1 May, 2014 Draft

Regulatory

Impact Analysis

Maritime

Labour

Convention 2006

PREPARED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, TOURISM AND SPORT – MAY 2014

1

Summary of Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)

Department/Office:

Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport Title of Legislation:

1. Merchant Shipping Act 2010 (Maritime Labour

Convention) Commencement Order;

2. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour

Convention)Flag State (Inspection & Certification)

Regulations;

3. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour

Convention)Crew Accommodation and Recreational

Facilities, Food and Catering and Ships’ Cook

Certification Regulations;

4. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention)

Shipowners’ Liability and Repatriation of Seafarers

Regulations;

5. Merchant Shipping (Certification of Ships’

Cooks)Revocation Order;

6. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention)

Seafarers’ Employment Agreements and Wages

Regulations

7. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention)

Medical Regulations

8. Protection of Young Persons

(Employment)(Exclusion of Workers in the Fishing

Sector) Regulations

9. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention)

Organisation of Working Time Regs (Amendment)

10. Merchant Shipping (Variation of Seamen's

Provisions) Revocation Order

Related Publications: Merchant Shipping Act 2010

Maritime Labour Convention 2006

Available to view or download at: www.irishstatutebook.ie

www.ilo.org/

Contact for enquiries: Hilary Dalton Telephone: 01 604 1577 (hilarydalton@dttas.ie)

Policy options considered:

2

1. No change (“do nothing”)

2. Provide for aspects of the Convention in national law, without ratifying the Convention.

3. Ratify the Maritime Labour Convention, and introduce the necessary legislation to meet our obligations

under the Convention

Preferred Option:

Option 3 is the preferred option because it ensures that Ireland’s meets its international obligations

OPTIONS

Option COSTS BENEFITS IMPACTS

1. No

Change

There would be

some increased

costs for the

industry, in that

shipowners who

operate

internationally

would have to

comply with the

Convention, even

if we do not ratify.

There would be no

additional costs for

shipowners who do

not operate

internationally.

No benefits No action would result in Irish ships being at a

disadvantage, as our ships which travel

internationally would be subject to additional

inspections in foreign ports.

The Marine Survey Office (MSO) would not be

in a position to carry out port State control

inspections for international ships arriving into

our ports (for the purposes of ensuring

compliance with MLC), as we would not be a

party to the Convention.

Non-ratification could result in Irish shipowners

considering the possibility of registering their

ships in Member States which have ratified the

Convention, in order to avoid increased scrutiny

of their ships in foreign ports, as well as possible

loss of charters. This could carry significant

negative implications for Ireland for trade and

employment in the sector.

Irish seafarers could face increasing employment

difficulties on-board ships flying the flag of

States who have ratified, as they would not be

holding the most appropriate medical

certificates, in line with the ILO MLC.

Additionally, seafaring employment agencies

located in Ireland could also be at a disadvantage

as they would be based in a State which is not a

party. Recently, An Taoiseach welcomed the

establishment of such a company and the

associated new jobs in this and other companies

in the shipping sector could be threatened by

non-ratification. Link:

http://www.flagshipmgt.com/2013/07/19/irish-

taoiseach-enda-kenny-welcomes-flagship-

management-to-ireland/

Non-ratification could be seen by trade unions

3

and seafarers’ employment organisations as a

failure to adequately safeguard seafarers’ living

and working conditions.

2. National

Law

There would be

some increased

costs for the

industry, in that

relevant

shipowners would

have to comply

with national

legislation.

Shipowners which

operate

internationally

would have to

comply with the

Convention

requirements,

thereby incurring

additional costs.

There would be

benefits for

seafarers in

that national

Regulations

would entitle

them to better

living and

working

conditions

provided for in

the

Convention.

All of the impacts relevant to Option 1 would

also apply here (apart from the last paragraph)

as, despite the fact that seafarers would benefit

from better conditions, without ratification,

Ireland would not be a party to the Convention

and MLC Certificates could not be issued. MLC

Certificates are taken as evidence of compliance

with the Convention in port States. Without the

certificates, Irish Ships would be subjected to

increased inspections abroad, even though they

would be in compliance with the Convention

through the application of national legislation.

3. Ratify

ILO

MLC,

2006

Some increased

costs for

shipowners in

ensuring

compliance with

the Convention

and, where

appropriate, in

paying ROs for

certification and

intermediate

inspections.

