1 / 24

Maritime labour convention (mlc), 2006 the first 3 months

Maritime labour convention (mlc), 2006 the first 3 months. CARSTEN GIERGA– MANAGING DIRECTOR, YCF GROUP, HAMBURG, GERMANY INTERTANKO EUROPEAN MEMBER SEMINAR - 12 TH - 13 TH NOVEMBER 2013. MARITIME LABOUR CONVENTION (MLC), 2006 THE FIRST 3 MONTHS. Topics :

frisco
Download Presentation

Maritime labour convention (mlc), 2006 the first 3 months

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Maritime labour convention (mlc), 2006the first 3 months CARSTEN GIERGA– MANAGING DIRECTOR, YCF GROUP, HAMBURG, GERMANY INTERTANKO EUROPEAN MEMBER SEMINAR - 12TH - 13TH NOVEMBER 2013

  2. MARITIME LABOUR CONVENTION (MLC), 2006 • THE FIRST 3 MONTHS • Topics: • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME • Most Common deficiencies • Practical solutions

  3. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME • Liberia’s Proactive Measures – MLC Implementation: • Trained a global network of more than 200 Inspectors to conduct shipboard MLC compliance inspections and issue MLC certificates • Provided global MLC seminars, workshops and gap analysis to shipowners and operators • Developed an Online Complaint Procedure • Summary (October 25, 2013) : • Number of vessels required MLC certification: 3,242 • Number of DMLC I issued:3,141 • Number of DMLC II submitted for review:3,112Accepted:3,058 • Number of MLC certified vessels/MLC certificates: 1,796 (Incl. 233 Interim Cert.) • Number of vessels certified by ROs: 1,126

  4. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME During 1.105 MLC inspections on Liberian vessels there were • 321 Deficiencies Most affected regulations: 1: Food and catering 2: Accommodation and recreational facilities 3: Health and safety and accident prevention 4: Employment agreements 5: Payment of Wages 6: Hours of work and hours of rest

  5. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME Authorized officer requests certificate & DMLC- Reg.5.2.1 MLC Inspection in Port Does ship have MLC, 2006 certification?A5.2.1, para. 1 Not produced Yes Flag ratified MLC, 2006 A5.2.1, para 1(a) Flag not ratified MLC, 2006 A5.2.1, para 1(a) Certificate & DMLC valid & complete? A5.2.1, para. 1 • No • Document not maintained or falsely maintained or does not contain required information required; Yes Do W & L conditions, believed or alleged to be defective, constitute a clear hazard to safety, etc., or a serious breach of requirements, including seafarers’ rights? A5.2.1, para. 1, last sentence Yes BUT • b) Clear grounds for believing W & L conditions do not conform to Convention; or • c) Reasonable grounds ship changed flag to avoid compliance with Convention; or • d) there is a Complaint and • W & L conditions are alleged to be defective, including seafarers’ rights Inspection ends Yes No More detailed inspection MUST be carried out * More detailed inspection MAY be carried out *

  6. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME More Detailed inspection to be carried out: Any deficiency found? No Yes Inspection ends And Clearly hazardous or serious / repeated breach of requirements? Are deficiencies significant or related to a complaint? Deficiencies brought to the attention of the master with deadlines for rectification • Ship detained in port until: • Deficiencies rectified or • Plan of Action accepted by Authorized Officer • A 5.2.1, para. 6 • All possible efforts must be made to avoid ship being unduly detained or delayed (A5.2.1, para. 8) No Yes • Mandatory to inform: • Shipowner and seafarer organizations • A5.2.1, para. 4 Yes No • Notify Flag State and invite representative; • Request Flag State to reply within deadline; • Inform Shipowner and seafarer organizations in port state. • A 5.2.1, para. 6 • Optional to inform: • Flag State A5.2.1 para. 4(a) • Next Port Authorities A5.2.1, para 4(b) • ILO Director General A5.2.1, para 5 Inspection ends

