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

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

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notes that most of the provisions of the Maritime Labour Code relating to the repatriation of seafarers have been repealed, and that this matter is now regulated by the Transport Code.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.

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 3(2) of the Convention. Destinations for repatriation. The Committee notes that even though section 88(1) of the Maritime Labour Code lists the choice of destinations available to French seafarers for the purposes of repatriation, section 119 of this Code, applicable to foreign seafarers employed on board vessels registered in France, provides that the shipowner will be deemed to have met his/her obligation regarding repatriation if foreign seafarers are brought back to their port of embarkation. Since most seafarers on board French vessels are foreigners, this clause might, to a large extent, release shipowners from their obligations under the Convention. The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to any person employed on board ship, irrespective of his/her nationality, and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that foreign seafarers too can choose the destination to which they wish to be repatriated, in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 4(2). Cost of repatriation. The Committee notes that section 89 of the Maritime Labour Code states that the cost of repatriation shall be borne by the shipowner. However, section 85 of this Code provides for the possibility of the shipowner being released from the obligation to cover the cost of medical care and repatriation by paying a flat-rate sum to the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority at the time the seafarer is brought ashore. However, under the terms of the Convention, a shipowner can only be released from the obligation to pay the cost of repatriation when there is a serious breach of employment obligations on the part of the seafarer. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the shipowner is only released from bearing the cost of repatriation of the seafarer under the conditions prescribed by the Convention. It also requests the Government to supply information on the application of section 85 of the Maritime Labour Code in practice.

Article 4(4)(c). Cost of repatriation and seafarers’ pay and allowances. The Committee recalls that under the provisions of this Article of the Convention, where it is provided for by national legislation or collective agreements, the costs to be borne by the shipowner must include the seafarer’s pay and allowances from the moment he or she leaves the ship until he or she reaches the repatriation destination. It notes, however, that the Maritime Labour Code does not contain this requirement. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the payment of the seafarer’s remuneration and allowances is provided for by collective agreement.

Article 4(4)(d). Cost of repatriation and transportation of personal luggage. The Committee notes that section 88(2) of the Maritime Labour Code provides that repatriation does not include the provision of clothing. This is distinct from the requirement of the Convention, which provides that repatriation costs must also include the transportation of 30 kg of the seafarer’s personal luggage. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that repatriation costs include such transportation of luggage, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

Article 4(4)(e). Repatriation costs and medical treatment. The Committee notes that under sections 82 and 82bis of the Maritime Labour Code, any seafarer who has disembarked or is ill or injured outside metropolitan France and who is repatriated by the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority shall receive a daily food allowance, the amount of which shall be fixed by the articles of agreements or otherwise according to the customary procedures of the port of disembarkation, and shall be reimbursed on provision of supporting documentation for his or her medical and pharmaceutical expenses up to the amount fixed by the courts, “if it is recognized that the seafarer still requires medical care after repatriation”. Section 85 of the Code also provides for the possibility of the shipowner being released from the obligation to cover the cost of medical care and repatriation by paying a flat-rate sum to the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority at the time the seafarer is put ashore. However, under the provisions of the Convention, the shipowner must cover the cost of repatriation of seafarers, including the cost of medical treatment for a seafarer who has disembarked pending repatriation. The Committee requests the Government: (i) to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the cost of medical treatment is covered by the shipowner until the seafarer’s state of health allows him or her to travel to the repatriation destination; and (ii) to provide information on the use in practice of the option to pay the flat-rate sum in lieu of covering the cost of repatriation.

Article 4(5). Payment of the cost of repatriation by the seafarer. The Committee notes that the Maritime Labour Code provides that the shipowner may not require the seafarer to share the cost of repatriation except in cases involving serious misconduct or further to an injury or illness intentionally caused by the seafarer. Section 90(1) of this Code provides, however, that the coverage of the cost of repatriation in respect of a seafarer who disembarks during a voyage after termination of a contract at the mutual request of the parties is governed by an agreement reached by those parties. Under the provisions of this section, the seafarer could therefore be required to cover part of the cost. The Committee therefore requests the Government to explain whether there have been cases in practice in which the termination of the contract has been decided upon by joint agreement between the shipowner and the seafarer, and to indicate the manner in which the cost of repatriation has been shared.