Increased costs for

MSO in training

surveyors in MLC

implementation.

New fees for MLC

Certificates would

be paid by

shipowners when

Fees Order is

made.

Decent work

for seafarers

and secure

economic

interests by

ensuring fair

competition for

shipowners.

Seafarers,

employed on

Irish ships and

ships of other

administrations

would be

protected by

the Convention

and our

shipowners

would operate

ships that

comply with

this new

regulatory

framework.

Ireland would

comply with

Convention

Irish ships would not be subject to additional

inspections abroad.

MSO would be in a position to carry out port

State control on foreign ships entering our ports

for the purposes of ensuring compliance with the

Convention.

Positive impact on Ireland’s reputation from a

trade and employment perspective and could

encourage ships to register on the Irish flag

leading to growth in the merchant fleet.

Irish seafarers would carry the most up to date

ILO Medical Certificate resulting in better

employment prospects on ships flying the flag of

other ratifying States.

Seafarers’ employment agencies could be more

encouraged to set up business in Ireland, as a

ratifying party to the Convention which provides

seafarers with significantly improved living and

working conditions.

Ireland’s reputation as a State which protects the

rights of seafarers would improve, and there

would be less likelihood of trade union issues

arising.

4

and maintain

our

status/position

within the

international

shipping

community.

A more secure,

better protected

and responsible

maritime

workforce, and

a more socially

responsible

shipping

industry.

A strong

enforcement

regime for

living and

working

conditions,

with a

certification

system.

1. Summary of the RIA

MLC entered into force on the 20th

August 2013 for members who have ratified the Convention, and it will

enter into force for Ireland 12 months after the date our ratification is registered with the ILO.

Ireland, along with other ILO Member States, must bring the Convention into force via national legislation.

Section 87 of the Merchant Shipping Act 2010 enables the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport to

make regulations to fulfil the State’s commitments in relation to the merchant shipping aspects of the

Convention for Irish ships and seafarers working on those ships.

Ireland supports the Maritime Labour Convention, and has been making preparations to ratify it. DTTAS

(and where appropriate DJEI) have been working with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel on the

drafting of a package of Regulations, in order to enable Ireland to ratify. It is a complex project involving

the drafting of approximately 10 S.I’s, relating to the enforcement of the Convention from a flag State

perspective, and technical standards as set out in the Convention relating to living and working conditions

for seafarers. A number of SI’s also impact on employment legislation. Furthermore, along with the

Convention, Directive 2009/13/EC1 requires transposition. (This Directive also entered into force on 20

th

August 2013 and must be transposed by 20th

August 2014).

The implementation of the Convention is an international obligation to which Ireland signed up in 2006.

The preferred option therefore is to ratify the Convention and implement it nationally. There are some

1Directive 2009/13/EC implementing the Agreement concluded by the European Community Shipowners' Associations (ECSA)

and the European Transport Workers’ Federation (ETF) on the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 and amending Directive

1999/63/EC.

5

associated costs in implementing the Convention, both for the shipping industry and for the competent

authority, which is designated as the Marine Survey Office (MSO) of the Irish Maritime Administration

(IMA). (The IMA is a new, over-arching maritime safety section in the Department of Transport, Tourism,

and Sport which comprises a number of Units, including the MSO.) The increased costs are unavoidable

however, as the industry would have to comply with the Convention once it is in force, given the “no more

favourable treatment” clause in the Convention. This clause seeks to ensure a level playing field under

which the ships of countries that have ratified the Convention will not be placed at a competitive

disadvantage, as compared with ships flying the flag of countries that have not ratified the MLC.

The Convention consolidates previous ILO Conventions, so while there are some new requirements, the

Convention aims at maintaining the standards in the current instruments at their present level, while leaving

each country greater discretion in the formulation of their national laws. The new Convention contains

minimum standards that are well within the current industry practice, and should easily be met by most

shipowners.

The increased costs are outweighed however, by the many benefits of implementing the Convention, namely

the fact that seafarers will be better informed of their rights and of remedies available, improved

enforcement of minimum working and living conditions, the right to make complaints both on board and

ashore, and the introduction of a strong enforcement regime, backed by a certification system. Furthermore,

the Convention will result in the development of a more secure and responsible maritime workforce, and a

more socially responsible shipping industry.

