenewinstru­ment(ConventionsNos.108and185),theSeafarers’PensionConvention

11Inouropinion,thismaybeassociatedwithtwofactors:firstly,theadventofliberalization,chal­lengingthetraditionalinvolvementoftheStateinpublicpolicies,includingthesocialsphere,andsec­ondly,discrepanciesinvolvingtheratificationandeffectiveimplementationofILOmaritimelabourcon­ventions,especiallybyleadingStates.

12ThefollowingStateshaveratifiedMLC2006:AntiguaandBarbuda,Australia,theBahamas,Benin,BosniaandHerzegovina,Bulgaria,Canada,Croatia,Denmark,Gabon,Kiribati,Latvia,Liberia,Luxembourg,MarshallIslands,Netherlands,Norway,Panama,SaintVincentandtheGrenadines,Singapore,Spain,Switzerland.AccordingtotheILO,theseratificationsrepresent56%oftheworldgrosstonnage(www.ilo.org,lastvisit24.1.2012).

13ThepositionoftheEUtowardsMLC2006isnotablyreflectedintwoimportantdocuments.ThefirstdocumentistheCommunicationfromtheCommissionunderArticle138(2)oftheECTreatyonthestrengtheningofmaritimelabourstandards,COM(2006)287final(June15,2006),wheretheEuropeanCommissiondiscussesthebenefitsoftheConventionaswellasitscommitmenttoencouragingratifica­tionprocessesinviewofensuringthattheConventionentersintoforceassoonaspossible.TheseconddocumentistheCouncilDecisionof7June2007authorisingMemberStatestoratify,intheinterestoftheEuropeanCommunity,theMaritimeLabourConvention,2006,oftheInternationalLabourOrganisation,O.J.(L161)63(EC).Technically,theCouncilDecisioninquestionprovidestheneces­saryauthorizationtothememberStatestoratifytheConventionintheinterestsoftheCommunity,asaresultofthefactthattheConventioncontainsprovisionsintheareaofsocialsecuritywhichfallwithinthescopeofCommunityrulesonthecoordinationofsocialsecurityschemes(basedonArticle42oftheECTreaty).Insimpleterms,whilesubstantiverulesonsocialsecurityprincipallyremainnational,totheextentthatcoordinationrulesaregovernedbyEClaw(namelyRegulation883/2004anditsimplemen­tationregulation),andtotheextentthatMLC2006hasanimpactonsocialsecurityofthememberStates,suchauthorizationwasdeemednecessarybytheEuropeanCommission.ItshouldbenotedthatArticle1oftheCouncilDecisionprovidesthatmemberStatesareauthorizedtoratifyMLC2006forthepartsfallingunderCommunitycompetence.

1946(No.71)andTheMinimumAge(TrimmersandStockers)Convention1921(No.15),whichisnolongerrelevanttotheshippingindustry.

Theframeworkreflectingthe“old”systemhadbeendraftedinamannerwhereimplementationwasnotfocused.Discrepanciesconcerningtherati­ficationrecordofthememberStateswerenoteworthy;thus,theabsenceofuniformityattheinternationallevelcreatedtheriskofunfaircompetitionaswellastheriskofjeopardizingthelegalprotectionofmaritimelabour.14Thenewsystemisanticipatedtoremedythislimitation:itsetsupdatedmaritimelabourstandards,15itreflectsanadjustedmethodology,whichwasinspiredtoagreatextentbytheworkoftheInternationalMaritimeOrganization,anditprovidesacomprehensiveframeworkofreferencefortheindustry.

Inthiscontext,theaimofthepaperistwo-fold:ontheonehand,itaimstoshedlightinanon-exhaustivemanneronthecontributionofMLC2006totheenhancementofthelegalregimeofseafarers;ontheotherhand,itaimstoexplorepossiblelimitations.Threedirectionswillbediscussedinthatrespect,namely:

  1. 1.Anewmethodology:thetoolforsuccess?
  2. 2.Substantivelawaspects:Enhancementoftheprotectionofseafarersvs.Limitationofseafarers’protection
  3. 3.Complianceandenforcementenhanced:certification-relatedaspectsandcompulsorysynergiesbetweenthestakeholdersinvolved

 

IANEWMETHODOLOGY:THETOOLFORSUCCESS?

A.Structure

Theobviouschallengethathadtobeaddressedbytheinternationallegis­laturepriortotheadoptionoftheinstrumentunderconsiderationdealtwiththelimitationsoftheendeavour,bothsubstantiallyandformally.Insub­stance,thequestionwaswhetherexistingILOmaritimeconventionsshouldbeconsolidatedorupdatedorwhetherthewholeprocessshouldcombine

14TheseconcernsarediscussedbyILIANACHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandDMITRIA.PENTSOVinLabourStandardsonCypriotShips:MythandReality,37VAND.J.TRANSNAT’LL.3,647-725(2004).

15Forexample,theConventionenhancestherightofseafarerstobeinformedabouttheirrightsandaddressescomplaintproceduresavailabletoseafarers;italsoprovidesclearidentificationoftheshipown­erorassimilatedentitywithoverallresponsibilityforthepurposesoftheConvention.

bothfeatures.16Concerningthestructure,therewerediscussionswhetherthenewinstrumentshouldaccommodateaplethoraofprovisionsorshouldmaintaindistinctinstruments,aswasalreadythecase.17

Lengthypreliminarydiscussionsresultedintheadoptionofauniquetextbringingtogetherexistinginstruments,withtheexceptionofthethreeinstrumentsmentionedabove.18Eventhoughthebulkoftheworkeffectedconsistedinconsolidation,amendmentworkhadalsobeenundertakenoncertainpoints.Inpractice,memberStatesoftheILOarecurrentlyencour­agedtoratifyaconventioncontainingmorethanahundredpageswithdis­tinctpartsonmandatorynormsandrecommendatoryprovisions.

Thestructureofthenewinstrumentwasconceivedwiththeaimoffacil­itatingimplementation.Theinstrumentcontainsthreemainparts,namelyArticles,RegulationsandtheCode.ArticlesandRegulationsreflectbroadprinciplesandobligations,whicharemandatory,19whereastheCodecom­prisesthedetailsthatarenecessaryfortheimplementationofRegulations.20

TheCodecomprisestwoparts:PartAonStandardsismandatory,where­asPartBonGuidelinesisrecommendatory(non-mandatory).21ThesubjectmatterisorganizedintosubjectareasrevolvingaroundfiveTitles,namely:

.                       •Minimumrequirementsforseafarerstoworkonaship

.                       •Conditionsofemployment

.                       •Accommodation,recreationalfacilities,foodandcatering

.                       •Healthprotection,medicalcare,welfareandsocialsecurityprotection

.                       •Complianceandenforcement

 

InsearchforpossibleadvantagesthatwouldstemfromthestructureofMLC2006,onecouldnotethatthestructurechosenbytheinternationalleg­islaturecoversthesubjectmatterinacomprehensivemannerbymeansofasingleinstrument.Thelatterclearlydistinguishesrightsandrecommenda­tions,andreservesaspecialplaceforcomplianceandenforcementrelated

16SeeILO,ReviewofrelevantILOmaritimeinstruments,JMC/29/2001/1,2001,Geneva,p.22etseq.

17SeeILIANACHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSI,PortStateControlofLabourandSocialConditions:MeasureswhichcanbetakenbyPortStatesinKeepingwithInternationalLaw(astudycommissionedbytheILO),XXIANNUAIREDEDROITMARITIMEETOCÉANIQUE251-285(2003).

18Seesupra.

19Seepoint3oftheExplanatorynotetotheRegulationsandCodeoftheMaritimeLabourConvention.

20Seepoint4oftheExplanatorynotetotheRegulationsandCodeoftheMaritimeLabourConvention.

21Id.

provisions.Consistencyintheuseoflanguagewasoneoftheaimsofthedraftersoftheinstrument.22

AnillustrationofthecurrentsituationasopposedtothesituationthatwouldresultfromtheentryintoforceofMLC2006wouldbethefollow-ing:23Country“A”hasratifiedfourILO(“old”)maritimelabourconventionsonly,i.e.ILOConventionNo.147andthreemoreILOmaritimelabourcon­ventionsthatarenotincludedintheAppendixofConventionNo.147.24Asaresultofthislowrecordofratification,theStateconcernedhasdifferenti­ated,i.e.lower,labourstandardscomparedtocountry“B.”ThelatterhasratifiedfifteenILOmaritimelabourconventions,i.e.ILOConventionNo.147,someConventionsincludedintheAppendixofConventionNo.147andsomeadditionalConventionsthatarenotincludedinthescopeofConventionNo.147.Whenvesselsflyingtheflagofregistrationcountry“C”callattheportofcountry“A,”intheeventofacomplaintorevidencethatthereisnocompliancewiththestandardsofConventionNo.147,25portStatecontrolinspectionwillbeeffectedwithregardtofewerinstrumentsthanintheframeworkofportStatecontrolincountry“B,”wherecontrolscovermoreareas.Inthelightofthenewconsolidatedinstrument,ifweassumethatbothcountries“A”and“B”ratifyMLC2006,amoreuniformportStatecontrolwillresultwherelabourstandardswillstopbeinguneven.Thisshouldbeperceivedbothintheinterestofseafarersandintheinterestoffaircompetition.Inourexample,inactualfact,country“A”willhavetoapplythemandatoryprovisionsofMLC2006whichreflectsixty-eightinstruments(ConventionsandRecommendations)26inthescopeofitsstan­dards,representingagreatimprovementformaritimelabourprotection.

B.SpecialFeatures

Inadditiontotheinterestofthenewinstrumentfromtheaspectofmethodologyandstructure,MLC2006deservesspecialattentionfromthepointofviewofanumberoflegalfeatureswhichwerenovelorproperto

22NoteforexampletheuseofthetermsseamaninConventionNo.22asopposedtotheuseoftheterm“seafarer”inConventionNo.163.

23Theexampleisgeneralandnotregion-specific.ItisbasedontheassumptionthattheportStatehasalreadyratifiedtheILOconventionswhoseenforcementisverifiedoverforeignvesselscallingatitsports,andthatdomesticlegislationconcernedextendsthecontrolofILOmaritimeconventions,astrans­posedintodomesticlegalorder,toallships,includingvesselsflyingtheflagofaStatethathasnotrati­fiedthesaidconventions.

24OnthewaytheILOConvention147operates,seeinfra,18.

25SeeArticle4ofILOConventionNo.147.

26ItshouldberecalledthatundertheMLC2006theGuidelines,whichlargelytransposethe“old’RecommendationsoftheILO,arenotmandatory.

IMOpractice.Amendmentproceduresreflectsuchnovelfeatures.Thetra­ditionalimportanceattributedtosubstantialequivalence,asexplainedbelow,hasbeenmaintainedinthenewinstrument.Lastbutnotleast,theinvolvementofsocialpartnersintheadoptionofdomesticlegislationtrans­posingMLC2006requirementsshouldbenoted.

1.Tacitacceptanceprocedure

TacitacceptanceprocedureortacitamendmentprocedureisfollowedbytheIMO;itseekstoremedytheproblemthattheadoptionofinternationalregulationsisatime-consumingprocesswhichislikelytorenderlegislativeworkout-of-date.Theideaonwhichthemechanismisbasedisthatamend­mentsenterintoforceonaspecificdate,unlessobjectedtobyaspecificnumberofStates.27

TheConventiondistinguishesbetweenamendmentprocedureunderArticleXIVfortheinstrumentasawhole(ArticlesandRegulations)andArticleXVfortheamendmentstotheCode(PartAandPartB).WhileArticlesandRegulationscanonlybeamendedbytheConferenceintheframeworkofArticle19oftheILOConstitution,asfarastheamendmentprocedureoftheCodeisconcerned,anacceleratedprocedurehasbeenpro­videdfor28undertheformofatacitacceptanceprocedure.Intheframeworkofthelatter,anamendmentapprovedbytheConferenceshallbeconsideredtohavebeenaccepted,unless,bytheendoftheprescribedperiod,formalexpressionsofdisagreementhavebeenreceivedbytheDirector-GeneraloftheILOfrommorethan40percentoftheMemberswhichhaveratifiedtheConvention,andwhichrepresentnotlessthan40percentofthegrosston­nageoftheshipsoftheMemberswhichhaveratifiedtheConvention.29

2.Substantialequivalence

Otherlegalfeaturesconcerntheconceptofsubstantiveequivalence,whichisnotnovelfromthepointofviewofILOpractice,butwhichhasbeenmaintainedinthenewsystemwithregardtostandardsinPartAoftheCode(otherthanTitle5).30

SubstantiveequivalencehasalonghistoryasregardsILOconventions.ItwasnotablyexaminedintheframeworkoftheAppendixtoMerchantShipping(MinimumStandards)Convention,1976(No.147)(hereinafter

27SeeG.P.PAMBORIDES,INTERNATIONALSHIPPINGLAW(KluwerLawInternational-Ant.N.Sakkoulas

1999)100seq.

28ArticleXV

29Id,para.7.

30ArticleVI,paras3and4.

