https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8935-001X
![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Shipping is the ‘invisible’ backbone that keeps the global economy moving, even during the COVID-19 crisis. This article examines the extent to which seafarers have access to satisfactory shore-based welfare services/facilities (SBWS) that meet global regulatory standards under the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC). In particular, this article provides an empirical analysis of the implementation of relevant laws and MLC in European countries and China. While China has become a dominant player in world trade in recent years, the existing literature (especially in English) pays little attention to China’s implementation of MLC provisions, including SBWS provisions. To bridge this research gap, this article critically evaluates SBWS in practice in China, using manually collected data, and compares China’s arrangements with those of European countries. After exploring the different models adopted by Western countries and China, this article evaluates key SBWS providers in China through various lenses – past, present, and future initiatives.
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our gratitude to the respondents. Special thanks go to Professors Jason Chuah, Alan Durant, and Tamara Hervey for their feedback on earlier versions of this work. The Chinese government has accepted our advice and has established an International Seafarers’ Centre in Shanghai (Yangshan). Normal disclaimer applies. Errors remain the authors’ responsibility.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 IMO, COVID, “White list” and Training in Focus (16/02/2021).
2 UNCTAD, Review of Maritime Transport (2018) 2, 46.
3 E.g. IMO, Circular Letter No. 4204/Add.35 (14/12/2020).
4 A Maslow, ‘A Theory of Human Motivation’ (1943) 50(4) Psychological Review 370–396. J Haidt, The Happiness Hypothesis (Arrow, 2006) 107–134.
5 See Section II.A.
6 E.g. UNCTAD, ‘Facilitating Crew Changes and Repatriation of Seafarers during the COVID-19 Pandemic and beyond’ (22/03/2021).
7 Ibid. UNCTAD (n 6). See details in Sections V.C–V.D.
8 We manually collected empirical data on COVID-related port restrictions from online datasets filed by industry networks, e.g. ITF and others, Data from ITF Seafarers: Your port of Call Online (data updated up to July 2020) <www.thinglink.com/card/1301500120591761410>. All internet sources cited in this article, last accessed 01/02/2023.
9 ILO, Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (MLC), as amended in 2014, 2016, and 2018. <www.ilo.org/global/standards/maritime-labour-convention/lang--en/index.htm>.
10 M Oldenburg and H Jensen, ‘Maritime welfare facilities-utilization and relevance for the compensation of shipboard stress’ (2019) 14(1) Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology 11.
11 G Exarchopoulos, et al., ‘Seafarers’ Welfare: A Critical Review of the Related Legal Issues under the Maritime Labour Convention 2006’ (2018) 93 Marine Policy 62–70. B Pauksztat, ‘“Only work and sleep”: Seafarers’ Perceptions of Job Demands of Short Sea Cargo Shipping Lines and their Effects on Work and Life on board’ (2017) 44(7) Maritime Policy & Management 899–915.
12 M Oldenburg, X Baur, and C Schlaich ‘Occupational Risks and Challenges of Seafaring’ (2010) 52(5) Journal of Occupational Health 249–56.
13 P Zhang and M Zhao, ‘Maritime Health of Chinese Seafarers’ (2017) 83 Marine Policy 259–67.
14 Ibid. Pauksztat (n 11).
15 T Xu and P Zhang, ‘Rethinking the Concept of Seafaring Labor’ (2016) 6 Journal of Shipping and Ocean Engineering 221–25.
16 We discovered this problem through our fieldtrips/interviews. See details in Sections VI–VII.
17 T Alderton, et al, The Global Seafarer: Living and Working Conditions in Globalized Industry (ILO 2004).
18 See details in Section IV.
19 ILO, Ratifications of MLC. <www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?=NORMLEXPUB:11300:0::NO::P11300_INSTRUMENT_ID:312331>.
20 MLC Article IV (Seafarers’ employment and social rights).
21 MLC Regulation 4.4 (Access to shore-based welfare facilities).
22 See Section IV.
23 MLC Regulation 4.4 (n 21).
24 Section IV.
25 UNCTAD (n 2).
26 Alderton (n 17). UNCTAD, ‘Container Ports: the Fastest, the Busiest, and the Best Connected’, 2019, <https://unctad.org/news/container-ports-fastest-busiest-and-best-connected>.
