THE OPEN REGISTRY ISSUE AND THE POSITION OF ILO:

The International Labour Organisation (DLO) was established in 1919, under the Treaty of Versailles, to bring governments, employers, and trade union

representatives together for united action in the cause of social justice and higher living standards everywhere. In 1946 it became the first specialised agency of the United Nations hamg special responsibility for social and labour issues. The aims and

activities of ILO are to:

- formulate international policies and programmes to help improve working and li\nng conditions, enhance employment opportunities and promote basic human rights;

- create international labour standards to serve as guidelines for national authorities in putting these policies into action;

- carry out an extensive programme of technical co-operation to help Governments in making these policies effective in practice; and

- engage in training, education and research to help advance these eflforts.(30)

The ILO is unique among world organisations in the sense that workers' and employers' representatives have an equal voice with those of governments in formulating its policies. However, the activities of the ILO are based on the three fundamental organs;

* the International Labour Conference;

* the Governing Body; and

* the International Labour Office.

The International Labour Conference meets yearly in June in Geneva. It is composed of delegates fi-om each member country, two fi-om the Government, one each fi-om the Workers and the Employers, and a number of experts and advisers. Normally it discusses general reports, programme, budget, and information and reports on the application of Conventions and Recommendation. It adopts new labour standards and revises existing ones.

The Governing Body determines the line of action of the organisation by deciding the agenda of the Conference and also by directing the work of the International Labour

OfiBce. It is composed of 28 Government members, 14 Employer and 14 Worker members and meets 3-4 times per year.

The International Labour OfiBce is the permanent secretariat of the Organisation. It is charged with the execution of the decisions of the Conference and the Governing Body.(31)

Between 1919 and 1993, the ILO has adopted 174 Conventions and 181 Recommendations. Their coverage includes certain basic human rights such as freedom of association, freedom from forced labour, and equality of opportunity in employment and occupation, labour administration, industrial relations, employment policy, working conditions, social security, occupational safety and health, protection of children, and employment of special categories such as migrant workers and seafarers.

In the field of maritime affairs, particularly as to seafarers affairs, the ILO has adopted (between 1920 to 1987) a total of 36 Conventions and 26 Recommendations concerning seaferers, which demonstrates the important part of ILO activities devoted to seafarer questions.(32) A list of the important Maritime Labour Conventions and the Maritime Labour Recommendations regarding seafarers are shown in Annex 4.

Unlike ITF the ILO has no special target to cripple or elinunate the open registry system. But, due to the consistent efforts of the ITF in demonstrating open registry as an issue to the ILO, the activities of this organisation has also been centred around open registry shipping. In 1933, the ITF first ofiBcially brought this issue before the ILO stating that open registry shipping is substandard and that an inquiry needed to be made by the ILO. At the 18th session of the Joint Maritime Commission in 1955, which advises the Governing Body on maritime issues, the ITF submitted a report on the problems of open registry. The commission agreed that the issue could be

considered at the 1956 Preparatory Technical Maritime Conference and at the 1958 Maritime Session of the International Labour Conference. The Preparatory Conference adopted it as a text which was submitted to the Maritime Session of the International Conference. After a brief discussion, the Session adopted it as the Social Conditions and Safety (Seafarers) Recommendation Number 108. The body of the Recommendation strengthened the genuine link requirement regarding administration, regulation, inspection and control. Although as a recommendation, this did not have the force of law, it must be regarded as a victory for the ITF representatives at the ILO.(33)

At the twenty first maritime session of the International Labour Conference in 1970, the workers' delegate fi'om Finland (a major area for ITF anti-FOC activity) submitted a draft resolution on open registry. The resolution requested member states to report on steps taken to comply with Recommendation Numbers 107 and 108. After debate, the resolution was passed with minimal changes.

The ILO Convention No. 147, which strengthens port state control, is being treated as a powerful tool for ITF seafarers to control substandard ship. They also use the ILO recommendations and conventions as a legal stand for boycotting open registry ships. Moreover, the regular increases of ILO recommended minimum wages schedules have also been an important factor in reducing the wider gap of wages between developed countries seafarers and under-developed countries seafarers. This is, of course, in line with ITF policy which is clearly designed to protect the jobs of seafarers fi-om developed covmtries, in part by raising the wages of those fi-om the third world.(34).

* References:

(1) Herbert R. Northrup and Richard L. Rowan, The International Transport Workers' Federation and Flag of Convenience Shipping, (1983), p. 3.

(2) ITF, Report on Activities, 1990-91, 1992-93. pp. 15, 77.

(3) ITF Constitution (1990), pp. 5,7.

(4) Ibid., p. 8.

(5) Ibid., p. 9.

(6) Ibid., p. 11.

(7) Ake Selander, Is ITF Right ? Lloyd’s London Press Ltd.(1981), p. 2.

(8) nr Constitution, (1990), p. 3,16.

(9) Ake Selander, Is ITF Right? Lloyd’s London Press (1981), p. 3.

(10) ITF Constitution (1990), pp. 2-3.

(11) ITF, Flag of Convenience- The ITF's Campaign, p. 18.

(12) Ibid., p. 18.

(13) Ibid., p. 19.

(14) Ibid., pp. 20-21.

(15) Herbert R Northrup and Richard L. Rowan, The ITF and FOC shipping, (1983) p. 102.

(16) Ibid., pp. 102- 103.

(17) ITF, Seafarers Bulletin, (1993), p. 4.

(18) Ibid., p. 14.

(19) nr. Standard Collective Agreement for FOC Seafarers, (1994), pp. 11,16.

(20) Herbert R. Northrup and Richard L. Rowan, The ITF and FOC Shipping (1983), pp. 117,122.

(21) ITF, Standard Collective Agreement, (1994), p. 18.

(22) Ibid., pp 17-18.

(23) Paul K. Chapman, Trouble On Board, (1992), p. 87.

(24) ITF, FOC- The ITF's Campaign, p. 18.

(25) Herbert R. Northrup and Richard L. Rowan, The ITF and FOC Shipping, (1983), p. 46.

(26) Ibid., p. 46.

(27) Ibid., p. 47.

(28) ITF, Message To Seafarers,(1995), p. 1.

(29) The Maritime Monitor, ( January, 10,1995).

(30) UN, Basic Facts About The United Nations, p. 227.

(31) ILO, Report On The ILO Seminar For Senior Government OfiBcials From Asian Countries On Maritime Labour Standards, (1983), p. 16.

(32) ILO, Maritime Labour Conventions and Reconunendations, (1994), p. 2.

(33) Herbert R. Northrup and Richard L. Rowan, The ITF and FOC Shipping, (1983), p. 219.

(34) Ibid., p. 220.

CHAPTER 4

THE OPEN REGISTRY SHIPPING AND THE POSITION OF THE UNCTAD, AND THE EUROPEAN UNION