Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2021, publiée 110ème session CIT (2022)

Convention du travail maritime, 2006 (MLC, 2006) - Inde (Ratification: 2015)

Autre commentaire sur C186

Demande directe

2022
2021
2018

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) and the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), received by the Office on 1 and 26 October 2020 and 4 October 2021, 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 and its comments on the General Report of 2021 on this issue.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

The Committee notes the Government’s first report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006). It further notes that the Government previously ratified three maritime labour Conventions which have been denounced following the entry into force of the MLC, 2006, for India. The Committee notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2014 entered into force for India on 23 January 2019. The Committee notes the observations of the Forward Seamen’s Union of India, received by the Office on 23 January 2017. The Committee notes the efforts undertaken by the Government and the social partners to implement the Convention. Following a first 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.

Article I. General questions on application. Implementing measures. The Committee notes that the Government provides three Industry Agreements which are in force for the period 2015–19. The Committee notes that these agreements are applicable respectively to Off Shore, Home Trade and Foreign going Ratings and Petty Officers. For the determination of their scope of application, they refer to “seamen engaged on Offshore Indian Articles of Agreement” or to “seamen engaged on Home Trade Indian Articles of Agreement”. The Committee requests the Government to provide, in relation with the implementation of the MLC, 2006, more detailed information on the scope of application of these three Industry Agreements.

Article III. Fundamental rights and principles. The Committee notes that the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), have not been ratified by India. In accordance with its approach followed when a country has not ratified some or all of the ILO fundamental Conventions and thereby is not subject to supervision in respect of these fundamental Conventions, the Committee expects to receive concrete information on how the country or territory has satisfied itself that its laws and regulations respect, in the context of the MLC, 2006, the fundamental rights referred to in Article III. The Committee notes that, while the Government refers to an established practice that collective bargaining between the stakeholders is given due recognition, it has not provided any explanation on how effect is given, in the context of the Convention, to the fundamental rights to freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how it has satisfied itself that its laws and regulations, in the context of the MLC, 2006, respect these fundamental rights.

Article II, paragraphs 1(f) and 2. Definitions and scope of application. Seafarers. The Committee notes that MS Notice No. 5 of 2017, paragraph 3, provides that the provisions of MLC, 2006, as enshrined in the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, shall be applicable to trainees and cadets as for other seafarers. The Government indicates in its report that, after extensive consultation with the shipowners and seafarers, it was clarified that the trainee is a seafarer. However, the Committee notes that under paragraph 4 of MS Notice No. 5 of 2017, relaxation with the respect of some provisions of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, has been granted with respect to trainees and cadets concerning the maximum duration of service on board to which the seafarers shall be entitled for repatriation and social security measures. The Committee notes that according to the Rules, all other provisions of the Convention, as enshrined in the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, shall apply with respect to trainees/cadets. The Committee further notes that paragraph 3 of MS Notice No. 8 of 2017 provides that “the matter has been further examined and it is observed that trainees/cadets are not covered in the prevailing collective bargaining agreements. It is therefore clarified that trainees/cadets are exempted from the provision of implementation of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, in respect of payment of wages applicable for other seafarers under prevailing CBA”. The Committee notes that, while considering that trainees and cadets are seafarers, the Government has decided to provide them with a different level of protection regarding the maximum period of service on board, social security and wages. The Committee recalls that it considers, from the combined reading of Standard A2.4, paragraph 3, on annual leave and Standard A2.5, paragraph 2(b), on repatriation, that the maximum continuous period of shipboard service without leave is 11 months. The Committee further recalls that Standard A2.4, paragraph 3, provides that any agreement to forgo minimum annual leave with pay shall be prohibited, except in cases provided for by the competent authority. The Committee considers that this provision needs to be understood in a restrictive manner. Recalling the fundamental importance of paid annual leave to protect the health and well-being of seafarers and to prevent fatigue, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the specific exception provided for the trainees and the cadets and to indicate the maximum period of service on board following which they shall be entitled to annual leave. Concerning the social security protection and the wages of the trainees and the cadets, the Committee recalls that Article VI, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Convention, allows a Member which is not in a position to implement the rights and principles in the manner set out in Part A of the Code (Standards), unless expressly provided otherwise in the Convention, to implement Part A through provisions in its laws and regulations or other measures which are substantially equivalent to the provisions of Part A. It recalls that any law, regulation, collective agreement or other implementing measure shall be considered to be substantially equivalent, in the context of the Convention, if the Member satisfies itself that: (a) it is conducive to the full achievement of the general object and purpose of the provision or provisions of Part A of the Code concerned; and (b) it gives effect to the provision or provisions of Part A of the Code concerned. The Committee recalls that any substantial equivalences that have been adopted must be stated in Part I of the Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance (DMLC) that is to be carried on board ships that have been certified. The Committee requests the Government to confirm if it has decided to adopt measures which are substantially equivalent regarding trainees and cadets, and to provide detailed information on how the measures adopted conduce to the full achievement of the general object and purpose of the provisions of Part A of the Code concerned and how they give effect to this provision or these provisions.