ConventionNo.147onMinimumStandards);theAppendixincludesanum­berofILOConventionsthatmemberStatesmayhaveratifiedornot,dependingonthecase.TheprincipleisthatintheeventofthememberStatenothavingratifiedtheConventionsenumeratedintheAppendix,itisnotaskedtoadheretotheprecisetermsoftheinstrumentsinquestion.WhilethereisnofullconformitywiththeILOrequirementsinquestion,substan­tialequivalencewouldrequirethatthegeneralgoalorgoalsofaConventionaresatisfied,includingforexampleitsobjectandpurpose.31Allowingforsubstantiveequivalenceinobservingtherequirementsofaninternationalinstrumentprovidesflexibilityandefficiency.TheissuewasexaminedbytheILOCommitteeofExpertsinageneralsurveyonlabourstandardsonmerchantships.32ThetestforsubstantialequivalencewouldfirstbetoseekwhethertheStatehasdemonstrateditsrespectfororacceptanceofthemaingeneralgoalsoftheinstrument,andhasenactedlawsandregulationswhichareconducivetotheirrealization;ifthisisthecase,secondly,itwouldhavetobeinvestigatedwhethertheeffectofsuchlawsorregulationsistoensurethatinallmaterialrespectsthesubordinategoalsoftheinstrumentareachieved.33

Morespecifically,forexample,withregardtoArticle5oftheFoodandCatering(Ships’Crews)Convention,1946(No.68),whichisincludedintheAppendixofConventionNo.147onMinimumStandards,accordingtotheILOCommitteeofExperts,thesubstantivesafetystandardinArticle5ofConventionNo.68seemtobethoserequiringfoodandwatersupplieswhicharesuitableinquantity,nutritivevalueandqualitytosecurethehealthofthecrew.ForthepurposesofArticle2(a)(i)ofConventionNo.147,therequirementofsubstantialequivalencetoArticle5maybemetsimplywherefoodandwateraresafeforconsumptionwithoutrisktohealth.34

MLC2006makesuseoftheprincipleofsubstantialequivalence.Itpro­videsthatamemberStatewhichisnotinapositiontoimplementtherightsandprinciplesinthemannersetoutinPartAoftheCodemay,unlessexpresslyprovidedotherwiseinthisConvention,implementPartAthroughprovisionsinitslawsandregulationsorothermeasureswhicharesubstan­tiallyequivalenttotheprovisionsofPartA.35Forthispurpose,anylaw,reg­ulation,collectiveagreementorotherimplementingmeasureshallbecon­

31SeeILC,77thSession,LabourStandardsonMerchantShips,GeneralSurveyoftheReportsontheMerchantShipping(MinimumStandards)Convention(no.147)andtheMerchantShipping(ImprovementofStandards)Recommendation(No.155),1976(Geneva,ILO,1990),citedinILIANACHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandPENTSOV,supranote2,18.

32Id.

33Id.at44.

34Id.note80,at68.

35ArticleVI.

sideredtobesubstantiallyequivalentinthecontextofthisConvention,iftheMembersatisfiesitselfthatitisconducivetothefullachievementofthegeneralobjectandpurposeoftheprovisionorprovisionsofPartAoftheCodeconcerned,anditgiveseffecttotheprovisionorprovisionsofPartAoftheCode.

Lastbutnotleast,apointwhichdeservesspecialmentionconcernstheinvolvementofemployers’andseafarers’representativeorganizationsintheadoptionofdomesticlegislationsaddressingmattersrelatedtoMLC2006.

3.InvolvementofsocialpartnersintheadoptionofdomesticlegislationgivingeffecttoMLC2006

Consultationwithshipowners’andseafarers’organizationshasbeenpro­videdforinnumerousRegulationsofMLC2006aimingattheadoptionofdomesticmeasuresthatwouldgiveeffecttotheinstrumentbymemberStates.Forexample,thisisthecasewithregardtohealthandsafetypro­tectionandaccidentprevention(Regulation4.3),wherePurpose2oftheRegulationstatesthat“EachMembershalldevelopandpromulgatenation­alguidelinesforthemanagementofoccupationalsafetyandhealthonboardshipsthatflyitsflag,afterconsultationwithrepresentativeshipownersandseafarers’organizations....”Itisalsostatedinthesameinstrumentthat“thelawsandregulationsandothermeasuresreferredtoinRegulation4.3,para.3,36shallberegularlyreviewedinconsultationwiththerepresentativesoftheshipowners’andseafarers’organizations....”37Thisisanelementofflexibilitywhichbringsthelegislativeframeworknearertothestateoftheindustry,whilealsocontributingtotheconsensusrequiredfortheproperimplementationoflawsandregulationsinvolved.

IncaseswhererepresentativeorganizationsofshipownersorofseafarersdonotexistwithinamemberState,38anyderogation,exemptionorotherflexibleapplicationoftheConventionforwhichaconsultationwithshipowners’andseafarers’organizationisrequired,mayonlybedecidedbythatmemberStatethroughconsultationwiththespecialtripartitecommitteeestablishedbytheGoverningBodyoftheILO.39

Beyondtheveryimportantissueofthetoolsusedbytheinternationalleg­islature,whichcontributetotheeffectivenessofMLC2006,thecontentofthe

36Thisprovisionstatesthat“EachMembershalladoptlawsandregulationsandothermeasuresaddressingthemattersspecifiedintheCode,takingintoaccountrelevantinternationalinstruments,andshallsetstandardsforoccupationalsafetyandhealthprotectionandaccidentpreventiononshipsthatflyitsflag”.

37StandardA4.3.3.

38ThiscaseisaddressedinArticleVIIofMLC2006.

39ArticleXIIIofMLC2006.

instrumentitselfcallsfortheexaminationofthedifferencesbetweenthe“old”conventionsandtheinstrumentunderexamination.Thecontributionofthenewinstrumenttotheenhancementofmaritimelabourstandardsaswellastheexistenceofpointsofweaknessshouldalsobeofinterest.Giventheextentoftheinstrument,comprising68distinctConventionsandRecommendations,itisimpossibleforpracticalreasonstoaccommodateacomprehensivein-depthanalysisonallsubstantialpointswhichcouldbeofinterest.Inthissense,wehavechosentonarrowdownthefocustofoursubjectareas,name-ly:seafarers’employmentagreements,socialsecurity,repatriation,accesstoshore-basedfacilitiesandtherightofcomplaintofseafarersaboardandashore.Thechoiceofthesesubjectareasoffers,inouropinion,adifferentiat­edinputtotheissueofthecontributionofMLC2006totheenhancementoftheprotectionofmaritimelabour.

IISUBSTANTIVELAWASPECTS:ENHANCEMENTOFTHEPRO­TECTIONOFSEAFARERSVS.LIMITATIONOFSEAFARERS’PROTECTION

Firstly,itshouldbenotedthattheconceptofseafarerisnowbroadanduniform.“Seafarer”meansanypersonwhoisemployedorengagedorworksinanycapacityonboardashiptowhichtheConventionapplies.40Shipsfallingintothescopeofthenewinstrumentincludeanyship“otherthanonewhichnavigatesexclusivelyininlandwatersorwaterswithin,orcloselyadjacenttoshelteredwatersorareaswhereportregulationsapply.”41Inprinciple,theConventionappliestoallshipswhetherpubliclyorprivate­lyowned,ordinarilyengagedincommercialactivities,otherthanshipsengagedinfishingorinsimilarpursuitsandshipsoftraditionalbuild.42The

40ArticleII(1)(f).Itshouldbenotedthatinthe“old”system,theterm“seafarer”wassubjecttoadis­tinctdefinitionineachconvention.Forexample,underSeafarers’PensionsConvention,1946(No.71),“thetermseafarerincludeseverypersonemployedonboardorintheserviceofanysea-goingvessel,otherthanashipofwar,whichisregisteredinaterritoryforwhichtheConventionisinforce”(Article1),whereasunderSocialSecurity(Seafarers)Convention(Revised),1987(No.165),“thetermseafarersmeanspersonsemployedinanycapacityonboardaseagoingshipwhichisengagedinthetransportofcargoorpassengersforthepurposeoftrade,isutilizedforanyothercommercialpurposeorisaseago­ingtug,withtheexceptionofpersonsemployedon(i)smallvesselsincludingthoseprimarilypropelledbysail,whetherornottheyarefittedwithauxiliaryengines;(ii)vesselssuchasoilrigsanddrillingsplat­formswhennotengagedinnavigation....”

