Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Mexico (CTM) and the Authentic Workers’ Confederation of the Republic of Mexico (CAT) on the application by the Government of Conventions Nos 22, 55, 56, 58, 134, 164 and 166. The Committee also notes the reports provided by the Government on the application of these maritime Conventions. In order to provide an overview of matters arising in relation to the application of these Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, as follows.

The Committee recalls that, within the framework of the Standards Review Mechanism, the Governing Body has included on the agenda of the 118th Session (2030) of the International Labour Conference an item for the abrogation of Conventions Nos 22, 55, 56, 58, 134, 164 and 166, which have been revised by the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 as amended (MLC, 2006). Observing that all of the maritime Conventions ratified by Mexico will in principle be abrogated in 2030, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments concerning the eventual ratification of the MLC, 2006.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, as of December 2020, the powers that were previously included among the administrative, supervisory and vigilance functions of the Secretariat of Communications and Transport were transferred to the Marine Secretariat (SEMAR). The Committee notes the indication by the CAT that the SEMAR established a sectoral programme under the National Development Plan 2019–24, including special objectives for the conditions of personnel working at sea. However, the CAT indicates that the Federal Labour Act (LFT) only includes a special chapter on workers on ships and that it would be appropriate to update the current legislation with a view to paying due attention to the needs of seafarers. The Committee further notes the CAT’s indication that capacity-building should be promoted for the competent authorities in relation to supervision so that they have adequate technical knowledge, including knowledge of the relevant legislation and international conventions, when carrying out inspections on board ships. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on these matters.

Seamen ’ s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Article 9 of the Convention. Termination of the agreement. The Committee notes that, in reply to its comments on the lack of conformity of section 209(III) of the LFT with the Convention, the Government reiterates that this section, which provides that employment relationships may not be terminated when the vessel is abroad, is more favourable to workers than Article 9(1) of the Convention. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to ensure that the national legislation allows both parties to terminate an employment agreement of seafarers for an indefinite period, including when the ship is abroad.

Article 14(1). Record of discharge in the identity document. The Committee notes that, in reply to its comments, the Government indicates that: (i) the Harbour Masters and Maritime Affairs Unit is responsible for certifying voyages and issuing the seafarer’s book and maritime identity document for personnel on board ships in the Mexican merchant navy; and (ii) the expiry or termination of the seafarer’s agreement is not recorded in the seafarer’s book and maritime identity document, as it is considered that seafarers do not work for the same enterprise during the five-year period of validity of the seafarer’s book. Observing that the Government has not provided information on the measures that give effect to this provision, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Shipowners ’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (No. 55)

Article 6 of the Convention. Repatriation expenses in the event of sickness or injury. The Committee notes the reference by the Government, in its reply to its previous comments, to the provisions of the Maritime Navigation and Trade Act, as amended, on the disembarkation of seafarers in need of medical care. However, the Committee observes that those provisions refer to the repatriation of foreign seafarers. The Government also indicates that expenses incurred as a result of sickness abroad, including the cost of repatriation, are covered by the shipowner through the protection and compensation insurance scheme known as the PANDI in Mexico. The Committee takes note of this information.

Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134)

Articles 2(3) and 3 of the Convention. Detailed statistics on occupational accidents on board. Research into general trends and hazards of maritime employment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comments, that, within the field of competence of the SEMAR through the Harbour Maters and Maritime Affairs Unit, information is not available on occupational accidents on board ship which would make it possible to obtain disaggregated statistics on the part of the ship (deck, engine room or catering areas) and the location (at sea or in port) where the accident occurred. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that up to now studies and research have not been conducted that could establish general trends for the prevention of occupational accidents and hazards in the context of maritime employment. The Committee further notes the data provided by the Government on maritime accidents recorded during the period 2019–22, and cases involving the death or serious injury of a person, or the loss of a person on board. In view of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that full statistics on accidents and cases of sickness of seafarers are compiled, analysed and published and, where necessary, are followed up through research into general trends and the hazards brought out by the statistics.

Article 4(3). Measures for the prevention of occupational accidents. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comments, that the SEMAR is the authority responsible for the adoption of specific measures concerning safety in the maritime port sector and the supervision of official Mexican standards in relation to the matters covered by the Convention, such as safety jackets and fire prevention systems. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents of seafarers. The Committee notes the CTM’s observation concerning the need for the Government to require shipowners to comply with the provisions of the LFT with respect to the establishment of joint occupational safety and health committees which can discharge the functions set out in the Act for the prevention of occupational accidents. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on this observation. Furthermore, observing that the Government has once again failed to provide information on specific accident prevention programmes for seafarers, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Health Protection and Medical Care (Seafarers) Convention, 1987 (No. 164)

Article 4(c) of the Convention. Right to visit a medical doctor.Observing that the Government has once again failed to provide information on the provisions or other measures which ensure that full effect is given to Article 4(c) of the Convention, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Article 5(4) and (5). Inspection at regular intervals of the medicine chest. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments, the Government reiterates the information provided previously and refers to the inspections carried out by the SEMAR in respect of compliance with International Maritime Organisation (IMO)’s Conventions. The Committee recalls that Convention No. 164 differs in its scope and requirements from the IMO Conventions. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the intervals at which on-board medicine chests are inspected.

Article 7. Medical advice by radio or satellite communication. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments, the Government refers to the measures for the application of the IMO International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR Convention), 1979, and in this context to the procedures and equipment for crewmembers of ships to benefit from medical advice by radio or satellite communication. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 8. Presence of a medical doctor on board ships. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comments, that under the terms of the International Health Regulations ships that transport hazardous cargos are required to have on board medical personnel, medicaments, specific antidotes and a special team, and that members of the crew who are designated to service in medical facilities must be trained in the provision of medical first aid, in accordance with the IMO International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW Convention), 1978. However, the Committee observes that the Government has not provided information on the provisions that give effect to Article 8.The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that ships carrying 100 or more seafarers on board and ordinarily engaged on international voyages of more than three days’ duration carry a medical doctor as a member of the crew responsible for providing medical care.

Article 11. Separate hospital accommodation.Observing that the Government has not provided further information in response to its request, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166)

Article 2(1)(c), (e), (f) and (g) of the Convention. Circumstances giving rise to repatriation. The Committee notes the Government’s reference in relation to the application of Article 2(1)(c), in reply to its previous comments, to section 34 of the Maritime Navigation and Trade Act which, however, relates to the repatriation of foreign seafarers. The Committee notes that the Government provides information on the coverage by the protection and compensation insurance scheme of costs occasioned by illness abroad, including the cost of repatriation. While noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to adopt appropriate measures to require that any seafarer on board a ship flying the Mexican flag shall be entitled to repatriation in the event of illness or injury or other medical condition which requires his repatriation when found medically fit to travel.

With reference to the circumstances envisaged in Article 2(1)(e), (f) and (g), the Government refers to article 133 of the Constitution and sections 6 and 18 of the LFT, under the terms of which the respective laws and international treaties concluded and approved in accordance with article 133 shall form part of national law and may be applied in respect of anything that benefits the worker without requiring the adoption of national provisions. The Government indicates that, in view of the above, effect is given to the provisions concerned. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 2(2). Maximum duration of service periods on board following which seafarers are entitled to repatriation.Observing that the Government has not provided information on the legislation or other measures that give effect to this provision, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Article 3. Destinations for repatriation. Observing that the Government has not provided further information on the legislation or other measures that give effect to this provision, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Articles 4 and 5. Responsibility of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation.Observing that the Government has not provided further information on the legislation or other measures that give effect to this provision, the Committee reiterates its previous comment.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention in an appropriate language. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comments, that the SEMAR disseminates information on the existence of the Convention, which can be consulted on the ILO webpage. The Committee recalls that Article 12 provides that the text of the Convention shall be available in an appropriate language to the crew members of every ship which flies the national flag. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give full effect to this provision.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Industrial Chambers of the United States of Mexico (CONCAMIN), forwarded by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) on 26 July 2016, regarding the Government’s application of Conventions Nos 22, 55, 134, 163 and 164. CONCAMIN indicates that, in view of the Committee’s considerations and the legislation in force, it would be appropriate to analyse the whole body of standards relating to seafarers and indicates its willingness to participate in the process of analysis and implementation of ad hoc regulations. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in this regard. The Committee also notes the reports sent by the Government on the application of the abovementioned maritime Conventions and Convention No. 166. In order to provide an overview of matters arising in relation to the application of these Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, as follows.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under article 133 of the Political Constitution of the United States of Mexico (Constitution) and section 6 of the Federal Labour Act of 1 April 1979, treaties form part of national law and may be applied without it being necessary to adopt national legislation. The Committee observes that article 133 of the Constitution provides that the said Constitution, the laws of the National Congress emanating from it and all treaties which are in conformity with it, concluded by the Government with the approval of the Senate, shall be the supreme law of the land, and that the judges of each federal entity shall act in conformity with the Constitution, laws and treaties, notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in the constitutions or laws of federal entities. The Committee also observes that, under section 6 of the Federal Labour Act, the respective laws and treaties concluded and approved in accordance with article 133 of the Constitution shall be applicable to employment relationships in respect of all the benefits enjoyed by workers, from the date of entry into force. On this basis, in the absence of specific national provisions that give effect to the self-executing provisions of the Conventions, the Committee has considered the latter provisions to be directly applicable in Mexico. However, the Committee wishes to emphasize that the maritime Conventions contain a number of provisions which are not self-executing and hence require the adoption of legislation and other measures by the Government.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22)