27 ILO, The Impact on Seafarer’s Living and Working Conditions of Changes in the Structure of the Shipping Industry, doc.JMC/29/2001/3 (ILO 2000).
28 See summary in the following paragraphs and accompanying footnotes.
29 Oldenburg (n 10), 11.
30 H Benamara, et al., Container ports: the fastest, the busiest, and the best connected (UNCTAD 07/08/2019), <https://unctad.org/news/container-ports-fastest-busiest-and-best-connected>. See Pauksztat (n 11), 899.
31 Ibid. M Levinson, The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World (Princeton University 2006).
32 ITF/MORI, MORI Seafarers’ Living Conditions Survey Interpretative Report (ITF House, 1996). E Kahveci, Port Based Welfare for Seafarers: Summary Report (Cardiff University 2006). ITF, et al., Port-based Welfare Services 2016 Survey (ITF House 2016).
33 ITF/MORI, Ibid.
34 Ibid.
35 Kahveci (n 32).
36 E Kahveci, Port Based Welfare Services: A Further Analysis (Cardiff University 2007).
37 ITF (n 32).
38 H Sampson, et al., ‘Overstretched and under-resourced: the corporate neglect of port welfare services for seafarers, Maritime Policy and Management’ (2022), doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2022.208478.
39 J Zuidema, et al., ‘Port-based seafarers’ welfare in Canada: resources and gaps’ (2023) 147 Marine Policy 105336.
40 Maslow (n 4). Haidt (n 4). Oldenburg (n 12). Zhang and Zhao (n 13).
41 ITF (n 32). Kahveci (n 32). Kahveci (n36). Zuidema (n 39).
42 Ibid.
43 Wilhenlmsen, et al, Empirical Data on COVID-19 Global Port Restrictions (updated by port-based agents up to 23/01/2023) [Dataset], <www.wilhelmsen.com/ships-agency/campaigns/coronavirus/coronavirus-map/>.
44 E.g. ITF (n8).
45 Oldenburg and Jensen (n 10). ITF/MORI (n 32). Kahveci (n 32). Zuidema (n 39).
46 Our pilot research on China discussed SBWS before the pandemic, particularly regarding the port-based transportation services for seafarers, see M. Zhao, et al., ‘Port based welfare services in Chinese ports: Their roles, changes and challenges’ (2021) Marine Policy 130.
47 E.g. M Stopford, Maritime Economics (Routledge, 2009), 5–7.
48 UNCTAD (n 2), 63–82; Drewry Maritime Research, Ports and Terminal Insight (2018) 1.
49 Ibid.
50 ACFTU, China has become the country with the largest number of seafarers in the world (01/04/2021).
51 MLC (n 19).
52 See our pilot research as published as Zhao (n 46).
53 ITF dataset (n 8).
54 See Zhao (n 46). Zhang (n 15). Zhang (n 89). Zhao (113).
55 The questions in detail can be viewed and downloaded from the authors’ online database in “SBWS Questions for Survey and Semi-structured interviews”, Mendeley Data, v1 <http://doi.org/10.17632/ct84dx5f5v.1#file-a091b6d5-f687-4c4c-bb11-1972d3ac6017>. All data was first uploaded in 2019 and updated on 01/01/2020, 01/08/2021, 01/01/2022 and 01/01/2023.
56 ITF dataset (n8).
57 Wilhenlmsen (n 43).
58 ICS, Caution around revised Chinese port crew change rules, 02/02/2023, <https://www.ics-shipping.org/news-item/caution-around-revised-chinese-port-crew-change-rules/>
59 See detailed lists of the COVID-restriction measures from the datasets (n 8) and (n 43). COVID-19 Crew Change Traker (country by country), <www.iss-shipping.com/tools/covid-19-crew-change-tracker/>, updated 30/01/2023.