Regulation 1.4 and Standard A1.4, paragraph 5. Recruitment and placement. System of protection. The Committee notes that Rule 5(g) of the Merchant Shipping (Recruitment and Placement of Seafarers) Rules, 2016, provides that the recruitment and placement services provider shall establish a system of protection, by way of a bank guarantee to compensate seafarers for any monetary loss that they may incur as a result of the failure of a recruitment and placement service and the relevant shipowner under the seafarers’ employment agreement to meet his/her obligation to them. The Committee notes however that when providing details about the amount of the bank guarantee, Rule 15 of the above-mentioned Rules refers only to seafarers who are placed on foreign flag ships. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the system of protection established to give effect to Standard A1.4, paragraph V(vi), of the Convention also applies to seafarers who are placed on Indian flag ships and to indicate the relevant national provisions.

Regulation 1.4, paragraph 3, and Standard A1.4, paragraphs 9 and 10. Recruitment and placement. Services based in countries in which the Convention does not apply. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the measures taken to require that shipowners of ships flying the Indian flag who use recruitment and placement services which operate in countries that have not ratified the Convention, ensure, as far as practicable, that those services meet the requirements of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to explain how it gives effect to Regulation 1.4, paragraph 3, and Standard A1.4, paragraphs 9 and 10, of the Convention.

Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, paragraph 6. Seafarers’ employment agreement. Termination. Shorter notice period for urgent reasons. The Committee notes that Rule 8(7) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Rules), 2016, provides that a period of notice shorter than the minimum period may be given in circumstances which are recognized “under the applicable collective bargaining agreements” as justifying termination of the employment agreement at shorter notice or without notice. In determining these circumstances, it shall be ensured by the shipowner that the need of the seafarer to terminate, without penalty, the employment agreement on shorter notice or without notice for compassionate or other urgent reasons is taken into account. Noting that the Industry Agreements provided by the Government do not contain provisions on the compassionate or other urgent reasons which justify a shorter notice period, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how those circumstances are determined in practice in order to ensure full compliance with Standard A2.1, paragraph 6.

Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1(e) and 3. Seafarers’ employment agreement. Record of employment. The Committee notes that Rule 8(1)(e) of Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that at the end of, or termination of, contract, every seafarer’s continuous discharge certificate shall be endorsed with a record of employment on board the ship. The Committee notes that the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, do not require, as Standard A2.1, paragraph 3, of the Convention, that the record of employment shall not contain any statement as to the quality of the seafarers’ work or as to their wages. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how full effect is given to Standard A2.1, paragraph 3, by ensuring that records of employment do not contain any statement as to the quality of the seafarers’ work or as to their wages. The Committee further requests the Government to provide an example of the approved document for seafarers’ records of employment.