  7. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME Complaint received by an authorized officer (A5.2, para 1) Have onboard complaint procedures (Reg 5.1.5) beenexplored? Initial Investigation A5.2.2, para1 Should more detailed inspection be carried out? (A5.2.2, para 2) Guidelines for PSCO’s, para 110) Yes No No Yes Should the onboard procedures first be explored? Follow A5.2.1, route : paras 1(d), 3, 4, 5, 6 See flowchart on “Action to be taken” No Investigations with persons involved in the complaint (Guidelines for PSCOs, para.114 Yes No Promote resolution at ship-board A5.2.2, para.3 Investigation reveals non-conformity justifying detention ? (Guidelines for PSCOs, para. 115) Yes Follow the procedure in A5.2.1, para. 6 See flowchart on “Action to be taken” Officer may refrain from further action (Guidelines for PSCOs, para.113 Complaint resolved ? No more action required • A5.2.2, para. 6 : • Copy of report to ILO Director-General • accompanied by Flag State reply; • Inform Shipowner and Seafarer organizations in the port State. • (Guidelines for PSCOs, para. 117) No Yes • A5.2.2, para. 5 • Notify flag state for corrective plan of action with deadline; • (Guidelines for PSCOs, para. 116) No Can flag State handle matter, having acceptable plan of action Yes No more action required

  8. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME

  9. LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAMME

  10. Standard A1.2 – Medical Certificate • Medical certificates not signed or incorrectly entered by medical practitioner • Standard A 1.4 – Recruitment and placement services (RPS) • No evidence to indicate that RPS in non-ratifying countries operate as far as practicable in accordance with Standard A1.4 • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 MOST COMMON DEFICENCIES Common deficiencies identified by MLC Standard

  11. Standard A2.1 – Seafarers employment agreements (SEA’s) • Seafarers not provided signed original of SEA • Seaman’s book expired or not available • CBA not available on board for review or not consistent with SEA • Standard A2.2 – Payment of wages • No monthly account of wages provided • Wages not paid regularly at monthly intervals • Seafarers not paid for overtime hours worked over guaranteed overtime hours • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 MOST COMMON DEFICENCIES Common deficiencies identified by MLC Standard

  12. Standard A2.3 – Hours of work and hours of rest • Record of rest hours not kept or not consistent with ships log or overtime records • Minimum hours of rest not provided in any 24 hours or 7 days period and no compensatory rest provided immediately thereafter • Table of working arrangements not posted • Seafarers not provided with copy of their individual work/rest hours • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 MOST COMMON DEFICENCIES Common deficiencies identified by MLC Standard

  13. Standard A3.2 – Food, water and catering • Evidence of training and qualification of ship’s cook not in accordance with flag requirement • No evidence of training of other catering staff • Storage of food not as required • Standard A3.1– Accommodation and recreational facilities • Poor housekeeping • Sanitary facilities in-operational • Inadequate ventilation • Flooring and cabin equipment damaged • No measures to reduce noise and vibration • Weekly inspections not carried out or records not kept • - • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 MOST COMMON DEFICENCIES Common deficiencies identified by MLC Standard

  14. Standard A4.1 – Medical care on board ship and ashore • ITU publications for obtaining radio medical advice not on board • medicines on board not as per required scale • Standard A4.3– Health and safety protection and accident prevention • No risk assessment for critical operations • No functioning safety committee on board • No evidence of near miss reporting and investigation • ILO Code of practice and IMO Noise Code not on board for review by seafarers • - - • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 MOST COMMON DEFICENCIES Common deficiencies identified by MLC Standard

  15. Standard A5.1.1– General principles • Copy of Convention not on-board • Standard A5.1.5– On-board complaint procedures • Seafarers not provided with a copy of on-board complaint procedures • Seafarers not familiar with the procedure • Required contact information of Administration and Shipowner not entered • LIBERIA’S MLC,2006 MOST COMMON DEFICENCIES Common deficiencies identified by MLC Standard

