Is the Filipino seafarer a migrant worker?

ILastofthreeparts F we care enough for the Filipino seafarer, then let us try to understand why removing the STCW (Standards of Training, for Seafarers) functions from the Maritime Industry Authority ( Marina) at this point would compromise his standing in the seafaring global market.

I have said on many occasions that the STCW convention is one of the pillars of maritime safety, together with the International Convention on the Safety of Life at Sea (Solas) and the International Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol). The implementation and enforcement of these International Maritime Organization (IMO) instruments are primarily country of registry is obliged to and requirements of these three maritime conventions.

Marina’s core mandate includes taking charge of ship registration under the Philippine nationality to a ship is determined and passed upon by the agency in accordance with law and regulations adopted for such a purpose. The function of allow - tion of the seaworthiness of the ship at the time of its entry into the Philippine Register of Ships and during her operations as a

Marina relies on the provisions of the Solas, Marpol and STCW conventions and the corresponding regulations formulated to implement them. Therefore, it is but logical that these conventions are implemented by the maritime safety agency, which is also responsible for ship registration.

PH as flag-state and labor-supplying country

country’s flag are adequately manned according to the minimum safe manning and by accordance with the STCW con - gations, the Philippines has to consider the Solas requirement in determining the minimum number of crew and the STCW convention in respect of the edu of seafarers.

In giving effect to the provisions of the STCW convention, member-states are mindful of on their ships seafarers who are compliant with the requirements of the convention. In the case of the Philippines, it is presumed that the country endeavors to train and certify Filipino seafarers who shall man Philippine- flagged ships. As the number of Filipino seafar convention exceeds the demand of Philippine- flagged ships engaged in international voy in the requirements of foreignregistered ships, as well. From the perspective of the foreign country that employs Filipino seafarers, it is compelled by its that only STCW-compliant crew In case there are not enough seafarers to man the national the option to hire non-citizens.

The shortage of seafarers in many shipowning countries, like Norway, Japan and the Netherlands, works in favor of the Philippines, which for many years had been touted as the premier shipboard labor-supplying country. The Philippines must, - spective if it has to sustain being globally recognized as a source of STCW-compliant seafarers. This the country may not be able to do if it continues to train and certify Filipino seafarers detached from the objectives of the convention state of the ships hiring them.

Taking out the functions related to international seafaring from Marina to the proposed Department of Migration and Development (DMD) is the best formula to demolish the headway gained in promoting the Philippines as a provider of competent seafarers.

First, it gives an impression of instability in the implementation of the STCW convention, thus arousing suspicion on the ability to properly implement its provisions. Why should the implementation of the convention be transferred from the maritime administration to an agency in charge of migration?

Second, the transfer of the functions creates uncertainty among those called to train and certify Filipino seafarers as the regulatory framework shifts from one agency to another.

If the STCW functions are removed from Marina, it’s possible that policies, processes and regulations would be reviewed and even revised. The review would mean deferring existing plans to give way to the new agency’s mindset, thus slowing down progress in enhancing the STCW implementation. And based on the objectives of the proposed the implementation of the STCW convention would be supplanted by concerns for migrant workers.

Maritime Labor Convention 2006

The International Labor Organization ( ILO), the United Nations agency responsible for promoting the protection of the labor sector, including migrant workers, had developed and adopted multilateral instruments for seafarers apart from migrant workers. In fact, the migrant labor convention and several ILO recommendations have explicitly excluded seafarers from their coverage. More so now with the comprehensive Maritime Labor Convention of 2006 (MLC 2006), which consolidates all ILO instruments relating to guaranteeing the rights, protection and welfare of seafarers.

The draft national legislation to implement MLC 2006 is now the subject of deliberations in the Senate. The House of Representatives had endorsed to the Senate House Bill 5685, or the Magna Carta of Filipino Seafarers. The objectives of the bill creating the DMD is replicated in the various bills implementing MLC 2006, with the latter focused only on the protection of Filipino seafarers and which rightly exclude migrant workers. One can only imagine the resulting confusion if the DMD and the Magna Carta of Filipino Seafarers bills are enacted without the seafarers being deleted from the coverage of the former.

A friend from one Asian maritime country who has been keenly following the Philippines’ implementation of the STCW convention frankly observed: “Why can’t the Philippines put their acts together?”

Let us start putting our acts together by having that unity of purpose: of sustaining the Philippines’ position as the premier ship-board labour supplier by assuming the perspective of a flag- state in the training and