Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2011, publiée 101ème session CIT (2012)

Convention (n° 92) sur le logement des équipages (révisée), 1949 - Türkiye (Ratification: 2005)

Article 6(8) of the Convention. Fire prevention. While noting the information provided by the Government with regard to fire-prevention measures taken in ports, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any decisions taken by the competent authorities regarding the extent to which ship constructors are required to take fire-prevention or fire-retarding measures in the construction of crew accommodation, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention.

Article 10. Sleeping rooms. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that due to the navigational watch system employed on passenger ships, there is no need to separate daymen and watchkeepers. Recalling that the Convention applies to all ships of 500 GT or more, and not only to passenger ships, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any berthing arrangements reflecting Article 10(28). Furthermore, while noting that the Government’s report does not contain any information with regard to measures taken or envisaged in order to bring the national legislation into line with Article 10(8) and (9)(a), the Committee once more requests the Government to indicate any such actions taken or envisaged. Finally, with regard to Article 10(9)(d) and (10), the Committee refers the Government to its comments under the Accommodation of Crews (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1970 (No. 133).

Article 11. Mess rooms. The Committee once more requests the Government to indicate: (i) whether in practice, separate mess-room accommodation is provided in ships of 1,000 GT and over for deck department petty officers and other ratings as well as for engine department petty officers and other ratings (paragraph 3); (ii) whether adequate provisions for mess room accommodation for the catering department exists for ships of less than 5,000 GT (paragraph 4); and (iii) whether proper facilities for washing utensils are provided even where available pantries are not accessible to mess rooms and whether seats in the mess rooms are of a damp-resisting material capable of being easily cleaned (paragraphs 9 and 10). In this latter respect, the Committee recalls that the same requirements have been incorporated in Guideline B3.1.6(6) and (7) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006).

Article 13. Sanitary accommodation. The Committee once more requests the Government to take measures to: (i) prescribe the allocation of water closets to various groups of the crew (paragraphs 3 and 4); and (ii) ensure that all sanitary facilities are provided with soil pipes and water pipes of adequate dimensions and so constructed as to minimize the risk of obstruction and to facilitate cleaning (paragraph 10). In addition, the Government is requested to indicate whether in ships where the radio officers or operators are accommodated in an isolated position, provision is made for sanitary facilities near or adjacent thereto (paragraph 2(d)).

Article 14. Hospital accommodation. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legal provisions, if any, specifying that ships carrying 15 or more seafarers and engaged in a voyage of more than three days’ duration must provide separate hospital accommodation which is suitably situated and easily accessible. The Committee recalls that the same requirement is now reflected in Standard A3.1(12) of the MLC, 2006.

Articles 15 and 16. Specific crew accommodation requirements. Further to its previous comment, the Committee asks the Government to specify how it is ensured in national law and practice that: (i) sufficiently and adequately ventilated accommodation is provided outside of the sleeping rooms for the hanging of seafarers’ oilskins; (ii) in ships of over 3,000 GT, one room for the deck department and one room for the engine department are provided and equipped for use as an office; (iii) measures are taken to protect the crews’ quarters in ships regularly trading to mosquito-infested ports by the fitting of suitable screens to side scuttles, ventilators and doors to the open deck; and (iv) in the case of ships in which are employed such groups of ratings as necessitate the employment of a substantially larger number of ratings than would otherwise be employed, special arrangements are made to take account of distinctive national habits and customs, in particular concerning the number of persons occupying sleeping rooms and concerning mess rooms and sanitary facilities.

Article 17(2). Weekly inspections. While noting the Government’s indication that maintenance inspections are carried out by medical and port control teams as well as by the crew, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the provisions in the national legislation giving effect to this Article. The Committee recalls that the requirement for frequent inspections of the crew accommodation has been incorporated in Standard A3.1(18) of the MLC, 2006.

Part VI of the report form. Comments of workers’ organizations. The Committee notes the observations made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-İŞ) regarding the application of the Convention. TÜRK-İŞ considers that monetary fines for failing to comply with crew accommodation requirements are not sufficiently deterrent and should be combined with stricter sanctions such as ship detention. It also draws attention to the current system of filing complaints which requires a statement to be made before a public notary, an official from the Ministry of Health to be called in and a report to be drawn up under the supervision of the notary. TÜRK-İŞ states that this is a complicated and time-consuming procedure while there is no established mechanism for investigating such complaints. In addition, TÜRK-İŞ regrets that, when drafting regulations, the Government gives precedence to academic experts from the Maritime Academy while trade union organizations are consulted only once every ten or 20 years. Noting the lack of a consultative body bringing the social partners together to debate issues such as the designing of crew accommodation, TÜRK-İŞ suggests that a technical committee, consisting of representatives of seafarers’ unions, shipowners, governmental agencies and the Maritime Academy, should be established and that the views of the social partners should be sought once a year, having regard to the rapid developments in the shipping sector. The Committee requests the Government to transmit any comments it may wish to make in reply to the observations of TÜRK-İŞ.

Finally, the Committee recalls that most of the provisions of this Convention have been consolidated in Regulation 3.1, Standard A3.1 and Guideline B3.1 of the MLC, 2006, and therefore ensuring compliance with Convention No. 92 will facilitate the implementation of the corresponding requirements of the MLC, 2006. While noting the Government’s statement that preparations are currently under way for the ratification of the MLC, 2006, the Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any further developments in this respect.