Seamen's Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22) - Panama (Ratification: 1970)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

See under Convention No. 8, as follows:

The Government has communicated the following information:

The Government has reactivated the Tripartite Maritime Labour Commission, which is responsible for dealing with the discrepancies in the application of Conventions Nos. 8, 22, 32. 53, 55, 68, 92 and 126 concerning seafarers' conditions of work; these discrepancies will be eliminated in due course. The Committee began its work in 1986 with the following agenda: (a) means of placing deck and engineering officers so that they may obtain the two years' experience on the high seas necessary to enter the practical experience programme for the Panama Canal; (b) training; (c) examination of a maritime labour Bill; (d) immediate measures for the placement of seafarers (officers and crew); (e) draft of the Planning Ministry (MIPPE) on strengthening the maritime sector; (f) study of a recommendation to the executive in favour of centralising everything to do with the maritime sector in one body.

Four working subcommittees have been created, namely: (a) subcommittee on the placement of seafarers; (b) subcommittee on wages, working time and bonuses; (c) subcommittee on the termination of employment; (d) subcommittee on safety and social welfare.

The results of the work of the these committees have been:

(1) a draft Bill has been prepared to grant tax incentives to owners of ships running international services which are registered in the National Merchant Marine and which hire deck and engineering officers of Panamanian nationality;

(2) a draft Bill to establish conditions for career advancement of officers in the Merchant Marine and regulate entry requirements, and lay down other provisions as to the training of officers.

Discussion of the third point on the agenda has now begun (i.e. a maritime labour Bill).

In addition, a Government representative said with reference to Article 5, paragraph 1 of Convention No. 53 (Officers' Certificates of Capacity) that Panama presently had an inspection system which, in one of its phases, was being carried out through the issue of certificates of competency seafarers and officials. For the issue of these certificates, a document was required certifying the capacity of the individual to work on the vessel. This inspection system also operated when port inspectors, the ship's captain or the ship's owners detected anomalies in the matter of certification, safety or any other breach of the Convention. In these cases, they could ask for an inspection by a consul of the Merchant Marine, who was to carry this out together with the Port Authority, the ship's captain or the ship's owners. With regard to paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the Convention, national legislation provided under Act. No. 2 of 1980 (Chapter XII) for the possibility of detaining vessels on account of a breach of the Convention. With regard to paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Convention, there was no specific procedure allowing for communication with consuls of the Merchant Marine when violations of the Convention's provisions were found. However, the normal channels of communication were used in these cases, giving rise to a consul's inspection in order to confirm the violation of the Convention and to take the necessary measures as required.

With regard to Convention No. 55 (Shipowners' Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen)) the interested parties had presented new versions of draft maritime labour legislation. The Tripartite Maritime Labour Commission, reactivated in August 1986, had among the items on its agenda the study of draft maritime labour legislation, including provisions that referred to this and other maritime Conventions. Panama had never ceased its efforts to achieve the adoption of the necessary regulations to give them full effect.

With regard to Convention No. 68 (Food and Catering (Ships' Crews)), the Government representative expressed her surprise that Panama had been invited to provide more information on the application of the Convention, when Panama appeared this year on the list of cases of progress for this and other maritime Conventions. Panama had established and applied satisfactory a whole new world-wide system of inspection of vessels of the Panamanian Merchant Marine in order to put into effect the regulations which apply Convention No. 68 as well as Conventions Nos. 92 (Accommodation of Crews (Revised)) and 126 (Accommodation of Crews (Fishermen)). After referring to the information which had been provided and providing statistical data on the inspections carried out in recent year (which had increased very appreciably), the speaker said that study guides were currently being prepared for the examinations for cooks and waiters, where exhaustive consideration would be given to the procedures for ensuring an adequate supply of food products and adequate catering. These would be forwarded to the ILO. The Government was aware that there were still measures to be taken in order to give full effect to the Convention. In future reports more information would be given concerning the matters raised by the Committee of Experts.