Article 3(1) of the Convention. Facilities to examine the articles of agreement before signature. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the manner in which it is ensured that seafarers are given facilities to examine the articles of agreement before signature. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in this regard that seafarers may consult free of charge the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board and the Office of the Federal Prosecutor for the Defence of Labour regarding any queries concerning the content of the agreement. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, under section 28 of the Federal Labour Act, when a Mexican worker is employed abroad, the agreement shall be submitted to the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board to verify that it satisfies the conditions of work prescribed by the abovementioned Act. The Committee notes this information.

Article 6(3)(10). Information to be included in the agreement. Conditions for the termination of the agreement. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the Federal Labour Act does not include, among the indications which must be provided in writing in the agreement, the conditions for termination of the agreement. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that such conditions are established in sections 194 and 195 of the Federal Labour Act, which include the stipulation that the agreement shall indicate whether it is concluded for a definite or indefinite period or for an individual voyage, and in section 206 of the aforementioned Act concerning the termination of employment relationships of workers on board vessels. Furthermore, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under article 133 of the Constitution and section 6 of the Federal Labour Act, the provisions of Article 6(3) of the Convention concerning the particulars that the agreement must contain are directly applicable in national law. While recalling the self-executing nature of Article 6 of the Convention, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government and considers that it responds to its previous request on this matter.

Article 9. Termination of the agreement. In many previous comments, the Committee noted that section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act – which provides that employment relationships may not be terminated when the vessel is abroad, in unpopulated areas or in port, should the vessel be exposed in the latter case to any risk due to bad weather or other circumstances – is not in conformity with Article 9 of the Convention, which provides that an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that the notice specified in the agreement shall have been given. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the purpose of section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act is to prevent workers and the vessel itself from being exposed to exceptional situations of risk and does not prevent the termination of the employment relationship when such a situation no longer exists. However, the Committee once again observes with deep concern that section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act prevents the possibility of an agreement for an indefinite period being terminated in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, as required by the Convention. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to bring the national legislation into conformity with Article 9 of the Convention.

Article 14(1). Record of discharge in the identity document. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the copy of the seafarers’ book and identity document sent by the Government does not include a space to enter the expiry or termination of the agreement. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Communication and Transport (SCT), the competent authority for issuing this document, stated that in view of the austerity measures regarding the use of government resources and the significant number of seafarers’ books and identity documents in circulation, the space for noting the expiry or termination of the agreement has not yet been incorporated in the document in question. The Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the measures taken to ensure that any discharge is recorded in the document issued to the seafarer, in accordance with Article 14(1) of the Convention.

Shipowners’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (No. 55)

Article 6 of the Convention. Repatriation expenses in the event of sickness or injury. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 204(VII) of the Federal Labour Act, employers have the obligation to provide seafarers with food and accommodation, medical treatment and medicines in the event of illness, but that there is no mention of shipowners’ responsibility to bear the cost of repatriation for a sick or injured seafarer who is put ashore during the voyage as a result of illness or injury. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Federal Labour Act does not specifically establish the obligation to cover repatriation expenses in such circumstances. However, the Government indicates that this obligation derives from article 123(A)(XXVI) of the Constitution, which provides that employment contracts concluded between a Mexican citizen and a foreign employer shall clearly specify that the cost of repatriation shall be borne by the employer. The Committee observes that this provision of the Constitution does not regulate the repatriation of seafarers on vessels flying the Mexican flag or not under foreign ownership. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all seafarers have the right to be repatriated at the expense of the shipowner in the event of sickness or injury, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention.

Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134)

Article 2(3). Detailed statistics on occupational accidents on board. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure the availability of statistics relating to occupational accidents on board that indicate clearly the part of the ship (deck, engine room or catering areas) and the location (at sea or in port) where the accident occurred, in accordance with Article 2(3). The Committee notes the Government’s indications that: the Merchant Shipping Department at the SCT and the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS) compile the relevant statistics; the IMSS bases its statistics on the data compiled in the occupational accident notification system (SIAAT), and the relevant Mexican Official Standard (NOM-036-SCT4-2007 of 17 August 2007) is being updated. However, the Committee observes that the statistics of the Merchant Shipping Department forwarded by the Government do not indicate the part of the vessel or the location where accidents occurred. The Committee also notes that the Government has not provided any statistics from the IMSS and that the SIATT accident notification form does not include a space to indicate in the part of the ship and the location where the accident occurred. Lastly, while noting that NOM-036-SCT4-2007 provides that the shipowner shall report occupational accidents to the maritime authority, the Committee points out that the aforementioned standard does not specify the level of detail to be included in such reports. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether and how the different mechanisms established for the compilation of information on occupational accidents on board (by the Merchant Shipping Department or the SIAAT system) enable the Government to have disaggregated statistics, in accordance with Article 2(3) of the Convention.

Article 3. Research into general trends and hazards of maritime employment. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take steps to conduct research into general trends and hazards of maritime employment. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on occupational safety and health (OSH) advisory committees at both the national and the individual state level (COCONASST and COCOESST, respectively and on the National Advisory Committee on OSH Normalization). The Committee also notes the Government’s indications that the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Regulations (Federal OSH Regulations), which apply to ships, require employers to do research into the risks of various types of jobs and to send information to the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare. The Government also indicates that employers can examine the risks of occupational accidents through OSH committees and services. However, the Committee observes that the mechanisms for research into the occupational hazards described by the Government are not exclusive to maritime employment. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify whether in practice such research makes it possible to establish general trends and hazards peculiar to maritime employment, and can be used in relation to the prevention of accidents in the particular context of maritime employment, in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention.

Article 4(3). Measures for the prevention of occupational accidents. In its previous comments, the Committee firmly requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the standards applicable to seafarers for the prevention of accidents and the protection of health in employment specify the particular features of maritime employment listed in Article 4(3), such as structural features of the ship, machinery, special safety measures on deck, loading and unloading equipment, fire prevention and firefighting, anchors, chains and lines, dangerous cargo and ballast, and personal protective equipment. The Committee notes that the information supplied by the Government is of a general nature and does not mention the adoption of any standards that meet the requirements of Article 4(3). The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the standards applicable to seafarers for the prevention of occupational accidents include the aspects listed in Article 4(3) of the Convention.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the formulation and implementation of programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents among seafarers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the SCT and the Ministry of Shipping have competence for the matters covered by the Convention. However, the Committee observes that the Government does not indicate whether these authorities have drawn up the prevention programmes required under Article 8. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government to the effect that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare does not have separate programmes for the prevention of accidents to seafarers, to whom the general OSH self-management programme (PASST) – of general application – applies. The Committee once again notes with regret that the information provided by the Government refers to generally applicable OSH programmes, whereas the Convention requires specific maritime programmes to be drawn up in cooperation with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps to formulate and implement programmes which give effect to Article 8 of the Convention.

