ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Country comments > Texts of comments: Malta

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Malta

Adopted by the CEACR in 2022

C144 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultation. The Committee welcomes the Government’s first report on the application of the Convention. It notes the Government’s indication that the most representative organizations of employers and workers in Malta for the purpose of the Convention are: the General Workers’ Union (GWU); the Confederation of Malta Trade Unions (CMTU); the Malta Employers’ Association (MEA); and the Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry. The Government refers to the tripartite Employment Relations Board (ERB) as the de facto consultation mechanism for all matters related to employment law, industrial relations and ILO matters. Since the Convention was ratified by Malta in 2019, the ERB has held consultations with respect to the matters on the agenda of the 108th Session of the International Labour Conference, including on the draft of the Violence and Harassment Convention (No. 190) and the Centenary Declaration on the Future of Work. Stakeholders were also asked for their comments on government responses to article 22 reports. On 6th April 2021, the ERB was also consulted with respect to the possible ratification of the Domestic Work Convention, 2011 (No. 189) and on the submission of the Violence and Harassment Recommendation, 2019 (No. 201) and the Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience Recommendation, 2017 (No. 205) to Malta’s competent authority (the House of Representatives). The Government adds that ERB meetings are held monthly and that items are placed on the agenda for consultation as the need arises. The Committee notes, however, that the Government does not provide information on tripartite consultations held with regard to other matters concerning international labour standards under Article 5(1), such as questionnaires on Conference agenda items (Article 5(1)(a)); the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (Article 5(1)(c)); and the possible denunciation of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(e)). The Committee requests the Government to provide updated detailed information on the content and outcome of tripartite consultations held on all matters concerning international labour standards covered by Article 5(1)(a) through (e) of the Convention, including tripartite consultations held with respect to the possible ratification of Convention No. 189.

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C087 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee takes note of the observations of the General Workers’ Unions (GWU) received on 31 August 2019, which denounce violations of the right to organize in practice. The GWU alleges that various employers and contractors circumvent the legislative provisions on freedom of association by depriving their workers of their right to join trade unions. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.
Article 2 of the Convention. Right to establish organizations without previous authorization. The Committee previously observed that section 51 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act, 2002 (EIRA) provides that a trade union or an employers’ association and any member, officer or other official thereof, may not perform any act in furtherance of any of the purposes for which it is formed unless such union or association has first been registered, and that the penalty for contravention of this provision is a fine not exceeding €1,165. It requested the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal section 51 of the EIRA. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that: (i) registration is important so that trade unions, employers’ associations and their members can be officially recognized and able to effectively engage in collective bargaining; (ii) registration is free; and (iii) the annual reporting system provides data on the abovementioned organizations, which helps determine their activity level. The Committee recalls once again that the official recognition of an organization through its registration constitutes a relevant aspect of the right to organize, as it is the first measure to be taken so that organizations can fulfil their role effectively. At the same time, the Committee also recalls that the exercise of legitimate trade union activities should not be dependent upon registration, nor should the exercise of such legitimate activities be subject to penalties. The Committee reiterates its request for the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal section 51 of the EIRA.
Article 3. Right of organizations to freely organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous observations, the Committee requested the Government to amend section 74(1) and (3) of the EIRA – according to which, if an amicable settlement of a trade dispute and conciliation has not resulted in a settlement, one of the parties may notify the Minister, who shall refer the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal for settlement – so as to ensure that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is only possible in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the mechanism provided by the abovementioned section is to be used in case of failure of conciliation as facilitated under section 69 of the EIRA; (ii) the purpose of the Industrial Tribunal would be gravely undermined if a party could not challenge another party unless the latter agrees; and (iii) since the Industrial Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction on trade disputes, the parties cannot resort to other means such as the civil courts. The Committee once again recalls that recourse to compulsory arbitration to bring an end to a collective labour dispute is only acceptable when the two parties to the dispute so agree, or when a strike may be restricted or prohibited – that is, in the case of disputes concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, essential services in the strict sense of the term or situations of acute national crisis. It further recalls that accordingly, the failure of conciliation and the existence of protracted disputes are not per se elements which justify the imposition of compulsory arbitration. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to modify section 74(1) and (3) of the EIRA to ensure that compulsory arbitration may only take place with the approval of both parties or in circumstances in which a strike can be restricted or prohibited. The Committee requests the Government to inform on any developments in this respect.
Article 9. Armed forces and the police. The Committee previously noted with interest the adoption of the Various Laws (Trade Union Membership of Disciplined Forces) Act, 2015 which amended the EIRA by adding a new section 67A, which gave members of the disciplined forces the right to become members of a registered trade union of their choice. It invited the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 67A of the EIRA, in particular whether any trade unions have been formed and registered under this provision and the number of their members, and also whether any requests for such trade union registration are under consideration or have been rejected. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that 1,189 members have registered with the Malta Police Association, 1,356 members have registered with the Police Officers Union and 165 members have registered with the Union of Civil Protection. It also notes that the Government points out that there have been no further requests for such unions to be registered, and no requests have been rejected. The Committee invites the Government to continue providing information on the practical application of section 67A of the EIRA.

C098 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee takes note of the observations of the General Workers’ Union received on 31 August 2019 referring to matters examined in this comment.
Article 1 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its previous observations, the Committee had requested the Government to indicate the procedures applicable for the examination of allegations of anti-union dismissals submitted by public officers, port workers and public transport workers given that, pursuant to the Employment and Industrial Relations Act, 2002 (EIRA) those categories are excluded from the jurisdiction of the industrial tribunal.
Concerning the public officers, the Committee had noted that they could appeal to the Public Service Commission (PSC), an independent body, and requested the Government to indicate whether the PSC was empowered to grant such compensatory relief as to constitute sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee notes that the Government informs that: (i) according to the provisions of the PSC Disciplinary Regulations, public officers may only be dismissed upon recommendation of the PSC; (ii) the PSC recommends the dismissal of a public officer after the finding of guilt for having committed an offence listed in the Schedule of offences and penalties appended to the PSC Disciplinary Regulations; (iii) union activity is not considered a disciplinary offence and therefore is not listed in the Schedule; (iv) as there are a number of safeguards which need to be observed prior to the dismissal of a public officer, it is highly unlikely that a public officer could be dismissed from the public service for anti-union reasons, and (v) information about compensatory relief in case of anti-union dismissal of public officers is not currently being sought from the PSC. Regarding the port workers, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that: (i) they are licensed and registered under the terms of the relevant regulations; (ii) all licensed port workers are represented by the Malta Dockers Union; and (iii) the Port Workers Board, which is partly composed by representatives of the Malta Dockers Union, acts as a disciplinary board. The Committee takes due note of the elements provided by the Government concerning the procedures that precede the dismissal of public officers, on the one hand, and port workers, on the other hand, and that contribute to prevent the occurrence of anti-union dismissals. The Committee requests however the Government to indicate before which body the public officers and the port workers may appeal against decisions taken by the PSC and the Port Workers Board, respectively, in case they consider they were subject to anti-union dismissals.