41ArticleII(1)(i).

42ArticleII(4).

Conventionisnotapplicabletowarshipsandnavalauxiliaries.43Itshouldbenotedthattherearesomeelementsofflexibilityconcerningsmallerships.44

Inthelinesbelow,selectiveaspectsthathavebeenenhancedrelatingtotheconditionsofemploymentandareaswheretheprotectionofseafarershasbeenstatic,reducedorlimited,include:

-Seafarers’employmentagreements

-SocialSecurity

-Repatriation

-Accesstoshore-basedfacilities

-Therightofcomplaintofseafarersashoreandaboard

A.Seafarers’EmploymentAgreements

Undertheexistingsystem,theissueofseafarers’employmentagreementsisgovernedbyTheSeamen’sArticlesofAgreementConvention,1926(No.22).Inthenewinstrument,thematterisregulatedbyRegulation2.1.Duringthenegotiationswhichwereundertakenfortheelaborationofthenewinstrument,itwaspointedoutthatConventionNo.22didnotreflectrecentdevelopmentintheshippingindustryandthattheConventionwasbasedonship-specificarticlesofagreement,whereasincurrentpracticethereisatrendforshipowner-specificarticlesofagreement.45Moreover,accordingtotheemployers’pointofview,therewasanassumptionofsuper­visionandcontroloverthecontractbypublicadministration,whichdidnotnecessarilyreflectthesituationinmanycountries.46

ConventionNo.22appliestoallsea-goingvesselsregisteredinthecoun­tryofanymemberStateratifyingtheConventionandtotheowners,mastersandseamenofsuchvessels.47Theusualexceptionsconcerningshipsofwarandsomeothertypesofvesselapply.48Fromthepointofviewofterminol­ogy,itshouldbenotedthatunderthepresentinstrument“seaman”includes

43Id.

44Forexample,seetheprovisionsrelatingtoaccommodationonboardshipinTitle3oftheConvention.Onthispoint,seeCHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandPENTSOVsupranote2,300.

45SeeReviewofrelevantILOmaritimeinstruments,supranote17,4.

46Id.

47Article1(1).

48Article1(2).Inadditiontowarships,theexclusionconcernsGovernmentvesselsnotengagedintrade,vesselsengagedinthecoastingtrade,pleasureyachts,Indiancountrycraft,fishingvesselsandves­selsoflessthan100tonsgrossregisteredtonnageor300cubicmetres,vesselsengagedinthehometradebelowthetonnagelimitprescribedbynationallawforthespecialregulationofthistradeatthedateofthepassingoftheConvention.

everypersonemployedorengagedinanycapacityonboardanyvesselandenteredontheship’sarticles;itexcludesmasters,pilots,cadetsandpupilsontrainingshipsanddulyindenturedapprentices,navalratings,andotherpersonsinthepermanentserviceofaGovernment.49

Theseafarer’sagreementshouldcontainanumberofrightsandobliga­tionsforeachpartythatareenumeratedinConventionNo.22.50Minimumparticularsarestatedintheinstrument.51NumerousissuespertainingtoConventionNo.22werediscussedbytheILOCommitteeofExperts,whichprovideausefulsourceofanalysisoftheinstrumentinquestion.52

AccordingtoMLC2006,Regulation2.1,seafarers’employmentagree­ments,whichmustbesignedbyboththeseafarerandtheshipowner,pro­videfordecentworkingandlivingconditionsaboard.53Seafarersmustcom­mitthemselvesinaninformedmanner,whichmeansthatinformationmustbeprovidedtothempriortosigningthecontract.54Eachpartyhasasignedoriginal.55Acopyisalsomaintainedaboardwhichhastobeaccessibleforreviewbycompetentofficers.56Clearinformationonconditionsofemploy­mentofseafarersmustbeobtainedeasilyaboardbyseafarers.57Seafarersmustalsobeprovidedarecordoftheiremploymentaboardtheship.58Thematterstobeincludedintheagreementmustbeprovidedforintheratify­ingmemberState’slawsandregulations.59Thisnotablyincludestheamountofseafarers’wages,60theamountofpaidannualleave61andtheconditionsofterminationofagreement.62

Theexplicitrequirementthatallseafarersshouldhaveanemploymentagreementisnoteworthy.Moreover,acopyofthecollectivebargainingagreementformingallorpartofaseafarer’semploymentagreementandacopyofthestandardformoftheagreementhavetobeavailableinEnglishifthecontractandtheapplicablecollectiveagreementarenotinEnglish.63Thisisanewrequirement.Inadditiontotheabove,themandatoryparticu­

49Article2(b).
50Article6(2)and6(3).
51Article6(3).
52SeeCHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandPENTSOV,supranote2,125seq.
53StandardA2.1,para.1(a).
54StandardA2.1,para.1(b).
55StandardA2.1,para.1(c).
56StandardA2.1,para.1(d).

57Id.
58StandardA2.1,para.1(e).
59StandardA2.1,para.4.
60Id.at(e).
61Id.at(f).
62Id.at(g).
63Exceptforshipsengagedonlyindomesticnavigation.SeeStandardA2.1,para(2).

larsoftheagreementnowincludehealthandsocialsecurityprotection,64repatriationright,65andreferencetoapplicablecollectiveagreement.66Thedurationoftheminimumperiodofnoticeforearlyterminationshallnotbeshorterthansevendays,67whereasunderthe“old”Convention,earlytermi­nationofanagreementconcludedforanindefiniteperiodshouldnotbelessthantwenty-fourhours.68

UponentryintoforceofMLC2006,possibleareasoffrictionfortheleg­islatureatthedomesticlevelresultingfromtheshiftfromthe“old”Conventiontothenewsystemwouldinclude,forexample,dependingonthestateofnationallegislation,thefollowing:domesticlegislationdoesnotpro­videallthecompulsoryparticularsthathavetobeincludedintheseafarer’semploymentagreement,orthereisnoprovisionindomesticlegislationontheavailabilityofdocumentationaboardinEnglish.Furthermore,intheeventwheretheagreementwasmadeforanindefiniteperiod,therequiredperiodofterminationnoticeislessorabsentfortheshipowner.

Possibledeficienciesdisclosedattheimplementationlevelwouldnotablyinclude:a)thesituationwheretheseafarerworksaboardthevesselwithoutanemploymentagreement;b)theagreementdoesnotcontainalltheitemsprovidedinMLC2006,despitethefactthatthelegislationprovidesacom­pulsorycontentortheemploymentagreementcontainsclausesthatviolateseafarers’rights;c)refusalgiventotheseafarertobeprovidedarecordofemploymentoncompletionofengagement;d)nocollectivebargainingagreementformingallorpartoftheemploymentagreementisaboard,etc.69

B.SocialSecurity

SocialsecurityissueswereaddressedinSocialSecurity(Seafarers)Convention(Revised)1987(No.165)andintheSeafarers’SocialSecurity(Agreements)Recommendation,1946(No75);inthenewsystem,relevantprovisionscanbefoundinRegulation4.5.

