Marine Online
After completing this lesson you will know that minor deficiencies can lead to
non-compliance with the MLC 2006 and know the possible consequences of not
meeting the requirements of the MLC 2006 it is made clear within the maritime
labour convention that for it to be effective there is a requirement for
strong uniform policing of the standards as has been stated already this role is
shared by both flag state and port state control there is an obvious risk that
the inspections carried out by these two bodies will be largely subjective due to
interpretation by the individual inspectors in order to reduce this
subjectivity the ILO has adopted two sets of guidelines for the inspectors
based on the 14 areas identified for inspection and certification in the
convention the two published guidelines are the guidelines for flag state
inspections under the maritime labour convention 2006 and the guidelines for
port state control officers carrying out inspections under the maritime labour
convention 2006 these guidelines give examples of what should be inspected
what types of evidence should be sought during the inspection and the actions to
be taken we're on board deficiencies are found in following these guidelines it
is hoped that a consistent interpretation of the requirements can
be achieved by all inspectors in continuing the theme of this module we
will concentrate on the guidelines for port state control officers
as was stated in an earlier lesson if when boarding a ship to carry out an
inspection under the convention a port state control inspector is presented
with a valid maritime labor certificate complete with the appropriate
declaration of maritime labor compliance they should accept this as prima facie
evidence of compliance in such a case no further detailed inspection should be
necessary if however an inspector is not satisfied with the certification or they
have sufficient reason to believe that the vessel does not comply with the
requirements of the convention or they have received a complaint from a
Seafarer relating to a breach of the convention they may then carry out a
more detailed inspection we're on board deficiencies are found during such an
inspection the actions taken by the inspector will depend on the severity of
the deficiencies there are certain actions that an inspector must take in
the event of any deficiency being found there are other actions that the
inspector must take and may take if any deficiency is considered to be
significant minor deficiencies may be considered to
be small failings in meeting the requirements of the MLC 2006 which may
possibly occur even on a well-run ship individual minor deficiencies would have
little or no adverse effect on the working or living conditions of the
seafarers or present any real hazard to their health safety or security where
minor deficiencies are found during an inspection then the inspector must
inform the master and give a deadline by which the deficiencies must be remedied
deficiencies may be considered significant if they present a probable
hazard to the health safety or security of seafarers or if they have a
noticeably adverse effect on the seafarers working or living conditions
the master must be informed in writing if there is a deficiency that is
considered to be significant it is possible that minor deficiencies may be
considered significant because of the number of deficiencies found or because
the vessel has a history of repeated minor deficiencies or failure to remedy
previously identified deficiencies if the inspector in his professional
judgment considers any deficiency to be significant or if it is related to a
seafarers complaint but he must also inform the seafarers and ship owners
organisation in report if the inspector does decide
that there is a significant deficiency or the deficiency relates to a complaint
then the flag state may also be notified the relevant information relating to
such incidents may also be forwarded to the competent authority in the vessels
next scheduled port of call significance or repeated deficiencies may constitute
a non conformance which may be considered a serious or repeated breach
of the requirements of the convention when serious or repeated breaches
occurred on board a vessel and it would be failing to maintain ongoing
compliance with the convention
the convention requires that be made to avoid a vessel being unduly
detained or delayed normally where non-conformance --is exist a vessel
should be allowed to sailed once a rectification plan and deadlines for
implementation has been agreed between the inspector and the ship's master the
exceptions to this are where the onboard conditions present either a safety
health for security hazard to the crew or the non-conformance --is constitute a
serious or repeated breach of the requirements in such cases the inspector
must ensure that the non-conformance --is in these categories are rectified
before the vessel can sail it may be that the vessel can be allowed to sail
once the more serious deficiencies have been rectified and an acceptable
rectification plan is agreed for the remaining less serious deficiencies
here is a list of examples of efficiencies which may be considered as
requiring detention of a vessel by port state control authorities the examples
are taken from the ILO guidelines for port state control officers carrying out
inspections under the maritime labour convention 2006 the final decision as to
whether or not detention is warranted will be made by
the port state control inspector based on his professional judgment as to the
significance of any non-conformance --is
in this lesson we have considered the circumstances which may lead to a
detailed inspection being carried out by a port state control inspector we have
also considered the actions that may be taken by the inspector as a result of
deficiencies being identified during a detailed inspection under the convention
before moving on to the assessment you should complete the following self-test
questions