Seafarers’ Welfare Convention, 1987 (No. 163)

Articles 2, 5 and 6 of the Convention. Welfare facilities and services in ports and on board ship. Review of welfare facilities and services. International cooperation. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the functioning of seafarer centres (Casas del Marino) in various ports in the country, on the review of welfare facilities and services for seafarers, and on international cooperation in this field. The Committee notes that the Government refers once again to the General Regulations for Seafarers of 8 December 1943 but does not indicate how the seafarer centres operate in practice. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government once again refers to section 214 of the Federal Labour Act, which provides that the Federal Executive Authority shall determine how services in seafarer centres shall be maintained and improved, without indicating whether any regulations have been promulgated under the aforementioned section. The Committee recalls that, under Article 2 of the Convention, each Member undertakes to ensure that adequate welfare facilities and services are provided for seafarers both in port and on board ship. Such services shall be reviewed frequently to ensure that they are appropriate in the light of changes in the needs of seafarers resulting from technical, operational and other developments in the shipping industry (Article 5). Moreover, each Member undertakes to cooperate with other Members with a view to ensuring the application of the Convention (Article 6). The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to these provisions of the Convention.

Health Protection and Medical Care (Seafarers) Convention, 1987 (No. 164)

Article 4(c) of the Convention. Right to visit a medical doctor. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take the necessary measures to guarantee seafarers the right to visit a doctor without delay in ports of call where practicable. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that: (a) seafarers have the unrestricted right to medical consultations in ports of arrival; and (b) seafarers may use IMSS hospitals in Mexican ports and are covered for medical assistance abroad by the insurance policies concluded by shipowners with “protection and compensation associations”. While noting this information, the Committee observes that the Government does not indicate the legal provisions which ensure compliance with Article 4(c) of the Convention, according to which seafarers must be guaranteed the right to visit a doctor without delay in ports of call where practicable. The Committee firmly requests the Government to provide the aforementioned information.

Article 5(4) and (5). Inspection at regular intervals of the medicine chest. Checking of the labelling. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take steps to give effect to the specific requirements relating to the regular inspection of the medicine chest on board at intervals not exceeding 12 months and the checking of the labelling, expiry dates and conditions of storage of all medicines contained in the medicine chest, in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that: (a) the Merchant Shipping Department is responsible for the application of Mexican Official Standard NOM-034-SCT4-2009 of 24 February 2009 concerning OSH conditions for the handling, transportation and storage of hazardous chemicals, which stipulates that a medicine chest must be carried on board; and (b) maritime safety inspections are ongoing and can be conducted at any time. However, the Committee observes that the information provided by the Government does not indicate how such inspections are ensured at regular intervals not exceeding 12 months or whether the requirements for storage of the medicines listed in Article 5(4) and (5) are checked. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide information on the intervals at which on-board medicine chests are inspected, and on the checking of compliance with the provisions of the Convention regarding the labelling and storage of medicines.

Article 7. Medical advice by radio or satellite communication. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the manner in which it is ensured that vessels can obtain medical advice at any time of day by radio or satellite communication, in accordance with Article 7. The Committee notes with regret that the Government once again refers in this regard to the Maritime Safety Inspection Regulations of 12 May 2004, which require vessels to carry radio communication equipment on board. The Committee recalls that the existence of radio communication equipment on board is not sufficient to ensure the availability of medical advice on vessels on the high seas at any time of day or night, in accordance with Article 7. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 8. Presence of a medical doctor on board ships. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the fact that neither the Maritime Safety Inspection Regulations nor the Federal Labour Act specify the ships or categories of ships which are required to carry a medical doctor as a member of the crew. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government once again refers to section 204(VIII) of the Federal Labour Act, under which employers are obliged to carry medical staff and equipment on board as established by the laws and regulations on maritime communications. In view of the fact that the provisions referred to by the Government do not meet the requirements of Article 8, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that ships covered by the Convention carry a medical doctor as a member of the crew.

Article 9. Training courses for persons in charge of medical care. In its previous comments, the Committee reminded the Government that training courses for persons in charge of medical care on board vessels who are not doctors must meet the requirements of Article 9, such as being approved by the competent authority and being based on the content of the relevant international guides. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the Nautical Academies and the Education Centre provide senior and junior Merchant Navy officers with training courses which conform to the requirements of the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), including courses in basic first aid, medical first aid and medical care. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that these courses are approved at the national level by the Ministry of Public Education and the Maritime Authority, while the qualifications and validations issued are recognized at the global level by the International Maritime Organization. The Committee notes this information, which meets the requirements of the Convention.

Article 11. Hospital accommodation. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the national legislation does not give effect to Article 11, which stipulates that in any ship of 500 or more gross tonnage, carrying 15 or more seafarers and engaged in a voyage of more than three days’ duration, separate hospital accommodation must be provided. In this regard, the Committee notes with regret that the Government refers once again to section 49 of the Federal OSH Regulations of 13 November 2014, which regulate the provision of preventive occupational medical services. The Committee reiterates that the aforementioned Regulations are of a general nature and do not contain provisions determining the type of vessel in which separate hospital accommodation is required or describing the particular features of such hospital accommodation. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to take the necessary steps to give effect to Article 11 of the Convention.

Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166)

Article 2(1)(c) of the Convention. Repatriation in the event of illness, injury or other medical condition. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 204(VII) of the Federal Labour Act, employers have the obligation to provide seafarers with food and accommodation, medical treatment and medicines in the event of illness, but that there is no mention of shipowners’ responsibility to bear the cost of repatriation for a sick or injured seafarer who is put ashore during the voyage as a result of illness or injury. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Federal Labour Act does not specifically establish the obligation to cover repatriation expenses in such circumstances. However, the Government indicates that this obligation derives from article 123(XXVI) of the Constitution, which provides that employment contracts concluded between a Mexican citizen and a foreign employer shall clearly specify that the cost of repatriation shall be borne by the employer. The Committee observes that this provision of the Constitution does not regulate the repatriation of seafarers on vessels flying the Mexican flag or not under foreign ownership. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all seafarers have the right to be repatriated at the expense of the shipowner, in accordance with Article 2(1)(c) of the Convention.

Article 2(1)(e) and (f). Repatriation in the event of the inability of the shipowner to continue to fulfil legal or contractual obligations or in the event that a seafarer does not consent to go to a war zone. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take steps to ensure that seafarers have the right to be repatriated under the circumstances provided for in Article 2(1)(e) – namely, in the event of the shipowner not being able to continue to fulfil his or her legal or contractual obligations as an employer of the seafarer by reason of bankruptcy, sale of ship or any other similar reason – and in Article 2(1)(f) – namely, in the event of a ship being bound for a war zone to which the seafarer does not consent to go. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 204(IX) of the Federal Labour Act guarantees repatriation regardless of the reason. However, the Committee notes with regret that the aforementioned section excludes from its scope situations of separation for reasons that cannot be ascribed to the employer, which can include the cases listed in Article 2(1)(e) and (f). In view of the fact that section 204(IX) of the Federal Labour Act does not give adequate effect to Article 2(1)(e) and (f), the Committee once again requests the Government to take steps to ensure that the shipowner is obliged to bear the cost of repatriation, in accordance with Article 2(1)(e) and (f).

Article 2(1)(g). Repatriation in the event of termination or interruption of employment in accordance with an industrial award or collective agreement. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions in the national legislation on the right to repatriation in the event of the interruption or termination of employment in accordance with an industrial award or collective agreement. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government refers to section 209(V) and (VI) of the Federal Labour Act. However, the Committee notes with regret that the aforementioned section only guarantees repatriation in the event of the loss of the ship through seizure or disaster, or in the event of a change of nationality. Hence it does not cover cases of termination or interruption of employment in accordance with an industrial award or collective agreement. In view of the fact that section 209(V) and (VI) of the Federal Labour Act does not give adequate effect to Article 2(1)(g), the Committee once again requests the Government to take steps to ensure that the shipowner is obliged to bear the cost of repatriation, in accordance with Article 2(1)(g).