60 GAC, COVID Shipping Updates, <www.gac.com/coronavirus>.
61 We used online meeting software and transferred our survey from paper to internet-based forms.
62 See MLC (n 9). See also Exarchopoulos (n 11); Pauksztat (n 11) 899.
63 ILO C108, Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958, <www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C108>.
64 ILO C185, Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003, as amended. <www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?=NORMLEXPUB:93:0::NO::P93_INSTRUMENT_ID:312330>.
65 Ibid.
66 ILO C163, Seafarers’ Welfare Convention, 1987. <www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID:312308>.
67 Ibid.
68 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982), Article 94.3.
69 IMO, International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Adoption: 1974; Entry into force: 25 May 1980 <www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/International-Convention-for-the-Safety-of-Life-at-Sea-(SOLAS),-1974.aspx>.
70 IMO, International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), Adoption: 1978; Entry into force: 1984; Major revisions in 1995 and 2010. <www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/Pages/STCW-Conv-LINK.aspx>.
71 IMO, International Safety Management (ISM) Code (1994). <www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/Pages/ISMCode.aspx>.
72 I Christodoulou-Varotsi, ‘Critical Review of the Consolidated Maritime Labour Convention (2006) of the International Labour Organization: Limitations and Perspectives’ (2012) 43(4) Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce 467.
73 IMO, International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code (2002). Entry into force: 2004. <www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Security/Pages/SOLAS-XI-2%20ISPS%20Code.aspx> .
74 E.g. P Zhang, Seafarers’ Rights in China: Restructuring in Legislation and Practice Under the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (Springer 2016). P. Zhang and L. Zhao, ‘Restructuring seafarers’ welfare under the Maritime Labour Convention: an empirical case study of Greece’ (2020) 5(4) Maritime Business Review 373–89, doi: 10.1108/mabr-02-2020-0009.
75 MLC (n 9).
76 ILO (n 19).
77 Ibid.
78 See more regarding the four pillars on https://mismarine.com/the-four-pillars-of-international-maritime-law/. IMO, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), adopted in 1973, www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/International-Convention-for-the-Prevention-of-Pollution-from-Ships-(MARPOL).aspx
79 MLC (n 9).
80 ISWAN, Port Welfare Partnership Programme, <www.portwelfare.org/ilo-mlc--2006-4.4-regulations---standards.html>. MLC consolidated 68 conventions and recommendations, but some important conventions not included are those relating to seafarers’ identity documents (ILO 108 & 105) and pensions (ILO 71.)
81 MLC (n 20).
82 MLC (n 21).
83 MLC Standard A4.4 (Access to shore-based welfare facilities).
84 MLC Guideline B4.4 (Access to shore-based welfare facilities).
85 MLC, Part A of the Code.
86 See details in our other research, e.g. G Exarchopoulos, et al, Seafarers’ welfare: A critical review of the related legal issues under the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (2019)93 Marine Policy 62–70.
87 See details from our another research on the Development of Maritime Legislation in China Under the Impact of MLC 2006 in Zhang (n 76), pp. 1–18, 19–68. P Zhang, et al., ‘Maritime Labour policy in China: Restructuring under the ILO׳ s Maritime Labour Convention 2006’ (2014) 50 Marine Policy 111–116
88 Ibid.
89 Ibid.
90 See authors’ datasets and hand-collected data from other empirical datasets outlined in Section II Methods.
91 E.g. this article, and our pre-pandemic empirical research (Zhao, et al (n.52)) which pinpoints shore-based transportation services.
92 Ibid.
93 Through fieldtrips and interviews in 2018, we have found that the Hamburg Seafarers’ Centre was established earlier and influenced the Tilbury (London) Seafarers’ Centre.
94 See details in and datasets filed in accompanying footnotes.
95 ISWAN, Is there a Future for Seafarer Centres?, 16 December 2015. <www.seafarerswelfare.org/news/2015/is-there-a-future-for-seafarer-centres>.
