Seafarers

Key Points

01

Seafarers provide the ultimate acid test as to whether the MLC has succeeded in its goal of ensuring “the principles of decent work” and “the right of all seafarers to decent employment”.

02

SRI conducted a survey of seafarers on the MLC during 2018. The survey was conducted face-to-face with 5200 seafarers in 10 labour supply States, namely: Bangladesh, China, India, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Russia, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Vietnam. Seafarers were accessed at maritime training centres and schools; universities; maritime administrations; shipping companies; manning agents; port terminals and unions. The respondents included officers, ratings and some masters.

03

Overall there was a high level of awareness of the MLC amongst seafarers, although there was uneven knowledge of the MLC across the different nationalities of seafarers. Over 50 % of seafarers in the survey thought that the MLC had improved their situation. Around 65% of seafarers in the survey had received some training on the MLC, mostly on board.

04

Top seafarer concerns were:

• Skills training. Over 80% referred to skills training, that is upskilling and reskilling on hard issues such as digital (evolving) technologies, automation of ships and green fuels (and green skills, such as resource management, energy efficiency and air pollution issues); also soft skills such as leadership training and other skillsets so that seafarers can do their own lifelong learning to address changes as they come.
• MLC training. Around 70% would like more training about their rights and responsibilities under the MLC.
• Training on legal risks to avoid detention or criminal charges. Specifically mentioned was the need to be informed about local legal risks when ships enter foreign ports.
• Fatigue linked to excessive work hours and inadequate rest.  58.3% of seafarers surveyed had suffered fatigue when on board; 50.6% said that  fatigue was a risk to their own safety or the safety of the ship.
• Higher wages and job security. The lack of permanent contracts as well as low wages in the face of economic uncertainties.

05

The on-board complaint procedure is not generally used by seafarers, who often appear to fear victimisation.  In the SRI survey, over 80% of seafarers surveyed had been provided with a copy of the on-board complaint procedures.  But only 17% had made an on-board complaint regarding the MLC.

06

Seafarers were asked an open question on what would improve their situation. 1563 comments were received which were analysed using manual coding.  Seafarers answers often coincided with concerns they had.  Hence the most frequent answers related to:

• better wages and job security;
• training within the context of MASS and GHG;
• promotion of employment opportunities in the maritime sector and career and skill development;
• better regulation of hours of work and rest;
• safe manning levels should be increased in some of the ships using the experience of seafarers;
• full implementation and enforcement of the MLC;
• “proper implementation of the MLC law … rather than just making the laws”.

07

The definition of the term “seafarer” was intensely discussed throughout the development of the draft MLC text.  Around 30 States have communicated to the ILO Director-General their national determinations concerning categories of persons to be regarded as seafarers for the purpose of the Convention. All these States appear to have used their determinations to exclude categories of persons from the definition of seafarer. One of the most common defects with the definition of a seafarer identified by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) was the exclusion of cadets and/or masters from the legislation of several States.

08

In a General Observation in 2014, the CEACR observed “some difficulty” in connection with the application of the flexibility provided in paragraph 3 of Article II and noted that:

“… the concept of “substantial equivalence” …is not applicable to cases of doubt as to whether the Convention applies to a category of persons or ships…also that the MLC, 2006 does not allow for the partial application of the national law implementing its provisions if the workers concerned are seafarers covered by the Convention. Exclusion of workers from the scope of the Convention is possible only where: (a) they clearly do not come within the definition of “seafarer”; (b) the ship on which they work is clearly not a “ship” covered by the Convention; (c) a doubt can arise in regard to (a) or (b) above and a determination has been made, in accordance with the Convention, that the categories of workers concerned are not seafarers or are notworking on ships covered by the Convention; or (d) the provisions in the relevant legislation that do not apply to such workers relate to subjects that are not covered by the Convention”.

09

The discussion around who is a seafarer under the MLC is likely to remain current in the context of MASS and the skills and positions that will be needed for future ships.