Concerning the public transport workers, the Committee notes that the Government informs that: (i) scheduled public transport workers are employed by a private company and the Union UMH is recognized as their trade union; and (ii) collective grievances are raised through this union to the company’s management. The Committee reiterates its request for the Government to indicate the specific procedures applicable for the examination of allegations of anti-union dismissals concerning scheduled public transport workers.
The Committee also previously observed that the general sanctions set by section 45(1) of the EIRA might not be sufficiently dissuasive, particularly for large enterprises, and requested the Government to take the necessary measures, after consultation with the social partners, to provide for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions for acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it is currently conducting an exercise with the social partners to review and update the EIRA but does not foresee any changes to section 45(1) at this stage. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures within the framework of the revision of the EIRA to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention by ensuring that sufficiently dissuasive sanctions are provided for acts of anti-union discrimination.
Articles 2 and 3. Adequate protection against acts of interference. The Committee previously requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated so as to introduce in the legislation an explicit prohibition of acts of interference, as well as sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against such acts. The Committee notes with regret that the Government, in its report, merely reiterates its position that parties who feel wronged by another party’s acts of interference can institute a civil action for damages before the courts of civil jurisdiction. The Committee recalls that Article 2 of the Convention requires the prohibition of acts of interference by organizations of workers and employers (or their agents) in each other’s affairs, designed in particular to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers or employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial or other means, with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt specific provisions prohibiting acts of anti-union interference, coupled with rapid appeal procedures and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions.
Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee had previously requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated with a view to amending section 6 of the National Holidays and Other Public Holidays Act, so as to ensure that this provision: (i) does not render automatically null and void any provisions in existing collective agreements which grant workers the right to recover public holidays falling on a Saturday or Sunday; and (ii) does not preclude voluntary negotiations in the future over the issue of granting workers the right to recover national or public holidays which fall on a Saturday or Sunday on the basis of a collective agreement. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the above-mentioned provision has been amended and now stipulates that when a national holiday or a public holiday listed in the Schedule falls on a Saturday or on a Sunday, it shall be deemed to be a public holiday for the purposes of entitling any person to a day of vacation leave in addition to the leave entitlement for that particular year.
Article 5. Armed forces and the police. In its previous observation, the Committee noted with interest the adoption of the Various Laws (Trade Union Membership of Disciplined Forces) Act, 2015 which amended the EIRA by adding a new section 67A, which gave members of the disciplined forces the right to become members of a registered trade union of their choice and stipulated that their organizations were entitled to negotiate the conditions of employment of their members. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the practical application of article 67A. The Committee examines the information provided by the Government in this respect under its comments concerning the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C149 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Article 2 of the Convention. National policy concerning nursing services and nursing personnel. The Committee welcomes the detailed information provided by the Government in its report. In particular, the Committee notes the implementation of the “National Health Systems Strategy for Malta 2014-20” (NHSS), which aims to provide every individual with the opportunity to lead a healthy and active life, and to benefit from equitable access to sustainable quality health care. The NHSS was developed with the technical assistance of the WHO, following an extensive consultation process with a wide range of stakeholders, including health care workers, health care organisations and health authorities. The NHSS is based on a “people-centred” approach, which recognizes four major groups of stakeholders involved in its implementation, including health practitioners (such as nursing personnel). In this regard, the NHSS envisages the involvement of health workers in health care governance and policy decision- making. The NHSS includes among its main objectives the improvement of the quality of care available, by ensuring consistency of care delivered by competent health workers. With a view to achieving this goal, the NHSS establishes a set of initiatives to raise standards for the professional development of health workers in the framework of a patient-centered approach. These initiatives include: strengthening the provision of training, including providing for training in relation to specialization and for the continued professional development of all health workers; moving forward with the development and implementation of the competency programmes for all groups of health care workers; piloting a mentoring programme for newly recruited employees; and supporting associations of health workers in taking steps to improve their continued professional development to in turn improve career advancement opportunities. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government in relation to the “Health Workforce Planning Framework for Malta 2010-20”, which includes a detailed analysis of the impact of the different components of policy interventions implemented with respect to nursing personnel and nursing services. The Framework evaluates the policy interventions implemented in relation to: nursing workforce planning (planning capacity and stakeholder information); recruitment and retention (including financial and non-financial incentives, career structure and opportunities, nurse involvement in decision making); the deployment and performance of nurses (financial and non-financial incentives, data on activity and workforces, allocation of necessary equipment and material); and effective utilisation of their qualifications in the various health-care establishments (effective strategic management, financial and non-financial incentives, nurse involvement in decision making). Based on this evaluation, the Framework establishes projections of the number of nurses needed and of those available for the period 2010-20 and calculates the minimum standard nurse-to patient ratios needed to deliver adequate hospital services in the country. The Government does not indicate whether the Framework was developed in consultation with the employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed updated information on the nature and impact of measures implemented in the framework of the “National Health Systems Strategy for Malta 2014-20” and the “Health Workforce Planning Framework for Malta 2010-20”, particularly with respect to measures taken to improve the working conditions, career opportunities and professional competencies of nursing personnel. It also requests the Government to indicate whether the employers' and workers' organisations concerned, including the Malta Union of Midwives and Nurses (MUMN), were consulted in the development of measures taken or envisaged. In the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the Committee invites the Government to provide updated information on the impact of the pandemic on nursing personnel and nursing services, including measures taken to mitigate these impacts and to ensure the occupational safety and health of this essential category of frontline workers.
