Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2013, Publicación: 103ª reunión CIT (2014)

Repetition

Article 1(c) of the Convention. Disciplinary measures applicable to seafarers. For many years, the Committee has been referring to certain provisions of the 1976 Merchant Shipping Act, under which various breaches of labour discipline are punishable with imprisonment (involving an obligation to work, under section 10 of the Prisons Act and rules 76 and 95 of the Prison Rules) and deserting seafarers from ships registered in another country may be forcibly conveyed on board the ship. The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its earlier reports that some amendments to the Merchant Shipping Act have been made. It notes, however, that under sections 129(b) and (c) and 131(a) and (b) of the updated text of the Merchant Shipping Act, which it has consulted on the Government’s website, penalties of imprisonment may still be imposed for breaches of discipline such as disobedience to lawful command, neglect of duty, desertion and absence without leave, and section 135 of the Act still provides for the forcible conveyance of deserting seafarers to ships registered in another country, where it appears to the minister that reciprocal arrangements will be made in that country.

The Committee recalls that Article 1(c) expressly prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour as a means of labour discipline. As the Committee repeatedly pointed out, only acts which endanger the ship or the life or health of persons are excluded from the scope of the Convention (see, for example, paragraphs 179–181 of the General Survey of 2007 on the eradication of forced labour). The Committee therefore reiterates its hope that the necessary measures will at last be taken with a view to amending the above provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, either by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour or by restricting their application to the situations where the ship or the life or health of persons are endangered (as is the case, e.g. in section 128 of the same Act). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard in its next report.

Article 1(d). Punishment for having participated in strikes. Over a number of years, the Committee has been referring to section 73 of the 1970 Industrial Relations Act, as amended, under which the minister may refer a dispute in non-essential services to the tribunal for settlement, if he considers that a public interest so requires; the recourse to strike action in this situation is prohibited, violation being punishable with penalties of imprisonment (involving an obligation to perform labour, as explained above) under sections 74(3) and 77(2)(a) of the same Act. The Committee has further noted that, according to section 76(1), a strike which, in the opinion of the minister, affects or threatens the public interest, might also be referred to the tribunal for settlement, failure to discontinue the participation in such a strike being punishable with imprisonment under section 76(2)(b).

The Committee previously noted the Government’s indications in its earlier report that the proposed Trade Unions and Industrial Relations Bill had been tabled in the House of Assembly, and that it contained no provisions imposing sanctions of imprisonment for breach of the legislation, which may be punished only with fines. The Committee also noted the Government’s repeated statement that the above provisions of the Industrial Relations Act had never been applied in practice, and that the legislation would be amended when a consensus is achieved after further consultation with the social partners.

While having noted these indications, the Committee reiterates the firm hope that the review of the Act announced by the Government for a number of years will soon result in the amendment of the above provisions, so that no sanctions involving compulsory labour can be imposed for the mere fact of peaceful participation in a strike, in order to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention. Referring also to its comments made in 2007 under Convention No. 87, likewise ratified by the Bahamas, the Committee asks the Government to supply a copy of the new legislation, as soon as it is adopted.