With regard to Convention No. 126 (Accommodation of Crews (Fishermen)), they had not made any further progress than had been indicated in the Government's last report, because of the priority given to the application of other maritime Conventions and related regulations. It was the Government's intention to find solutions gradually to the problems indicated by the Committee of Experts, within the bounds of their possibilities and in accordance with national conditions. Information would be provided on the measures adopted.

The Workers' members stressed the importance that the Conventions in question had for Panama, with its important fleet. Although there were still other measures to be taken, the Government had carried out a series of efforts (as the Government representative had indicated) in ordre to bring the legislation into full conformity with these Conventions. These efforts could be seen in particular with regard to the application of Convention No. 68, where the Committee of Experts had indicated a case of progress. This was a cause for satisfaction. The Committee of Experts had asked for information on the matters to be resolved, and had stressed the importance of the workers protected being aware of their rights. This information should be given to the people concerned at the time of their recruitment and throughout their period of employment, as well as through trade union organisations. Once the interested parties were aware of all those rights provided to them by the Conventions and by law, there was still the matter of implementation. When the workplace was a moving vessel, it was difficult to prove application, and hence the importance of inspection. Finally the Workers' members asked whether the ILO was still providing technical assistance to Panama concerning the application of maritime Conventions and, if not, how much assistance might be provided.

The Employers' members also stressed the importance of the four Conventions under consideration in the particular case of Panama. The progress made, as confirmed by the Committee of Experts, was a cause for satisfaction. Nevertheless, the Government should respond to certain questions raised by the Committee of Experts, and there were still problems to be solved. Convention No. 53 concerning competency certificates for officers dealt with very important matters on which the safety of many people depended. The issues covered by the other three Conventions under consideration were also very important. Progress had been made over the years on these issues, and this was cause for satisfaction. The Government representative had indicated with regard to certain questions that studies had to be carried out and with regard to others that it had not been possible to deal with these yet or that they would be the subject of gradual improvement. The recognition of the discrepancies between the legislation and the Conventions, and the statement by the Government representative, allowed for hope that the changes, the need of which was recognised by the Government, would become reality. The Government must be encouraged in this direction and also encouraged to send replies to the specific questions raised by the Committee of Experts, so that the latter would be able to note any progress made, and so that the Government could also be helped to see how there might be better application, albeit gradual, of the provisions of the Convention.

The Government representative gave the assurances that Panama would continue to make progress in the application of maritime Conventions. within the limits of its possibilities and national conditions, with regard to both legislation and practice.

The representative of the Secretary-General indicated that ILO technical assistance to Panama in the area of application of maritime Conventions had facilitated progress, and that this assistance would continue to be provided from both headquarters and the technical centres in Latin America.

With regard to Conventions Nos. 53 and 68, the Committee noted with interest from the information provided by the Government representative and the observations of the Committee of Experts that appreciable progress had been made in the application of Convention No. 53 and in particular of Convention No. 68. The Committee requested the Government to consider the adoption of further measures on the points raised by the Committee of Experts and expressed the hope that the Government would be able to report progress with a view to ensuring the full application of these Conventions in both law and practice.

With regard to Conventions Nos. 55 and 126, the Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative. The Committee expressed its hope that the work now being done by the Tripartite Maritime Labour Commission would soon enable the Government to take the necessary legislative or other measures on all the points raised in the comments of the Committee of Experts in order to ensure the full application of these Conventions.

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

The Committee notes with interest that on 6 February 2009, Panama has ratified the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), the entry into force of which in respect of Panama will result in the automatic denunciation, among others, of Convention No. 22. In this regard, it draws the Government’s attention to the fact that, while it is broader in scope, the MLC, 2006, contains similar provisions to those of Convention No. 22 with regard to the seafarer’s employment agreement. Consequently, the full application of Convention No. 22 will facilitate the application of the corresponding provisions of the MLC, 2006.