Article 3(1). Nursing education and training. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the educational system established for nursing personnel in the country. The Government indicates that the courses offered by the University of Malta’s Institute of Health Care were transferred to the Faculty of Health Sciences in 2010, which includes a Nursing Department and a Mental Health Nursing Department. The Faculty offers full-time courses at undergraduate level in general nursing, leading to registration with the Council for Nurses and Midwives as well as degree and postgraduate courses. It works in collaboration with national public and private health care institutions, including the Mater Dei Hospital, which provide on-the-job training in diverse clinical settings. The Faculty promotes faculty exchanges through the Erasmus programme as well as lifelong learning courses for practicing nurses. Moreover, the Government indicates that, to address the increasing demand for qualified nurses, in October 2017, Northumbria University developed a new degree programme in Nursing Studies with the support of the Malta Enterprise and the MUMN. The Committee notes the information provided on the number of graduates accepted into the new programme. The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government that the Maltese Nursing Conversion Programme and the introduction of specialist nurse training have increased the skills, competencies and size of the nursing workforce. It further notes that the number of practicing nurses has increased by more than one-third over the past decade, to reach 7.9 per 1 000 population in 2018, slightly below the EU average of 8.5. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide updated detailed information on the content and impact of the measures adopted to ensure that nursing personnel are provided with education and training appropriate to the exercise of their functions.
Articles 5 (2) and 6. Collective bargaining concerning employment and working conditions of nursing personnel.  Since 2001 the Committee has been requesting the government to provide more detailed information regarding collective agreements for nursing personnel. It notes with interest the information provided by the Government in respect of the set of collective and sectoral agreements signed between 2000 and 2018 with a view to improving the working conditions and career prospects for nursing personnel in the public and the private sectors. The Government indicates that working conditions for nursing personnel are established mainly in two types of agreements: the collective agreements for all public service employees, including nurses working within the public services; and sectoral agreements that are negotiated specifically for nurses and midwives. The Government indicates that both collective and sectoral agreements establish a specific time frame for their implementation. Prior to the expiry of the agreements, workers’ organizations, including the MUMN, submit their proposals concerning working conditions. The Government also adds that the collective agreements concluded between 2000 and 2013 introduced, among other measures, the establishment of a clinical specialist nursing framework (2000) a Continuous Professional Development allowance for all nurses (2006) and a special long service leave scheme for nurses with at least 30 years of full-time service (2013). The Government reports on the conclusion of the fifth Collective Agreement for Public Sector Employees in 2017, including nurses in the public sector, for the period 2017-24. The new collective agreement was signed by, among other actors, the MUMN, the General Workers’ Union (GWU), UĦM – Voice of the Workers, the Malta Union of Teachers (MUT), and the Medical Association of Malta (MAM). The agreement provides for an increase in salaries and certain allowances for Public Administration employees. In particular, the agreement introduces increments on the “shift allowance” for those employees working on a shift basis, a “qualification allowance” for those employees who have acquired additional qualifications beyond those required for the exercise of their duties. The Government adds that the most recent sectoral agreement has been concluded, covering Public Service Nurses for the period 22 November 2018 to 31 December 2022. It sets out a basic salary scale for the different categories of nursing personnel, providing for double pay on Sundays and triple pay on Public Holidays. The 2018 sectoral agreement also provides for different allowances, such as the “Nursing Premium” (varying from €3,843 to €8,960 depending on years of service and working conditions, and a “Continuous Professional Development Allowance” (consisting of €700 per annum for professional educational activities). The Government does not provide information on the current collective agreements covering the employment and working conditions of nursing personnel in the private sector. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide updated detailed information on the content and impact of collective and sectoral agreements concluded concerning the working conditions (including remuneration and training opportunities) of nursing personnel in public and private hospitals, nursing homes and medical centres. It further requests the Government to provide copies of such agreements in its next report.
Article 5 (3). Procedures for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the different procedures contemplated in the Collective Agreement for Public Service Employees 2017-2024 in case of dispute and/or disagreement between the parties arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment. The Government indicates that such procedures provide for negotiation between the parties through a conciliation mechanism (section 10), as well as for a panel of arbitrators (section 11). Noting that the information provided by the Government concerns the public sector, the Committee requests the Government to also provide information on the procedures for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment of nursing personnel in the private sector.
Article 6 (g). Social security. The Committee notes that the Government refers to the introduction of a pension reform raising the retirement age of nursing personnel to 65, with a view to increasing their retention in the profession and maintaining the number of nurses in the workforce. The Government also indicates that an agreement was concluded between the Government and the MUMN, which provides the possibility for nurses to continue to work post-retirement age. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the pension reform introduced raising the retirement age of nurses and the content and impact of its agreement with the MUMN. It further requests the Government to indicate whether, following the pension reform, nursing personnel enjoy conditions with regard to social security that are at least equivalent to those of other workers.
Article 7. Occupational safety and health of nursing personnel. The Committee notes that, according to the European Commission 2019 Country Health Profile on Malta, in 2017, the country reported the third highest notification rate of new HIV cases in the European Union (EU). The report points out that rates of newly diagnosed cases overall have increased by more than 50 per cent since 2008, in contrast to a general downward trend observed across the EU. In this context, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the measures taken to prevent occupational transmission of HIV among nurses, including the specialization of nurses working in multidisciplinary teams in decontamination, infection control and HIV to contain infectious diseases, and the implementation of plans for post-exposure management of health care personnel. In this respect, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the Joint ILO/WHO Guidelines on Health Services and HIV/AIDS, 2005, which contains guidance on the effective prevention of occupational transmission of HIV. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that national legislation mandates the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) when the risks to the health and safety of workers cannot be avoided or sufficient limited by technical means of collective protection or by measures, methods or procedures of work organization. The legislation further establishes that PPE should be provided free of charge by the employer, who must ensure that the equipment provided is adequate and in a satisfactory hygienic condition. Workers and workers’ representatives are also provided with training in the proper used of PPE. The Government adds that such training must be provided at the expense of the employer and take place during working hours. The Committee notes from the website of the Government that health workers at Mount Carmel Hospital, as well as staff working in Community Mental Health Services have received training on the use of PPE and the management of COVID-19 positive patients. The Committee refers in this regard to paragraph 49 of Recommendation No. 157, which establishes that “(1) all possible steps should be taken to ensure that nursing personnel are not exposed to special risks. Where exposure to special risks is unavoidable, measures should be taken to minimise it; (2) measures such as the provision and use of protective clothing, immunisation, shorter hours, more frequent rest breaks, temporary removal from the risk or longer annual holidays should be provided for in respect to nursing personnel regularly assigned to duties involving special risks so as to reduce their exposure to these risks. (3) In addition, nursing personnel who are exposed to special risks should receive financial compensation.” The Committee notes that the NHSS provides for the adoption of measures to maintain the physical and mental health and well-being of health workers, calling for the necessary infrastructure, including access to psychological support services, to be provided to address stress and burn-out of nursing staff working within the health care system, especially in those areas where staff are dealing with critically-ill or terminally ill patients. Noting that nursing personnel, often in close contact with patients, are at high risk of being infected while treating patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 when infection control precautions are not strictly practiced, the Committee requests the Government to provide updated information on all the safety measures taken or envisaged, including the provision of sufficient quantity of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and adequate rest breaks during their shifts, with a view to protecting the health and wellbeing of nurses and limit as much as possible their risk of contracting COVID-19. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures implemented to prevent and reduce psychosocial risks, including burn-out, violence and harassment, in addition to preventing the risk of long-term repercussions on nurses’ wellbeing. It further requests the Government to indicate whether nurses and/ or their representatives were consulted or participated in the formulation and implementation of such measures.