Regulation 2.2 and Standard A2.2, paragraph 6. Wages. The Committee notes the observations submitted by the Forward Seaman’s Union of India (FSU), received by the Office on 23 January 2017 alleging that shipowners of Indian-registered ships have entered into an “urgent wage agreement” with one trade union, on 2 April 2016, disregarding the Merchant Shipping Maritime (Labour) Rules, 2016, and the amount of the minimum wage set by the Joint Maritime Commission. The FSU refers to Rule 9(5) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, which provides that the wages included in the collective bargaining agreement or the seafarers’ employment agreement shall be in accordance with the guidelines as laid down in the MLC, 2006. For the FSU, this includes Guideline B2.2.4, according to which the basic pay or wages for a calendar month of service for an able seafarer should be no less than the amount periodically set by the Joint Maritime Commission or another body authorized by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office. The FSU further explains that the basic payment of the Able Seamen of Indian ships are fixed at US$105, whereas the minimum wages as per the Joint Maritime Commission is US$614 for the period 2016–18. The Committee notes that the Government, in its reply received on 26 November 2018, confirms that Rule 9(5) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, refers to the Guidelines of the MLC, 2006, and that though these guidelines are generally recommendatory in nature, India has adopted those Guidelines for implementation. The Government further states that according to its reading of the Guidelines, if there is an agreement between the shipowners’ association and the seafarers’ union, the agreed wage would prevail over the international minimum wage. The Government adds that in a meeting held with relevant stakeholders to discuss this issue, shipowners’ expressed their inability to pay the minimum wage set by the Joint Maritime Commission. It further informs that the minimum wage has traditionally been agreed by the Indian National Shipowners’ Association (INSA), the most representative shipowners’ organization in the country, and the National Seafarers’ Union of India and another trade union based in Kolkata. Following the complaint made by the FSU, the Government has requested the relevant authority to provide an updated list of seafarers’ trade unions along with their number of affiliates so that they can determine what is the union representing the majority of seafarers. It concludes, indicating that upon receipt of those numbers, an alternative mechanism for entering into the wage agreement can be worked out. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the development of the situation and on any mechanisms put in place to deal with the minimum wage issues. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how Guideline B2.2 of the Convention (calculation and payment of wages; minimum wage and minimum monthly basic pay or wage figure for able seafarers) has been given mandatory force in Indian legislation.

Regulation 2.4 and Standard A2.4, paragraph 3. Entitlement to leave. Prohibition of agreements to forgo annual leave. The Committee notes that Rule 11(2) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that any agreement to forgo the minimum annual leave with pay, except in cases provided for by the Director-General of Shipping, shall be prohibited, as it is required under Standard A2.4, paragraph 3, of the Convention. The Committee recalls that it considers that the possibility to authorize exceptions to the prohibition of agreements to forgo minimum annual leave needs to be understood in a restrictive manner. In contrast, to read in this Standard a broad authorization to forgo annual leave for cash compensation or otherwise, would defeat the purpose of Regulation 2.4, which is to ensure that seafarers have adequate leave. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the authorized exceptions that have been granted by the Director-General of Shipping under Standard A2.4, and the ground for such authorizations.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 3. Repatriation. Prohibition of advance payment and to recover costs. The Committee notes that Rule 12(4) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that the shipowner shall not make any provision requiring seafarers to make an advance payment towards the cost of repatriation at the beginning of their employment, and also from recovering the cost of repatriation from the wages of seafarers or other entitlements except where the seafarer has been found, as per the applicable collective bargaining agreements, to be “in default” of the seafarer’s employment obligations. The Committee recalls that under Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 3, each Member shall prohibit shipowners from recovering the cost of repatriation from the seafarers’ wages or other entitlements except where the seafarer has been found, in accordance with national laws or regulations or other measures or applicable collective bargaining agreements, to be in “serious default” of the seafarer’s employment obligations. Noting that the national legislation refers to the situation of “default” and not “serious default” as required by the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 3, of the Convention. It further requests the Government to provide information on the procedure to be followed and the standard of proof to be applied before any seafarer covered by the Convention can be found to be in “serious default of the seafarers employment obligations”.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2(c). Repatriation. Entitlements. The Committee notes that Rule 12(3) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that “the shipowner shall ensure that there are appropriate provisions in collective bargaining agreements, specifying the circumstances in which seafarers are entitled to repatriation; the maximum duration of service periods on board following which a seafarer is entitled to repatriation – which shall be less than 12 months; and the precise entitlements to be accorded by shipowners for repatriation, including those relating to the destinations of repatriation, the mode of transport, the items of expense to be covered and other arrangements to be made by shipowners”. The Committee recalls that Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2, requires each Member to ensure that there are appropriate provisions on these issues in its laws and regulations or other measures or in collective bargaining agreements. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of all applicable collective agreements indicating the relevant provisions which are giving effect to Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 2.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Repatriation. Financial security. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Standard A2.5.2, the Government shall ensure the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. In this regard, the Committee takes note that the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, are giving effect to the 2014 amendments. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) does national legislation require the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in the event of their abandonment? (If yes, specify if the financial security system was determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned); (b) has your country received requests to facilitate repatriation of a seafarer? (If yes, how did your country respond?); (c) what are the circumstances under which a seafarer is considered abandoned according to national legislation?; (d) does national legislation provide that ships that need to be certified according to Regulation 5.1.3, must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (If yes, please specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence must contain the information required by Appendix A2-I and has to be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (e) does national legislation require that the financial security system is sufficient to cover outstanding wages and other entitlements, all expenses incurred by the seafarer (including the cost of repatriation), and the essential needs of the seafarers, as defined in Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 9?; and (f) does national legislation provide for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the above-mentioned questions and to indicate in each case the applicable national provisions.

