The Committee notes that in its reports on the application of various maritime Conventions, the Government indicates that the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), is under study in the Tripartite Group on International Standards. In order to give an overall view of the issues needing attention in connection with the application of maritime Conventions, the Committee considers that they are best dealt with in a single set of comments, which is set out below.

Placing of Seamen Convention, 1920 (No. 9)

Articles 2–5 of the Convention. Recruitment agencies for seafarers. The Committee requested information on the law and practice pertaining to the operation of employment agencies for seafarers. It notes that the Government reports in this connection that the Register of Merchant Marine Personnel is responsible for placing seafarers free of charge, in accordance with Decree No. 463/968 of 23 July 1968.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Article 14(2) of the Convention. Certificate as to the quality of the seafarer’s work. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the seafarer has at all times the right to obtain from the master a separate certificate as to the quality of his/her work or, failing that, a certificate indicating whether the seafarer has fully discharged his/her obligations under the agreement. The Committee notes that the Government refers to Maritime Provision No. 16 of 25 October 1982 on seamen’s articles of agreement, which recalls that under Uruguayan law ratified international treaties are transposed into national provisions that are fully applied and take precedence over any provisions of domestic law that may afford lesser benefits or guarantees. The Committee concludes that Article 14(2) of the Convention, establishing that “the seaman 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”, is part of Uruguayan law and that there is therefore no need to adopt other domestic provisions in order for it to apply.

Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108)

Articles 2–4 of the Convention. Issuance of a seafarer’s identity document. In earlier comments, the Committee noted Maritime Provision No. 38 of 14 March 1988, which regulates the issuance of seafarers’ identity documents in accordance with the requirements of the Convention. While observing that the Government indicates that the Maritime Authority does not grant identity documents to seafarers, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures which it envisages to adopt in order to ensure that identity documents are issued in conformity with the requirements of Maritime Provision No. 38.

Article 5(2). Readmission to a territory. The Committee requested the Government to specify the provisions ensuring that a seafarer, holder of a seafarer’s identity document issued by the Uruguayan authorities, will be readmitted in Uruguay during a period of at least one year after the date of expiry indicated in that document. Observing that the Government has not provided information on this issue, the Committee requests it to specify how effect is given to Article 5(2) of the Convention.

Article 6. Permission to enter the territory for any seafarer holding a valid seafarer’s identity document. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the provisions ensuring the right of entry of seafarers holding valid seafarers’ identity documents issued by other countries, for temporary shore leave or for the purpose of joining a ship or transiting to join a ship in another country. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the documents certifying identity as a crew member are the crew member’s book, a passport identifying the holder as a seafarer or documentation showing the holder to be fit to serve on board. The Committee nonetheless observes that the Government specifies no provision guaranteeing the right of entry of seafarers holding seafarers’ identity documents issued by other countries. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions or the administrative regulations or instructions that guarantee the right of entry of seafarers holding identity documents issued by other countries, for temporary shore leave or for the purpose of joining a ship or transiting to join a ship in another country, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention.

The Committee recalls that the Convention has been revised by the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). It draws the Government’s attention to its general observation addressing the recent amendments to the annexes of Convention No. 185.

Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134)

Article 2(1)–(3) of the Convention. Statistics of occupational accidents. The Committee requested the Government to provide recent statistics of occupational accidents in the maritime sector. It notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that there are no specific statistics for all types of accidents. Recalling that according to the Convention, statistics must record the numbers, nature, causes and effects of occupational accidents, with a clear indication of the department on board ship and of the area where the accident occurred, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to compile statistics that meet the requirements of the Convention.

Article 3. Research. The Committee requested the Government to send information on the research under way into general trends relating to occupational accidents at sea and the particular hazards of maritime employment identified by the statistics gathered on the subject. The Committee notes that according to the Government, the Maritime Authority is not engaged in research into general trends in occupational accidents. Pointing out that according to the Convention research shall be undertaken into general trends and into such hazards as are brought out by statistics, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to Article 3 of the Convention.

Article 4(3)(h). Prevention of accidents. Dangerous cargo. The Committee requested the Government to indicate whether there are specific provisions on measures for the prevention of accidents that are peculiar to maritime employment that cover dangerous cargo. The Committee takes note of Maritime Provisions Nos 51 of 16 December 1996, 55 of 24 June 1997, 85 of 12 June 2002, 101 of 13 June 2005, 102 of 5 June 2005, 123 of 21 August 2009 and 153 of 12 October 2014, sent by the Government, and observes that they contain specific provisions on the prevention of accidents on board ships transporting dangerous cargo. The Committee further observes that Decree No. 158/985 of 25 April 1985 approves the Dangerous Goods Operations and Transport Regulations, which contain provisions on measures to prevent accidents caused by dangerous cargo. Lastly, the Committee notes the information from the Government to the effect that the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, and the International Safety Management (ISM) Code of the International Maritime Organization have been incorporated in Uruguay’s statutory law.

Article 4(3)(h). Prevention of accidents. Ballast. The Committee asked the Government to indicate the provisions that address the prevention of accidents in the handling of ballast. It takes note of the Maritime Provisions sent by the Government and observes that Maritime Provision No. 109 ALFA of 7 November 2006 refers to the safety of crew members and persons involved in the exchange of ballast water. However, this provision does not include measures for the prevention of accidents caused by ballast. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate whether any other provisions give effect to Article 4(3)(h) of the Convention.

Article 5. Obligation of seafarers to comply with accident prevention provisions. The Committee pointed out to the Government that Chapter II of Maritime Provision No. 17 of 11 October 1983 contains recommendations, which are not binding, to improve safety and health on board ships inter alia through the use of protective equipment. The Committee points out that according to the Convention, provisions on accident prevention must specify clearly the obligation of shipowners, seafarers and others concerned to comply with them. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure mandatory compliance with the provisions governing accident prevention, particularly those covering protective equipment.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents. The Committee requested the Government to indicate whether a committee had been set up in the maritime sector to formulate, implement and periodically review the national safety and health policy, as prescribed by Decree No. 291/007 of 13 August 2007. While noting the information supplied by the Government to the effect that since 2013 a sectoral committee has been in operation with a mandate to draft a standard for the prevention of occupational risks in the ports sector, the Committee observes that the abovementioned committee does not include representatives of shipowners and seafarers, and does not address the subject of on-board personnel. Recalling that the Convention requires the establishment of national or local joint accident prevention committees or ad hoc working parties on which both shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations are represented, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Article 8 of the Convention in practice.