Application in practice. The Committee observes that, according to the European Commission 2019 Country Health Profile on Malta, the reforms undertaken in education, training and employment conditions have increased the number of nurses. The Committee notes in this respect the information provided by the Government regarding the trends during the period 2003-18 in the number of nurses entering in the profession as well as in those leaving the profession, due to retirement or for other reasons, such as career changes or emigration. The Government reports that in 2018 there were 3,420 nurses in the public sector (73.2 per cent were women and 26.8 per cent men). With regard to their qualifications, the Government indicates that 91.9 per cent were first- level nurses, 5.8 per cent were second-level nurses and 2.3 per cent were registered in the mental health part of the register. Nevertheless, the Committee notes from the cited report of the European Commission that, despite these efforts, the country continues to experience a shortage of nursing personnel in hospitals and long-term care and the nursing workforce in these settings is increasingly reliant on migrant workers, posing challenges for recruitment and retention. The Committee requests the Government to continue to continue to provide updated detailed information on the application of the Convention in practice, including statistics disaggregated by sex, age and region, on the ratio of nursing personnel to the population, the number of persons enrolled in nursing schools, the number of men and women nurses who enter and leave the profession each year, the organization and the operation of all institutions in the public and the private sector which provide healthcare. It also requests the Government to provide any official studies, surveys and reports addressing health workforce issues in the health sector, including those that might have been developed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

C159 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Articles 2, 3 and 7 of the Convention. Vocational rehabilitation and employment policies for persons with disabilities. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government reports that, according to data from Malta’s Public Employment Service (Jobsplus), the number of persons with disabilities in employment increased from 1,797 in 2013 to 3,578 in 2018 (2,474 men and 1,104 women). The Government attributes this increase to the implementation of a set of measures that include: enforcement of the 2 per cent employment quota for persons with disabilities in enterprises employing more than 20 workers established under sections 15 and 16 of the Persons with Disability (Employment) Act; implementation of the “Access to Employment” and the “Bridging the Gap” schemes, supporting the transition of persons with disabilities from unemployment to employment (including through providing subsidies to employers and exempting them from social security contributions). Other initiatives include pre-employment training and job coaching provided by the Job Bridge Training Centre and the one-year Sheltered Employment Training (SET) programme. The Government reports that compliance by employers subjected to the quota increased from 11 per cent in December 2015 to 60 per cent in December 2017. It also refers to the implementation of the European Union (EU)-funded “100 Mirrors Initiative”, a pilot project that provides coaching, mentoring and job shadowing services for women with disabilities who wish to become entrepreneurs. In addition, the Committee notes the implementation of the EU-funded Person-focused Inclusion (INK) project, whose objectives include strengthening the competencies of persons with disabilities and supporting their inclusion in the labour market, as well as the REACH project (also funded by the EU), that provides persons with disabilities with social services, as well as with independent living and employability skills, to promote their social inclusion and reduce their risk of poverty. The Committee nevertheless notes that, according to the 2020 Malta Country Report of the European Commission (2020 EC report) developed in the framework of the 2020 European Semester, even if the employment rate of persons with disabilities, which stood at 37 per cent in 2017, has increased significantly, more than doubling over the past decade, it remains one of the lowest in the EU (EU average: 51 per cent). The 2020 EC report highlights that the activity rate of persons with disabilities in Malta remains very low. According to the report, as of 2018, 30 per cent of persons with disabilities were at risk of poverty and social exclusion, compared with 17 per cent of persons without disabilities. In its concluding observations on Malta, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) expressed concern that: (a) article 17(3) of the Constitution restricts the right to access education and vocational training to “persons with disabilities that are incapable of working”; (b) the current quota system (…) seems ineffective, being applicable only to larger employers with 20 or more employees; (c) the State party uses medicalized criteria to assess the suitability of persons with disabilities to work (…); and (d) there is a high number of employers who do not employ persons with disabilities irrespective of their ability to work effectively (document CRPD/C/MLT/CO/1, 17 October 2018, paragraph 39). Lastly, the Committee recalls that, in its previous comments, it noted that the Employment and Training Corporation Strategic Plan 2016–18 contemplated the review of the Employment and Training Services Act with a view to strengthening the penalties imposed on employers that fail to comply with the statutory employment quota. The Government reports that no further amendments have been introduced to the Employment and Training Act. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed updated information on the status and impact of the measures adopted to promote the employment of persons with disabilities in the open labour market, including the implementation of the statutory 2 per cent employment quota for persons with disabilities. It also requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to replace any assessment of suitability to work with an assessment that considers the needs and requirements for reasonable accommodation at work for persons with disabilities; and to raise awareness among employers on the capacities of persons with disabilities and their right to equal access to employment opportunities to work in the open labour market.
Article 4. Effective equality of opportunities and treatment between men and women workers with disabilities, and between workers with disabilities and other workers. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government reports that, in accordance with section 22(1)(i) of the Equal Opportunities (Persons with Disability) Act, 2000, the Equal Opportunities Compliance Unit (EOCU) within the National Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disability initiated 65 cases concerning denial of reasonable accommodation in the public and private sectors between 2012 and 2014. In this context, the Committee notes the concluding observations of the CRPD, in which it noted with concern that, while the Equal Opportunities (Persons with Disability) Act refers to multiple discrimination, it does not address intersectional discrimination against persons with disabilities in its article 3A(1) (document CRPD/C/MLT/CO/1, 17 October 2018, paragraph 7). The Committee notes that, according to the report of the Academic Network of European Disability Experts (ANED), the “European Semester 2018/2019. Malta country fiche on disability”, Malta has one of the highest gender gaps in the EU in relation to employment rates of persons with disabilities. The EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU–SILC) estimates that the employment rate of women with disabilities in Malta is the lowest in the EU. While the employment rate for women without disabilities is around 55 per cent (compared to 80 per cent for men without disabilities), the employment rate for women with disabilities is estimated at less than 20 per cent (compared to 35 per cent for men with disabilities). The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the nature and the impact of measures adopted or envisaged to ensure effective equality of opportunities and treatment in employment and occupation between women and men with disabilities, as well as between workers without disabilities and those with disabilities, including information on the impact of these measures on the employment of persons with disabilities, including statistics disaggregated by economic sector and sex. The Committee also requests the Government to provide copies of court decisions, if any, addressing discrimination against women and men with disabilities, including denial of reasonable accommodation in the public and private sectors.
