Crew change crisis: Governments need to heed MLC obligations


Crew change crisis: Governments need to heed MLC obligations – IHS Markit Safety at Sea

September 2, 2020 Gabriella Twining, SAS reporter

Crew members wearing face masks as a precaution against the spread of corona virus, after the ship docked. Credit: Robin Utrecht/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Proper enforcement of the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (MLC) is the only way to ensure seafarers are repatriated home. Governments, and flag States, need to carry out their legislative obligations under MLC so that the crew change crisis is not exacerbated further, maritime experts say.

There are currently an estimated 200,000 seafarers globally stuck onboard, and more stuck at home waiting to join a vessel, due to global COVID-19 travel restrictions imposed by governments. However, there is no reason legislatively that crew change cannot happen. Standard A.2.5.1 – Repatriation in the MLC states that once a seafarer’s employment agreement expires onboard they are entitled to repatriation. Paragraph 5 specifies that should the ship owner fail to make arrangements or meet the cost of repatriation for the seafarer, the responsibility then falls to the flag State. Should the flag State fail in making the necessary arrangements, it is then the responsibility of the nation state in which the seafarer finds themselves or the nation state of the seafarer to carry out the repatriation. The cost of repatriation will then be recovered from the ship owner, according to the standard.

Dr. Cleopatra Doumbia-Henry, president, World Maritime University, who spearheaded work on the MLC at the ILO, commented to SAS that the main issue in the crew change crisis is the continued reluctance of many countries to enable seafarers to disembark in ports, to transit and transfer through airports, and to enable seafarers to return home after their tour of duty. She noted that many seafarers today come from the developing world and must go through multiple transit points in order to get home. “It is therefore critically important not only for flag States and shipowners to assume their responsibility with respect to repatriation, but also for countries to enable seafarers to transit and transfer through their ports and airports to enable them to return home after their long tour of duty,” she said.

COVID-19 has undoubtedly created unprecedented challenges for shipping and governments to follow MLC regulations. As such, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) released guidance on 10 July which outlined the extensions and exemptions to MLC requirements, to tackle the impact COVID-19 was having on the shipping industry. However, the guidance states that while authorities are encouraged to be pragmatic in their approach during these exceptional circumstances, they should ensure that the pandemic is not used as an excuse to breach MLC.

According to Natalie Shaw, director of employment affairs, International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), the guidance provides the argument of force majeure, (where unforeseeable circumstances prevent actors from fulfilling their contractual obligations), which effectively enables flag States  and governments who are experiencing the current challenges and temporarily not having to fulfil their responsibilities under the MLC.

However, the notion of force majeure no longer applies the moment an option is available to comply with MLC; for example, the availability of flights or transport options for crew. As the guidance states, “circumstances rendering performance more difficult or burdensome do not constitute a case of force majeure”. The guidance even encourages governments to limit contract extensions only to cover the time it takes for the crew to reach the next port, and should even consider diverting a ship to a port where crew changes can be carried out.

Leave a Reply

SSCP   CAS-002   9L0-066   350-050   642-999   220-801   74-678   642-732   400-051   ICGB   c2010-652   70-413   101-400   220-902   350-080   210-260   70-246   1Z0-144   3002   AWS-SYSOPS   70-347   PEGACPBA71V1   220-901   70-534   LX0-104   070-461   HP0-S42   1Z0-061   000-105   70-486   70-177   N10-006   500-260   640-692   70-980   CISM   VCP550   70-532   200-101   000-080   PR000041   2V0-621   70-411   352-001   70-480   70-461   ICBB   000-089   70-410   350-029   1Z0-060   2V0-620   210-065   70-463   70-483   CRISC   MB6-703   1z0-808   220-802   ITILFND   1Z0-804   LX0-103   MB2-704   210-060   101   200-310   640-911   200-120   EX300   300-209   1Z0-803   350-001   400-201   9L0-012   70-488   JN0-102   640-916   70-270   100-101   MB5-705   JK0-022   350-060   300-320   1z0-434   350-018   400-101   350-030   000-106   ADM-201   300-135   300-208   EX200   PMP   NSE4   1Z0-051   c2010-657   C_TFIN52_66   300-115   70-417   9A0-385   70-243   300-075   70-487   NS0-157   MB2-707   70-533   CAP   OG0-093   M70-101   300-070   102-400   JN0-360   SY0-401   000-017   300-206   CCA-500   70-412   2V0-621D   70-178   810-403   70-462   OG0-091   1V0-601   200-355   000-104   700-501   70-346   CISSP   300-101   1Y0-201   200-125  , 200-125  , 100-105  , 100-105  , CISM   NS0-157   350-018  , NS0-157   ICBB  , N10-006 test  , 350-050   70-534   70-178   220-802   102-400   000-106   70-411  , 400-101   100-101  , NS0-157   1Z0-803   200-125  , 210-060   400-201   350-050   C_TFIN52_66  , JN0-102  , 200-355   JN0-360   70-411   350-018  , 70-412   350-030   640-916   000-105   100-105  , 70-270  , 70-462   300-070  , 300-070   642-999   101-400   PR000041   200-101  , 350-030   300-070  , 70-270  , 400-051   200-120   70-178   9L0-012   70-487   LX0-103   100-105  ,