  16. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Relation between Shipowner/Operator/Crew Manager • Article II(1)(j) provides for the ‘shipowner’ under MLC to be the ‘owner of the ship’ or ‘Operator of the ship’ (Manager/Bareboat Charterer) • The name and address of the ‘shipowner’ under MLC must be included in the DMLC Part II, the MLC Certificate and the seafarers’ employment agreement as being responsible Party for taking over the duties under the Convention • Article II(1)(j) provides for duties and responsibilities imposed on shipowners under the Convention to be fulfilled by another person or organization • Where these duties are fulfilled by the ‘Operator’, a declaration in the DMLC Part II from the ‘shipowner’ appointing the ‘Operator’ to fulfill these duties is required.

  17. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Relation between Shipowner/Operator/Crew Manager SCENARIO: A seafarers’ employment agreement is concluded between the “Owner” of the ship and the seafarer. However, the “Owner” is not the “MLC Shipowner” pursuant to Article II/1(j). Or alternatively, a seafarers’ employment agreement is concluded between the “Crew Manager” as Employer” and the seafarer. Would either of these agreements still be valid under the Convention’s requirements? NOTE: The MLC Shipowner under MLC must be identified (by name and address) on the employment agreement (A2.1.4b ). The “Crew Manager”, as employer, may sign the employment agreement as representative of the “MLC Shipowner” (A2.1.1a). SOLUTION:The Liberian Administration would accept the employment agreement as valid pursuant to MLC requirements as long as: The “Owner” or “Crew Manager” is the employer of the seafarers; The Agreement establishes a relationship with the “MLC Shipowner” acting as the agent of the “Owner”; or in the case of a “Crew Manager” acting as the employer, it may sign the employment agreement as representative of the “MLC Shipowner”; and The Agreement includes the (a)Name, (b) Address and (c) Signature of the MLC shipowner or its authorized representative.

  18. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Relation between Shipowner/Operator/Crew Manager • SCENARIO : • What about in cases where the Client is unable to comply with amending the Seafarer’s Employment Agreement to include (1) the “MLC Shipowner” name and address (standard A2.1.4b ); and (2) the signature of the Crew Manager as employer, signing as representative of the shipowner (Operator) (standard A2.1.1a)? • SOLUTION: • Where shipowners are unable to comply with standards A2.1.4 (b) and A2.1.1 (a), the Administration may consider accepting substantial equivalents as provided for in Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Convention. • NOTE – In general, in the event that a shipowner is unable to implement Liberian provisions, the Administration will consider providing substantial equivalents to these requirements, if it: • Fully achieves the general objective and purpose of the provision(s) of Part A of MLC; and • Gives effect to the provision(s) of Part A of MLC

  19. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Relation between Shipowner/Operator/Crew Manager • Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance - Part I • Substantial equivalencies • (Note: Strike out the statement which is not applicable) • The following substantial equivalencies, as provided under Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Convention, except where stated above, are noted (insert description if applicable): • Compliance with Standard A2.1.1a: Seafarers’ employment agreements shall be signed by both the seafarer and the shipowner or the representative of the shipowner. • Compliance with Standard A2.1.1c: The shipowner and seafarer concerned shall each have a signed original of the seafarers’ employment agreement. • Compliance with Standard A2.1.4b: The seafarers’ employment agreement shall contain the name and address of the shipowner. • Seafarers on board are employed by XXXXXX Crewing Services Pvt. Ltd (As Employer) • There is an engagement of services signed between the shipowner under MLC (XXXXXX Shipping Pvt. Ltd) and the Employer. • Seafarers depart the port of engagement with a seafarers’ employment agreement signed only by the seafarer and are provided with a signed original prior to commencing duty on board. • XXXXXX Shipping Pvt. Ltd is the shipowner under Article II/1(j) and Standard A2.1.4b of MLC, 2006 and agrees to ensure that it will comply with all the terms and conditions of the seafarers’ employment agreement upon engagement of the seafarer. • No Equivalency has been granted.