Article 2(2). Maximum duration of service periods. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions on the maximum duration of service periods on board following which seafarers are entitled to repatriation. In this respect, the Committee notes with regret that the Government refers to sections 6 and 18 of the Federal Labour Act and article 133 of the Constitution. The Committee recalls that Article 2(2) requires national laws or regulations or collective agreements to prescribe the maximum duration of service periods on board following which seafarers are entitled to repatriation. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that this duration is prescribed by national laws or regulations or collective agreements.

Article 3. Destinations for repatriation. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions establishing the right of seafarers to choose from among the prescribed destinations for repatriation. In this respect, the Committee notes that the Government refers to section 209(V) and (VI) of the Federal Labour Act. The Committee notes with regret that the aforementioned section only covers repatriation in the event of the loss of the ship through seizure or disaster, or in the event of a change of nationality for the ship, and does not allow seafarers in such situations to choose between different destinations. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that sections 6 and 18 of the Federal Labour Act and article 133 of the Constitution give effect to Article 3. However, the Committee recalls that Article 3(1) requires national laws or regulations to prescribe the destinations to which seafarers may be repatriated. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to adopt the necessary legislation to give effect to Article 3.

Articles 4 and 5. Responsibility of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take steps to ensure the shipowner’s compliance with the obligation to arrange for repatriation through prompt and appropriate means. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 209(V) and (VI) of the Federal Labour Act. However, the Committee observes that the aforementioned section guarantees repatriation only in the event of the loss of the ship through seizure or disaster, or in the event of a change of nationality for the ship. The Committee notes with regret that these provisions do not cover all the cases of repatriation envisaged in the Convention, do not specify which elements listed in Article 4 must be included in the cost of repatriation, and do not clarify how repatriation is to be arranged if the shipowner fails to make the necessary arrangements in accordance with Article 5. In view of the fact that section 209(V) and (VI) of the Federal Labour Act does not give adequate effect to Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention, the Committee once again requests the Government to take steps to ensure that repatriation is arranged for in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.

Article 6. Passport and other identity documents. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to specify how it is ensured that seafarers who are to be repatriated are able to obtain their passport and other identity documents. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the National Institute for Migration (INM) is responsible for making arrangements for entry into the countries of repatriation. While noting this information, the Committee recalls that Article 6 seeks to protect seafarers from situations in which they are obliged to surrender their passport to the shipowners, captain or employment agency, as a result of which they could be without an identity document at the time of repatriation. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to clarify how it is ensured that seafarers can retain their passport or other identity documents for the purpose of repatriation.

Article 7. Paid leave. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the national legislation does not contain any provision ensuring that time spent awaiting repatriation and repatriation travel time is not deducted from paid leave accrued to the seafarer. The Committee notes that the Government refers to the direct application of the Convention and indicates that sections 6 and 18 of the Federal Labour Act and article 133 of the Constitution give effect to Article 7. The Committee notes this information, which responds to its previous requests.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention in an appropriate language. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the manner in which the text of the Convention in an appropriate language is made available to the crew members of every ship registered in its territory. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that consultations will be held with the Merchant Shipping Department on the possibility of disseminating the text of the Convention in English and Spanish to the crew members of every seagoing vessel registered in its territory. The Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information, further to consultations with the Merchant Shipping Department, on the application of this provision of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues to be addressed in relation to the application of maritime Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine these matters in a single comment, as follows.

Placing of Seamen Convention, 1920 (No. 9). Articles 3(2) and 4. Prohibition of the practice of finding employment for seafarers as a commercial enterprise for pecuniary gain. Efficient and adequate system of free employment offices for seafarers. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that the Convention prohibits the finding of employment for seafarers for pecuniary gain. The Committee once again observes that the 2006 Regulations on workers’ employment agencies establishes a system in which private paid employment agencies coexist with agencies providing services free of charge. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the law and practice into conformity with the Convention.

Article 5. Advisory committees. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the establishment of committees consisting of an equal number of representatives of shipowners and seafarers to advise on matters concerning the operation of employment offices for seafarers. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on this subject. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Medical Examination of Young Persons (Sea) Convention, 1921 (No. 16). Article 3. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the national legislation does not establish a duration for the validity of medical certificates for seafarers under 18 years of age, as required by this Article of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the ninth section of the Medical requirements for technical personnel in maritime transport, published in September 2010, provides that personnel in the merchant navy shall be subject to a comprehensive psychological and physical examination every two years in order to assess their psychological and physical aptitude to perform safely and efficiently the duties entrusted to them in their maritime workbook, job description or maritime identity document, with the exception of those under 18 years of age, for whom it shall be every six months.

Sickness Insurance (Sea) Convention, 1936 (No. 56). Article 1(1). Coverage of the compulsory sickness insurance scheme. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether the agreements concluded between the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS) and a number of shipping companies were still in force and whether the compulsory social security scheme, in the absence of such agreements, covers all seafarers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it does not have information on those agreements. The Committee however notes that section 12(I) of the Social Security Act provides that those persons shall be covered by insurance under the compulsory scheme, which includes sickness insurance, who, in conformity with sections 20 and 21 of the Federal Labour Act, perform paid work or provide personal or subordinate services, permanently or occasionally, to other associations, persons or economic units without legal personality, irrespective of the act which gave rise to such services and of the legal personality or economic nature of the employer, even where the latter, under the terms of any special legislation, is exempt from the payment of contributions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these provisions guarantee in practice coverage by the compulsory medical insurance for all seafarers.

Article 7. Right to the insurance benefit after the termination of the engagement. The Committee notes that section 109 of the Social Security Act establishes a period of eight weeks following termination of employment during which entitlement is maintained and envisages the possibility for that period to be extended by the Technical Council of the IMSS at the request of the executive authorities. In this regard, the Committee notes that section 109 of the Act does not establish the period for the conservation of rights such that it covers the normal interval between successive engagements. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the provisions that have been adopted or are envisaged to ensure that seafarers benefit from the right to the sickness insurance benefit, also in the event of sickness occurring during the normal interval between successive engagements.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the reports provided by the Government on the application of its ratified maritime Conventions. With a view to providing an overview of the matters raised in relation to the application of these Conventions, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine them in a single comment, as follows.

Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22). Article 3(1) and (4). Safeguards for the signature of the agreement. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions in law to ensure that seafarers are given an opportunity to examine the agreement before signing, with an understanding of its clauses. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under the terms of section 530(I) of the Federal Labour Act, the Office of the Federal Prosecutor for the Defence of Labour (PROFEDET), which has delegations in each federal entity, includes among its responsibilities the representation and provision of advice to workers and their unions, if they so request, in relation to any authority on matters regarding the application of labour standards. The Committee nevertheless observes that there are no specific provisions giving effect to the Convention. While noting this information, the Committee firmly requests the Government to indicate the manner in which it is ensured that seafarers benefit from the facilities envisaged in this Article of the Convention.

Article 6(3)(10). Information to be included in the agreement. Conditions for the termination of the agreement. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 195 of the Federal Labour Act does not include, among the indications which shall be provided in writing in the agreement, the conditions for the termination of the agreement. In view of the absence of further information on this subject, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the agreement shall contain the conditions for its termination, that is to say: (i) if the agreement has been made for a definite period, the date fixed for its expiry; (ii) if it has been made for a voyage, the port of destination and the time which has to expire after arrival before the seafarer shall be discharged; and (iii) if the agreement has been made for an indefinite period, the conditions which shall entitle either party to rescind it, as well as the required period of notice for rescission, provided that such period shall not be less for the shipowner than for the seafarer, as required by this Article of the Convention.

Article 7. Crew list. The Committee notes that various sections of Chapter VI of the Regulations issued under the Maritime Shipping and Commerce Act include the crew list among the requirements for the authorization of the arrival and departure of marine vessels and craft. Noting the absence of provisions in the Regulations specifying whether the agreement shall be recorded or annexed to the list of crew, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 8. Information on conditions of employment available on board. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the need to ensure that clear information may be obtained on board by seafarers as to their conditions of employment. In this regard, the Committee notes that section 194 of the Federal Labour Act provides that terms and conditions of employment shall be indicated in writing and that a copy shall be provided to each party, another shall be communicated to the Port Authority or the nearest Mexican consul, and a fourth to the labour inspectorate in the location that shall be determined. The Government adds that section 132(XVIII) of the Act provides that the employer shall be required to display visibly and disseminate in the workplace the full text of the collective labour contract or contracts applicable in the enterprise. The Committee notes this information with interest.

