Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government in its report.

Freedom of association of seafarers. With regard to its long-standing comments concerning the need to extend the general protection on freedom of association to seafarers and their organizations, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that, in 2000, a tripartite committee had been set up by a decision of the Minister of Mercantile Marine, in order to submit a proposal concerning the modernization of the legislative framework in the area of seafarers’ freedom of association. The Committee further notes from the Government’s report that after having met three times, the tripartite committee was unable to conclude its work mainly because 11 out of 14 first-level seafarers’ organizations opposed, in writing, the revision of the legislative framework as unnecessary and premature. The Committee takes note of the Government’s statement that the Ministry of Mercantile Marine plans to launch in the future another initiative for the re-examination of the legislative framework in the area of seafarers’ freedom of association, the success of which will depend on the level of consensus reached by seafarers’ organizations. Furthermore, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the exemption of seafarers from the scope of Act No. 1264/82 does not imply a complete absence of a legislative framework concerning seafarers’ freedom of association, as the right to establish and join trade unions is guaranteed in the Constitution and several other laws, which address certain aspects of trade union elections, the right to strike and collective bargaining. Moreover, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that first-level seafarers’ organizations representing all specializations as well as a second-level seafarers’ organization function freely in accordance with their statutes.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which seafarers are currently represented by seafarers’ organizations (representation by category, occupation or class of seafarer) and the manner in which new seafarer organizations are established and function, given that there appear to be no specific legislative provisions on this issue.

Article 2. Recognition of the most representative trade unions. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that Act No. 3276 of 1994 on collective agreements concerning work at sea authorized the Minister of Mercantile Marine to evaluate freely which seafarers’ organizations were the most representative for collective bargaining purposes and had requested the Government to indicate the criteria on the basis of which the representative status of seafarers’ organizations was evaluated. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the criteria to evaluate the representativeness of organizations include, inter alia, the number of members, the number and size of ships belonging to the members of the organization, and the tradition of the organization as representative of a specific category of ships. The Committee recalls that when national legislation provides for a compulsory procedure for recognizing unions as exclusive bargaining agents, certain safeguards should be attached, such as: (a) the certification to be made by an independent body; (b) the representative organization to be chosen by a majority vote of the employees in the unit concerned; (c) the right of an organization, which in a previous trade union election failed to secure a sufficiently large number of votes, to request a new election after a stipulated period; (d) the right of any new organization other than the certified organization to demand a new election after a reasonable period has elapsed (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 240). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which these safeguards are ensured.