2. Description of Policy Context, Objectives and Options

POLICY CONTEXT/BACKGROUND

The Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (MLC) was adopted at the 94th

International Labour Organisation’s

(ILO) Maritime Session, on 23rd

February 2006 in Geneva. The Convention seeks to ensure that the

employment and social rights of seafarers on Irish ships are fully implemented. The new Convention

consolidates and updates over 60 maritime labour instruments adopted by the ILO since 1920. Ireland was

represented at the Conference by a tripartite delegation consisting of Government officials, nominees of the

employers (IBEC) and of the workers (ICTU). This tri-partite group played an active role in developing the

Convention and fully supports the measures it contains.

The Convention is organised into five general areas covering: -

Title 1.Minimum requirements for seafarers to work on a ship (minimum age; medical certification; training

and qualifications of seafarers; recruitment and placement standards).

Title 2. Conditions of employment (employment agreements; wages; hours of work and hours of rest;

entitlement to leave; repatriation; seafarers compensation for ship’s loss or foundering; manning levels;

careers and skills development and opportunities for employment).

Title 3.Accommodation, recreational facilities, food and catering.

Tile 4 Health protection, medical care, welfare & social security provision (medical care on board ship and

ashore; ship owners liability; health and safety protection and accident prevention; access to shore-based

welfare facilities; social security).

Title 5.Compliance and enforcement (Flag State responsibilities; Port State responsibilities; labour

supplying responsibilities).

6

The Convention entered into force twelve months after the date on which there were registered ratifications

by thirty ILO Member States with a total share of at least 33% of the world gross tonnage. This criteria was

met on 20th

August 2012 so the Convention has been in force for those 30 countries since the 20th

August

2013.

Ireland, along with other ILO Member States, must bring the Convention into force via national legislation.

Section 87 of the Merchant Shipping Act 2010 enables the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport to

make regulations to fulfil the State’s commitments in relation to the merchant shipping aspects of the

Convention for Irish ships and seafarers working on those ships.

The Convention will enter into force for Ireland 12 months after our Instrument of Ratification is registered

with the ILO.

In terms of application, it is proposed to apply the Convention to all Irish seagoing ships wherever they may

be. Any ship which comes within the definition of “seagoing” is covered by the Convention. A seafarer is

defined as any person, including the master, who is employed or engaged or works in any capacity on board

a ship and whose normal place of work is on the ship, but excludes pilots. For the purposes of the

Convention, “ship” means any vessel, whether publicly or privately owned, which is ordinarily engaged in

commercial maritime operations, being a vessel other than a fishing vessel or warships or naval auxiliaries.

Only vessels of 500 GT or over which operate internationally are subject to certification inspections, which

will be carried out by ROs. A Maritime Labour Certificate is valid for 5 years, but the validity of the

Certificate is subject to an intermediate inspection to ensure continuing compliance with national

implementing legislation. These intermediate inspections will also be carried out by ROs. All other vessels

which come within the scope of the Convention, will be subject to general inspections every three years.

These inspections will be carried out by the MSO in tandem with other inspections.

OBJECTIVES

The Maritime Labour Convention seeks to establish a global standard for the living and working conditions

of seafarers. The European Commission has also endorsed the objectives of the Maritime Labour

Convention through EC Council Directive 2009/13/EC and two further Directives on enforcement from a

port State and flag State perspective, which have been recently concluded.

According to the ILO, the basic objectives of the MLC, 2006 are:

to ensure comprehensive worldwide protection of the rights of seafarers (the Convention is

sometimes called the seafarers’ Bill of Rights);

to establish a level playing field for countries and shipowners committed to providing decent

working and living conditions for seafarers, protecting them from unfair competition on the part of

substandard ships.

DTTAS’ ultimate objective is to provide the legislative basis for the implementation of the MLC for Irish

ships and seafarers working on those ships.

In order to achieve this objective, Government approval to ratify the Convention is being sought. It is then

intended to lodge an instrument of ratification with the ILO. Under the Convention, there will be a 12

month period between the registration of an instrument of ratification and the entry into force of the

Convention for a Member State. The draft package of Regulations will be finalised during this intervening

period; (in fact, all Regulations are due for completion by 20 August 2014 in order to comply with the

Directive), and the inspection and certification system can commence, with the issue of MLC Certificates

where appropriate. (It should be noted that only ships of 500 GT and over, which operate internationally,

are required to be certified).