Article 10. Repatriation and replacement of seafarers serving on ships calling at ports or passing through territorial or internal waters. The Committee notes that with regard to the application of this Article, the Government refers to the provisions applicable to seafarers in transit and in particular to the application of the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). Since the Government does not refer to the provisions of the national legislation in question and the first report concerning this Convention has not yet been submitted, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures intended to facilitate the repatriation and replacement of seafarers serving on ships which call at ports in France or pass through French territorial or internal waters.

Article 11 of the Convention and Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention. The Committee notes the Governments’ indication that the enforcement of the provisions of the Convention comes under the competence of the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority. Such enforcement covers all aspects of conditions of employment, work and life on board. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on shipowners’ compliance with obligations relating to repatriation as required by this Article of the Convention. It also requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention and the number and nature of infringements reported.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention. The Committee recalls that under the provisions of this Article, and with a view to allowing seafarers to know their rights, the text of the Convention must be available in an appropriate language to the crew members on board. Since the national legislation and the report do not contain any information on the implementation of these provisions, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the text of the Convention is available in an appropriate language to the crew members of all ships registered in France.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the Government’s communication that, due to internal administrative constraints related to preparations for ratification of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, the services in charge of reporting on maritime Conventions were unable to submit the reports on time and will make efforts to communicate them to the Office as soon as possible. In the meantime, the Committee is bound to repeat its previous comment, which read as follows:

Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Destinations for repatriation. Even though section 88(1) of the Maritime Labour Code, in conformity with the provisions of the abovementioned paragraph, lists the choice of destinations available to French seafarers for the purposes of repatriation, section 119 of this Code, applicable to foreign seafarers employed on board vessels registered in France, states that the shipowner will be deemed to have met his obligation regarding repatriation if foreign seafarers are brought back to their port of embarkation. Since most seafarers on board French vessels are foreigners, this clause might, to a large extent, release shipowners from their obligations under the Convention. The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to any person employed on board ship, irrespective of his nationality, and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that foreign seafarers too can choose the destination to which they wish to be repatriated, in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 2. Cost of repatriation. Section 89 of the Maritime Labour Code states that the cost of repatriation shall be borne by the shipowner. However, section 85 of this Code provides for the possibility of the shipowner being released from the obligation to cover the cost of medical care and repatriation by paying a flat-rate sum to the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority at the time the seafarer is brought ashore. However, under the terms of the Convention, a shipowner can only be released from the obligation to pay the cost of repatriation when there is a serious breach of employment obligations on the part of the seafarer. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the shipowner is only released from bearing the cost of repatriation of the seafarer under the conditions prescribed by the Convention. It also requests the Government to supply information on the use of section 85 of the Maritime Labour Code in practice.

Article 4, paragraph 4(c). Cost of repatriation and seafarers’ pay and allowances. Under the provisions of this Article of the Convention, where it is provided for by national legislation or collective agreements, the costs to be borne by the shipowner must include the seafarer’s pay and allowances from the moment he or she leaves the ship until he or she reaches the repatriation destination. The Maritime Labour Code does not contain this requirement. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the payment of the seafarer’s remuneration and allowances is provided for by collective agreement.