Article 5. Consultations with the social partners and with organizations of and for persons with disabilities. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government reiterates that the Jobsplus Board includes representatives of workers’ and employers’ organizations and of the National Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disability. It also indicates that public consultations were held concerning the final text of the National Disability Strategy. In addition, the Government refers to the launching of the Malta Business Disability Forum in 2018, as a joint initiative between the National Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disability, the Malta Chamber of SMEs (former GRTU), the Malta Employers’ Association and the Malta Chamber of Commerce to foster increased cooperation. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not provided information on the content and outcome of the consultations held within the Jobsplus Board or of the results of the consultations held in relation to the National Disability Strategy. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed updated information on the content and outcome of the consultations held within the Jobsplus Board on the implementation of a vocational rehabilitation and employment policy for persons with disabilities. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to provide updated information on the outcome of the consultations held in relation to the National Disability Strategy, in collaboration with employers’ and workers’ organizations, and to provide a copy of the Strategy once adopted.
Article 9. Training of suitably qualified staff. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that Jobsplus and the Lino Spiteri Foundation provide regular training to their staff and external applicants, in collaboration with the National Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disability and civil society organizations, to qualify or to top-up their qualifications as job mentors and job coaches. The Agenzija Sapport also organizes regular in-house training for staff involved in the implementation of vocational training and guidance projects for persons with disabilities, such as the INK project. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed updated information on the nature and impact of measures taken or envisaged to ensure the availability of suitably qualified staff responsible for the vocational guidance, vocational training, placement and employment of persons with disabilities.
In the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the Committee recalls the comprehensive guidance provided by international labour standards. In this context, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience Recommendation, 2017 (No. 205), which provides guidance for the development and implementation of measures to effectively respond to the profound socio-economic effects of the pandemic in areas such as education, vocational training and retraining, and employment. In particular, Paragraph 7(h) of Recommendation No. 205, provides that, in taking measures on employment and decent work in response to crisis situations, Member States should take into account the need to pay special attention to population groups and individuals who have been made particularly vulnerable by the crisis, including, but not limited to, persons with disabilities. The Committee invites the Government to provide in its next report updated information on the impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic on the application of the Convention.

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the Government’s second report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), and the observations of the General Workers’ Union (GWU) received by the Office on 31 August 2019. The Committee notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2014 and in 2016 entered into force for Malta on 18 January 2017 and on 8 January 2019 respectively. Based on its second review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following issues. If considered necessary, the Committee may come back to other matters at a later stage.
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) and of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), received by the Office on 1 October 2020 and 26 October 2020, respectively, alleging that ratifying states have failed to comply with certain provisions of the Convention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Noting with deep concern the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Convention, the Committee refers to its general observation of 2020 on this issue.
Article II, paragraphs 1(f), 2, 3 and 7 of the Convention. Definitions and scope of application. Seafarers. National determination. In its previous comments, noting that the Merchant Shipping Notice 105 Rev. 1. of 8 January 2015 determines the categories of persons not to be regarded as seafarers under the convention, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether such determination was made after consultations with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned. Noting that, according to such Notice, the shipowner should submit an application to the competent authority if he deems that there is any other category of persons who should not be considered as seafarers for the purposes of the MLC, 2006, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether any additional determination of persons or categories of persons had been made. The Committee notes that, according to the GWU's observations, the ITF and the GWU have been and still are engaged in talks with the authority Transport Malta, both the Port Authorities and the Flag state, over the determination of what is the definition of “seafarer” and under which legislation should his employment fall. The Government indicates that 1) the established list of persons excluded from the term seafarer follows the international application of such exclusions and is intended to maintain harmonisation with the application by other jurisdictions; 2) in cases where doubt arose, reference was made to the Resolution concerning information on occupational groups adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 94th (Maritime) Session; 3) to date there have only been a handful of ad hoc requests, some of which have been accepted by the Directorate, and 4) decisions are only taken following consultations with the seafarers’ and the shipowners’ representatives. The Committee requests the Government to i) indicate the categories of persons who have been excluded from the application of the Convention following the procedure foreseen in Merchant Shipping Notice 105 Rev.1., and ii) specify if the decisions made apply to a category of ships or to individual shipowners .
Article II, paragraphs 1(i), 4, 5 and 7. Definitions and scope of application. Ships. National determination. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate whether cases of doubt have arisen as to whether a ship or a particular category of vessel is covered by the Convention. The Government indicates that there have been no such cases and should such a case ever arise, the Directorate has the necessary mechanism in place to consult both the shipowners’ and the seafarers’ organisations, both locally actively represented to resolve such doubt. The Committee notes, however, the GWU's observations, according to which the ITF and the GWU have been and still are engaged in talks with the authority Transport Malta, both the Port Authorities and the Flag state, over the need to determine which vessels fall either under the MLC, 2006 or under the local legislation by way of the Commercial Vessels Regulation and the Non-Convention Vessels Code. The Committee also notes the Government's indication that Malta has, following extensive consultations with all stakeholders involved, issued a Non-Convention Vessel (NCV) code that applies to ships not engaged in international voyages. The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to all ships as defined in Article II, paragraph 1(i), other than those expressly excluded under paragraph 4. The Committee also recalls that Article II, paragraph 6, provides additional flexibility, under certain conditions, with respect to the application of “certain details of the Code”, i.e. Standards and Guidelines, but only to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages, and only “to the extent that the subject matter is dealt with differently by national laws or regulations or collective bargaining agreements or other measures”. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide detailed information on the scope of application of the NCV code, the number, types and tonnage of the ships included therein, and to clarify whether the Convention applies to vessels falling within the scope of the NCV code.
Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4. Substantial Equivalence. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate if it has adopted any substantial equivalences as permitted under Article VI. The Government indicates that substantial equivalences are in the majority of cases adopted in relation to commercial yachts, given the special nature of such vessels. Such requests are addressed on a case-by-case basis following a thorough consultation between the owner and the Administration. Recommendations from the legal and technical staff within the Administration determine the final outcome of such requests. The Committee notes, however, that the sample Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance (DMLC) Part I submitted by the Government does not refer to any substantial equivalences or exemptions. The Committee recalls that the concept of substantial equivalence is not a matter for administrative discretion but has to be decided by a Member on a horizontal basis – i.e. not on an ad hoc basis – following the requirements of Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Convention. Explanations are required where a national implementing measure differs from the requirements of Part A of the Code. In particular, the Committee requires information on the reason why the Member was not in a position to implement the requirement in Part A of the Code, as well as (unless obvious) on the reason why the Member was satisfied that the substantial equivalence met the criteria set out in Article VI, paragraph 4. Any substantial equivalences that have been adopted must be stated in Part I of the DMLC that is to be carried on board ships that have been certified. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information with respect to the substantial equivalence(s) it has adopted, indicating the precise differences between the national provisions and the corresponding requirements in the Convention and how it has satisfied itself that the national provisions concerned are substantially equivalent to the requirements of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to provide a copy of the DMLC Part I, reflecting any substantial equivalences that have been adopted.
Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. Minimum age. Hazardous work. The Committee previously noted that, while the DMLC, Part I states that Rule 6 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention)Rules (MS Rules) prohibits work that may pose a danger to health and safety for seafarers aged under 18, Rule 6 does not contain such prohibition. It further noted that the Government had not provided information on the list of hazardous activities, which is required under Standard A1.1, paragraph 4 of the Convention. The Government indicates that, cognisant of the dangers and occupational hazards attributed to the maritime industry, it ensures through its flag state inspectors that no seafarer is exposed to such occupational hazards and dangers and requests that risk assessments are evaluated prior to the undertaking of certain tasks, as foreseen in rules 114-117 of the MS Rules. The Government also indicates that it will engage in consultations with the shipowners' and seafarers’ organizations concerned in order to further strengthen the protection of young seafarers, following which a list of hazardous tasks will be compiled. The Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that the employment, engagement or work of seafarers under the age of 18 is prohibited where the work is likely to jeopardize their health or safety, as required by Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. It further requests the Government, after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned, to determine the list of such types of work and to provide a copy thereof once available.
Regulation 1.4 and the Code. Recruitment and placement. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the national laws and regulations which implement these requirements of the Convention and to provide information on the existing recruitment and placement services in Malta. The Government indicates that it has never issued any approval for seafarer recruitment and placement agencies in Malta and no evidence exists that such agencies operate in or from Malta. Recruitment agencies in Malta are regulated by domestic and European Union legislation. The Committee notes that the Employment Agencies Regulations set out the conditions for employment agencies to operate in Malta. According to such regulations, in the case of employment of seamen, it shall be the responsibility of the employment agency or employment business as well as of the user to ensure that the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act are complied with. Additionally, Rules 17 and 18 of the MS Rules provide that the Registrar-General shall ensure that recruitment services in Malta comply with the Convention and that the competent authority shall ensure that public and private seafarer recruitment and placement services be operated in an orderly manner that protect and promote seafarers’ employment rights. The Committee notes, however, that none of those instruments refer to (i) the prohibition of seafarer recruitment and placement services from using means, mechanisms or lists intended to prevent or deter seafarers from gaining employment for which they are qualified (Standard A1.4, paragraph 5(a)); (ii) the obligation to ensure that recruitment and placement of seafarers are free of charge for seafarers and whether seafarers are protected against monetary loss that they may incur as result of the failure of recruitment and placement services (Standard A1.4, paragraph 5(b) and (c)vi)); and (iii) how national legislation ensures that all complaints concerning the activities of recruitment and placement services are investigated involving, as appropriate, representatives of shipowners and seafarers (Standard A1.4, paragraph 7). Noting, in the light of the above-mentioned provisions, that private seafarer recruitment and placement services are likely to operate in the country, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on i) how the requirements of Standard A1.4, paragraph 5, are complied with (prohibition of blacklists, no fees or other charges on the seafarer, keeping registers, qualification of seafarers, protection of seafarers in foreign ports, managing complaints, establishing a compulsory insurance scheme to compensate seafarers); and ii) the national laws, regulations or other measures which implement these requirements of the Convention.
Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, paragraph 1(b). Seafarers’ employment agreement. Examination and advice before signing. The Committee previously noted that Rule 20, section (3), of the MS Rules does not ensure the right to seek advice from other persons before signing a seafarer’s employment agreement, as required by the Convention and requested the Government to indicate how it gives effect to this provision of the Convention. The Government indicates that although the rules do not refer to the right to seek advice from other persons or entities, this right is not being denied to any seafarer who wants to make use of it. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that these provisions of the Convention are directly applicable at the national level by virtue of Rule 2(4) of the MS Rules, which foresees that such Rules are to be read and construed together with the provisions of the Convention and of the European Union Council Directive 2009/13/EC. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that both in law and in practice seafarers are given the opportunity to examine and seek advice on the employment agreement before signing it, as required under Standard A2.1 of the Convention, providing for legal certainty and predictability for all interested parties.
Regulation 2.3 and Standard A2.3, paragraph 13. Hours of work and hours of rest. Exceptions. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any developments concerning the permission of exceptions to the minimum hours of rest through collective agreements and, if applicable, to submit copies of any relevant texts. The Government indicates that no collective agreement has ever been authorised. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.
Regulation 2.4, paragraph 2. Entitlement to leave. Shore leave. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information with respect to the implementation of Regulation 2.4, paragraph 2. The Government indicates that, although Rule 47 of the MS Rules, which deals with the issue of annual leave, does not refer to shore leave, it is to be construed together with the provisions of the Convention and Directive 2009/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, which foresee that seafarers shall be granted shore leave to benefit their health and well-being and with the operational requirements of their positions. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that both in law and in practice seafarers are granted shore leave in accordance with Regulation 2.4, paragraph 2.
Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(c). Repatriation. Entitlements. Noting that Rule 74(1) of the MS Rules provides that where the service of a seafarer terminates otherwise than by his/her consent to be discharged during the agreement, the master of the ship shall, besides giving the certificate of discharge required under this Rule and besides paying the wages to which the seafarer is entitled, make adequate provision in accordance with this Rule for his/her maintenance and for his/her return to a proper return port, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the meaning of “proper return port”. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that in cases of repatriation, the parties to the agreement are to be guided by the provisions found in the Convention and that when there is doubt, the references in the guidelines of the Convention are implemented. The Committee recalls, however, that Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2, requires each Member to ensure that there are appropriate provisions prescribing, among others, the precise entitlements relating to the destinations of repatriation in its laws and regulations or other measures or in collective bargaining agreements. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to regulate the meaning of “proper return port” under Rule 74(1) of the MS Rules and to indicate how it has given due consideration to the provisions of Guideline B2.5.1, paragraphs 6 and 7, in implementing its responsibilities under Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(c).