7

Some transitional arrangements have been put in place to cover the period since 20 August 2013 when the

Convention entered into force internationally.

OPTIONS/CHOICES

The three policy options considered were –

Option 1 – No change or “do nothing”.

Option 2 - Provide for aspects of the Convention in national law, without ratifying the

Convention.

Option 3 – Ratify the Maritime Labour Convention, and introduce the necessary legislation to

meet our obligations under the Convention.

Option 1 – No-change/Do Nothing

This could have a detrimental effect on the Irish shipping fleet, as they would be liable to undergo

inspections in foreign ports. This could lead to additional costs to shipowners and undue delays due to

inspections. Furthermore, this could effect the reputation of Ireland with the international maritime

community. It would also impact negatively on Irish seafarers who work, or are seeking employment, on

ships of States which have ratified the convention. Such seafarers may find it difficult to remain in

employment, or to find employment, if Ireland has not ratified the Convention.

Option 2 – Provide for aspects of the Convention in national law, without ratifying the Convention.

While this option would provide for national implementation of aspects of the MLC, we would not be a

party to the Convention and would not be in a position to issue MLC Certificates to Irish flagged ships,

which would result in the same detrimental effects on Irish shipping as outlined in option 1. The MLC

Certificate is taken as evidence of compliance with the Convention, so the absence of the Certificate would

result in additional inspections to Irish ships when they travel to foreign ports, whether they are actually in

compliance with the Convention or not. This option would impact negatively on Irish seafarers seeking

employment on ships of other ratifying States as they may find it difficult to remain in employment or find

employment if Ireland has not ratified the Convention.

Option 3 - Ratify the Maritime Labour Convention, and introduce the necessary legislation to meet

our obligations under the Convention.

Ratification is required in order that we meet our international obligations and to provide for decent living

and working conditions for seafarers on-board Irish flagged ships. It is also required to provide for the

enforcement of decent living and working conditions on foreign flagged ships visiting Irish ports. This

option would also safeguard the employment of Irish seafarers working on ships of ratifying States and

facilitate and secure their future employment.

3. Analysis of costs, benefits and impacts

The costs, benefits and impacts of each Option are set out below:

(i) Costs

Option 1 – In theory, one would assume that there would be no additional costs to the industry of we pursue

the “do nothing” option. This is only true for domestically operating shipowners, however, and the reality is

that the element of the industry which operate internationally will have to comply with the Convention in

any event, thereby incurring additional costs. The costs to the MSO arising from the implementation of the

Convention are not very significant, given that the general application of the Convention will be

implemented by existing MSO staff in course of their normal inspection duties. While the MSO will carry

out general inspections, the certification inspections (and intermediate inspections) for ships of 500 GT or

over, which operate internationally, are being delegated to the Recognised Organisations (ROs).

Shipowners will pay ROs directly for those inspections and there are no additional costs to the State. The

8

savings involved in not implementing the Convention would be outweighed by the negative international

reputational issues which would arise in relation to Ireland as a flag State.

Option 2 – Additional costs would arise for the shipping industry in the case of option 2, but without the

benefits arising from being a party to the Convention. The issue outlined with Option 1 also arises here –

ships that operate internationally will have to comply with the Convention in any event, even where we have

not ratified. While the MSO would not be in a position to issue MLC Certificates under this option, they

would have an obligation to ensure compliance with national legislation, so there would be some additional

costs arising for the MSO in this scenario.

Option 3 – This option would lead to additional costs for the industry; however as outlined above, the

additional costs will be incurred in any event as internationally-operating parts of the industry will have to

comply with the Convention, whether Ireland is a ratifying party or not. There would also be increased

costs, where appropriate, for the industry in paying ROs for certification and intermediate inspections

Additionally, new fees for MLC Certificates would be required to be paid by shipowners when a Fees Order

is made. In the case of the MSO, some additional costs would arise in relation to training of surveyors in the

implementation of the Convention.

The following sets out the cost and resource implications for the MSO:

Initially it is expected there will be a spike in Port State Control (PSC) related work until Surveyors gain

experience at PSC work in relation to the MLC. It is predicted that the MLC will occupy the total person

hours for one surveyor. Initially the administrative burden will be high until the DMLC Part 1s are in place,

but from there on, the administration burden should be relatively small. The MLC will occupy MSO

management staff to a significant degree until the MLC is in force in Ireland and internationally, but once

the initial surge of work is over, the management workload should lessen considerably.