Article 4, paragraph 4(d). Cost of repatriation and transportation of personal luggage. Section 88(2) of the Maritime Labour Code states that repatriation does not include the provision of clothing. This is distinct from the requirement of the Convention, which provides that repatriation costs must also include the transportation of 30 kg of the seafarer’s personal luggage. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that repatriation costs include such transportation of luggage, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 4(e). Repatriation costs and medical treatment. Under sections 82 and 82bis of the Maritime Labour Code, any seafarer who has disembarked or is ill or injured outside metropolitan France and who is repatriated by the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority shall receive a daily food allowance, the amount of which shall be fixed by the articles of agreements or otherwise according to the customary procedures of the port of disembarkation, and shall be reimbursed on provision of supporting documentation for his or her medical and pharmaceutical expenses up to the amount fixed by the courts, “if it is recognized that the seafarer still requires medical care after repatriation”. Section 85 of the Code also provides for the possibility of the shipowner being released from the obligation to cover the cost of medical care and repatriation by paying a flat-rate sum to the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority at the time the seafarer is put ashore. However, under the provisions of the Convention, the shipowner must cover the cost of repatriation of seafarers, including the cost of medical treatment for a seafarer who has disembarked pending repatriation. The Committee requests the Government: (i) to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the cost of medical treatment is covered by the shipowner until the seafarer’s state of health allows him or her to travel to the repatriation destination; and (ii) to provide information on the use in practice of the option to pay the flat-rate sum in lieu of covering the cost of repatriation.

Article 4, paragraph 5. Payment of the cost of repatriation  by the seafarer. The Maritime Labour Code states that the shipowner may not require the seafarer to share the cost of repatriation except in cases involving serious misconduct or further to an injury or illness intentionally caused by the seafarer. Section 90(1) of this Code states, however, that the coverage of the cost of repatriation in respect of a seafarer who disembarks during a voyage after termination of a contract at the mutual request of the parties is governed by an agreement reached by those parties. Under the provisions of this section, the seafarer could therefore be required to cover part of the cost. The Committee therefore requests the Government to state whether there have been cases in practice in which the termination of the contract has been decided upon by joint agreement between the shipowner and the seafarer, and to indicate the manner in which the cost of repatriation has been shared.

Article 10. Repatriation and replacement of seafarers serving on ships calling at ports or passing through territorial or internal waters. With regard to the application of this Article, the Government refers to the provisions applicable to seafarers in transit and in particular to the application of the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). Since the Government does not refer to the provisions of the national legislation in question and the first report concerning this Convention has not yet been submitted, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures intended to facilitate the repatriation and replacement of seafarers serving on ships which call at ports in France or pass through French territorial or internal waters.

Article 11 and Part V of the report form. Statistical information. The Government indicates that the enforcement of the provisions of the Convention comes under the competence of the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority. Such enforcement covers all aspects of conditions of employment, work and life on board. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on shipowners’ compliance with obligations relating to repatriation as required by this Article of the Convention. It also requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, the number and nature of infringements reported, etc.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention. Under the provisions of this Article, and with a view to allowing seafarers to know their rights, the text of the Convention must be available in an appropriate language to the crew members on board. Since the national legislation and the report do not contain any information on the implementation of these provisions, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the text of the Convention is available in an appropriate language to the crew members of all ships registered in France.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its first report. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Destinations for repatriation. Even though section 88(1) of the Maritime Labour Code, in conformity with the provisions of the abovementioned paragraph, lists the choice of destinations available to French seafarers for the purposes of repatriation, section 119 of this Code, applicable to foreign seafarers employed on board vessels registered in France, states that the shipowner will be deemed to have met his obligation regarding repatriation if foreign seafarers are brought back to their port of embarkation. Since most seafarers on board French vessels are foreigners, this clause might, to a large extent, release shipowners from their obligations under the Convention. The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to any person employed on board ship, irrespective of his nationality, and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that foreign seafarers too can choose the destination to which they wish to be repatriated, in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 2. Cost of repatriation. Section 89 of the Maritime Labour Code states that the cost of repatriation shall be borne by the shipowner. However, section 85 of this Code provides for the possibility of the shipowner being released from the obligation to cover the cost of medical care and repatriation by paying a flat-rate sum to the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority at the time the seafarer is brought ashore. However, under the terms of the Convention, a shipowner can only be released from the obligation to pay the cost of repatriation when there is a serious breach of employment obligations on the part of the seafarer. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the shipowner is only released from bearing the cost of repatriation of the seafarer under the conditions prescribed by the Convention. It also requests the Government to supply information on the use of section 85 of the Maritime Labour Code in practice.