Regulation 2.6 and Standard A2.6, paragraph 1. Compensation for the ship’s loss or foundering. Unemployment indemnity. The Committee notes that Rule 13 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that the shipowner shall ensure that, in every case of loss or foundering of any ship, the shipowner shall pay to each seafarer on board an indemnity against unemployment resulting from such loss or foundering which shall be specified in the collective bargaining agreement. The Committee requests the Government to provide any stipulation of the collective bargaining agreements in force that specify the amount of the indemnity against unemployment resulting from a ship’s loss or foundering. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate how due consideration has been given to Guideline B2.6.1 regarding the calculation of the indemnity against unemployment.

Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1, paragraph 3. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Flag State inspections. The Committee notes that Rule 6(2) of the Merchant Shipping (Seafarers’ Accommodation) Rules, 2016, provides that the seafarer’s accommodation facilities and its maintenance on a ship shall be verified during the initial, intermediate, renewal and additional surveys associated with the maritime labour certificate and declaration of maritime labour compliance. The Committee recalls that every ship, within the meaning of the Convention shall be inspected and not only ships to which a maritime labour certificate and a declaration of maritime labour compliance shall be issued. According to Standard A3.1, paragraph 3, of the Convention, the inspections required under Regulation 5.1.4 shall be carried out when: (a) a ship is registered or re registered; or (b) the seafarer accommodation on a ship has been substantially altered. The Committee requests the Government to indicate if every ship, within the meaning of the MLC, 2006, shall be inspected as provided by Standard A3.1, paragraph 3.

Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Exemptions. The Committee notes that the Merchant Shipping (Seafarers Accommodation) Rules, 2016, provide that the provisions of these Rules “shall not apply to any ship plying in voyages within territorial waters, the seafarers of which are not required to stay on board overnight for periods exceeding eight hours”. They further provide that the Director-General may accept equivalent arrangements on a ship or deviations from the requirements specified in these Rules, when such deviations can be clearly justified, subject to protecting the seafarers’ living conditions, health and safety. The Committee recalls that Standard A3.1, paragraph 21, of the Convention provides that any exemptions with respect to the requirements of this Standard may be made “only where they are expressly permitted in this Standard” and only for particular circumstances in which such exemptions can be clearly justified on strong grounds and subject to protecting the seafarers’ health and safety. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that exemptions are limited to those expressly permitted by the Convention and to provide detailed information on the exemptions granted.

Regulation 4.1 and the Code. Medical care ashore. The Committee notes that Rule 18 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, contains provisions on the shipowners’ responsibilities regarding medical care on board but does not regulate India’s obligation, as a coastal State, to ensure that seafarers on board ships in its territory who are in need of immediate medical care are given access to its medical facilities on shore (Regulation 4.1, paragraph 3). There seems to be no provision prescribing that the “competent authority” shall 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 and that medical advice, including the onward transmission of medical messages by radio or satellite communication between a ship and those ashore giving the advice, “shall be available free of charge to all ships irrespective of the flag that they fly” (Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(d)). The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on how effect is given to Regulation 4.1, paragraph 3, and to Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(d).

Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraphs 2 and 4(1). Standard medical report form. Medicine chest, medical equipment and medical guide. The Committee notes that Rule 18(2) of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that “the shipowner” shall adopt a standard medical report form for use by the masters of the ship and relevant onshore and on-board medical personnel as specified by the Director-General of Shipping and the form when completed, its contents shall be kept confidential and shall only be used to facilitate the treatment of seafarers. Recalling that Standard A4.1, paragraph 3, provides that the “competent authority” shall adopt a standard medical report form, the Committee requests to indicate whether such report form has been adopted.