Article 9(1). Termination of the agreement. For many years, the Committee has been noting that section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act, which provides that employment relationships may not be terminated when the vessel is abroad, in unpopulated areas or in port, in the event in the latter case that the vessel is exposed to any risk due to bad weather or other circumstances, is not in conformity with this provision of the Convention which provides that an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that the notice specified in the agreement shall have been given. The Government indicates in this respect that the purpose of this provision is not to prevent the possibility of terminating the agreement, but to protect the seafarer in situations of risk by reason of being outside the country, in unpopulated areas or subject to bad weather, thereby safeguarding the seafarer’s safety and health. The Committee notes that this explanation does not reply to its request in the sense that the termination of the agreement must be carried out in any port where the vessel loads or unloads. The Committee therefore firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into conformity with this Article of the Convention.

Article 14(1). Discharge. The Committee notes the copy of the new maritime book and identity document communicated by the Government, which contains spaces to record the duties performed on board, including the dates of embarkation and discharge. Nevertheless, the Committee notes that this copy of the workbook does not include a space to enter the expiry or termination of the agreement, whatever the reason. The Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that any discharge is recorded in the document issued to the seafarer, under the terms of Article 5, in accordance with the provisions of Article 14.

Shipowners’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (No. 55). Article 6. Repatriation expenses. The Committee refers to the comments that it is making on this subject in relation to the Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166).

Article 8. Safeguarding property left on board. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate any legal provisions which give effect to this Article of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee notes that sections 27 and 28 of the Maritime Shipping and Commerce Act provide that the master of the vessel shall be responsible for the vessel, as well as for its crew, passengers, cargo and the legal acts carried out, and that the master shall exercise authority in relation to the persons and property on board. The Committee notes this information.

Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention, 1970 (No. 134). Article 2(3). Detailed statistics on occupational accidents. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to adopt provisions requiring that statistics on occupational accidents on board ship clearly indicate the department (for example, deck, engine or catering) and the area (for example, at sea or in port) where the accidents occurred. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that Official Mexican Standard NOM-021-STP-1993 is being updated. The Committee notes that this Standard applies to all workplaces, and does not specify the manner in which it applies to accidents that occur on vessels. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that statistics on occupational accidents are compiled in conformity with the provisions of this Article of the Convention.

Article 3. Research into general trends and hazards of maritime employment. The Committee recalls that this Article of the Convention requires research to be undertaken into general trends and into such hazards as are brought out by statistics in order to provide a sound basis for the prevention of accidents which are due to particular hazards of maritime employment. The Committee notes that the information provided by the Government on this subject is of a general nature and does not refer to research undertaken in this regard. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 4(2) and (3)(d). Measures for the prevention of occupational accidents. For many years, the Committee has been noting the Government’s indication that the Crew Safety Manual is being revised. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Manual is prepared and revised by shipping enterprises and operators, in accordance with the provisions of Official Mexican Standard NOM-036-SCT4-2007 on the administration of operational security and the prevention of contamination by maritime vessels and craft, and that this is verified solely by the maritime authority. The Committee notes that the Official Standard to which the Government refers does not include provisions on specific aspects for the prevention of occupational accidents which are peculiar to maritime employment, such as structural features of the ship, machinery, special safety measures on and below deck, loading and unloading equipment, fire prevention and firefighting, anchors, chains and lines, dangerous cargo and ballast, and personal protective equipment for seafarers. Noting the gaps in the Mexican legislation, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the standards applicable to seafarers for the prevention of accidents and the protection of health in employment specify these matters.

Article 6(3) and (4). Enforcement measures. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the inspection authorities are familiar with maritime employment and its practices and to make available to seafarers copies or summaries of the legal provisions on the prevention of accidents. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that to conduct inspections on vessels and platforms at sea, inspectors are required to have the “sea book”, which is obtained by completing the “Basic security course on platforms and embarkations” provided by the Training and Skills Board for the Personnel of the National Merchant Navy (FIDENA). The Government adds that section 132(XVIII) of the Federal Labour Act establishes the requirement for employers to display visibly and disseminate in workplaces the principal provisions of Mexican regulations and Official Standards on occupational safety, health and the working environment, together with the full text of the collective labour contract or contracts in force in the enterprise, as well as making information available to workers on the risks and hazards to which they are exposed. The Committee notes this information.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the establishment and implementation of programmes for the prevention of accidents among seafarers arising from or occurring during employment. In reply to this request, the Government once again provides information on laws, regulations and safety and health programmes that are general in scope, although the Convention requires the establishment of specific maritime programmes with the cooperation of shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations. The Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures for the establishment and implementation of programmes that give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Seafarers’ Welfare Convention, 1987 (No. 163). Articles 2, 5 and 6. Welfare facilities and services in ports and on board ship. Review of welfare facilities and services. International cooperation. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the facilities and services provided by seafarer centres located in the various ports in the country. The Committee also requested the Government to indicate how it is ensured in law and practice that welfare facilities and services for seafarers are reviewed frequently, and to indicate the measures adopted in the field of international cooperation, as required by Article 6 of the Convention. In view of the lack of new information on these matters, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to these Articles of the Convention.

Health Protection and Medical Care (Seafarers) Convention, 1987 (No. 164). Article 4(c). Right to visit a medical doctor. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the legal provisions which guarantee the right of seafarers to visit a doctor without delay in ports of call, whether they are in the flag State or a third country. Noting that the Government’s reply does not address the issue raised, the Committee firmly requests it to take the necessary measures to guarantee seafarers the right to visit a doctor without delay in ports of call where practicable.

Article 5(4) and (5). Inspection at regular intervals of the medicine chest. Checking of the labelling. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the absence of measures in national maritime laws and regulations to give effect to the specific requirements relating to the regular inspection of the medicine chest on board at intervals not exceeding 12 months and the checking of the labelling, expiry dates and conditions of storage of all medicines contained in the medicine chest. In view of the absence of new information on these matters, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into conformity with these provisions of the Convention.

Article 7. Medical advice by radio or satellite communication. For many years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to indicate the manner in which this Article of the Convention is enforced and applied in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 48 of the Regulations on the inspection of maritime security provides that vessels authorized for coastal navigation shall be equipped for radio communication. The Government also indicates that Mexican legislation does not include specific provisions on these matters. The Committee reminds the Government that the sole existence of radio communication equipment on board is not sufficient to ensure the availability of medical advice on vessels on the high seas at any time free of charge in the form and in accordance with the requirements set out in the Convention. It therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to effectively implement this Article of the Convention.

Article 8. Presence of a medical doctor on board ships. The Committee notes that the Regulations on maritime security inspection, published on 12 May 2004, which replaced the Regulations on the naval inspection service of 1945, which required a vessel transporting more than 50 persons and engaged in a voyage of over 24 hours to have a medical surgeon on board, do not require the presence of a medical doctor on board the vessels to which they are applicable. The Government indicates that section 204(VIII) of the Federal Labour Act provides that employers are required to carry on board the medical care personnel and materials established by the laws and provisions on water transport. The Committee notes that this provision does not specify the vessels or categories of vessels which are required to carry a medical doctor as a member of the crew, taking into account, inter alia, such factors as the duration, nature and conditions of the voyage, and the number of seafarers on board. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 9. Persons in charge of medical care. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the specific courses for persons in charge of medical care on board vessels who are not doctors. In its reply, the Government indicates that the Nautical Schools of Mazatlàn, Tampico and Veracruz, and the Educational Centre of Campeche, provide courses on basic first aid and medical care. The Government adds that, under the terms of section 49(VI) of the Federal Regulations on occupational safety and health, employers are required to support the updating of the skills of those in charge of internal preventive occupational medicine services. The Committee recalls that the training courses have to be approved by the competent authority and based on the contents of the most recent edition of the International Medical Guide for Ships, the Medical First Aid Guide for Use in Accidents involving Dangerous Goods, the Document for Guidance – An International Maritime Training Guide, published by the IMO, and the medical section of the International Code of Signals, as well as similar national guides. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 11. Hospital accommodation. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that the national legislation does not give effect to this provision of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 49 of the Federal Regulations on occupational safety and health regulate the provision of internal and external preventive occupational medicine services. The Committee notes that these Regulations are of a general nature and do not contain provisions determining the type of vessel in which the provision of separate hospital accommodation is required, or the description of the characteristics of hospital accommodation on board, in accordance with the requirements of this Article of the Convention. The Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166). Article 2(1)(c). Repatriation in the event of illness, injury or other medical condition. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 204(VII) of the Federal Labour Act does not include among the obligations of employers in the event of illness or accident to a seafarer the requirement to pay repatriation costs. In its reply, the Government indicates that section 204(IX) provides that employers are required to repatriate workers or transfer them to the agreed destination, except in cases of discharge for reasons not attributable to the employer. Recalling that this provision of the Convention establishes the requirement for the repatriation of the seafarer by the employer in the particular event of illness or injury or other medical condition in which it is so required, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into conformity with the Convention.