The MSO will need to monitor the work of the RO in carrying out certification/intermediate inspections. It

is envisaged that an MLC checklist will be added to the annual flag state inspection for Irish international

trading vessels.

The MSO will be required to carry out inspections on the vessels that are not covered by ROs, but are

subject to the convention.

Additional PSC work will result once the convention enters into force. There is a possibility that Paris MOU

Concentrated Inspection Campaigns may result.

It is estimated that the initial cost associated with the implementation of the Convention will amount to

approximately €43,000 to cover training of MSO Surveyors. Ongoing annual costs should only be in the

region of €11,000.

(ii) Benefits

Option 1 – There are no benefits associated with this option.

Option 2 - There would be benefits for seafarers in that national Regulations would entitle them to better

living and working conditions provided for in the Convention. However, this would be offset by the fact

that Ireland would not be a ratifying party and seafarers may find themselves disadvantaged, for example, by

carrying medical certification from a State which is not a party to the Convention.

9

Option 3 – This option would result in decent work for seafarers and secure economic interests by ensuring

fair competition for shipowners. Seafarers, employed on Irish ships and ships of other administrations

would be protected by the Convention, and our shipowners would operate ships that comply with this new

regulatory framework which ensures decent living and working conditions for seafarers. Ireland would

comply with this new Convention and maintain our status/position within the international shipping

community. The Convention will result in a more secure, better protected and responsible maritime

workforce, and a more socially responsible shipping industry. Furthermore, the development of a strong

enforcement regime for living and working conditions, with a certification system, is a major benefit in the

pursuit of a better quality shipping sector.

(iii)Impacts

Option 1 - No action would result in Irish ships being at a disadvantage, as our ships which travel

internationally will be subject to additional inspections in foreign ports.

The MSO would not be in a position to carry out port State control inspections for international ships

arriving into our ports (for the purposes of ensuring compliance with MLC), as we would not be a party to

the Convention.

Non-ratification could result in Irish shipowners considering the possibility of registering their ships in

Member States which have ratified the Convention, in order to avoid increased scrutiny of their ships in

foreign ports, as well as possible loss of charters. This could carry significant negative implications for

Ireland for trade and employment in the sector.

Irish seafarers would be likely to face increasing employment difficulties on-board ships flying the flag of

states who have ratified, as they would not be holding the most appropriate medical certificates, in line with

the ILO MLC.

Additionally, seafaring employment agencies located in Ireland would also be at a disadvantage as they will

be based in a State which is not a party to the Convention. Recently, An Taoiseach welcomed the

establishment of such a company and the associated new jobs in this and other companies in the shipping

sector could be threatened by non-ratification. Link:

http://www.flagshipmgt.com/2013/07/19/irish-taoiseach-enda-kenny-welcomes-flagship-management-to-

ireland/

Non-ratification could be seen by trade unions and seafarers’ employment organisations as a failure to

adequately safeguard seafarers’ living and working conditions.

Option 2 - All of the impacts relevant to Option 1 would also apply here (apart from the last paragraph) as,

despite the fact that seafarers would benefit from better conditions, without ratification, Ireland would not be

a party to the Convention and MLC Certificates could not be issued. MLC Certificates are taken as

evidence of compliance with the Convention in port States. Without the certificates, Irish Ships would be

subjected to increased inspections abroad, even though they are in compliance with the Convention through

the application of national legislation.

Option 3 - Irish ships would not be subject to additional inspections abroad. The MSO would be in a

position to carry out port State control inspections on foreign ships entering our ports for the purposes of

ensuring compliance with the Convention.

There would be a positive impact on Ireland’s reputation from a trade and employment perspective, and the

pursuit of this option could encourage ships to register on the Irish flag leading to growth in the merchant

fleet.

10

Irish seafarers would carry the most up to date ILO Medical Certificate, resulting in better employment

prospects on ships flying the flag of other ratifying States.

Seafarers’ employment agencies could be more encouraged to set up business in Ireland, as a ratifying party

to the Convention which provides seafarers with significantly improved living and working conditions.