Regulation 4.2, Standard A4.2.1, paragraphs 8 to 14, and Standard A4.2.2. Shipowners’ liability. Financial security. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that pursuant to Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, national laws and regulations shall provide that the financial security system to assure compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard meet certain minimum requirements. In this regard, the Committee takes note that the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, are giving effect to the 2014 amendments. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) what is the form taken by the system of financial security and was it determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned?; (b) how national laws and regulations ensure that the system of financial security meets the following minimum requirements: (i) payment of compensation in full and without delay; (ii) no pressure to accept payment less than the contractual amount; (iii) interim payments (while the situation is being assessed) to avoid undue hardship; (iv) offsetting payment against any damages resulting from any other claim made by the seafarer against the shipowner and arising from the same incident; and (v) persons who can bring the claim for contractual compensation (seafarer, her/his next of kin, representative or designated beneficiary); (c) does national legislation provide that ships must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (If yes, please specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence has to contain the information required in Appendix A4-I, be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (d) does national legislation provide: (i) for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease; (ii) that the competent authority is notified by the financial security provider if a shipowner’s financial security is cancelled or terminated; and (iii) that seafarers receive prior notification if a shipowner’s financial security is to be cancelled or terminated?; and (e) how does national legislation ensure that effective arrangements are 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? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the above mentioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions.

Regulation 4.3 and the Code. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. The Committee notes that the Government’s report, as well as the examples of DMLC, Part I and Part II submitted with the report, refer to Rule 20 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, which provides that the Director-General of Shipping may specify separate guidelines from time to time, for the management of occupational safety and protection of health on board the ships. The Committee notes however that such guidelines do not seem to have been adopted yet. The Committee recalls that member States shall develop and promulgate national guidelines for the management of occupational safety and health on board ships that fly its flag, after consultation with representative shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations and taking into account applicable codes, guidelines and standards recommended by international organizations, national administrations and maritime industry organizations (Regulation 4.3, paragraph 2). The Committee further recalls that members shall adopt laws and regulations and other measures addressing the matters specified in the Code, taking into account relevant international instruments, and set standards for occupational safety and health protection and accident prevention on ships that fly its flag (Regulation 4.3, paragraph 3). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the laws, regulations and guidelines adopted to give effect to Regulation 4.3 and Standard A4.3.

Regulation 4.5 and the Code. Social security. The Committee notes that, at the time of ratification, in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 10 of Standard A4.5, the Government specified the following branches of social security: maternity benefit; invalidity benefit and survivors’ benefit. Noting that the Government indicates that discussions are taking place on the possibility to extend the social security protection for seafarers to other social security branches (old-age benefit, family benefit), not specified at the time of ratification, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments on this issue in accordance with Regulation 4.5, paragraph 2, and Standard A4.5, paragraph 11).

The Committee notes that, according to the information provided by the Government for the three branches specified, social security coverage is not available to all seafarers ordinarily resident in India, but only to Indian seafarers, holding CDC Book, and who are recruited/engaged by the Indian shipowners or through registered Recruitment and Placement Services, for Indian or foreign flag ships. The Committee recalls that under Standard A4.5, paragraph 3, each Member shall take steps to provide the complementary social security protection referred to in paragraph 1 of the Standard to all seafarers ordinarily resident in its territory, regardless of their nationality or of the flag of the ships they work on. Noting that the Government in its report has not indicated whether seafarers are residents or otherwise domiciled in the territory, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that all seafarers ordinarily resident in India are granted social security coverage in the branches specified, which is no less favourable than that enjoyed by shore workers resident in India, in conformity with Regulation 4.5 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that this responsibility could be satisfied, for example, through appropriate bilateral or multilateral agreements (Standard A4.5, paragraph 3).

Regulation 5.1.1 and Standard A5.1.1, paragraph 2. Flag State responsibilities. General principles. Copy of the MLC, 2006 on board. The Committee notes that the Annexure III of the MS Notice No. 16 of 2016 provides a checklist for inspections which indicates that the inspectors shall control that a copy of the MLC, 2006, is available on board. The Committee notes that the MS Notice No. 9 of 2017, which is applicable to ships of less than 500 gross tonnage, does not include the same requirements. Recalling that pursuant to Standard A5.1.1, paragraph 2, each Member shall require all ships that fly its flag to have a copy of the Convention available on board, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it ensures compliance with this requirement of the Convention.

Regulation 5.1.2 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Authorization of recognized organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that inspection under the MLC, 2006, has been delegated to recognized organizations. The Committee notes however that the Government has not provided further information on the measures taken to give effect to Regulation 5.1.2. In particular, the Committee recalls that Standard A5.1.2 provides that the competent authority shall review the competency and independence of the organization to be recognized (paragraph 1) and establish a system to ensure the adequacy of work performed by recognized organizations (paragraph 3(a)), as well as procedures for communication with and oversight of such organizations (paragraph 3(b)). The Committee also recalls that any authorizations granted with respect to inspections shall, as a minimum, empower the recognized organization to require the rectification of deficiencies that it identifies in seafarers’ working and living conditions and to carry out inspections in this regard at the request of a port State (paragraph 2). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to these requirements of Standard A5.1.2, and to provide an example or examples of authorizations given to recognized organizations.