Thesocialprotectionofavulnerableprofessionalgrouplikeseafarershastraditionallybeenanissueofgreatconcern.IncountrieslikeFranceorGreece,forexample,seafarerswereamongthefirstprofessionalgroupsto

64Id.atpara.4(h).
65Id.at(i).
66Id.at(j).
67Id.atpara.5.
68Article9(1).
69SeeILO,GuidelinesforFlagStateInspectionUndertheMLC2006,2009,Geneva.

besubjectedtoaspecificsocialinsuranceaffiliationbodyandscheme.70MLC2006statestheprincipleaccordingtowhichseafarersshouldbeenti­tledtosocialsecurityprotectionnolessfavourablethanthatenjoyedbyshoreworkers.71

Branchestobeincludedintheprotectionincludemedicalcare,sicknessbenefit,unemploymentbenefit,old-agebenefit,employmentinjurybenefit,familybenefit,maternitybenefit,invaliditybenefitandsurvivor’sbenefit,complementingtheprotectionprovidedonmedicalcare72andonshipown-er’sliability,73andunderothertitlesoftheinstrument.

Atleastthreeofthesebranchesshouldbeincludedatthetimeofratifica-tion.74

Itshouldbenoticedthatwhilethe“old”Conventionprescribedspecificstandards(minimumstandardsandsuperiorstandards),thenewinstrumentrequiresratifyingStatestoachieveprogressivelycomprehensivesocialsecu­rityprotectionforseafarersbymeansofnationalpoliciesandinternationalcooperation.75Thismaybeexplainedbyconcernsrelatedtotheanticipatedwide-scaleratificationofthenewinstrument.

C.Repatriation

Undertheexistingsystem,repatriationisaddressedbyRepatriationofSeafarersConvention(Revised)1987(No.166)andTheRepatriationofSeafarers’Recommendation,1987(No.174).76Inthenewsystem,repatri­ationisgovernedbyRegulation2.5.Theneedtorepatriatetheseafarerispropertomaritimelabouranditisjustifiedbythevulnerabilityofthesea­farerwhenhis/heremploymentrelationshipcomestoanendwhilebeingawayfromhome.77

ConventionNo.166statestheconditionsofrepatriation.78Forexample,ifanengagementforaspecificperiodorforaspecificvoyageexpires

70NotetheEtablissementNationaldesInvalidesdelaMarine(ENIM),establishedinFrancebyLouisXIVin1670,andtheGreekSeamens’PensionFund(Nό ό -)estab­lishedinGreecein1836.

71Seepara.3underthepurposeofRegulation4.5.

72UnderRegulation4.1

73UnderRegulation4.2

74StandardA4.5.2.

75SeeArticles4,9and11ofConventionNo165.AlsoseeCHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSIandPENTSOV,supranote2,320.

76AlsonotetheRepatriationofSeamenConvention,1926(No.23)andtheRepatriation(Ship’sMasterandAppentices)Recommendation,1926(No.27).

77SeeDIMITRISN.KAMVISIS,PRIVATEMARITIMELAW(Ant.N.Sakkoulas,Athens-Komotini,1982)270(inGreek).

78Article2.

abroad,theseafarerisentitledtorepatriation.79Theshipownerorganizesrepatriationbyappropriateandexpeditiousmeansathiscost.80Intheeventthattheshipownershouldfailtomakearrangementsforrepatriation,inprin­ciple,thecompetentauthorityoftheflagStatemeetsthecostofrepatria-tion.81

TherightofseafarerstoberepatriatedisstatedinMLC2006.Seafarersareentitledtorepatriationiftheseafarers’employmentagreementexpireswhiletheyareabroad,whentheseafarers’employmentagreementistermi­natedbytheshipownerorbytheseafarer82andwhentheseafarersarenolongerabletocarryouttheirdutiesundertheiremploymentagreementorcannotbeexpectedtocarrythemoutinthespecificcircumstances.83TheconsequencesofthefailureoftheshipownertorepatriatetheseafarerarealsomentionedintheStandard.84

ItisnoteworthythatunderthenewsystemeachmemberStateshallrequireshipsflyingitsflagtoprovidefinancialsecuritytoensurethatsea­farersaredulyrepatriatedinaccordancewiththeCode,85whichreflectsacontributiontotheenhancementoftheprotectionoftheseafarer.However,whileunderthe“old”Conventionthereasonofterminationofthecontractofemploymentdidnothaveanimpactonrepatriation,underMLC2006theentitlementtorepatriationpresupposesthattheterminationofthecontractbytheseafarerisjustified.86

D.AccessToShore-BasedFacilities

Undertheexistingsystem,accesstoshore-basedfacilitiesisaddressedinSeafarers’WelfareConvention1987(No.163)andRecommendationNo.173.87Inthenewsystem,thematterisregulatedinRegulation4.4,whilewelfareofseafarersaboardisaddressedunderTitle3ofMLC2006con­cerningaccommodationandrecreationalfacilities,foodandcatering.

79Article2(1).

80Article4.

81Article5.

82Thiscaserequiresthattheseafarerterminatesforjustifiedreasons.SeeStandardA2.5para.1(b)(ii).

83SeeStandardA2.5para.1(b)(c).

84SeeStandardA2.5para.5.

85Seepara.2underthePurposeofRegulation2.5.

86A2.5,1(b)(ii)

87SeeAlexandreCharbonneau,LaConvention163del’OITconcernantlebien-êtredesgensdemer:fondementàl’actiondesfoyers,XXIIANNUAIREDEDROITMARITIMEETOCÉANIQUE307-346(2004);IlianaChristodoulou-Varotsi,Lesdéfitsdubien-êtredesmarinsdanslenouveaucontextedelaConventiondutravailmaritimeconsolidéedel’OIT,ContributiontotheFourthEuropeanColloquiumonMaritimeLawResearch,Nantes,September20062006,XXVANNUAIREDEDROITMARITIMEETOCÉANIQUE141-156(2007).

Therequirementtoprovidetheseafareraccesstoanumberofserviceswhilethevesselisatportshouldbeunderstoodinthelightofthespecifici­tiesoftheseafarer’sjob,whichisexercisedundertheconditionsofatotalinstitutionwherework,restandfreetimeareorganizedinthesameplace.Thetendencynowadaysistohaveportcallsofincreasinglyshortduration,which,combinedwiththeremotenessofportswhicharelocatedatasignif­icantdistancefromtowns,maketheaccessoftheseafarertoshore-basedactivitiesdifficult,orsometimes,impossible.