Article 4, paragraph 4(c). Cost of repatriation and seafarers’ pay and allowances. Under the provisions of this Article of the Convention, where it is provided for by national legislation or collective agreements, the costs to be borne by the shipowner must include the seafarer’s pay and allowances from the moment he or she leaves the ship until he or she reaches the repatriation destination. The Maritime Labour Code does not contain this requirement. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the payment of the seafarer’s remuneration and allowances is provided for by collective agreement.

Article 4, paragraph 4(d). Cost of repatriation and transportation of personal luggage. Section 88(2) of the Maritime Labour Code states that repatriation does not include the provision of clothing. This is distinct from the requirement of the Convention, which provides that repatriation costs must also include the transportation of 30 kg of the seafarer’s personal luggage. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that repatriation costs include such transportation of luggage, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 4(e). Repatriation costs and medical treatment. Under sections 82 and 82bis of the Maritime Labour Code, any seafarer who has disembarked or is ill or injured outside metropolitan France and who is repatriated by the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority shall receive a daily food allowance, the amount of which shall be fixed by the articles of agreements or otherwise according to the customary procedures of the port of disembarkation, and shall be reimbursed on provision of supporting documentation for his or her medical and pharmaceutical expenses up to the amount fixed by the courts, “if it is recognized that the seafarer still requires medical care after repatriation”. Section 85 of the Code also provides for the possibility of the shipowner being released from the obligation to cover the cost of medical care and repatriation by paying a flat-rate sum to the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority at the time the seafarer is put ashore. However, under the provisions of the Convention, the shipowner must cover the cost of repatriation of seafarers, including the cost of medical treatment for a seafarer who has disembarked pending repatriation. The Committee requests the Government: (i) to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the cost of medical treatment is covered by the shipowner until the seafarer’s state of health allows him or her to travel to the repatriation destination; and (ii) to provide information on the use in practice of the option to pay the flat-rate sum in lieu of covering the cost of repatriation.

Article 4, paragraph 5. Payment of the cost of repatriation  by the seafarer. The Maritime Labour Code states that the shipowner may not require the seafarer to share the cost of repatriation except in cases involving serious misconduct or further to an injury or illness intentionally caused by the seafarer. Section 90(1) of this Code states, however, that the coverage of the cost of repatriation in respect of a seafarer who disembarks during a voyage after termination of a contract at the mutual request of the parties is governed by an agreement reached by those parties. Under the provisions of this section, the seafarer could therefore be required to cover part of the cost. The Committee therefore requests the Government to state whether there have been cases in practice in which the termination of the contract has been decided upon by joint agreement between the shipowner and the seafarer, and to indicate the manner in which the cost of repatriation has been shared.

Article 10. Repatriation and replacement of seafarers serving on ships calling at ports or passing through territorial or internal waters. With regard to the application of this Article, the Government refers to the provisions applicable to seafarers in transit and in particular to the application of the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). Since the Government does not refer to the provisions of the national legislation in question and the first report concerning this Convention has not yet been submitted, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures intended to facilitate the repatriation and replacement of seafarers serving on ships which call at ports in France or pass through French territorial or internal waters.

Article 11 and Part V of the report form. Statistical information. The Government indicates that the enforcement of the provisions of the Convention comes under the competence of the Maritime Labour Inspection Authority. Such enforcement covers all aspects of conditions of employment, work and life on board. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on shipowners’ compliance with obligations relating to repatriation as required by this Article of the Convention. It also requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, the number and nature of infringements reported, etc.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention. Under the provisions of this Article, and with a view to allowing seafarers to know their rights, the text of the Convention must be available in an appropriate language to the crew members on board. Since the national legislation and the report do not contain any information on the implementation of these provisions, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the text of the Convention is available in an appropriate language to the crew members of all ships registered in France.