Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108) - Uruguay (Ratification: 1973)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes the reports provided by the Government on the application of Conventions Nos 23, 108 and 134 on seafarers. In order to provide an overview of matters arising in relation to the application of the maritime Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, as follows.

The Committee recalls that, under the Standards Review Mechanism, the Governing Body of the ILO, on the recommendation of the Special Tripartite Committee of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), classified Conventions Nos 22, 23, 108, 133 and 134, all of which have been ratified by Uruguay, as “outdated standards”. At its 343rd Session (November 2021), the Governing Body placed on the agenda of the 118th Session (2030) of the International Labour Conference an item on the abrogation of Conventions Nos 22, 23, 133 and 134 and requested the Office to launch an initiative to promote the ratification on a priority basis of the MLC, 2006, and of the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188), among countries bound by those Conventions. It also requested the Office to encourage the ratification of the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003, as amended (No. 185), among countries bound by Convention No. 108. The Committee therefore encourages the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying the MLC, 2006, and Conventions Nos 185 and 188 and reminds it of the availability of technical assistance from the Office.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes with deep concern the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Convention. In this regard, the Committee refers to the resolution adopted by the Governing Body in its 340th Session (GB.340/Resolution) concerning maritime labour issues and COVID-19 disease, which calls on Member States to take measures to address the adverse impacts of the pandemic on seafarers’ rights and requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any temporary measures adopted in this regard, their duration and their impact on seafarers’ rights.

Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (No. 23)

Article 4 of the Convention. Entitlement to repatriation free of charge. Observing that the legislation referred to by the Government does not expressly guarantee the right to repatriation of seafarers in the event of shipwreck, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures adopted to give effect to Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to Decree No. 676/967 establishing rules on seafarers’ articles of agreement and repatriation, section 4 of which meets the requirements that the shipowner shall bear the return expenses of crew members, including everything related to the transportation, accommodation and maintenance of seafarers. The Committee takes note of this information.

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108)

Article 6 of the Convention. Permission to enter the territory for any seafarer holding a valid seafarer’s identity document. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the legislative provisions or the administrative regulations or instructions that guarantee the right of entry of seafarers holding identity documents issued by other countries, for temporary shore leave or for the purpose of joining a ship or transiting to join a ship in another country, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention. Observing that the Government has not provided information on this point, the Committee reiterates its request.

Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134)

Article 2, paragraphs (1)–(3) and Article 3 of the Convention. Statistics of occupational accidents. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to adopt the necessary measures to give effect to these requirements of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the State Insurance Bank statistics on accidents involving fishers on board ship. While taking note of this information and recalling that the Convention applies to any ship, other than a ship of war, registered in its territory, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that: (i) statistics are kept on all occupational accidents occurring to seafarers working on board ships covered by the Convention (Article 2); and (ii) that research is undertaken into the general trends and hazards brought out by the statistics (Article 3).

Article 5. Obligation of seafarers to comply with accident prevention provisions. Observing that Chapter II of Maritime Provision No. 17 of 11 October 1983 contains no binding recommendations to improve safety and health on board ships, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure mandatory compliance with the provisions governing accident prevention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Decree No. 406/988 of 3 June 1988 is the general provision on prevention for all activities for which there is no specific provision, as is the case with maritime labour. Recalling the need for legislation concerning the prevention of accidents to take into account the conditions specific to the maritime sector, the Committee requests the Government to take measures to give effect to Article 5 of the Convention.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents. In earlier comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Article 8 of the Convention in practice. Observing that the Government provides no new information, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to establish, in accordance with Article 8, national or local joint accident prevention committees or ad hoc working parties, on which both shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations are represented.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes that in its reports on the application of various maritime Conventions, the Government indicates that the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), is under study in the Tripartite Group on International Standards. In order to give an overall view of the issues needing attention in connection with the application of maritime Conventions, the Committee considers that they are best dealt with in a single set of comments, which is set out below.