ItisnoteworthythatConventionNo.163usestheterm“welfarefacilitiesandservices,”whichdefinesaswelfare,cultural,recreationalandinforma­tionfacilitiesandservices.88EachmemberState,accordingtothesameinstrument,undertakestoensurethatadequatewelfarefacilitiesandservic­esareprovidedforseafarersbothinportandonboardship.89ConventionNo.163isdiscreetaboutthefinancialconsequencesofsuchpolicyandstatesthatmemberStates“shallensurethatthenecessaryarrangementsaremadeforfinancingthewelfarefacilitiesandservices”providedinaccor­dancewithitsprovisions.90MemberStatesundertaketoensurethatwelfarefacilitiesandservicesareprovidedinappropriateportsofthecountryforallseafarers,irrespectiveofnationality,race,colour,sex,religion,politicalopinionorsocialorigin,andirrespectiveoftheStateinwhichtheshiponwhichtheyareemployedisregistered.91ItisnoteworthythatConventionNo.163doesnotusetheword“shall”butthemilderphrase“undertakestoensure.”Thetaskinquestionalsocoverswelfarefacilitiesaboard,sinceaccordingtotheinstrument,eachmemberStateundertakestoensurethatthewelfarefacilitiesandservicesoneveryseagoingshipregisteredinitsterri­tory,whetherpubliclyorprivatelyowned,areprovidedforthebenefitofallseafarersonboard.92

RatificationsuccessofConventionNo.163hasbeenlimitedasdemon­stratedbythelownumberofratifications,aswellasbytheabsenceintheratificationlistofleadingregistrationorportStates.93Thisobviouslyresultsinimportantdiscrepanciesfromcountrytocountryorevenfromcontinenttocontinentattheimplementationlevel.

88Article1(1)(b).

89Article2(1).

90Article2(2)

91Article3(1).

92Article4.

93On2.2.2012seventeenmemberStatesratifiedConventionNo.163(asopposed,forexample,tosixtyratificationsinthecaseofConventionNo.22onSeamen’sArticlesofAgreement,forty-sixratifi­cationsinthecaseofConventionNo.23onRepatriationandfifty-sixratificationsinthecaseofConventionNo.147onminimumstandards.ItisnoteworthythatinthecaseofConventionNo.163noneoftheratifyingcountriesisinAfricaorinAsia.SeeCHRISTODOULOU-VAROTSI,supranote88,147.

ThereisacompromiseunderMLC2006withregardtoaccesstoshore-basedfacilitiesfromthepointofviewthatunderthenewinstrumenteachStateisheldtoensurethatshore-basedwelfarefacilitiesareeasilyaccessi­ble,wheretheyexist.94Itseemsthatconcernsrelatedtotheanticipatedworldwide-scaleratificationofMLC2006werebroughtforward,asaresultofwhichtheprotectionprovidedbythepresentRegulationwaslimitedtoexistingwelfarefacilities.Tocounterbalancethislimitation,aprovisionhasbeenincludedwhich,underthe“old”system,canbefoundinRecommendationNo.173.Morespecifically,eachmemberState“shallencourage”theestablishmentofwelfareboardswhichshallregularlyreviewwelfarefacilitiesandservicestoensurethattheyareappropriateinthelightofchangesintheindustry.95Thisisanewelement.

Whilethe“old”ConventionimposedontheratifyingStatethedutytoensureadequatewelfarefacilitiesandservicestoseafarersinport(andaboard),underthenewinstrumentratifyingStateswillensurethatsuchfacilitiesandservicesareeasilyaccessiblewheretheyexist.Asfarasthispointisconcerned,theprotectionprovidedtoseafarershasbeenreduced.

E.TheRightofComplaintofSeafarersAboardandAshore

Therightofcomplaintofseafarerscanbeanimportanttoolfortheeffec­tiveprotectionofmaritimelabourwhenitisexercisedinanappropriatemanner.TherightofcomplaintoftheseafarerwascrucialfortheproperapplicationofConventionNo.147,becauseitactivatesportStatecontrolofsocialandlabourconditions.96

TherightofcomplainthasbeenprovidedforinMLC2006intwodiffer­entsituations,namelyintheframeworkofportStatecontrolinspectionpro­cedure97andintheframeworkofaprocedurewherethecomplaintissub­mittedintheportStateashore.98WhilethefirstaspectisaddressedintheprovisionspertainingtoportStatecontrol,thesecondaspectisaddressedinanindependentmannerbymeansofaspecificRegulation.99Theprovisionsconcernedatsomepointinterface.100Concerningcomplaintssubmitted

94Regulation4.4,Purpose1.

95StandardA4.4.3.UnderRecommendationNo.173welfareboardswereprovidedforonarecom­mendatorybasis(Article9).

96SeeArticle4oftheILOConventionNo.147.

97StandardA5.2.1.,para.1(d)

98Regulation5.2.2.entitledOnshoreseafarercomplaint-handlingprocedures.

99Id.

100Seebelow.

ashore,onemayeasilyimaginethattheseafarermayhavegoodreasonsnottosubmitacomplaintonboardthevessel.

AcomplaintinthecontextofportStatecontrolmeansinformationsub­mittedbyaseafarer,aprofessionalbody,anassociation,atradeunionorgenerallyanypersonwithaninterestinthesafetyoftheship,includinganinterestinsafetyorhealthhazardstoseafarersonboard.101ArecordshouldbekeptbythecompetentportStateauthorityofthedetailsofthecomplaint,includingarecordofactiontakenuponreceiptofthecomplaint.102TheactiontakenbythecompetentportStateauthorityrequiresthatitisfirstcheckedwhetherthecomplaintrelatestoarequirementofthemandatoryprovisionsoftheConvention.Whilethecomplaintisbeingaddressed,appropriatestepsmustbetakentosafeguardtheconfidentialityofthecom­plaintmadebyseafarers.103Thecomplaintislikelytoresultinamoredetailedinspectiononboardship.TheportStateauthorityhastheobligationtoconductsuchinspectionwheretheworkingandlivingconditionsallegedtobedefectivecouldconstituteaclearhazardtosafetyorhealthoraseri­ousbreachoftherequirementsoftheConvention.104

TheportStateauthoritymaydecidenottocarryoutamoredetailedinspection;thisis,forexample,thecasewherethecomplainthasbeenmadebytheseafarerwithrespecttohisorherindividualcase.105Ifthisisthecase,thecomplaintshouldbehandledinaccordancewiththeonshoreseafarercomplaint-handlingprocedures.106

OnshoreseafarercomplaintsallegingabreachoftheConventionmaybereportedtotheportStateauthorityintheportofcall.Insuchcase,theauthorizedofficershallundertakeaninitialinvestigation.107Inthelightofthenatureofthecomplaint,theinitialinvestigationincludesconsiderationofwhethertheon-boardcomplaintprocedurewasexplored.108Theauthorizedofficermayalsoconductamoredetailedinspectioninaccordancewiththeprocedureoninspectionsonboard.109Theportauthorityshouldseektopro­motearesolutionofthecomplaintattheship-boardlevel.110Intheevent

101StandardA5.2.1.,para3.AlsoseeILO,GuidelinesforportStatecontrolofficerscarryingout

inspectionsunderMLC2006,Geneva,2009,p.33seq.

102Id.p.34.

103StandardA5.2.2.para.7.

104StandardA5.2.1.para.1

105SeeILO,GuidelinesforportStatecontrolofficerscarryingoutinspectionsunderMLC2006,supra

note102,34.

106Regulation5.2.2.

107StandardA5.2.2.para.1.

108Id.atpara.2

109StandardA5.2.2para.2.