Ireland’s reputation as a State which protects the rights of seafarers would improve, and there would be less

likelihood of trade union issues arising.

Other Impacts

Jobs and National competitiveness

The implementation of the Convention would improve the employment prospects of Irish seafarers given

that we would be a ratifying party and seafarers would hold the most up to date medical certification as

provided in the Convention. The implementation of the Convention may enhance the perception of the Irish

flag, which could lead to growth in the merchant fleet. Irish ships abroad would be able to operate more

efficiently, given that ratification of the Convention would reduce the need for additional inspections to be

carried out on Irish ships in foreign ports. Implementation of the Convention should lead to a more secure,

better-protected and responsible maritime workforce.

The socially excluded and vulnerable groups, people with disabilities and rural communities

There are no negative impacts on the socially excluded, vulnerable or lower socio-economic groups, people

with disabilities or rural communities.

The environment

There are no negative impacts on the environment by ratifying and implementing the Convention.

The rights of citizens

The rights of seafarers would be improved by the implementation of the Convention as it provides for

measures which will lead to better working and living conditions for seafarers. The application of

Regulations relating to working hours, medical certification, training and qualifications, manning levels,

medical care and health and safety protection would result in a safer working environment which would

benefit citizens generally. The introduction of an inspection regime specifically for MLC compliance would

also benefit seafarers by ensuring that the rights afforded to them under the Convention are correctly applied

by shipowners.

Compliance Burdens, including Administrative Burdens The Marine Survey Office will have responsibility for ensuring compliance with the Convention. They will

be supported in this role as and when required by the Recognised Organisations approved by the Minister

for Transport, Tourism and Sport. While many aspects of the Convention are already set out in previous

ILO Conventions such as ILO 147, there are some new requirements under MLC 2006 which will increase

the compliance burden for shipowners. For example there is a new requirement to provide an individual

employment agreement for every seafarer. The MSO has been working with the National Maritime College

of Ireland (NMCI) to develop a standard employment agreement for cadets, and engagement has also taken

place with the industry on this aspect of the Convention. There will be a requirement for shipowners to

complete a Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance Part II in order to get MLC certification, while the

MSO will have to complete a Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance Part I. It should be noted that

certification is only required for ships of 500 GT or over which operate internationally.

The compliance burden will not be significantly increased however, as many of the requirements are already

in place. In fact, the consolidation of over 60 ILO Conventions will assist in streamlining the management

11

of working and living condition requirements by bringing them all together into one Convention. The

Convention should result in a simplification of reporting obligations for Member States, given that all issues

related to seafarers living and working conditions will now be dealt with in one Convention.

North-South and East-West Relations

The UK ratified the Convention in August 2013, so it will enter into force for them in August 2014. DTTAS

has met with officials from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) in the UK in order to discuss their

approach to ratification given the level of trade that occurs between the UK and Ireland. While different

approaches have been taken on some issues, the overall approach adopted by the UK and Ireland is similar

in terms of application and definition of seafarer.

4. Consultation

Article VII is entitled “Consultation with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organisations” and is in line with the

tripartite ethos of the International Labour Organisation. The Convention requires that there is consultation

with shipowners and seafarers’ organisations on certain items within Part A of the Code (mandatory

provisions). In order to meet our obligation for consultation, the Department sought the views of

stakeholders on a number of proposals in respect of the consultation elements contained within a number of

Articles and elements of Part A of the Code.

This consultation process took place between January and May 2011 and observations received have been

taken into account in the drafting of implementing legislation.

Consultation has also taken place with a number of relevant Government Departments in relation to aspects

of the Convention which are of relevance to them. The Departments of Transport, Tourism and Sport and

Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation have worked closely together, given that the competent authority for the

implementation of the Convention has been designated as the Marine Survey Office of DTTAS, while DJEI

has overall responsibility for ILO matters. Furthermore, the requirements of the Convention have in some

cases an impact on national employment legislation. Consultation in relation to legal issues and drafting of

Regulations has therefore been necessary. A number of inter-departmental working group meetings were

held in the preparation for ratification, with further meetings held specifically with DJEI.