Article 2(1)(e) and (f). Repatriation in the event of the inability of the shipowner to fulfil legal or contractual obligations. Ship bound for a war zone. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the provisions of the legislation which guarantee the right of the seafarer to repatriation in the event of bankruptcy or the sale of the ship, and of a ship being bound for a war zone, to which the seafarer does not consent to go. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 33 of the Navigation and Commerce Act provides that, in the event that a vessel flying a foreign flag is in Mexican navigable waterways and the competent maritime authority presumes that the crew has been abandoned or is at risk of loss of life or physical safety, the procedure for the coordination of competencies between administrative authorities in the event of failure in the duty of care for foreign crews on foreign vessels shall be applied. The Committee notes that section 33 of the Navigation and Commerce Act refers to vessels flying foreign flags, while the Convention applies to vessels flying the flag of the State. The Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that seafarers embarked on vessels registered in Mexico have the right to repatriation in the situations envisaged in these provisions of the Convention.

Article 2(1)(g). Termination or interruption of employment in accordance with an industrial award or collective agreement. In its previous comments, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions in the national legislation on the right to repatriation in the event of the interruption or termination of employment in accordance with an industrial award or a collective agreement. In its reply, the Government indicates that the General Labour Act, as amended in 2012, guarantees the repatriation of seafarers by updating the penalties to which shipowners are liable in the event of failure to pay the costs relating to these obligations. The Committee notes that the Government’s reply does not address the question raised. The Committee therefore firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that seafarers are entitled to repatriation in the situations envisaged in this Article of the Convention.

Article 2(2). Maximum duration of service periods. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions on the maximum duration of service periods on board which entitles seafarers to repatriation. In view of the absence of progress in this regard, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 3(2). Destinations of repatriation. For several years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the absence of provisions establishing the right of seafarers to choose from among the prescribed destinations for repatriation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 196 of the Federal Labour Act provides that, when the written contract is for a definite or indefinite period, the port to which the worker shall be returned shall be determined and, in the absence of such determination, the place in which the seafarer was taken on board shall be taken as the destination determined. The Committee notes that this section only covers the determination of the port to which the worker shall be returned in cases of contracts for definite or indefinite periods, and does not extend this right to cases of contracts for a voyage or for voyages, as envisaged in section 195(IV) of the Act. Moreover, this section is confined to providing that the port of return shall be determined, without explicitly providing that seafarers may choose the destination of repatriation, nor the options within which they may make that choice. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the legislation into conformity with Article 3(2) of the Convention.

Articles 4 and 5. Responsibility of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation. For many years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to take measures to ensure that full effect is given to these Articles of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 28(a) of the Federal Labour Act provides that repatriation shall be the responsibility of the contracting employer in the case of Mexican workers engaged in work outside the Republic who are covered by contracts concluded on the national territory. The Committee notes that this section only applies to Mexican workers engaged in work abroad, while the Convention applies to any seafarer employed on board a seagoing vessel registered in the territory of any Member. The Committee also notes that this provision does not cover the following aspects which are regulated by the Convention: (i) the competent authority shall meet the costs of repatriation if the shipowner fails to make the necessary arrangements (Article 5(1)(a)); (ii) the normal mode of transport for repatriation of seafarers shall be by air (Article 4(1)); and (iii) the costs to be borne by the shipowner in relation to repatriation shall include not only the passage, but also accommodation, food, pay and allowances and medical treatment when necessary from the moment that the seafarer leaves the ship until he or she reaches the repatriation destination (Article 4(4)). The Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring national law and practice into conformity with these provisions of the Convention.

Article 6. Passport and other identity documents. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to specify how it is ensured that seafarers who are to be repatriated are able to obtain their passport and other identity documents for the purposes of repatriation. In its reply, the Government indicates that the National Migration Institute (INM) is responsible for making the necessary arrangements concerning such documents, with the aim of carrying out the repatriation of seafarers who require it. Recalling that this provision of the Convention is intended to guarantee that seafarers can retain their passport or other identity documents for the purpose of repatriation, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 7. Paid leave. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the national legislation does not contain any provision ensuring that time spent awaiting repatriation and repatriation travel time shall not be deducted from paid leave accrued to the seafarer. In view of the absence of relevant information on this subject, the Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 12. Availability of the text of the Convention in an appropriate language. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the manner in which the text of the Convention in an appropriate language is made available to the crew members of every ship registered in its territory. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided further information on this subject. The Committee firmly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2016.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 6 of the Convention. Repatriation expenses. The Committee notes that under section 204(VII) of the Federal Labour Act the employer has the obligation, in the event of seafarer’s illness, to provide for food, accommodation and medical treatment; but no provision is made for the shipowner’s liability to defray the expenses of repatriation of a sick or injured seafarer who is landed during the voyage in consequence of sickness or injury. Nor is reference made to the specific destinations to which the seafarer may be repatriated or to the items of expense covered, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention. Recalling that the basic requirement set forth in Article 6(1) of the Convention is now reflected in Standard A2.5(1)(c) and Guideline B2.5.1(1)(b)(i) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), the Committee requests the Government to specify the legal provisions giving effect to the requirements of this Article of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to refer to the comments made in 2010 under the Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166).

Article 8. Safeguarding property left on board. The Committee understands that section 684 of the Code of Commerce that previously gave effect to this provision of the Convention, has been repealed by the Maritime Navigation and Commerce Act of 30 May 2006. Recalling that the same requirement has been incorporated in Standard A4.2(7) of the MLC, 2006, with the additional obligation to return the property left on board by sick, injured or deceased seafarers to their next of kin, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any legal provisions giving effect to this Article of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide up-to-date information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including, for instance, the number of seafarers to whom the Convention applies and who have benefited from medical care and maintenance, distinguishing, if possible, between those left ashore in the national territory and those landed elsewhere; the amounts paid by shipowners and the social security institution for sick, injured or deceased seafarers; copies of collective agreements containing provisions related to the Convention; and relevant extracts from activity reports of the Mexican Social Security Institute.

Finally, the Committee recalls that the main provisions of the present Convention have been incorporated in Regulation 4.2 and the corresponding Code of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) and that therefore compliance with Convention No. 55 will facilitate the implementation of the respective provisions of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any developments regarding the process of ratification and effective implementation of the MLC, 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 1(1) of the Convention. Coverage of compulsory sickness insurance scheme. The Committee recalls that the Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) has concluded a number of agreements (convenios de subrogacion de servicios) with shipping companies which provide that maritime transportation workers must enjoy the protection of the compulsory social security scheme, including protection for sickness, employment injury, maternity, and death. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the agreements concluded between the IMSS and 19 shipping companies are still in force and also to specify whether there are seafarers who might not be currently covered by the compulsory social security scheme in the absence of a specific agreement concluded by the shipping company employing them.

Article 7. Right to insurance benefit after termination of engagement. The Committee understands that for a certain number of years, the Technical Council of the IMSS has extended, in accordance with section 109 of the Social Security Act, the period during which the right to insurance benefits continues after termination of engagement from eight weeks to 16 weeks. Noting that such an extension was last granted in 2009 (Accord No. ACDO.AS1.HCT.14019/2.P.DG of 14 January 2009) the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether this practice continues and to transmit copies of the most recent decisions of the Technical Council.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee takes note of the statistical information provided by the Government in its report regarding the number of claims for sickness, occupational injury or maternity benefits, the average amount paid per seafarer and the total amount paid for funeral expenses during the period 2005–10. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide up-to-date information on the practical application of the Convention.