Regulation 2.6 and the Code. Seafarer Compensation for the ship’s loss or foundering. Noting that in accordance with section 54 in fine of the MS Rules “in all cases of wreck or loss of the ship, proof that the seafarer has not exerted himself to the utmost to save the ship, cargo and stores, shall bar his claim to wages”, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to Regulation 2.6. The Government indicates that, in the case of shipwreck or loss of the ship, Rule 54 of the MS Rules places the onus of proof of the seafarer’s inaction or negligence on the owner. The Committee once again recalls that Regulation 2.6 does not impose any conditions as regards seafarers’ compensation for the ship’s loss or foundering. In all cases, seafarers are entitled to their full salary payable under the contract, regardless of evidence of neglect or fault. Noting that the existing legislation contravenes Regulation 2.6 and the Code, the Committee requests the Government to amend section 54 of the MS Rules and remove the above limitation so as to ensure full compliance with this provision of the Convention.
Regulation 2.7 and the Code. Manning Levels. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on measures adopted to ensure that ships of less than 500 gross tonnage are sufficiently, safely and efficiently manned as required by the Convention. It further requested the Government to indicate the measures adopted to give effect to Standard A2.7, paragraph 3. The Government indicates that the Administration has catered for such instances through the issuing of an attestation document highlighting the required ranks and the number of personnel on board a ship flying its flag. The Committee notes, however, that the Government does not provide information on the procedures developed to determine, approve or revise manning levels for ships of less than 500 gross tonnage, specifying how they take into account the requirements set out in Regulation 2.7. It also notes that the copies of safe manning documents for tanker, passenger and cargo ships, that the Government provided, do not specify the gross tonnage of the ships to which they refer. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on how, when determining manning levels, the competent authority takes into account the requirements set out in Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2 concerning food and catering. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide information on procedures developed to determine, approve or revise manning levels for ships of less than 500 gross tonnage, specifying how they take into account: (i) the need to avoid or minimize excessive hours of work and limit fatigue; and (ii) the requirements set out in Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2 concerning food and catering.
Regulation 3.1 and the Code. Accommodation and recreational facilities. The Committee requested the Government to indicate if exemptions for ships of less than 200 gross tonnage and for ships of less than 3,000 gross tonnage have been granted under the Fourth Schedule of the MS Rules, and if the relevant consultations have taken place. The Committee further requested the Government to explain the meaning of “bona fide seafarers’ organizations”. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Registrar-General’s office has granted exemptions on a case-by-case basis following consultations with both the shipowners’ representatives and the seafarers’ unions. According to the Government, the “bona fide seafarers’ organizations” refer to the seafarer’s representatives chosen by the actual seafarers directly related to the request. The Committee notes the GWU’s statement that ITF and GWU have been involved in an exchange over a request from a work boat owner who asked for regulations relaxation regarding the living quarters on the boat, and communicated their position in writing to Transport Malta after meeting the owner. The Committee recalls that exemptions from the implementation of Regulation 3.1 can only be made in the cases expressly permitted by the Convention, and only for particular circumstances in which such exemptions can be clearly justified on strong grounds and subject to promoting the seafarers’ health and safety. The Committee requests the Government to provide a list of types of exemptions and waivers granted for ships of less than 200 gross tonnage and for ships of less than 3,000 gross tonnage under the Fourth Schedule of the MS Rules, by type of vessel, indicating the grounds under which such exemptions were granted and the organisations involved in the consultations to that end.
Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 1. Medical care on board and ashore. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate how effect is given to Standard A4.1, paragraphs 1(a) to (d). The Government reiterates that these provisions of the Convention are directly applied by virtue of Rule 2(4) of the MS Rules, which states that these Rules shall be read and construed together with the Convention and Council Directive 2009/13/EC of 16 February 2009 on implementing the Agreement concluded by the European Community Shipowners’ Associations (ECSA) and the European Transport Workers’ Federation (ETF). It further indicates that the Administration ensures that seafarers are properly covered for any medical emergency that may arise through the evaluation of employment agreements, which inter alia should include provisions addressing any medical needs that the seafarer may require whilst under an agreement. The Committee also notes that, according to Section 104 and the Fifth Schedule of the MS Rules, the shipowner shall be responsible for the cost of any medical stores including the cost of periodic replacements, and that the requirements for the medicine chest include dental equipment. However, no information is provided by the Government as to the measures in place to ensure: (i) the application to seafarers on ships flying Malta’s flag of any general provisions on occupational health protection and medical care relevant to their duties, as well as of special provisions specific to work on board ships (Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(a)); (ii) that seafarers are given health protection and medical care as comparable as possible to that which is generally available to workers ashore, including prompt access to the necessary medicines, medical equipment and facilities for diagnosis and treatment and to medical information and expertise (Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(b)); and (iii) that seafarers working on board a ship flying Malta’s flag are given the right to visit a qualified medical doctor or dentist without delay in ports of call, where practicable (Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(c)), including if and in what kind of cases the visit can be refused. Although the Government indicates that seafarers are covered for medical emergencies, the Committee notes that no information is provided on whether medical care includes measures of a preventive character, such as health promotion and health education programmes (Standard A4.1, paragraph 1(e)). Recalling that Standard A4.1, paragraphs 1(a) to (e) of the Convention are not self-executing as these provisions require the adoption of measures to ensure that seafarers are given health protection and medical care, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to give effect to these requirements of the Convention and to provide information on any development in this regard.
Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 2. Medical care on board and ashore. Standard medical report form. The Committee notes that while the Government supplied a medical report form for issuing seafarers’ medical certificates, it did not provide a copy of the standard medical report form to be carried on board ship for the use of the ships’ masters’ and relevant onshore and on-board medical personnel, as foreseen by Standard A4.1, paragraph 2. The Committee recalls that this provision of the Convention requires the competent authority of the flag State to adopt a standard medical report form that should only be used to facilitate the treatment of seafarers. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt the standard medical report form for seafarers pursuant to Standard A4.1, paragraph 2, and to provide a copy once available.
Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraphs 3 and 4(a) to (c). Medical care on board and ashore. On-board hospital and medical facilities, equipment and training. The Committee previously requested the Government to indicate how effect was given to Standard A4.1, paragraph 3 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government refers to the MS Rules 36 and 111 to 113. The Committee also notes that Sections 92, 97 to 104, 106 and the Fourth and Eight Schedule of those Rules provide the requirements for hospital and medical care facilities, for medical training of master and ship officers and for medical stores. The Committee further notes that Section 152 of the Merchant Shipping Act establishes that the owner and master of every Maltese ship shall ensure that the ship carries medicines, medical stores, equipment, facilities, appliances and books, as specified by law. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.
Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(d). Medical care on board and ashore. Minimum requirements. Medical advice by radio or satellite. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate how effect is given to this provision of the Convention. The Government indicates that this aspect is regulated by the Merchant Shipping (Safety Convention) Rules under which ships are required to carry appropriate equipment and maintain up-to-date contact information for radio or satellite communication to obtain onshore medical advice while on a voyage. Noting that no information is provided on the implementation of this provision by Malta as a coastal State, the Committee recalls that Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(d) provides for the adoption of laws and regulations requiring coastal States to ensure by a prearranged system that medical advice by radio or satellite communication to ships at sea, including specialist advice, is available 24 hours a day, free of charge to all ships irrespective of the flag that they fly. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted to comply with this requirement of the Convention.
Regulation 4.2, Standard A4.2.1, paragraphs 8 to 14 and Standard A4.2.2. Shipowners’ liability. Financial security. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the 2014 amendments to the Code have been implemented through the amended MS Rules. It further notes the example of a financial security certificate provided by the Government. The Committee notes, however, that the Government provides no information on the arrangements in place to receive, deal with and impartially settle contractual claims relating to compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard, through expeditious and fair procedures, as required by Standard A4.2.2, paragraph 3. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide the set of measures adopted to give effect to that provision of the Convention, indicating the applicable national provisions.
Regulation 4.3, paragraph 2. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. National guidelines. The Committee requested the Government to indicate if national guidelines for the management of occupational safety and health, to protect seafarers that live, work and train on board ships flying its flag, had been adopted after consultation with representative shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations. The Committee notes that the Government provides no new information on this point. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt, after consultation with the representative shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations, national guidelines for the management of occupational safety and health on board ships that fly its flag, in accordance with regulation 4.3, paragraph 2. In this regard, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to Guidelines for implementing the occupational safety and health provisions of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006.
Regulation 4.3 and Standard A4.3, paragraphs 5 and 6. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. Reporting, statistics and investigation. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide further information on whether the national Maritime Safety Investigation Unit (MSIU) takes into consideration the guidance provided by the ILO with respect to the reporting and recording of occupational accidents and diseases, and to indicate the relevant provision giving effect to this requirement of the Convention. The Government indicates that the MSIU follows the reporting, recording and investigation of occupational accidents as provided by the SOLAS Convention and the IMO Casualty Investigation Code and EU Directive 2009/18/EC. All notifications of occupational accidents, irrespective of the severity, are communicated to the European Commission, through the European Maritime Safety Agency. Safety investigation reports into occupational accidents, compiled by the MSIU are published and communicated to the European Commission and the IMO, through their respective databases. The Committee also notes that the Marine Accident/Incident report form aims to facilitate the reporting to the MSIU of such accidents. The Committee notes however that, as indicated by the Government, the MSIU does not record occupational diseases. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which compliance with the obligation to report and investigate occupational diseases on board all ships covered by the Convention is ensured, in accordance with Standard A4.3, paragraphs 5 and 6. The Committee also requests the Government to ensure that the guidance provided by the ILO with respect to the reporting and recording of occupational accidents and diseases is taken into account.
Regulation 4.4 and the Code. Access to shore-based welfare facilities. The Committee requested the Government to provide additional information regarding plans for further development of seafarer welfare facilities in its ports. The Government indicates that a welfare facility has been established on shore in Malta and that all seafarers have access to it without restriction, in accordance with the Convention, but that no welfare board has been established yet. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments regarding the establishment of a welfare board for regularly reviewing welfare facilities and services.
Regulation 4.5 and Standard A4.5, paragraph 3. Social security. Protection for seafarers ordinarily resident in its territory. Noting that, according to section 168A(2) of the Merchant Shipping Act, the Social Security Act or any enactment replacing that Act shall not apply in respect of foreign seafarers employed on Maltese ships, the Committee requested the Government to clarify the manner in which social security protection is extended to all seafarers ordinarily resident in Malta, regardless of their nationality and regardless of the flag of the ships they work on. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that all persons residing in Malta irrespective of their nature of employment are regulated by the Social Security Act (Chap. 318). The Committee also notes GWU’s observation that there have been exchanges with both Transport Malta and the International Department of the Social Security, particularly on the issue of where the social contributions are to be paid and what benefits are expected, in view of Regulation (EC) No. 883/2004 of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications regarding whether, and to what extent, seafarers ordinarily resident in Malta who work on ships flying a foreign flag – especially flying the flag of non-EU countries – are granted medical care, sickness benefit and employment injury benefits under the Maltese social security system, which are no less favourable than those enjoyed by shore workers resident in Malta.
Regulation 4.5 and Standard A4.5, paragraph 6. Social security. Comparable benefits for seafarers in the absence of adequate coverage. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on any measures adopted under Standard A4.5, paragraph 6 in relation to benefits to non-resident seafarers working on ships flying the Maltese flag who do not have adequate security coverage. Noting the absence of reply in the Government’s report, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how Standard A4.5, paragraph 6 is implemented with respect to non-resident non-EU seafarers working on board Maltese-flagged ships.
Regulation 4.5 and Standard A4.5, paragraph 9. Social security. Fair and effective procedures for the settlement of disputes. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the procedures of the settlement of disputes relating to social security for seafarers, as per Standard A4.5, paragraph 9 of the Convention.
Regulation 5.1.3 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Maritime Labour Certificate and Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance. The Committee requested the Government to review the DMLC, Part I, so as to ensure not only that it provides a reference to the relevant national legal provisions implementing the Convention, but that it also contains, to the extent necessary, concise information on the main content of the national requirements as provided for under Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10(a) to allow all persons concerned, such as flag State inspectors, authorized officers in port States and seafarers, to check that the national requirements are being properly implemented on board ship. The Committee notes with interest that the DMLC, Part I submitted with the Government's report includes references to the implementing legislation with succinct information on the provisions to which reference is made on the list of 16 matters to be inspected. According to Technical Notice SLS.33 of 27 august 2018 and the information available in the Transport Malta website, all documents referenced in the DMLC, Part I are to be carried on board ships and are accessible to those concerned. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.
Additional documentation requested. The Committee notes that the Government has omitted to provide some of the documents requested in the report form. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the following documents: an example of an approved document for seafarers’ record of employment (Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1 and 3); an example of a seafarers’ employment agreement (please remove individual identification information) (Standard A2.1, paragraph 2(a)).
© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer