As I did with most things in fisheries, I started doing the job, then got into the rules, and then got involved with the regulators. As my work gets more involved in the labour side (written a lot about it already) and many skills are transferable, I decided to get a qualification directly from the ILO as an inspector on labour conditions on board fishing vessels. So besides knowing about the issue but having been a fisherman and having written for FAO and published academically on the topic, I can speak now with some authority as an ILO-trained inspector.
I personally believe that if you want to be helpful in a complex problem like fisher’s labour rights, you need to see it from all angles and be adequately qualified. Pointing the finger at a problem only, shaming the people working on it and expecting them to fix it tomorrow with very few resources may give you media exposure but does not fix the issue.
As with most things in fisheries, is not a lack of regulatory frameworks but a lack of implementation and, in particular by the DWFN that has the opportunity to lead, but also by some developing states that are important flag states due to the lack of capacity.
The legal and jurisdictional framework for addressing labour conditions on board fishing vessels is centred on art 94(1) and art 94(3) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (‘UNCLOS’). These articles place responsibility on the flag state of a vessel for, inter alia, ‘administrative, technical and social matters’ on the vessel, for ensuring safety at sea, and for ‘the manning of ships, labour conditions and the training of crews, taking into account the applicable international instruments. Much of the international discourse on labour conditions on fishing vessels focuses on the question of how to enhance mechanisms to ensure that the flag state properly fulfils its flag state responsibilities and how states may exercise complementary jurisdiction.
A lot of the specifics are regulated UN specialised agencies (I have been working with FAO for over 30 years) on the labour side is the ILO, which is the only tripartite UN agency that brings together governments, employers and workers to set labour standards, develop policies and devise programmes to promote decent work for all people.
The ILO has been engaged in promoting decent working conditions on board ships and fishing vessels, including through the adoption of international instruments. The Maritime Labour Convention of 2006 establishes minimum international requirements for seafarers’ employment and working conditions, although fishing vessels are specifically exempt from the Convention.20 This gap in scope was filled to a large extent by the ILO Convention concerning Work in the Fishing Sector (‘Work in Fishing Convention C188’), and its accompanying Recommendation concerning Work in the Fishing Sector, both of which came into force in November 2017.
The Work in Fishing Convention seeks to ensure decent work in fishing and — together with the Protocol to the Forced Labour Convention — should provide a comprehensive framework for regulating working conditions and protecting migrant workers on foreign-flagged vessels operating in distant fisheries. It places overall responsibility for working conditions on the owner of the fishing vessel, while skippers are responsible for the safety of fishers on board and for the safety of the vessel.
In many respects, the Work in Fishing Convention parallels the Maritime Labour Convention. However, with only 19 ratifications, it does not have sufficient parties to be considered a ‘generally accepted’ international regulation to which states are required to conform under art 94(5) of UNCLOS. None of the major distant water fishing nations are party. This is significant given the emphasis in the Convention on the primacy of flag state jurisdiction for enforcement purposes.
And honestly, this is pathetic… we have binding measures for the protection and welfare of many species of fish… but not one for fishermen. And while we are working on that at the regional level via FFA and the WCPFC, nothing replaces Flag state responsibility and enforcement.
And when you dive into detail into C188… is not really impossible… is honestly the very basics that any job shall require… yet, as usual, it seems that fishers are considered as being deserving of what jobs on land take for granted.
The Convention addresses issues essential to ensuring decent work on fishing vessels. For example, it:
establishes the responsibilities of fishing vessel owners and skippers for the safety of fishers on board and for the safety of the vessels (Article 8);
sets a minimum age for work on board fishing boats and requires special protection for young fishers (Article 9);
requires fishers to undergo periodic examinations of their medical fitness for work on fishing vessels (Articles 10-12);
requires that fishing vessels are sufficiently and efficiently manned (crewed), are under the control of a competent skipper, and that the fishers on board are provided sufficient rest periods (Articles 13-14);
requires fishing vessels to have a crew list and fishers to have the protection of a signed work agreement, setting out the terms of the work they are performing (Articles 15-20, and Annex II);
entitles fishers to be repatriated when their agreements expire and for other reasons, and prohibits making fishers pay to obtain their jobs, or blacklisting them (Articles 21-22);
addresses how fishers are paid and that they shall have the means to send money home to their families at no cost (Article 23-24);
sets standards for living accommodation and food on board (Articles 25-28, and Annex III);
establishes requirements for occupational safety and health, as well as a basic level of medical care on fishing vessels; (Articles 31- 33);
ensures that fishers benefit from social security protection no less favourable than that provided to other workers in their country; and, at a minimum, provides protection in cases of their work-related sickness, injury or death (Articles 34-39).
These are, of course, only some of the main ideas, with the details provided in the Articles noted above.
The Convention provides for higher requirements for certain vessels (e.g., larger vessels at sea for longer periods) and exceptions for other vessels (e.g., smaller vessels operating closer to port or at sea for short periods). It also sets out how the requirements of the Convention are to be complied with and enforced (Articles 40-44).
The Convention makes it clear that the fishing vessel's owner is ultimately responsible for conditions of work on board the vessel. It provides that: The fishing vessel owner is responsible for ensuring that the skipper is provided with the necessary resources and facilities to comply with the obligations of this Convention.
The skipper (the person in charge of a vessel) has his or her own responsibilities. The Convention provides that: The skipper is responsible for the safety of the fishers on board and the vessel's safe operation. These responsibilities are spelled out in more detail in Article 8
I’ll write more details on another post, but yeah, I’m looking forwards to doing more in this field.