ICMA had a chance to sit down with Phil Schifflin, Director, Center for Mariner Advocacy of The Seamen’s Church Institute, to ask about advocacy for seafarers. You can contact the Center for Mariner Advocacy and find out more at: seamenschurch.org/programs-services/mariner-advocacy/
Transcript of conversation:
The issues that come before the IMO and the ILO generally reflect what is going on in the world. A classic example, one of the international instruments that is most widely adopted, is SOLAS, Safety of Life at Sea. SOLAS really came about after the sinking of the Titanic. They saw the incredible loss of life and issues that were identified as being inadequate from a safety perspective, so they came up with an international convention that helped address those issues.
But that is true all the time. The issues that the ILO is dealing with, as they relate to seafarers, are often driven by what is going on. During the COVID pandemic, there were a lot of things that negatively impacted seafarers. The next time the ILO got together to consider amendments to the convention dealing with seafarer rights, there were all sorts of issues that arose during the COVID pandemic that we tried to address. The IMO, both during the war between Russia and Ukraine and now with the conflict in the Middle East, has been dealing with issues arising from that. So really, the issues that are challenging seafarers or the maritime sector are the ones they are trying to work on.
I am Philip Schifflin. I am the Director of Mariner Advocacy for Seamen’s Church Institute, and I am part of the ICMA, that is, the International Christian Maritime Association, delegation to both the IMO and ILO. I think, if I answer why seafarers need advocates, and I can talk about why we need to be advocates, the reality is that seafarers are a very vulnerable population. Typically, these are foreign seafarers on a vessel that is flagged by a country that is not their own, often sailing into ports that are not their home ports, and often hired by employment agencies that are located in their home country.
In that situation, when they are taken advantage of in some way, such as not being paid wages, not being at home at the end of their contract, or being harassed while on board, the typical people we would turn to for help, our governments, usually are not there to help them. So they are really a very vulnerable population, often at the hands and mercy of the company. If the company takes care of them, that is great. If not, they need help, and organizations like ours, our chaplains who visit these seafarers, and people who do advocacy work on their behalf, can try to help bridge that gap when they need assistance.
The top advocacy questions that I typically deal with are, first, the payment of wages. The number of times that seafarers either are not paid on time or are not paid their full wages comes up regularly. The second issue deals with repatriation. That is, the seafarer has completed the contract and is ready to go home, but for one reason or another is not allowed to do so. The third would be shore leave. A seafarer comes into port ready to go ashore, and for one reason or another is not allowed to go ashore. Those are probably the three main advocacy issues I see.
The IMO and ILO are the International Maritime Organization and the International Labour Organization. These are two organizations that deal with seafarer-related issues. The IMO is all things maritime. Think about how you construct vessels, what the fire standards are on vessels, what type of training seafarers must have, what type of pollution prevention is required, what can be thrown overboard, and how vessels are kept safe. It includes matters such as life rafts and a whole range of technical issues associated with vessels, including those that affect seafarers. Because of that, we are there to try to make sure that, as they consider seafarers, they do so in a way that is best for them.
The ILO deals with all things labor. Whether you think of trucking or airlines, if it involves people doing work, the ILO has a section that deals with those workers, including seafarers. Since they focus on seafarer rights, we go there, again, to try to ensure they are doing so in a way that is best for seafarers.
ICMA has a delegation to both the IMO and ILO, and in our role as a delegation, we are observers. That means we do not actually have the right to vote. However, we do have the ability to express our opinions, and we are recognized by the people at both the IMO and ILO as honest brokers with respect to what is in the best interest of seafarers. We have no other competing interest, and I think people appreciate that.
We can advance our position formally by making comments in the room on various issues, but we are also very influential in conversations on the margins. That means speaking during coffee breaks, at lunch, and in informal settings, finding out what the issues are and trying to encourage positions that would be better for seafarers.
The IMO typically has multiple meetings each month, but certainly at least one meeting every month. The ILO similarly has meetings each month. We attend the meetings that are most impactful for seafarers. We look at what is on the agenda, what is being discussed, and then decide whether it makes sense to invest our limited time and resources in attending. For the IMO in London, that usually works out to somewhere between two and four meetings a year. For the ILO, it averages about one a year, though some years it may be none and others two or three.
The reason we all join ICMA and speak at the IMO and ILO with one voice is that it carries more weight. If there were 27 different seafarer welfare organizations saying 27 different things, that would be far less persuasive than one voice saying, “We represent 27 seafarer welfare organizations operating in 700 ports worldwide, and this is what our chaplains are seeing. This is why we think it is important.” It carries much more weight. The reverse is also true. When information comes from the IMO or ILO, we are able to share it and distribute it to all our members. It would be difficult for each organization to track all the issues, be present, and act on the information. So this approach makes us more effective and efficient.
Local chaplains are extremely important in advocacy because that is where our organizations meet the seafarer. If an issue arises, our chaplains are often the first to detect it. When they inform us of these challenges, we can begin to act on them and advocate on behalf of the seafarers, trying to secure some relief.
One thing I would say to our chaplains is that most seafarer-related issues are covered by some international instrument. It is rare to find an issue that is not addressed somewhere. The MLC 2006 is detailed enough to address matters such as food, the number of beds, and the amount of living space required. So if seafarers are being treated unfairly, there is likely an international instrument that applies.
I would ask chaplains to bring these issues to our attention so that we can work to provide relief. It is especially important when something new arises that has not been reported before. In those cases, we can bring the issue to the IMO and ILO and potentially help bring about change.
In fact, it was our organization that raised the issue of shore leave, noting that seafarers were receiving less and less access to it. We brought that issue to the ILO, made other parties aware, and ultimately that led to an amendment to the MLC 2006. That process began with our organization and with our chaplains identifying and reporting the problem.