Articles 5 and 14(2) of the Convention. Documents containing a record of employment on board and giving an assessment of the quality of work of seafarers. The Committee notes that resolution No. 009-2001 of 12 February 2001 mentioned by the Government in a previous report, concerns certificates of competence and not certificates containing a record of the seafarer’s employment. It therefore requests the Government to indicate the provisions in force which regulate the issue to seafarers of a certificate mentioning their record of employment on board in the manner provided for in Article 5 of the Convention. Furthermore, the Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comment concerning the implementation of Article 14(2) of the Convention, the Government refers to section 128(14) of the Labour Code, under which employers are required to provide workers free of charge, during the employment relationship and upon termination thereof, with a certificate indicating their period of service, the type of work or services carried out and the remuneration received every time. It recalls that the Convention requires the issue to the seafarer, on his/her request, of a separate certificate as to the quality of the work or, failing that, a certificate indicating whether the seafarer has fully discharged his/her obligations under the agreement for the purpose of facilitating the access to other employment. The document provided for under section 128 of the Labour Code contains no information concerning the quality of the work carried out by the worker concerned, but instead provides for the indication of his/her wages, even though this is not provided for under Article 14(2) of the Convention, and is in fact prohibited in the document referred to in Article 5 of the Convention. Consequently, the Committee invites the Government to consider the possibility of ensuring the issue to the seafarer, on his/her request, of a certificate in accordance with the provisions of Article 14(2) of the Convention.

Article 9(2). Notice. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative or regulatory provisions under which the notice given by the shipowner shall be given in writing in the case of the termination of an agreement for an indefinite period, as required under this Article of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including, for instance, extracts from the reports of the inspection and registration services and, if possible, details of the number of seafarers signed on each year, the number and type of violations of the provisions of the national legislation giving effect to the Convention, as well as the measures taken to remedy them.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the information communicated by the Government in its report. It draws the Government’s attention to the following point.

Article 5 and Article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Documents to be issued to seafarers. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to amend the legislation so that the observation as to the performance of the work of seafarers would no longer appear in the certificate of service issued to them. The Government indicates that Resolution No. 603-04-150 ALCN of 16 July 1986, which envisaged the issuing of this type of certificate, has been repealed. At present, seafarers employed aboard vessels flying the Panamanian flag receive only a titulo idóneo from the Panamanian authorities, a certificate setting forth the duties and responsibilities that the holder will be required to assume and which contains no statement as to the quality of his work. The Committee recalls that, under Article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, in addition to this certificate, the seafarer 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. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government, once again, to take the necessary measures to give full effect to this provision and thus to ensure that all seafarers employed aboard vessels flying the Panamanian flag may receive, at the end of their contracts, a separate document containing a statement as to the quality of the work performed.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It requests the Government to provide further information on the following points.

Articles 5 and 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention. The Committee notes that under article 1 of resolution No. 603-07-04-ALCN of 15 July 1986 every member of the crew of ships belonging to the National Merchant Fleet shall possess a Certificate of Service. The Committee further notes that article 2(h) of the said resolution includes "observation as to the performance of the work" among the requirements to the content of such Certificate. The Committee recalls that under Article 5, paragraph 2, of the Convention the document given to a seaman containing a record of his employment on board the vessel shall not contain any statement as to the quality of the seaman’s work or as to his wages. The Committee trusts that the Government will take all necessary measures in order to bring article 2 of resolution No. 603-07-04-ALCN into conformity with the requirements of the Convention. Please also supply a sample of the Certificate of Service.

Article 13. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to indicate the provisions of national law which give effect to this Article of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the national legislation does not regulate the issue of claiming discharge by the seafarer under the condition of furnishing a competent and reliable man in his place. Instead, the Government refers to dispensations granted under article 8 of resolution J.D. 009-01 of 12 February 2001 by the Directorate General of Seafarers. Recalling that the underlying purpose of Article 13 of the Convention is not to provide for exceptions from the certification requirements, but to allow a seaman to take his discharge through furnishing a replacement, the Committee trusts that the Government will take necessary measures in order to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and in particular Law Decree No. 8 of 26 February 1998 (hereafter "the Law Decree") - Regulations in respect of maritime labour at sea and on waterways.