Placing of Seamen Convention, 1920 (No. 9)

Articles 2–5 of the Convention. Recruitment agencies for seafarers. The Committee requested information on the law and practice pertaining to the operation of employment agencies for seafarers. It notes that the Government reports in this connection that the Register of Merchant Marine Personnel is responsible for placing seafarers free of charge, in accordance with Decree No. 463/968 of 23 July 1968.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Article 14(2) of the Convention. Certificate as to the quality of the seafarer’s work. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the seafarer has at all times the right to obtain from the master a separate certificate as to the quality of his/her work or, failing that, a certificate indicating whether the seafarer has fully discharged his/her obligations under the agreement. The Committee notes that the Government refers to Maritime Provision No. 16 of 25 October 1982 on seamen’s articles of agreement, which recalls that under Uruguayan law ratified international treaties are transposed into national provisions that are fully applied and take precedence over any provisions of domestic law that may afford lesser benefits or guarantees. The Committee concludes that Article 14(2) of the Convention, establishing that “the seaman shall at all times have the right … to obtain from the master a separate certificate as to the quality of his work or, failing that, a certificate indicating whether he has fully discharged his obligations under the agreement”, is part of Uruguayan law and that there is therefore no need to adopt other domestic provisions in order for it to apply.

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108)

Articles 2–4 of the Convention. Issuance of a seafarer’s identity document. In earlier comments, the Committee noted Maritime Provision No. 38 of 14 March 1988, which regulates the issuance of seafarers’ identity documents in accordance with the requirements of the Convention. While observing that the Government indicates that the Maritime Authority does not grant identity documents to seafarers, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures which it envisages to adopt in order to ensure that identity documents are issued in conformity with the requirements of Maritime Provision No. 38.

Article 5(2). Readmission to a territory. The Committee requested the Government to specify the provisions ensuring that a seafarer, holder of a seafarer’s identity document issued by the Uruguayan authorities, will be readmitted in Uruguay during a period of at least one year after the date of expiry indicated in that document. Observing that the Government has not provided information on this issue, the Committee requests it to specify how effect is given to Article 5(2) of the Convention.

Article 6. Permission to enter the territory for any seafarer holding a valid seafarer’s identity document. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the provisions ensuring the right of entry of seafarers holding valid seafarers’ identity documents issued by other countries, for temporary shore leave or for the purpose of joining a ship or transiting to join a ship in another country. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the documents certifying identity as a crew member are the crew member’s book, a passport identifying the holder as a seafarer or documentation showing the holder to be fit to serve on board. The Committee nonetheless observes that the Government specifies no provision guaranteeing the right of entry of seafarers holding seafarers’ identity documents issued by other countries. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions or the administrative regulations or instructions that guarantee the right of entry of seafarers holding identity documents issued by other countries, for temporary shore leave or for the purpose of joining a ship or transiting to join a ship in another country, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention.

The Committee recalls that the Convention has been revised by the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). It draws the Government’s attention to its general observation addressing the recent amendments to the annexes of Convention No. 185.

Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134)

Article 2(1)–(3) of the Convention. Statistics of occupational accidents. The Committee requested the Government to provide recent statistics of occupational accidents in the maritime sector. It notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that there are no specific statistics for all types of accidents. Recalling that according to the Convention, statistics must record the numbers, nature, causes and effects of occupational accidents, with a clear indication of the department on board ship and of the area where the accident occurred, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to compile statistics that meet the requirements of the Convention.

Article 3. Research. The Committee requested the Government to send information on the research under way into general trends relating to occupational accidents at sea and the particular hazards of maritime employment identified by the statistics gathered on the subject. The Committee notes that according to the Government, the Maritime Authority is not engaged in research into general trends in occupational accidents. Pointing out that according to the Convention research shall be undertaken into general trends and into such hazards as are brought out by statistics, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to Article 3 of the Convention.

Article 4(3)(h). Prevention of accidents. Dangerous cargo. The Committee requested the Government to indicate whether there are specific provisions on measures for the prevention of accidents that are peculiar to maritime employment that cover dangerous cargo. The Committee takes note of Maritime Provisions Nos 51 of 16 December 1996, 55 of 24 June 1997, 85 of 12 June 2002, 101 of 13 June 2005, 102 of 5 June 2005, 123 of 21 August 2009 and 153 of 12 October 2014, sent by the Government, and observes that they contain specific provisions on the prevention of accidents on board ships transporting dangerous cargo. The Committee further observes that Decree No. 158/985 of 25 April 1985 approves the Dangerous Goods Operations and Transport Regulations, which contain provisions on measures to prevent accidents caused by dangerous cargo. Lastly, the Committee notes the information from the Government to the effect that the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, and the International Safety Management (ISM) Code of the International Maritime Organization have been incorporated in Uruguay’s statutory law.

Article 4(3)(h). Prevention of accidents. Ballast. The Committee asked the Government to indicate the provisions that address the prevention of accidents in the handling of ballast. It takes note of the Maritime Provisions sent by the Government and observes that Maritime Provision No. 109 ALFA of 7 November 2006 refers to the safety of crew members and persons involved in the exchange of ballast water. However, this provision does not include measures for the prevention of accidents caused by ballast. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate whether any other provisions give effect to Article 4(3)(h) of the Convention.

