Is the Filipino seafarer a migrant worker?

FSecondofthreeparts ILIPINO seafarers are professionals and skilled work - cordance with the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW). However, they experience conflicts not with their employers, per se, but with fellow seafarers on the ship. Physi seafarer’s workplace. In such cases, a grievance machinery is available onboard or, if absent, the matter is brought to the attention of the manning agency in the Philippines. A shipowner’s breach of an employment contract is cognizable by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), regardless of

Whatever their nationality, seafarers are provided ample protection with respect to the safety and security of the workplace (ships), based on internationally agreed standards formulated and adopted by the International Maritime Organization; work conditions; and fair terms of employment under the Maritime Labor Convention 2006 and other International Labor Organization-adopted instruments. The for seafarers in cases of sickness/ injury or abandonment by shipowners is also covered by international regulations.

The aforementioned circumstances may not exist for land- based migrant workers, though. The stories we often hear of these workers are the travails of those who work as the househelp of citizens of the country where the former are working. Often these involve workers who have not reached college and are, therefore, unable to understand their rights when they’re abused by their employers. There are those who are too timid to demand what is due them because they lack proper information

In cases of abuse, there is no immediate recourse available to the migrant worker, as the workplace is totally controlled by the employer, and access to communication is limited or totally unavailable to him or her. Leaving the abusive employer is not an easy option to take, as the worker’s travel documents are kept by the employer. The grievance process may not be accessible to landbased migrant workers, as the abuse takes place outside the jurisdiction of the Philippines.

And then there is also the matter Filipinos working overseas. Reports of those called to protect migrant workers being guilty of indifference to the struggles of overseas Filipino workers seeking assistance and, at times, being the perpetuators themselves are numerous. The struggles of land-based Filipino migrant workers poignantly remind all that overseas employment may not be as promising as is being projected. These are what capture the attention of many in the Philippines. Stories of abuse against Filipino migrant workers are what prompted plans to create the Department of Migration and Development (DMD).

Maritime stakeholders for the creation of DMD

In the recent congressional hearing held to consider the substitute bill on the creation of the DMD, maritime stakeholders expressed support for the measure’s enactment, but unanimously called for the exclusion of Filipinos seafarers from the coverage of the bill and of the provisions pertaining to international seafaring, specifically the transfer of STCW functions currently discharged by the Maritime Industry Authority ( Marina) and the National Maritime Polytechnic ( NMP) to the proposed department.

The proposal to exclude Filipino seafarers from the applica - ing the term “overseas Filipino worker” as to refer to a person engaged in a remunerated activity in a state, of which he or she is not a citizen. This means go Republic Act (RA) 8042, or the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995.

The evident difference in the circumstances of employment between land- based migrant workers and seafarers calls for a distinct set of legislation for the latter. After all, seafaring is one profession that is subject to both national and international regulatory regimes with the resulting effect of recognizing the seafarer’s competency and qualifications anywhere in the world.

The Marina functions relating to international seafaring mentioned in the bill undoubtedly refer to the implementation of the STCW convention, one of the pillars of maritime safety. The convention sets the standards for certifying a seafarer’s competence to perform his duties onboard, including that of watchkeeping. It is the preparatory phase of a seafarer’s career prior to deployment, before taking his remunerated duties onboard. The question, therefore, focuses on why the migration department should take cognizance of this preparatory stage in a seafarer’s profession, considering that there is no certainty about his employment onboard a ship trading internationally? A corollary question then comes to mind: Why are the education/ training and licensure requirements for other professions, such as nursing, accountancy and engineering, which may potentially provide overseas employment opportunities for Filipinos, not included in the bill? Why focus only on seafaring?

Any plan to remove the STCW functions from Marina should be cautiously assessed in light of the European Maritime Safety Administration’s (EMSA) ongoing audit of the Philippines’ implementation of the STCW convention. The manner in which the implementation of the convention is being tossed from one agency to another and vice versa through legislation casts doubt on the country’s ability to effectively implement the same. After all, it was only in 2015 when RA 10635 designated Marina as the only agency tasked to implement the convention. Such legislative determination is now being disturbed by plans to transfer the same to the DMD.

While other seafaring countries are intent on improving their capability to provide STCW- certified seafarers, the Philippines is still deciding on which agency is going to handle the disposition of the convention’s requirements. Efforts by Marina to perform its STCW functions are dissipated by responding to those who continue to challenge the agency’s role as the single administration for the STCW convention as provided under RA 10635. Why not let Marina discharge its STCW mandate for the sake of Filipino seafarers? Tobeconcluded