It requests the Government to provide further information and clarification on the application in law and in practice of the Convention on the following points.

Scope of application of the Convention

Article 2(a) of the Convention.  With regard to the status of maritime workers as crew members, and the exclusions set forth in paragraph 2 of article 3(b) of the Law Decree, the Committee requests the Government to indicate which auxiliary service workers are not considered as crew and in what capacity they serve on the vessel.

Formalities and safeguards in completing the articles

Article 3, paragraphs 1, 2, and 4, and Article 15 of the Convention.  The Committee requests the Government to indicate how, in practice, it ensures effective and adequate supervision by the competent public authority of the conditions under which the seafarer signs the agreement, in particular when the agreement is concluded with foreign seafarers through the intermediary of manning or crewing agencies in Panama and abroad. With regard to paragraph 4, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the provisions of national law which ensure that seafarers, especially foreign seafarers, have understood the terms and conditions of the agreement and how in practice this is verified.

Jurisdiction over the agreement

Article 4 of the Convention.  The Committee notes the provisions of section II, Chapter 11, of the Law Decree concerning the applicability of principles of private international law to contracts concerning maritime labour relations. With regard to respecting the ordinary rules of jurisdiction over the agreement, as provided in this Article of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate (i) whether the jurisdiction and applicable law governing articles of agreement for work on Panama-flag ships are that of Panama, and (ii) whether litigation by foreign seafarers relating to work performed on Panama-flag vessels is necessarily justiciable before Panamanian courts.

The Committee notes that the Government has not indicated the legislative texts implementing these provisions and requests it to provide this along with copies of any standard Panamanian articles of agreement.

Record of sea service

Articles 5 and 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention.  The Committee notes from the Government’s report that in partial application of this Article, the sea service record is in practice included in the seafarer’s identity document (Carnet de Oficial o Marino), which the Committee further notes is issued pursuant to another ILO Convention, No. 108, and ratified by Panama. However, issuance of the identity document to foreign seafarers is not a requirement under that Convention, and Convention No. 22 requires that a document containing the sea service record (without mention of wages or quality of work) be issued to each seafarer. In addition to the obligatory document, Article 14(2) provides that the seafarer is entitled, if requested, to a separate certificate referring to the quality of work/fulfilment of obligations under the agreement.

The Committee considers that this requirement for separate documents cannot be met by including pages in an identity document which is not a conventional entitlement for foreign seafarers (who may already have an identity document issued by another State and with a different form) and in which there are pages for observations which could be used to refer to the quality of work or wages. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to bring its legislation into conformity with Articles 5 and 14(2) of the Convention.

Shipboard information as to conditions of employment

Article 8 of the Convention.  The Committee requests the Government to indicate the national legislation giving effect to this Articleand the means for the seafarer on board the vessel to obtain clear information as to the nature and extent of his rights and obligations under the articles.

Seafarer claiming discharge and providing replacement

Article 13 of the Convention.  The Committee notes the repeal of articles 251-278 of Cabinet Decree No. 252 of 30 December 1971 which previously gave effect to this provision, and requests the Government to indicate the provisions of national law which presently give effect to this Articleof the Convention.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and in particular Law Decree No. 8 of 26 February 1998 - Regulations in respect of maritime labour at sea and on waterways.