96 The Mariners HK, Corona Virus Info, <www.themarinersclubhk.org/a49.htm>.
97 Singapore MPA, Information for seafarers visiting Singapore, <www.mpa.gov.sg/web/portal/home/singapore-registry-of-ships/crewing/information-for-seafarers-visiting-singapore>.
98 Ibid.
99 See e.g. ILO (n 3); Sun and Zhao (n 116).
100 See and accompanying footnotes.
101 UNCTAD, (n 6).
102 E.g. Liverpool, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shantou and Kong Kong seafarers’ centres/clubs. E.g. Nautilus International, ‘Welfare: Liverpool seafarer centre increases ship visits to Covid-19 vessel-bound crews’, 23/03/2020, <www.nautilusint.org/en/news-insight/news/liverpool-seafarer-centre-increases-ship-visits-to-covid-19-vessel-bound-crew/>.
103 Lloyd’s List, Shedding light on suicides at sea, 20/03/2022.
104 Maslow (n 4). Haidt (n 4).
105 Some ship agents filed us the cost is around $1000 per month for its whole company; accordingly, the monthly cost of internet for individual seafarers is roughly $10 per person per month.
106 This is likely because the internet is satellite-based when the ship is on high seas.
107 UNCTAD, ILO, and IMO, Joint statement urging continued collaboration to address the crew change crisis, safeguard seafarer health and safety, and avoid supply chain disruptions during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, 28/02/2022. See more on empirical datasets in accompanying footnotes.
108 S Sun and L Zhao, ‘Legal Issues and Challenges in Addressing the Coronavirus Outbreak on Large Cruise Ships – A Critical Examination of Port States Measures’ (2022) 217 Ocean and Coastal Management 105995, doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105995, 1–6.
109 Ibid.
110 See similar practice in Canada from Zuidema (n 39).
111 See details in our another article, Zhao et al (n 52).
112 e.g. Bernamara (n 30).
113 ISM Code (n 73). ISPS Code (n 75).
114 See Shanghai Chronicles and ACG, Survey of China Mainland Press, Issues 5864–5883 (1975), 208.
115 Shanghai Chronicles Office, ‘Previously Shanghai Club, now Dongfeng Hotel’, (2009) <www.shtong.gov.cn/dfz_web/DFZ/Info?idnode=81784&tableName=userobject1a&id=108914>.
116 Ibid. E Honig, Sisters and Strangers: Women in the Shanghai Cotton Mills, 1919–1949 (Stanford University 1986).
117 ACG, Survey of China Mainland Press, Issues 5864–5883 (1975), 208.
118 Shanghai Chronicles Office, The Introduction of Shanghai International Seafarers Club’ (2003), <www.shtong.gov.cn/dfz_web/DFZ/Info?idnode=56350&tableName=userobject1a&id=42940>.
119 Ibid.
120 Shanghai Chronicles Office (n 123).
121 The current research engaged industry and governments, and they have accepted our advice and relaunch a new Shanghai ‘International Seafarers’ Club’ in 2019 in Shanghai (Yangshan, one of the top container port terminal in the world).
122 In China, many Seamen’ Clubs are affiliated to Trade Unions, which are part of the government. For instance, Dalian Seafarers’ Club and Shanghai Seafarers’ Club are both part of local seafarers’ trade unions.
123 See the statement mentioned above by the Staff of Dalian ISC.
124 See detailed appraisal of relevant Chinese legislation in Zhang (n 76).
125 The authors received several similar responses like this, from interviewees, thus this research addresses counterpart ports in western countries.
126 PPP will be explained in Section VII.C.
127 See details in Section IV above.
128 See Section IV.
129 See Section IV, and Sections V–VII, respectively.
130 See Methods in Section II.
131 See Section I.C.
132 Sections VI-VII.
133 PRC Ministry of Transport, ‘Yangshan International Seafarers’ Club’, 18/07/2019, <www.mot.gov.cn/difangxinwen/xxlb_fabu/fbpd_shanghai/201907/t20190726_3230944.html>.
134 State Council of PRC, The Belt and Road Initiative, <http://english.www.gov.cn/beltAndRoad/>.