110StandardA5.2.2.para.3

wheretheinvestigationortheinspectionrevealsseriousnon-conformities111therelevantprovisionsonInspectionsinportwillapply.Lastbutnotleast,itisnoteworthythattheflagStateandtheDirector-GeneraloftheILOmaybeinvolvedintheprocess.112

Theplethoraofprovisionsinvolvedwiththelegalregimeofseafarerscanonlybeeffectiveifenforcement-relatedmechanismsexist.Thenewinstru­mentincludessuchmechanisms.

IIICOMPLIANCEANDENFORCEMENTENHANCEDVIACERTIFI­CATIONANDSYNERGIESAMONGTHESTAKEHOLDERSINVOLVED

Oneoftheaimsofthenewinstrumentwastoenhancecomplianceandenforcement.Thisisnotablybasedontheuseofappropriatecertification,namelythemaritimelabourcertificateandthedeclarationofmaritimelabourcompliance,andonsynergiesamongthemainstakeholders.Asaresultofthesefeatures,thenewConventionshouldbeeffectiveandcon­tributesignificantlytofaircompetition.

A.FlagStates’Responsibilities

TheroleoftheflagStateiscentralbothintheinternationalsystemandintheILOsystem.113Internationallawoftheseahasplacedtheonusofeffec­tivelyexercisingjurisdictionandcontrolinadministrative,technicalandsocialmattersovernationalflaggedvesselsontheregistrationcountry.114EachflagStateisresponsibleforensuringimplementationofitsobligationsunderMLC2006onshipsflyingitsflag.115Moreover,eachflagStatehastheobligationtoestablishaneffectivesystemfortheinspectionandcertifi­cationofmaritimelabourstandards.116Itistobenotedthatrecognizedorganizationscanbeusedinthissystem.117

111Thiswouldbethecaseiftheconditionsonboardareclearlyhazardoustothesafety,healthorsecu­rityofseafarers,orthenon-conformityconstitutesaseriousorrepeatedbreachoftherequirementsoftheConvention(includingseafarers’rights).Seepara.6ofStandardA5.2.1.

112Seeparas5and6ofStandardA5.2.2ofRegulation5.2.2.

113Regulation5.1onFlagStateresponsibilities.

114SeeArticle94ofUNCLOS.

115Regulation5.1.1.para.1.

116Regulation5.1.1.para.2.

117Regulation5.1.3.

Shipsof500grosstonnageoroverengagedininternationalnavigation,andshipsof500grosstonnageoroverflyingtheflagofaMemberStateandoperatingfromaport,orbetweenports,inanothercountry,havetocarryamaritimelabourcertificatecertifyingthattheworkingandlivingconditionsofseafarersontheshiphavebeeninspectedandmeettherequirementsofdomesticprovisionsimplementingtheConvention.118Additionalrequire­mentsconcerntheissuanceofadeclarationofmaritimelabourcompliancestatingthenationalprovisionsimplementingtheConventionandsettingoutthemeasuresadoptedbytheshipownertoensurecomplianceoftheshipconcerned.119AmaritimelabourcertificateandadeclarationofmaritimelabourcomplianceconstituteprimafacieevidencethattheshiphasbeendulyinspectedbytheratifyingflagStateandthattherequirementsofMLC2006aresatisfied(totheextentsocertified).Asaresult,unjustifieddelaysinportsareexpectedtobeavoided.

B.PortStates’Responsibilities

PortStateControl(PSC)hasbeenamostimportanttoolfortheverifica­tionofapplicableinternationalmaritimestandards,especiallyintheareaofInternationalMaritimeOrganization(IMO)maritimesafetyconventions.PSCiseffectedinthecontextwhereforeignshipscallatportsotherthanthoseoftheirregistrationcountry.

PortStateControlonsocialandlabourconditionsofseafarershassome­whatdevelopedinthemarginofthecompetencyoftheregistrationcountryandtheportState.Asmentionedabove,theregistrationcountryisthecoun­tryhavingcompetenceparexcellencefortheeffectivenessofthestandardsaboardvesselsflyingnationalflags,120whileportStates’jurisdictionislarge­lylimitedundertheregimestemmingfromtheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea(UNCLOS)topollution-relatedmatters.121ThemajorinstrumentsonportStatecontrolconsistofagreementsamongnationaladministrations,referredtoasMemorandaofUnderstanding(MOUs)122and/orinregionalinstruments,whichvarybasedondomesticlegislation,

118Id.Therequirementofamaritimelabourcertificateandofadeclarationofmaritimelabourcom­pliancemayapplytoanyshipthatfliestheflagofaMemberStateandisnotcoveredbytheabove-mentionedprovisions,attherequestoftheshipownertotheMemberStateconcerned(Regulation5.1.3.para.2).

119Regulation5.1.3.para.4.

120SeeArticle94ofUNCLOS.

121NotablyseeArticles216,218,and220ofUNCLOS.

122NotablyseetheParisMemorandumofUnderstanding,theTokyoMemorandumofUnderstanding,theBlackSeaMemorandumofUnderstanding,andtheCaribbeanMemorandumofUnderstanding.

nationalinorigin,ordomesticlegislationtransposingregionalrequirements,as,forexample,ECDirectivesonportStatecontrol.123

FromthepointofviewofILOstandards,thepointofreferencehasbeentheMerchantShipping(MinimumStandards)Convention,1976(No.147).124Thelatterhasbeenasuccessfulinstrumentintermsofratification,havingbeenratifiedsofarbyfifty-sixMemberStates.125Whilethisconven­tionisalsoenforceabletowardsforeignvesselscallingatportsofnon-rati-fyingMemberStates,126theprocedureofcontrolisnotautomaticandisverymuchdependentonthesubmissionofacomplaintoronevidencethattheshipdoesnotconformtothestandardsoftheConvention.127

UnderMLC2006,inspectionofforeignvesselsisarticulatedinRegulation5.2.1.PortStatecontrolisinprinciplelimitedtoareviewofthemaritimelabourcertificateandofthedeclarationofmaritimelabourcom-pliance.128However,amoredetailedinspectionmaytakeplaceundertheconditionsstatedbytheConvention.129Theconditionsinquestionnotablyincludesituationswheretherequireddocumentationisnotproducedorisfalselymaintained,wheretherearecleargroundsforbelievingthattheworkingandlivingconditionsaboarddonotconformtotheConvention,orintheeventofcomplaint.Thedetailedinspectionunderconsiderationaimstoascertaintheworkingandlivingconditionsonboardtheship.Amoredetailedinspectionmusttakeplacewheretheworkingandlivingconditionsbelievedorallegedtobedefectivecouldconstituteaclearhazardtosafetyandhealthofseafarers,orconstituteaseriousbreachoftheConvention.

123SeeDirective2009/16/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof23April2009onportStatecontrolO.J.(L131)57(EC)whichrecastsCouncilDirective95/21/ECof19June1995onportStatecontrolofshipping(O.J.(L157)1(EC),thelatterhavingbeensubstantiallyamendedseveraltimes.

124OnILOConventionNo.147notablyseeTheimpactonseafarers’livingandworkingconditionsofchangesinthestructureoftheshippingIndustry,supranote2,107,seq.