Finally, the Committee seizes this opportunity to recall that the main provisions of the present Convention have been incorporated in Regulation 4.5 and the corresponding Code of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) and that therefore compliance with Convention No. 56 will facilitate the implementation of the respective provisions of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any developments regarding the process of ratification and effective implementation of the MLC, 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 2(3) of the Convention. Detailed statistics on occupational accidents. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention for a number of years to the need to ensure that the statistics concerning occupational accidents on board ships clearly indicate the department (for instance, deck, engine, or catering) and the area (for instance, at sea or in port) where these accidents occurred. In its last report, the Government indicates that national legislation does not contain detailed provisions covering these matters. In addition, the Government refers to certain general provisions of the Navigation and Maritime Commerce Act of 2006 concerning investigation of maritime accidents by the Ministry of Communications and Transport. The Committee requests once more the Government to take the necessary measures in order to give full effect to the specific requirements of this Article of the Convention. The Committee recalls, in this connection, that the same requirement is now reflected in Standard A4.3(5)(b) and Guideline B4.3.5(2) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006).

Article 3. Research into general trends and hazards of maritime employment. The Committee understands that the Public Policy on Occupational Safety and Health 2007–12, adopted in April 2008 by the National Consultative Committee on Safety and Hygiene at Work, provides for the development of a national information system on occupational risks. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide further information on the implementation of the five-year plan with special reference to the maritime sector and any concrete measures addressing the particular hazards of maritime employment, as prescribed by the Convention.

Article 4(2) and (3)(d). Provisions concerning the prevention of occupational accidents. The Committee recalls its previous comment in which it requested clarifications with respect to the revision of the Crew Safety Manual. Despite the five years that have elapsed since this comment was made, the Government is still not in a position to indicate whether the Crew Safety Manual has been revised, or to transmit a copy of the revised text. The Committee accordingly renews its request for additional information in that regard.

Article 6(3) and (4). Enforcement measures. Recalling that the Convention requires all necessary steps to be taken to ensure that inspection and enforcement authorities are familiar with maritime employment and its practices, and also calls for copies or summaries of the legal provisions on accident prevention to be brought to the attention of seafarers (for instance, by display in a prominent position on board ship), the Committee requests the Government to specify how it is given effect to the requirements of this Article of the Convention.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of occupational accidents. In response to the comments made by the Mexican Confederation of Workers (CTM) regarding the absence of a national programme for the prevention of accidents on board vessels, the Government refers to the Public Policy on Occupational Safety and Health 2007–2012. The Government also refers to the Mexican Official Standard NOM-019-STPS-2004 on the establishment, organization and operation of safety and hygiene committees in workplaces. The Committee notes that these texts are of general application whereas the Convention calls for maritime-specific programmes to be established with the cooperation of shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations. The Committee is therefore obliged to reiterate its request for concrete information concerning the formulation and implementation of programmes aimed at the prevention of occupational accidents to seafarers arising out, or in the course, of their employment.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee takes note of the statistical information provided by the Government in its report regarding the number of occupational accidents recorded in the maritime sector in the period 2005–09. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide up-to-date information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including, for instance, the number of seafarers covered by the relevant legislation, the number and nature of occupational maritime accidents reported, copies of official publications addressing accident prevention issues and detailed particulars on any campaign or initiative regarding the management of occupational safety and health on board ships.

Finally, the Committee recalls that the main provisions of the Convention have been incorporated in Regulation 4.3 and the corresponding Code of the MLC, 2006, and therefore compliance with Convention No. 134 will facilitate the implementation of the respective provisions of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any developments regarding the process of ratification and effective implementation of the MLC, 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 4(c) of the Convention. Right to visit a medical doctor. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to sections 26 and 27 of the Regulations to implement the General Health Act of 1985 that provide for medical services to be established in all international ports of the country. The Committee recalls, however, that this Article of the Convention seeks to guarantee the seafarers’ right to visit a doctor without delay in ports of call whether those of the flag State or of a third country. It therefore requests the Government to specify the legal provision, if any, giving effect to this requirement of the Convention. The Committee recalls, in this respect, that the same requirement has been incorporated in Standard A4.1(1)(c) of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006).

Article 5. Medicine chest. While noting the Government’s renewed reference to section 28 of the Regulations to implement the General Health Act and Mexican Official Standard NOM-005-STPS-1998, the Committee understands that there are no legislative or regulatory provisions giving effect to the specific requirements of Article 5(4) and (5) of the Convention, i.e. the inspection of the medicine chest at regular intervals not exceeding 12 months and the checking of the labelling, expiry dates and conditions of storage of all medicines contained in the medicine chest. It therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to bring the national legislation into line with the Convention on these matters. The Committee recalls, in this respect, that the same provisions are reflected in Guideline B4.1.1(4) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 7. Medical advice by radio or satellite communication. In the absence of the Government’s reply on this point, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that medical advice is available to ships at sea at any hour of the day or night (Article 7(1)), that such advice is available free of charge to all ships (Article 7(2)), that ships carry complete list of radio stations or coast earth stations through which medical advice can be obtained (Article 7(3)), that seafarers onboard are instructed in the use of the ship’s medical guide (Article 7(4)), and that doctors providing medical advice receive appropriate training (Article 7(5)). The Committee recalls, in this respect, that similar provisions have been incorporated in Standard A4.1(4)(d) and Guideline B4.1.1(6) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 8. Medical doctor on board ships. The Committee recalls that under section 81 of the Regulations on ship inspection of 1945, a vessel transporting more than 50 persons and engaged in a voyage of more than 24 hours is required to have a medical surgeon onboard. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these regulations are still in effect and also to specify whether the presence of a medical practitioner onboard a ship is required under any other circumstances. The Committee recalls, in this respect, that under Standard A4.1(4)(b) of the MLC, 2006, ships carrying 100 or more persons and ordinarily engaged on international voyages of more than three days’ duration must carry a qualified medical doctor.

Article 9. Persons in charge of medical care. The Committee notes that the Government’s report replies only partially to the points previously raised with respect to this Article of the Convention. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide detailed information on the medical training courses for persons in charge of medical care onboard who are not doctors (Article 9(2)), and any refresher courses that those persons are required to undergo at regular intervals to enable them to maintain and increase knowledge and skills (Article 9(4)). The Committee recalls, in this respect, that similar provisions have been incorporated in Standard A4.1(4)(c) and Guideline B4.1.1(3) of the MLC, 2006.

Article 11. Hospital accommodation. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that there seem to be no specific provisions in the national legislation requiring ships of 500 or more gross tons carrying 15 or more seafarers and engaged in a voyage of more than three days’ duration to provide separate hospital accommodation and detailing the construction and equipment standards for such accommodation. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate any laws or regulations giving effect to the specific requirements of this Article of the Convention. The Committee recalls, in this respect, that similar provisions for newly constructed ships have been incorporated in Standard A3.1(12) and Guideline B3.1.8 of the MLC, 2006.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide information concerning the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, the approximate number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, relevant extracts from applicable collective agreements, and copies of inspection reports showing the number and nature of any infringements observed and action taken.

Finally, the Committee recalls that the latest edition of the International Medical Guide for Ships was published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2007, and that an addendum concerning the contents of ships’ medicine chests was published in 2010.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 3(1) and (4) of the Convention. Conditions and safeguards for the signature of the agreement. The Committee understands that national law does not contain any provisions seeking to ensure that seafarers are given an opportunity to examine and seek advice on the agreement before signing and that they enter into an agreement with a sufficient understanding of their rights and responsibilities. The Committee accordingly asks the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that national law gives full effect to the requirements of this Article of the Convention.

Article 6(10). Contract details. The Committee notes that section 195 of the Federal Labour Act does not include the conditions for the termination of the agreement, whether made for a definite period, for a voyage or for an indefinite period, among the particulars that need to be included in the agreement. The Committee asks the Government to take appropriate action to ensure conformity with the Convention in this regard.