With regard to the application of substantive provisions of the Convention, in particular the scope of application; formalities and safeguards in completing the Articles; jurisdiction over the agreement; records of sea service; shipboard information as to conditions of employment; and the seafarer claiming his discharge, the Committee is addressing a direct request to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the adoption of Legislative Decree No. 8 of 26 February 1998 issuing the Regulations respecting maritime labour at sea and on waterways. It also notes Legislative Decree No. 7 of 26 February 1998 establishing the Maritime Authority of Panama, unifying various maritime functions of the public administration and adopting other provisions. The Committee requests the Government to supply detailed information on the application in law and practice of each of the Articles of the Convention, with particular reference to Articles 3, paragraph 4, and 9, paragraph 1, which had been the subject of its previous comments.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the Government's reports indicating that the draft text of the Labour Act respecting navigable seaways and waterways has not yet been adopted. It trusts that the Government will take into consideration the comments it has been making for several years and that the text will be adopted as soon as possible and thus ensure the application of Articles 3, paragraph 4 (understanding of the terms of the contract) and 9, paragraph 1 (termination of an agreement for an indefinite period by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads) of the Convention. To this end, it hopes that section 257 of the Labour Code, which provides that the parties cannot terminate an employment agreement, even for just cause, while the ship is in voyage, that is when it is at sea or in any national or foreign port which is not the port of boarding or the port of engagement in Panama, will be repealed.

[The Government is invited to submit a detailed report in 1996.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

With reference to its previous observation, the Committee takes note of the preliminary draft on employment in the merchant marine provided by the Government with its report. The Committee notes with interest that the Bill allows a contract for an indefinite period to be terminated in any port (section 45), in accordance with Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention, provided, however, that notice of a period of at least the duration of the last voyage has been given. The Committee would be grateful if, in its next report, the Government would state whether the legislation defines the term "voyage" and would indicate the average duration of a voyage bearing in mind present navigation conditions. The Committee trusts that the enactment of the Bill will be completed by the repeal of section 257 of the Labour Code which prohibits the termination of a contract in ports other than the port of engagement. However, the Bill does not appear to make provision to ensure that the seaman has understood the agreement (Article 3, paragraph 4). The Committee hopes that it will be possible for an appropriate clause to be inserted into the Bill and that the Government's next report will contain information on progress made in this respect.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

With reference to its previous observation, the Committee takes note of the preliminary draft on employment in the merchant marine provided by the Government with its report. The Committee notes with interest that the Bill allows a contract for an indefinite period to be terminated in any port (section 45), in accordance with Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention, provided, however, that notice of a period of at least the duration of the last voyage has been given. The Committee would be grateful if, in its next report, the Government would state whether the legislation defines the term "voyage" and would indicate the average duration of a voyage bearing in mind present navigation conditions. The Committee trusts that the enactment of the Bill will be completed by the repeal of section 257 of the Labour Code which prohibits the termination of a contract in ports other than the port of engagement.

However, the Bill does not appear to make provision to ensure that the seaman has understood the agreement (Article 3, paragraph 4). The Committee hopes that it will be possible for an appropriate clause to be inserted into the Bill and that the Government's next report will contain information on progress made in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Further to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in 1987 to the effect that the Tripartite Maritime Labour Committee, responsible, inter alia, for settling any discrepancies brought to its attention in the application of the present Convention, has been reactivated. The Committee hopes that any measures adopted as a result of the work of the Tripartite Committee will take account of the provisions of Article 9, paragraph 1 (possibility for either party of terminating an agreement for an indefinite period in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that notice of not less than 24 hours has been given), and of Article 3, paragraph 4 (provision to ensure that the seafarer has understood the agreement), of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1988, published 75th ILC session (1988)

Further to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in 1987 to the effect that the Tripartite Maritime Labour Committee, responsible, inter alia, for settling any discrepancies brought to its attention in the application of the present Convention, has been reactivated. The Committee hopes that any measures adopted as a result of the work of the Tripartite Committee will take account of the provisions of Article 9, paragraph 1 (possibility for either party of terminating an agreement for an indefinite period in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that notice of not less than 24 hours has been given), and of Article 3, paragraph 4 (provision to ensure that the seafarer has understood the agreement), of the Convention.