Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety (해양환경안전학회지)

The Korean Society of Marine Environment and safety (해양환경안전학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Analysis of the Implementation of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, Through Port State Control

항만국통제를 통한 해사노동협약의 이행실태 분석

  • Yang, Jinyoung (Department of Maritime Transportation System, Mokpo National Maritime University)
  • 양진영 (목포해양대학교 대학원 해상운송시스템학과)
  • Received : 2018.12.24
  • Accepted : 2019.02.25
  • Published : 2019.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, (MLC) aimed to ensure decent working conditions for seafarers and entered into force on August 20, 2013. It was considered as the fourth pillar in the maritime sector. This paper evaluates how the MLC has been implemented in the field and what issues were addressed in the shipping industry. To achieve this, statistical analysis was conducted using inspection data of Port State Control (PSC) carried out by the Paris MOU and the Tokyo MOU during 2010-2012 and 2014-2016 for deficiencies under the MLC and International Labour Organization (ILO) No. 147 Convention. This study compared pre-2013 and post-2013 deficiency data according to ship's age, size (gross tonnage) and type. The results showed that, although the deficiencies reported by the Tokyo MOU during 2014-2016 were nearly double those from 2010-2012, the deficiency share against total deficiencies for the Tokyo MOU remained two thirds of those for the Paris MOU. This study suggests that the Tokyo MOU should strengthen its inspection efforts on MLC and ILO should provide clear references, such as guidelines and a unified interpretation for national discretions under the MLC for the purpose of harmonized PSC inspections. Additionally, it would be desirable to consolidate the deficiency coding system for the MLC by deleting the codes for the ILO No. 147 Convention, which was incorporated into the MLC. It would also be beneficial to add new deficiency codes for social security, including seafarers' leave and repatriation.

선원의 근로환경을 개선하기 위한 2006년 해사노동협약이 2013년 8월 20일 발효되었으며, 이 협약은 해운업계에서 4번째 중요한 협약으로 간주되고 있다. 이 연구는 해운업계가 이 협약을 어떻게 이행하고 있으며, 어떤 문제점이 있는지를 분석하기 위하여 실시하였다. 이를 위하여 유럽지역 및 아태지역 항만국통제 협력체가 해사노동협약과 ILO 제147호 협약과 관련된 2010~2012년 및 2014~2016년간 지적한 결함사항을 선령, 크기(총톤수), 선형 및 결함사항 유형에 대하여 협약 발효 전후(2013년) 3년간을 각각 비교하였다. 그 결과 아태지역에서 협약 발효 후인 2014~2016년 기간에 협약 발효 전 기간보다 결함사항이 약 2배 증가하였지만, 총 결함건수 대비 선원근로환경 관련 결함건수의 비율은 유럽지역의 약 2/3에 머물고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 해사노동협약이 보다 더 잘 이행되기 위해서는 이 협약에 대한 아태지역 항만국통제 협력체의 점검율을 높이는 노력이 필요하며, 이 협약이 국내법으로 위임한 규정에 대하여 국제노동기구가 국제해사기구의 가이드라인이나 통일해석과 같은 명확한 근거를 제공함으로써 통일적인 항만국통제가 시행되도록 하여야 한다. 또한, 해사노동협약에 편입된 ILO 제147호 협약에 대한 결함코드를 삭제하고 해사노동협약의 해당 결함코드로 통합하는 한편, 선원휴가 및 교대 등 사회보장 등과 관련된 항만국통제 결함코드를 신설할 필요가 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abel, A.(2014), The Maritime Labour Convention 2006 in the European Union, In J. Lavelle (Ed.), The Maritime Labour Convention 2006: International labour law redefined, pp. 1-17.
  2. Bo, L.(2006), Research on roles of China maritime safety administration under the consolidated maritime labour convention, World Maritime University, 2006.
  3. Cartner, J. A.(2014), The shipmaster and the Maritime Labour Convention 2006, In J. Lavelle (Ed.), The Maritime Labour Convention 2006: International labour law redefined, pp. 47-68.
  4. Durler, R.(2010), The Maritime Labour Convention 2006: A major step forward in maritime law, In N. M. Gutierrez (Ed.), Serving the rule of international law: Essays in honour of professor David Joseph Attard, pp. 297-304.
  5. International Labour Office(2015), Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006): Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) (Fourth ed.), Geneva: ILO.
  6. ILO(2018a), International Labour Organization, Ratifications of C147 - Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147). Retrieved September 26, 2018, from http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:11300:0::NO:::.
  7. ILO(2018b), International Labour Organization, International Labour Standards on Seafarers. Retrieved September 26, 2018, from http://ilo.org/global/standards/subjects-covered-byinternational-labour-standards/seafarers/lang--en/index.htm.
  8. ILO(2018c), International Labour Organization, National determinations - Republic of Korea. Retrieved September 26, 2018, from http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:80023:::NO:80023:P80023_COUNTRY_ID:103123.
  9. ILO(2018d), International Labour Organization, Ratifications of Maritime Labour Convention, 2006. Retrieved September 26, 2018, from http://ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:11300:0::NO:11300:P11300_INSTRUMENT_ID:312331:NO.
  10. IMO(2018), International Maritime Organization, Status of Conventions. Retrieved September 26, 2018, from http://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/StatusOfConventions/Documents/StatusOfTreaties.pdf.
  11. Jeon, Y. W.(2016), A Study on the Port State Control System in the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, Maritime Law Review, 28(2), pp. 1-35. https://doi.org/10.14443/kimlaw.2016.28.3.1
  12. Lavelle, J.(2014), How to determine jurisdiction and governing law in disputes arising out of a seafarer's employment agreement, In J. Lavelle (Ed.), The Maritime Labour Convention 2006: International labour law redefined, pp. 181-213.
  13. McConnell, M. L., D. Devlin and C. Doumbia-Henry(2011), The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006: A legal primer to an emerging international regime.
  14. Ozcayir, Z. O.(2004), Port State Control (Second ed.), p. 74.
  15. Paris MoU(2017), 2016 Paris MoU Annual Report. Retrieved September 29, 2018, from https://www.parismou.org/2016-paris-mou-annual-report-%E2%80%9Cseafarers-matter%E2%80%9D.
  16. Tokyo MOU(2017), Annual Report. Retrieved September 29, 2018, from http://www.tokyo-mou.org/doc/ANN16.pdf.
  17. Veganaden, M.(2007), The potential implications of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, for policy and management in the maritime sector : A critical analysis, World Maritime University, 2007.