Regulation 5.1.3 and Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 12. Flag State responsibilities. Maritime labour certificate and declaration of maritime labour compliance. Documents on board. The Committee notes that section 176A of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, provides that the shipping master, surveyor, seamen’s welfare officer, port health officer, Indian consular officer, or any other officer at any port duly authorized in this behalf by the Central Government, may inspect any ship, in such manner as may be prescribed, and the master of the ship or any person having charge over the ship shall make available to such inspecting officer, the maritime labour certificate and the declaration of maritime labour compliance. The Committee recalls that Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 12, provides that a current valid maritime labour certificate and declaration of maritime labour compliance shall be carried on the ship and a copy shall be posted in a conspicuous place on board where it is available to the seafarers. A copy shall be made available in accordance with national laws and regulations, upon request, to seafarers, flag State inspectors, authorized officers in port States, and shipowners’ and seafarers’ representatives. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how effect is given to this provision.

Regulation 5.1.3 and Standard A5.1.3, paragraphs 14 and 15. Flag State responsibilities. End of validity of the maritime labour certificate and the declaration of maritime labour compliance. The Committee notes that the Government has not indicated any relevant provision establishing the circumstances in which a maritime labour certificate ceases to be valid and the circumstances in which a maritime labour certificate must be withdrawn (Standard A5.1.3, paragraphs 14–17). The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate how it gives effect to these requirements of the Convention.

Regulation 5.1.5 and Standard A5.1.5, paragraph 3. Flag State responsibilities. On-board complaint procedures. Victimization. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Rule 28(2) of Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, is the legal provision under which victimization of seafarers for filing a complaint is prohibited and penalized in India. However, the Committee notes that this Rule deals with the on shore complaint-handling procedures and does not seem to apply to on-board complaints. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on how effect is given to Standard A5.1.5, paragraph 3, according to which the on-board complaint procedures shall include safeguards against the possibility of victimization of seafarers for filing complaints. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the applicable national provisions which require that a copy of the on-board complaint procedures applicable on the ship is provided to the seafarers (Standard A5.1.5, paragraph 4).

Regulation 5.1.6. Flag State responsibilities. Marine casualties. The Committee notes that section 358 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, provides that a shipping casualty shall be deemed to occur when any loss of life ensues by reason of any casualty happening to or on board any ship on or near the coast of India. The Committee recalls that Regulation 5.1.6, paragraph 1, provides that each Member shall hold an official inquiry into any serious marine casualty, leading to “injury or loss of life”, that involves a ship that flies its flag. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on how it ensures that an official inquiry is carried out in any serious marine casualty, leading to injury and not only in cases of loss of life.

Regulation 5.2.1 and the Code. Port State responsibilities. Inspections in port. The Committee notes that under Rule 27 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, the Director-General of Shipping shall establish the procedure for inspection as required under the Convention for fulfilling its port State responsibilities. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on how full effect is given to Standard A5.2.1, including any national guidelines issued to inspectors in implementation of Standard A5.2.1, paragraph 7.

Regulation 5.2.2 and the Code. Port State responsibilities. Onshore seafarer complaint-handling procedures. The Committee notes that Rule 28 of the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour) Rules, 2016, provides that an on shore complaint redress procedure shall be followed in all Indian ports as specified by the Director-General of Shipping, in consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned, who are parties to the Collective Bargaining Agreement as reflected in the seafarers employment agreement, where applicable. The Committee also notes that the MS Notice No. 3 of 2013 establishes a relevant grievance redress mechanism but only for Indian seafarers. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how full effect is given to Regulation 5.2.2 and Standard A5.2.2.

Statistical information. Noting that some required statistical information has not been provided in the report, the Committee requests the Government to provide clear and detailed information regarding: (a) the number of seafarers who are working on national flag ships, distinguishing those who are engaged or not engaged in international voyages (or voyages between ports in other countries); (b) the number of seafarers who are nationals or residents or otherwise domiciled in the territory; and (c) the number of foreign seafarers who are working on Indian flag ships.