  20. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Who is considered a seafarer? • A ‘Seafarer’ is any person employed or working in any capacity on board a ship • Provides for a national level determination “in the event of doubt” • Resolution 7 adopted by the Conference provides guidance and criteria to be considered by national authorities • Following persons are generally not considered as seafarers: • Professional Pilots • Port Workers • Guest entertainers • Ship Inspectors/Surveyors/Auditors • Ship Superintendents • Repair and maintenance technicians • Temporary riding crew such as Suez Canal Crew • Specialist offshore technicians • PCASP • Marine warranty surveyors • Client representatives

  21. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Who is considered a seafarer? • SCENARIO “A” • Are Cadets/Trainees treated as “SEAFARERS” – in accordance with MLC? • SOLUTION: • The Administration will give due consideration to exempting Cadets as “SEAFARERS” from some of the Regulations and/or Standards under the Convention, if the Cadet/Trainee is enrolled in a Maritime University and is on board for the sole purpose of completing the requisite sea time required as part of graduation. Cadets, if classified as such, will be exempt from the requirements of recruitment and placement, employment agreement, wages, entitlement to leave, and social security protection. • SCENARIO “B” • Will “Riding Crew” be classified as “SEAFARERS” – in accordance with MLC? • SOLUTION: • The Administration will give due consideration to excluding these categories of persons as “SEAFARERS”, in accordance with MLC, and requires as part of its review and analysis the following information: • Duration and frequency of person’s stay on board; • Purpose of the person’s work on board in relation to the routine business of the vessel; • Location of the person’s principal place of work/employment and employer; and • Is there person afforded similar labour and social conditions protection through P&I cover, personal insurance or through the marine services company ashore.

  22. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Who is considered a seafarer? • SCENARIO “C” • Are Charterers personnel on offshore supply vessels, anchor-handling vessels, seismic vessels, diving support vessels considered as seafarers– in accordance with MLC? • SOLUTION: • After reviewing and having considered that such persons are seafarers under the Convention, the Administration will consider accepting substantial equivalents for compliance with the requirements of Regulations: • 1.1 (minimum age); • 1.2 (medical certification); • 1.3 (Training and qualifications); • 1.4 (Recruitment and placement); • 2.1 (Seafarers' employment agreements); • 2.2 (wages); • 2.4 (entitlement to leave); • 2.5 (repatriation); • 4.2 (Shipowners' liability); and • 4.5 (social security) of the Convention.

  23. PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS • Who is considered a seafarer? • Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance - Part I • Substantial equivalencies • (Note: Strike out the statement which is not applicable) • The following substantial equivalencies, as provided under Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Convention, except where stated above, are noted (insert description if applicable): • Compliance with the requirements of Regulations 1.1 (minimum age); 1.2 (medical certification); 1.3 (Training and qualifications); 1.4 (Recruitment and placement); 2.1 (Seafarers' employment agreements); 2.2 (wages); 2.4 (entitlement to leave); 2.5 (repatriation); 4.2 (Shipowners' liability); and 4.5 (social security) of the Convention for: • 1. Project/Construction team; • 2. Remote Operating Vehicle (ROV) team; • 3. Survey team (including data processors, laboratory personnel); • 4. Rig move team (tow master/rig mover and riding crew);and • 5. Administrative support staff (fiscal) • The categories of persons listed in 1 to 5 above are employed by the charterer or sub-contractor of the charterer. • The employer(s) of the persons under these categories have provided an undertaking to the shipowner under Article II(1)(j) of MLC, ensuring that they have taken over the duties and responsibilities imposed under Regulations 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 4.2 and 4.5 of the Convention. • The shipowner under Article II(1)(J) of MLC agrees to take over the duties and responsibilities imposed under Regulations 2.3 (Hours of work and hours of rest); 3.1 (Accommodation and recreational facilities); 3.2 (Food and Catering); 4.1 (Medical care on board ship and ashore); 4.3 (Health and safety protection and accident prevention); and 5.1.5 (on-board compliant procedures) No equivalency has been granted

  24. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ? • THANK YOU! www.liscr.com

More Related