User:Mhallsid/sandbox/Maritime Labour Convention Implementation Study

The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) was adopted by the International Labour Organisation on 23 February 2006 and entered into force on 20 August 2013. A study on the implementation of labour supplying responsibilities pursuant to the Maritime Labour Convention within and outside the European Union[1] (the MLC Implementation Study) was undertaken during 2015 to assess how the main EU and non-EU seafarers' Labour Supplying States (LSS) having ratified the MLC, or in the process of ratifying it are complying, or intend to comply with the requirements laid down in the MLC.

The study examined how the obligations to establish an effective inspection and monitoring system for enforcing labour supplying responsibilities under the MLC were satisfied, in 25 targeted European and non-European LSS and Flag States (FS), 18 of which have ratified the MLC at the time of the survey. The study focused especially on the role of the Recruitment and Placement Service providers, social security systems, shipowners' obligations and the States' compliance. The methodology adopted for the study integrated desktop research, stakeholders' interviews, a survey among seafarers and the convening of an implementation workshop attended by representatives of the main stakeholder groups.

Background
The Maritime Labour Convention (MLC, 2006) is a comprehensive International Convention that was adopted by the International Labour Conference of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in February 2006 in Geneva, Switzerland. The basic aims of the MLC, 2006 are to ensure comprehensive worldwide protection of the rights of seafarers and to establish a level playing field for countries and shipowners committed to providing decent working and living conditions for seafarers, protecting companies and States from unfair competition on the part of substandard ships. The global maritime recruitment system is an essential part of the global maritime labour market. Manning agencies and crewing companies have the main responsibility for the recruitment and placement of seafarers (defined as Seafarers' Recruitment and Placement Service providers - RPS or SRPS). The MLC, 2006 sets the global minimum standards concerning seafarers’ recruitment and placement in Regulation 1.4. The purpose of this regulation is to ensure that seafarers have access to an efficient and well-regulated recruitment and placement system.

In short, Standard A1.4 focuses on the following areas: In addition, topics including the investigation of complaints and relevant social security issues are also covered.
 * Establishment and definition of public and private RPS;
 * Obligations of ILO Member States where SRPSs are located, concerning the establishment of a system for the operation, supervision and control of SRPS in their territory;
 * Obligations of the SRPS concerning record-keeping, providing employment, arranging seafarers’ placement and informing seafarers of their rights and duties;
 * Shipowners’ responsibilities regarding protection of seafarers from being stranded, payment of wages and other;
 * Recruitment of seafarers from countries that have not ratified the MLC, 2006; and,
 * System of protection against monetary loss.

Goals of this study
The study goals, as defined in a Public Tender published by the European Commission, were to:
 * Provide an assessment on how the main EU and non EU seafarers' labour supplying countries having ratified the MLC, 2006 or being in the process of ratifying it are complying, or intend to comply with the requirements laid down in the MLC, 2006 and the new obligations to establish an effective inspection and monitoring system for enforcing labour supplying responsibilities under the MLC, 2006;
 * Identify the main policy options which will allow the EU and non EU Flag States to ensure that the most important LSS implement those responsibilities under the MLC, 2006 pertaining to seafarer recruitment and placement, as well as the social security protection of its seafarers; and
 * Assess the need or not, of having a European Union legislative framework aimed at ensuring that the most important LSS implement their responsibilities under the MLC, 2006 as pertaining to seafarer recruitment and placement.

Study methodology
A triangulation of methods (desktop research, personal/ telephone interviews, on-line questionnaire, implementation workshop) and data sources (seafarers and stakeholders groups; FS and LSS competent authorities, public and private SRPS, shipowners’ associations and seafarers’ trade unions, international organisations, classification societies, PSC and MOUs, NGOs and other) was utilised to support the study.

Country profiles
The study focused on examining 25 countries, from which 18 were MLC ratifying and seven were MLC non-ratifying at the time of the survey, while 15 EU member States and 10 non EU-members were analysed. The following countries were examined, as selected by the European Commission: Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Malaysia, Morocco, Myanmar, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. The study team created 25 country profiles for the targeted countries that present the following information (among others): A full set of country profiles, for each of the targeted States is included in Annex III of the Final Study Report.
 * Category of state (MLC ratifying/ non-ratifying State, EU/ non EU member);
 * National maritime labour information (fleet and seagoing labour statistics);
 * Contact information of state's competent authorities;
 * Comments from ILO's Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR), if any;
 * Results from THETIS, regarding MLC-related deficiencies (crew certificates, working and living conditions, and the four categories of labour conditions) for the period August 20, 2013 (or other for the countries when implementation started on a later date) to August 20, 2015;
 * Status of RPS (public/ private/ job placement websites);
 * RPS licensing/certification/ other regulatory system and RPS supervision results;
 * Seafarers’ insurance, social security and Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) if any;
 * Other issues (complaint handling procedures and results, cooperation with other countries);
 * Data obtained from desktop research, stakeholders’ interviews and other primary and secondary sources, special notes and recommendations by the study team.

Stakeholder interviews
In order to support the goals of the study a number of stakeholders’ groups were identified and selected stakeholders were approached for interview, based on a structured script and/or semi-structured interviews (personal, telephone and via Skype). The stakeholders’ groups included representatives of Flag and Labour Supplying States, seafarers’ trade unions, shipowners’ associations, classification societies, shipping companies and RPS, Port State Control and MOU authorities, international organisations, non-governmental organisations. Until September 2015, 70 stakeholders have been interviewed, representing more than 60 organisations/firms. A list of all interviewed stakeholders is provided in Annex II.

Implementation workshop
A workshop on the implementation of labour supplying responsibilities pursuant to the MLC, 2006 within and outside the EU was organised and took place in Berlin, Germany in June 22–23, 2015. Selected stakeholders were invited, including 45 representatives of competent authorities and Member States of the ILO, shipowners and their associations, seafarers’ trade unions, recruitment and placement service providers, maritime authorities, representatives of classification societies, PSC officers and other. The findings from the workshop are discussed in section 5 of Annex I, while a compendium of the full list of workshop participants, published materials, and information on the participants is included in Annex V.

Seafarer survey
A comprehensive seafarer web-based survey was prepared in three languages; English, Tagalog and Russian. A brief summary of the seafarer survey results is provided in section 4.6 of the Final Study and the results of the English and Russian language surveys are provided in detail in Annex IV. In total 519 seafarers responded in English and Russian, although the responses in Tagalog were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete answers. Results from this survey were incorporated into the study findings and recommendations.

Survey among shipping companies and SRPS
With the use of structured interview scripts the survey team approached a number of shipping companies, shipowners' associations and SRPS for the collection of data, in order to cross-check information provided by other stakeholders, including authorities of ship registries. There was a limited sample collected mainly with the assistance of the UK Chamber of Shipping. In total seven shipping companies, three SRPS and eight shipowners' associations participated in this survey (the European Community Shipowners' Associations- ECSA and the German, Greek, Danish, Norwegian, Portuguese, Dutch and Swedish Shipowners' Associations). Results from this survey have been incorporated in the analysis.

Summary of findings
The definition of the seafarer recruitment and placement service was found to be interpreted in different ways among the FS and LSS, since many aspects of the concepts that have not been clearly defined are concerned. The process of certification and the names of licensed/ certified RPS are not published by most EU Member States, nor by most ratifying and non-ratifying countries. Not all licensed/ certified RPS display their certifications visibly on their Internet sites or elsewhere. Classification societies acting as Recognised Organisations[7] (ROs) rarely publish the SRPS certificates issued. There are indications that seafarers often are unaware of the certification/ licensing status of the SRPS that they are using. Some States differentiate the organisations providing web/ job boards from RPS, and exclude them from the provisions of the MLC, 2006. A significant number of Internet-based placement services and "job boards" that consider themselves outwith the scope of the MLC definition were identified. Private RPSs exist in most LSS, but also unofficially in MLC ratifying States that by the national law allow only public SPRSs. In such a case, private SRPS operate as branches of foreign SRPS. Not all MLC ratifying States (nor EU Member States) have implemented a system for SRPS certification, licensing or other regulatory process; and, where certificates of compliance are requested by shipowners, many of these countries propose voluntary certification scheme utilising classification societies. A few MLC ratifying States have issued guidance to their national seafarers who are seeking employment through an RPS domiciled in an MLC non-ratifying State.

A key goal of MLC, is that ultimately all seafarers, whatever their nationality or residence and whatever the flags of the ships they work on, should be protected by comprehensive social security protection. This goal does not have to be reached at the time of ratification. Regulation 4.5 of the MLC states that an ILO Member State shall ensure that seafarers who are subject to its social security legislation, are entitled to benefit from social security protection no less favourable than that enjoyed by shore workers. To this end, Standard A4.5 requires that at the time of ratification seafarers shall be covered by three out of nine social security branches mentioned in the MLC (i.e. medical care, sickness benefit, unemployment benefit, old-age benefit, employment injury benefit, family benefit, maternity benefit, invalidity benefit and survivors’ benefit). ILO Member States have to progressively extend the social protection coverage. The study found that although some ratifying States declare that their social security system covers 9/9 branches mentioned by the MLC, 2006, in practice there are differences among the benefits offered to all nationals (i.e. shore-based and seagoing workers), and (a) the benefits offered to national seafarers working on national-flagged ships, (b) those offered to national seafarers working on foreign-flagged ships, (c) those offered to foreign crew working on national-flagged ships. Social protection is primarily provided by the seafarer's State of ordinary residence, but there may be no State-based system of social security for any workers. Many countries may have problems in ensuring that adequate social protection is provided to seafarers working on ships flying their flag but coming from countries providing little or no social protection to their nationals and residents (see also, International Labour Standards Department, 2012).

Several MLC ratifying States have made bilateral/multilateral agreements with other countries and shipping companies, within and outside the EU, for collaboration in the employment terms on the basis of collective bargaining agreements (CBAs). Overall, there seem to be a few countries that have bilateral or multilateral agreements on social security agreements with other countries; however these mechanisms and arrangements do not appear to be widespread and available information is not clear. One form of a multilateral agreement is the EU Regulation on the coordination of social security systems (see European Commission, 2004).

The issues of on-going and long time benefits due to illness (inability to work) and pensions were found to not being adequately addressed by the MLC, 2006. Although ILO's Seafarers’ Pensions Convention (C71; ILO, 1946) was not incorporated in the MLC, issues concerning relevant social security branches are a problematic matter in the cases of bilateral agreements. Regarding insurance cover for seafarers, the Protection and Indemnity (P&I) clubs cover only for shipowners’ liabilities to third parties and do not provide insurance cover arrangements for crewing agencies. Private insurance cover of seafarers and RPS is evolving after the implementation of the MLC, 2006; however it is not widespread in the industry. The role of private insurance packages, versus or complementary to that of P&I Clubs coverage needs further examination.

The recording of complaints is a subject that would appear to be of significance when discussing RPS compliance and States' supervision responsibility. Although formal complaint procedures concerning the shipowner, as required under the MLC are in place, seafarers are reluctant to utilise these procedures, due to fear of establishing their names as "trouble-makers" and limiting their opportunities for future employment. The majority of complaints would appear to be submitted by seafarers to port chaplains, seafarers' trade unions, and to the International Transport Federation (ITF), who either send onboard their own inspectors or notify the relevant authorities. The ROs that have established their own standards for the certification of SRPS under Reg. 1.4 of MLC, 2006 require the SRPS to have their own complaints procedure.

There are indications from seafarers and representatives of seafarers' trade unions, as well as of a few FS's that practices of deterring seafarers for seeking employment for which they are qualified for, still exist, usually in an indirect way. Varying degrees of respecting the anonymity of the individual complainant seafarer involved are adopted; however in practice the anonymity of the complainant is not always ensured, as revealed by the survey.

The investigation and recording of complaints from the FS and LSS seems absent, since only one country (EU Member, MLC ratifying State) has recorded complaints from August 20, 2013, and has published relevant results.

Policy recommendations
Based on the inputs from desktop research, interviews of stakeholders, the seafarers’ survey and the implementation workshop, the study team prepared recommendations for policy alternatives at the international, EU and national level. The goal of these policy actions would be to enable the EU and EU Flag States to ensure that the most important LSS implement their responsibilities under the MLC, 2006 pertaining to seafarer recruitment and placement, and work to ensure the social security protection of seafarers.

The recommendations defined by the study team are measures that would both enhance the awareness of seafarers as to their rights under MLC, 2006, and enable stakeholders to better guarantee these rights and duties as required under the MLC, 2006. To achieve this goal four categories of policy recommendations were proposed. Policy recommendation are described in the Final Study Report and Annex VI.
 * Category A (MLC awareness) relates to the provision of an MLC awareness campaign for seafarers;
 * Category B (definition, regulation and operation of SRPS) includes two recommendations that could be implemented by the ILO;
 * Category C (supervision and inspection of SRPS and, recording and handling of complaints) relates to a set of recommendations that target the EU Member States competent authorities, PSC authorities and the ILO;
 * Category D (forum for the promotion of bilateral/ multilateral agreements for seafarers' employment, social security and insurance coverage) proposes further research and discussion at the national level.

The proposed policies could be implemented at the European, international (ILO) and national (Member States and social partners) level. The collaboration of the Commission with national authorities and organisations, as well as international bodies (e.g. the ILO, ITF, etc.) could:
 * enhance the effectiveness of these policies at the national and international level;
 * ensure level playing field for EU shipping companies;
 * maximise the benefits from the implementation of MLC, 2006 for EU seafarers and EU shipping companies; and,
 * maintain and enhance the leadership role of the EC, represented by DG-MOVE, in the promotion of MLC, 2006 as the primary multi-national mechanism for enhancing the employment and social security rights of both EU and non-EU seafarers.

Authorship and disclaimer
The present article has been authored by the research team of Innovative Compliance Europe Ltd and Hochschule Wismar, University of Applied Sciences: Technology, Business and Design (the organisations contracted to perform the MLC, 2006 Implementation Study). Innovative Compliance Europe Ltd and Hochschule Wismar, University of Applied Sciences: Technology, Business and Design declare that the information herein was produced within a contract with the European Union and that the opinions expressed are those of the contractor only and do not represent the contracting authority's official position.