125AsofFebruary2,2012(seeilo.org.www,lastvisit2.2.2012).However,insomepartsoftheworld,itsapplicationisnotensured,asaresultoflackofadequateratifications.OntheConventionnotablyseeChristodoulou-Varotsi&Pentsov,LaborStandardsonCypriotShips:MythandReality,supranote15,653seq.,PatrickChaumette,Lecontroldesnaviresparl’Etatduport,inLanorme,lavilleetlamer,EcritsdeNantes,enl’honneurduDoyenYvesPrats,2000,265seq.

126SeeChristodoulou-VarotsiandPentsov,supranote15,654,footnoteno24,asfollows:

BoththeCommitteeonSubstandardVessels,ParticularlyThoseRegisteredUnderFlagsof

Convenience,setupbythe62d(Maritime)SessionoftheInternationalLabourConference,

andtheConferenceitselfdecidedagainstlimitingtheapplicationofArticle4ofthe

ConventiontoshipsflyingtheflagofthestatewhichhasratifiedtheConvention.SeeILO

SubstandardVessels,ParticularlyThoseRegisteredUnderFlagsofConvenience,62d

(Maritime)Sess.,1976,RecordofProceedings192(para.77),260-61(ILO,Geneva,1977).

127SeeArticle4oftheConvention.

128Regulation5.2.1.para.2.

129StandardA5.2.1.,para.1.

Where,followingamoredetailedinspection,theworkingandlivingcon­ditionsaboardarefoundtoviolatetheConvention,thedeficienciescon­cernedarenotablybroughttotheattentionofthemasterwithrequireddead­linesfortheirrectification.Intheeventwhere,followingamoredetailedinspection,theconditionsonboardareclearlyhazardoustothesafety,healthorsecurityofseafarers,orthenon-conformityconstitutesaseriousorrepeatedbreachoftherequirementsoftheConvention,thevesselisdetaineduntiltheconformitiesinquestionarerectifiedoranappropriateactionplanisaccepted.130

Itisnoteworthythattheimportanceattributedtothemaritimelabourcer­tificateandtothedeclarationofconformityofmaritimelabour,asaresultofwhichdelaysanddetentionsareavoidedintheeventwherethedocu­mentationinquestionisingoodorder,isfundamentallyconnectedwiththeaimoftheConventiontooperateasaninstrumentfacilitatingfaircompeti­tion.

C.Labour-SupplyingResponsibilities

Thisaspectisnovel.Regulation5.3aimstoensurethateachMemberimplementsits

responsibilitiesundertheConventionasconcernsseafarers’recruitmentandplacementaswellassocialprotection.Theresponsibilitiesinquestionarenotconfinedtolabour-supplyingStatesbutalsocoveranyMemberStateprovidingmaritimelabour.ThecompetencyoftheflagStateforthework­ingandlivingconditionsofseafarersonshipsflyingitsflagisnotchal­lenged.However,inadditiontothisresponsibility,theMemberalsohasaresponsibilitytoensuretheimplementationoftheConventionregardingtherecruitmentandplacementofseafarersaswellasthesocialprotectionofseafarersthatareitsnationalsorresideinitsterritory,totheextentthatsuchresponsibilityisprovidedbytheConvention.

Itshouldberecalledthattheareaofrecruitmentandplacementisgov­ernedbyRegulation1.4.ItisstatedintheConventionthatseafarers’recruit­mentandplacementservicesshouldbeoperatedinanorganizedmanneraccordingtotherequirementsoftheConvention.Thelatternotablyrequiresthattheservicesinquestionprotectseafarers’rightsandoperateincon­formitywitharegulatedsystem,whosemainfeaturesareprovidedbytheRegulationinquestion.

130StandardA5.2.1.para.6.

Aneffectiveinspectionandmonitoringsystemforenforcinglabour-sup-plyingresponsibilitiesundertheConventionshouldbeestablished.131

 

 

IVCONCLUDINGREMARKS

Despiteminorweaknesses,suchas,forexample,thenon-inclusionofabandonedseafarersinthescopeofthenewinstrument,afewareaswhereprotectionwasreduced,andthefearofchangeprovokedbysuchasophis­ticatedinstrument,theoverallanticipatedcontributionofMLC2006canbeviewedaspositive.Thisisespeciallytruefromthepointofviewofthecapacityofthenewconventiontooperateasaglobal,comprehensiveinstru­mentwithclearobjectivesandmeansofrealizationofsuchobjectives.TheunevenapplicationofmaritimelabourstandardsfromoneStatetoanothercanreasonablybeexpectedtoberemediedwiththenewinstrument.Faircompetition,whichisintheinterestbothofshipownersandseafarers,canalsoreasonablybeexpectedtobeenhanced.Maritimesafetyculturewillalsobestrengthened,thehumanelementbeingoneofitscomponents.Thecapacityoftheimplementationprocesstobecomeaneffectivetoolforaddressingtheproblems,ratherthanameredocumentationexercise,aswellasthecapacityoftheratifyingStateswithalimitedexperienceinILOmar­itimeConventionstoadapttothenewframeworkwithouthinderingship­pingactivitieswillactasacatalystforthesuccessofMLC2006.

131Regulation5.3para.3underPurpose.

 

International Websites

site_links_1

www.aeip.net (European Association of Paritarian Institutions of Social Protection)

www.agediscrimination.info (Age Discrimination)

www.bbc.co.uk (BBC)

www.bls.gov (Bureau of Labor Statistics-USA)

www.cls.dk (Centre for Labour Market and Social Research-Denmark)

www.dwp.gov.uk (Department for Work & Pensions–UK)

www.echr.coe.int (European Court of Human Rights)

www.economist.com (Economist)

europa.eu/index_en.htm (Official Website of European Union)

www.europarl.europa.eu (Εuropean Parliament)

www.europe.osha.eu.int (Occupational Safety & Health Association-EU)

www.faz.com (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung)

www.ft.com (Financial Times)

www.healthfinder.gov (health sites portal)

www.iht.com (International Herald Tribune)

www.ilo.org (International Labour Organization)

www.inrs.fr (Institut National de Recherche et de Securité-France)

www.internationallawoffice.com

www.ipe.com (Investment & Pensions Europe)

www.lefigaro.fr (Le Figaro)

www.lemonde.fr (Le Monde)

www.lse.fr (Liaisons Sociales Européennes)

www.monde-diplomatique.fr (Le Monde Diplomatique)

www.newsweek.com (Newsweek)

www.ngo.org (UN Non-Governmental Organizations portal)

www.nytimes.com (New York Times)

www.observatoire-retraites.org/ (Observatoire National de Retraites-France)

www.oecd.org (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development)

www.osha.gov (Occupational Safety & Health Administration-USA)

www.spiegel.de (Der Spiegel)

www.ssa.gov (Social Security Agency-USA)

www.taxsites.com (tax sites portal)

www.washingtonpost.com (Washington Post)

www.welt.de (Die Welt)

www.who.int (World Health Organization)

www.wikilaw3k.org (WikiLaw3k.org)

www.zeit.de (Die Zeit)

Subcategories