Article 5. Obligation of seafarers to comply with accident prevention provisions. The Committee pointed out to the Government that Chapter II of Maritime Provision No. 17 of 11 October 1983 contains recommendations, which are not binding, to improve safety and health on board ships inter alia through the use of protective equipment. The Committee points out that according to the Convention, provisions on accident prevention must specify clearly the obligation of shipowners, seafarers and others concerned to comply with them. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure mandatory compliance with the provisions governing accident prevention, particularly those covering protective equipment.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents. The Committee requested the Government to indicate whether a committee had been set up in the maritime sector to formulate, implement and periodically review the national safety and health policy, as prescribed by Decree No. 291/007 of 13 August 2007. While noting the information supplied by the Government to the effect that since 2013 a sectoral committee has been in operation with a mandate to draft a standard for the prevention of occupational risks in the ports sector, the Committee observes that the abovementioned committee does not include representatives of shipowners and seafarers, and does not address the subject of on-board personnel. Recalling that the Convention requires the establishment of national or local joint accident prevention committees or ad hoc working parties on which both shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations are represented, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Article 8 of the Convention in practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 5(2) of the Convention. Readmission to territory. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report, in particular the adoption of Act No. 18.250 of 6 January 2008 on immigration. The Committee recalls that under Maritime Provision No. 38 of 14 March 2008 of the National Port Authority, the seafarer’s identity document has a period of validity of ten years. The Committee therefore requests the Government to specify the legislative provisions, administrative regulations or instructions that ensure that a seafarer will be readmitted to the country during a period of at least one year after the expiry of his/her identity document, as required by this Article of the Convention.

Article 6. Permission to enter the territory for shore leave, transit or transfer. Noting that under section 41 of Act No. 18.250, a passport is required to enter the country, the Committee recalls that under Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention, the seafarer’s identity document is the sole document needed for the seafarer to enter the country or another State party to the Convention and to return to the issuing State even after expiry. The principles of free admission to a territory (for purposes of shore leave) and right of return are not self-executing, but require specific measures by the competent authority for their implementation. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions, administrative regulations or instructions guaranteeing the right of entry of seafarers holding valid seafarers’ identity documents issued by other countries, for temporary shore leave or for the purpose of joining a ship or transiting to join a ship in another country.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee requests the Government to supply up-to-date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, statistical information on the number of seafarers’ identity documents issued during the reporting period, extracts from reports of the services entrusted with the enforcement of the relevant laws and regulations and any difficulties encountered in the application of the Convention.

Finally, the Committee takes the opportunity to recall that the Convention has been revised by the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185), which was adopted by the ILO to enhance port and border security, while at the same time facilitating the seafarer’s right to shore leave by developing a more secure and globally uniform seafarers’ identity document. In fact, Convention No. 185 complements actions taken within the framework of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) through the adoption of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS), sets out basic parameters regarding the content and form of the documents, and provides technical guidance in the Annexes in order to ensure that Members may easily adapt their systems while taking national circumstances into account. In this respect, the Committee wishes to refer to the summary of consensus achieved at the consultative meeting on Convention No. 185, held in Geneva on
23–24 September 2010, according to which “further ratifications and recognition of the seafarers’ identity document (SID) to facilitate shore leave are urgently needed, especially among port States” (see CSID/C.185/2010/4, p. 17). The Committee therefore invites the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying Convention No. 185 in the very near future and to keep the Office informed of any decisions taken in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also notes the observations made by the Inter-Union Assembly of Workers-National Convention of Workers (PIT-CNT). With reference to Part III of the report form, the Committee invites the Government to provide its response to these comments, to enable it to examine them in greater detail at its next session.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Convention. The Committee refers to its observation of 1978 in which it noted with satisfaction that both the boarding pass and the seafarer's book, which the Government forwarded at the time, contained the statement provided for in the above provision of the Convention, that they were seafarers' identity documents conforming to the provisions of the present Convention.

The Committee observes, however, that the specimen copy of the seafarer's book communicated by the Government with its last report, does not contain such a statement. It also notes that Maritime Provision No. 38, of 14 March 1988 of the National Ports Authority institutes a seafarer's identity document which, in accordance with Annex "Alfa", must contain, among other data, the statement that it is a national identity document conforming to Convention No. 108 of the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a specimen copy of this new identity document with its next report.