Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166) - France (Ratification: 2004)

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes that most of the provisions of the Maritime Labour Code relating to the repatriation of seafarers have been repealed, and that this matter is now regulated by the Transport Code. It observes that section L5511-1 of the Transport Code distinguishes between seafarers – who must meet professional qualifications and physical fitness, and whose employment is in connection with the navigation, steering, maintenance, and operation of the ship – and mariners, the latter including also unqualified persons as seamen who carry on board a ship, professional activity related to its operation. It notes that sections L5542-29 to L5542-33 of the Transport Code regulate the repatriation of seamen. It further notes that, under section L5549-1 of the Code, the shipowner must also ensure the repatriation of personnel not engaged in the maritime profession under the conditions and arrangements provided for under sections L5542-29, L5542-30 and L5542-33. While noting that the application of section L5542-31 relating to different types of repatriation costs borne by the shipowner and to the seafarer’s choice as to repatriation destinations has not been extended to mariners, and while recalling that under Article 1(4) of the Convention, the term “seafarer” means any person who is employed in any capacity on board a seagoing ship to which this Convention applies, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the provisions applicable on this matter. In addition, the Committee notes that section L5612-6 of the Transport Code makes the provisions of this Code relating to individual employment relationships, especially with regard to repatriation, applicable to crew members resident in France and employed on board ships registered in the French International Register (RIF). Recalling that according to its Article 1(1), the Convention applies to every seagoing ship whether publicly or privately owned which is registered in the territory of any Member for which the Convention is in force and which is ordinarily engaged in commercial maritime navigation, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how the right to repatriation of seafarers, who are not French residents and who are employed on board ships registered on the RIF, is regulated.

Article 3(2). Repatriation destinations. The Committee notes with satisfaction that section 119 of the Maritime Labour Code, which established rules less favourable for foreign seafarers as regards the possible repatriation destinations, has been repealed by the legislative part of the Transport Code.

Article 4(1). Arrangements for repatriation. The Committee notes that the Transport Code has not reproduced the provision of section 88(2) of the Maritime Labour Code, which provided that repatriation should be carried out by appropriate and expeditious means, the normal mode of transport being by air. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how the application of this provision of the Convention is now ensured. It recalls, in this connection, that Guideline B2.5.1(6) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), which revises the present Convention, also provides that the normal mode of transport should be by air.

Article 4(2) and (5). Repatriation costs. The Committee notes with satisfaction that section 85 of the Maritime Labour Code, which allowed the shipowner to be absolved from the obligation to arrange for and cover the cost of repatriation by paying a lump sum to the competent authority, has been repealed. It also notes that the Government intends to eliminate the notion of the seafarer’s non-excusable fault as a ground permitting the shipowner to be released from his obligations with respect to repatriation. In addition, the Committee recalls its previous comment in connection with the provisions of Maritime Labour Code stipulating that the coverage of the repatriation costs in the case of a seafarer who disembarks during a voyage after termination of the contract by mutual consent of the parties is regulated by common agreement. It observes that this provision has been reproduced in section L5542-33 of the Transport Code and draws the Government's attention to the fact that the Convention requires the repatriation costs to be borne by the shipowner except in case of serious default of his/her employment obligations. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure the full conformity of the legislation with the Convention on this point. It notes, in this regard, that same requirement for shipowners has been incorporated in Standard A2.5(3) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 4(4)(c). Cost of repatriation. Seafarer’s pay and allowances. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not address the question raised by the Committee in its previous direct request on this point. It therefore requests the Government to indicate whether measures have been taken by law or collective agreement to ensure that repatriated seafarers receive their remuneration and allowances from the moment they leave the ship until they reach the repatriation destination.

Article 4(4)(d). Cost of repatriation. Transportation of personal luggage. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any indication as regards the cost of transporting the seafarer’s personal luggage of the repatriated seafarer and notes that the Transport Code does not address this issue. The Committee hopes that the Government will take measures to ensure that the cost of transportation of 30 kg of the seafarer’s personal luggage to the repatriation destination is to be borne by the shipowner, as required under this Article of the Convention. It observes that Guideline B2.5.1(3)(d) of the MLC, 2006, also includes the transportation of 30 kg of luggage among the repatriation costs to be borne by the shipowner.

Article 4(4)(e). Cost of repatriation. Medical treatment. The Committee notes with satisfaction that sections 82 and 82bis of the Maritime Labour Code, which limited the shipowner’s liability in respect of medical treatment of the repatriated seafarer, have been repealed.

Article 5(a). Responsibility of the flag State. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the penal sanctions applicable to the shipowner who fails to meet his obligations with regard to repatriation. It also notes that the Government set up in 2002 an emergency assistance system to organize the repatriation of seafarers forming part of the crew of a ship flying French flag and calling at a French port. It notes with interest the efforts of the French Immigration and Integration Office with respect to the repatriation of seafarers abandoned in French ports. However, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the same emergency assistance system makes arrangements for the repatriation also when the shipowner of a ship registered in France and calling at a foreign port fails to meet his obligations with regard to repatriation.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government considers amending the Transport Code with a view to introducing an obligation to make the text of the Convention available to the crew, in an appropriate language, on all vessels registered in France. It recalls, in this connection, that according to Standard A5.1.1(2) of the MLC, 2006, each Member party to this Convention must require all ships that fly its flag to have a copy of the Convention. In addition, under Standard A2.5(9), each Member must require that ships that fly its flag carry and make available to seafarers a copy of the applicable national provisions regarding repatriation, written in an appropriate language.

Recalling that the Government continues to be bound by the provisions of the present Convention until the MLC, 2006, enters into force for France, the Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any new development concerning the ratification and implementation of the MLC, 2006, in light of the EU Council decision of 2007 authorizing EU Member States to ratify it.