DTTAS has also liaised with Departments of Social Protection and Health, given that the Convention

includes elements relevant to those Departments. Regulation 4.5 of the Convention provides that all

seafarers have access to social security protection; that each Member undertakes to take steps according to

its national circumstances, to achieve progressively comprehensive social security protection for seafarers;

and that each Member shall ensure that seafarers who are subject to its social security legislation, are entitled

to benefits from social security protection no less favourable than that enjoyed by shore-workers. Standard

A4.5.1 of the Convention sets out 9 social security branches which must be considered with a view to

achieving progressively comprehensive social security protection. The Convention provides that at the time

of ratification, the protection to be provided by each Member must include at least 3 of the 9 branches, and it

is a requirement that the ILO be notified at the time of ratification as to the branches with which we comply.

DSP has advised that social welfare benefits are provided in accordance with the Social Welfare

Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended). These cover the full range of benefits outlined in Standard A4.5, and

include benefits in the area of sickness, unemployment, family, maternity, invalidity, old age and survivor’s

benefits. Any seafarer resident here and working on an Irish registered vessel can be insured for these

benefits and, subject to qualifying conditions, can receive a payment. Those working on other flagged

vessels are not compulsorily insured here, although they have access to non- contributory benefits if they are

regarded as habitually resident here, and can satisfy a means test. (These benefits cannot be paid outside the

jurisdiction however.) In conclusion, DSP have advised that existing social welfare provisions are adequate

to meet the needs of the Convention, and no legislative change is required.

12

Regulation 4.1 of the Convention seeks to protect the health of seafarers and ensure their prompt access to

medical care on board ship and ashore. Regulation 4.1.3 states that each Member shall ensure that seafarers

on board ships in its territory who are in need of immediate medical care are given access to the Member’s

medical facilities on shore. Department of Health has advised that Irish and EU/EEA seafarers on board

ships in EU territorial waters requiring immediate medical care can access public health services, under the

provisions of EU Regulation 883/2004. The current legislative framework underpinning the Irish public

health system provides that seafarers on board ships in Irish territorial waters requiring immediate medical

care can access public health services, in line with Regulation 4.1. This entitlement is subject to the caveat

that the cost of any health care provided through the Irish public health system to seafarers, who were on

board non-EU/EEA flag ships in Irish territorial waters, is the responsibility of the seafarer/shipowner as the

case may be. (Where a person is deemed not to be "ordinarily resident" in Ireland and not attached to the

social security system of another EU\EEA Member State, the HSE may either apply the full economic costs,

or provide urgent care at a reduced cost, or, where hardship may be caused, provide the service at no cost. It

is understood from the Department of Health that the HSE bills the shipowner where the seafarer can't pay,

and it is understood that the bill is usually paid.)

In this context, it should be noted that Regulation 4.2 of the Convention deals with shipowners’ liability,

which seeks to ensure that seafarers are protected from the financial consequences of sickness, injury or

death occurring in connection with their employment. Regulation 4.2 provides that shipowners shall be

liable to bear the costs for seafarers working on their ships in respect of sickness and injury occurring

between the date of commencing duty and the date upon which they are deemed duly repatriated, or arising

from their employment between those dates. DTTAS is working with OPC’s on a draft Regulation to

implement Regulation 4.2 of the Convention in this regard. The draft Regulation, which has been the

subject of consultation with Department of Health, provides that shipowners’ liability for the cost of medical

care should only apply in circumstances where the seafarer is being charged for the service provided.

5. Review

Article XIII of the MLC, 2006 provides for the establishment of a Special Tripartite Committee by the ILO‘s

Governing Body. The mandate of this Committee is to keep the working of the Convention under

continuous review. The Committee will consist of two representatives nominated by the Government of

each country that has ratified the Convention, and the representatives of Shipowners and Seafarers appointed

by the Governing Body after consultation with the ILO’s Joint Maritime Commission (JMC).

The Committee has an important role with respect to amendments to the Code. If faults are identified in the

working of the Convention, or if the Convention needs to be updated, the Special Tripartite Committee will,

in accordance with Article XV of the Convention, have the power to adopt amendments. The Committee

will also play an important consultative role under Article VII for countries that do not have shipowners‘ or

seafarers‘ organizations to consult when implementing the MLC, 2006.

Article 22 of the ILO Constitution sets out a requirement for ratifying Members to report to the ILO, via a

questionnaire, on implementation of the Convention 12 months after the Convention enters into force for

that Member State. The results of the Article 22 questionnaire will inform the ILO on issues arising with

implementation.