Article 7. Crew list. The Committee understands that there are no provisions in national legislation that require seafarers’ articles of agreement to be either recorded in or annexed to the crew list. The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 8. Information on conditions of employment available on board. The Committee understands that national law does not provide for measures enabling clear information to be obtained on board as to the conditions of employment, for instance by posting the conditions of the agreement in a place easily accessible. The Committee accordingly asks the Government to take the necessary measures in order to implement the requirements of this Article of the Convention in law and practice.

Article 9(1). Termination of agreement. For a considerable number of years, the Committee has been asking the Government to amend section 209 III of the Federal Labour Act, to ensure that the agreement may be terminated at any time by either party provided that due notice is given. In the absence of any progress in this respect, the Committee is obliged once more to urge the Government to take all necessary measures in order to bring the national legislation into conformity with this Article of the Convention.

Article 13(1). Termination of agreement by the seafarer in the event of promotion. The Committee understands that there are no provisions in national legislation permitting seafarers to claim their discharge, in the event of promotion or other circumstances that render it essential for their interests, on condition that they furnish a competent and reliable replacement. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 14(1). Discharge. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that the seafarer’s document issued in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention, provided no space to enter the discharge of the seafarer and the duties they performed on board. In its latest report, the Government indicates that it is currently working on a new model maritime book (libreta de mar) that will include a space to enter the discharge of the seafarer and the duties performed on-board. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any developments in this regard and to transmit a sample copy of the new maritime book once it has been prepared.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), contains in Regulation 2.1, Standard A2.1 and Guideline B2.1 up-to-date and more detailed requirements on seafarer’s employment agreements that revise existing standards set out in Convention No. 22. The Committee invites the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying the MLC, 2006, in the very near future and to keep the Office informed of any decision taken in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Article 2(1)(c) of the Convention. Repatriation in the event of illness, injury or other medical condition. The Committee notes that, under section 204(VII) of the Federal Labour Act, the employer has the obligation, in the event of a seafarer’s illness, to provide for food, accommodation and medical treatment but this does not include repatriation within the meaning of this Article of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate specific provisions of national laws, regulations or collective agreements establishing the shipowner’s duty to repatriate a seafarer in the event of illness or injury or other medical condition which requires his/her repatriation when found medically fit to travel.

Article 2(1)(e). Repatriation in the event of inability for the shipowner to fulfil legal or contractual obligations. While noting that under section 209(VI) of the Federal Labour Act, in case of change of registration of the ship, the shipowner has to proceed to the repatriation of the seafarers, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the provisions ensuring the seafarer’s right to repatriation in case of bankruptcy or sale of the ship.

Article 2(1)(f). Ship bound for war zone. The Committee requests the Government to specify any provisions in national laws, regulations or collective agreements guaranteeing the seafarer’s right to repatriation in the event of a ship being bound for a war zone, to which the seafarer does not consent to go.

Article 2(1)(g). Termination or interruption of employment in accordance with an industrial award or collective agreement. The Committee understands that the national legislation makes no specific provision for the seafarer’s right to repatriation in the event of termination or interruption of employment in accordance with an industrial award or collective agreement. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures adopted or envisaged to bring national law and practice into conformity with this provision of the Convention.

Article 2(2). Maximum duration of service. Further to its previous comment, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the maximum duration of service periods on board, following which a seafarer is entitled to repatriation, as may be prescribed by national laws, regulations or collective agreements.

Article 3(2). Destinations of repatriation. The Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that under the terms of the Convention the seafarers must be able to choose from among several destinations, namely the place at which they agreed to enter into the engagement, the place stipulated by an applicable collective agreement, their country of residence or such other place as may be mutually agreed at the time of the engagement. In the absence of any legislative or regulatory provisions implementing this requirement of the Convention, the Committee again requests the Government to take all necessary measures to bring national law and practice into conformity with the Convention in this regard.

Articles 4 and 5. Responsibility of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation. The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it noted: (i) that the shipowner’s obligation to arrange for repatriation was limited to cases of termination of employment attributable to him/her; (ii) the absence of legal provisions requiring the competent authority to meet the cost of repatriation if the shipowner fails to discharge his/her responsibilities; (iii) that no provision is made for air transport as being the appropriate and expeditious means of repatriation of seafarers (the few provisions in collective agreements to which the Government refers in its report apply in very limited cases, e.g. repatriation following shipwreck); and (iv) that the expenses of repatriation to be borne by the shipowner are not detailed to include travel cost but also accommodation, food and pay. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take prompt action to ensure that full effect is given to Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention.

Article 6. Passport and other identity documents. In the absence of any indication in the Government’s reports on this point, the Committee requests the Government to specify how it is ensured that seafarers who are to be repatriated are able to obtain their passport and other identity documents for the purposes of repatriation.

Article 7. Paid leave. The Committee understands that national legislation and regulations do not contain any specific provisions guaranteeing that time spent awaiting repatriation and repatriation travel time are not deducted from paid leave accrued by the seafarer. Therefore, the Committee is obliged to reiterate its request for all necessary measures to be taken in order to give full effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 12. Availability of Convention text in appropriate language. With a view to allowing seafarers to know their rights, the Convention requires that the text of the Convention be available in an appropriate language on board. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is given effect to this requirement of the Convention in law and practice.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that the main provisions of Convention No. 166 have been incorporated in Regulation 2.5, Standard A2.5 and Guideline B2.5 of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) and therefore ensuring compliance with Convention No. 166 would facilitate the implementation of the corresponding requirements of the MLC, 2006, once ratified and entered into force. The Committee therefore invites the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying the MLC, 2006, in the very near future and to keep the Office informed of any decisions taken in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee takes note of the information sent by the Government in its report. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Termination of the contract. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government merely states that it has no knowledge of the initiative of the Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM) for the amendment of section 209 III of the Federal Labour Act. The Committee points out that it has been asking the Government for more than 30 years to amend this provision, under which it is unlawful to terminate the employment relationship when the vessel is in foreign waters. The Convention, on the contrary, provides that an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads provided that notice has been given which shall not be less than 24 hours. Consequently, the Committee again asks the Government to take all necessary steps to ensure that the contract may be terminated at any time by either party provided that the notice specified has been given.

Article 14, paragraph 1, and Article 5. Discharge of the seafarer. The Committee noted previously that the seafarer’s document, issued in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention, provided no space to enter the discharge of the seafarer and the duties he performed on board. It accordingly asked the Government to take the necessary steps to give effect to these provisions. Since there is no response in the report, the Committee again asks the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the seafarer’s discharge is recorded in the document and that no statement may be included in the document as to the quality of the seafarer’s work or as to his wages.

Article 15 and Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. Further to the CTM’s comments to the effect that no inspections are carried out due to the lack of resources available to the inspections services, the Committee requested the Government to reply to these observations. By way of a response, the Government merely states: (i) that the CTM has not sent the additional information it had requested on the matter; and (ii) that since January 2005, no breaches of the Convention had been reported in the 21,779 regular inspections of general working conditions carried out in all the workplaces under Mexican Federal jurisdiction.

According to the Convention, “national law shall provide the measures to ensure compliance with the terms of the present Convention”. This means not only setting up an inspection service but also providing the necessary resources for it to function. The Committee accordingly asks the Government to provide information on the organization and working of the inspection services, on the number of inspectors employed in them, and on the measures taken to ensure proper performance of their duties. The Government is also asked to supply information on the exact number of inspection visits carried out in the maritime sector.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes with interest the information sent by the Government. It notes in particular the adoption of Mexican Official Standard NOM-168-SSA1-1998 on clinical files, and the Decision of the Secretariat of Health of 30 July 2003 amending it. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 4, paragraph (c), of the Convention. Visits to a doctor. The Committee notes that, as soon as they enrol in the compulsory social security scheme, seafarers are eligible for protection under sickness and maternity insurance. It nevertheless requests the Government to indicate whether special measures have been taken or are envisaged in order to ensure that seafarers are entitled to visit doctors without delay in ports of call where practicable.

Article 5. Medicine chests. For application of this Article, in its previous report, the Government referred the Committee to section 28 of the Regulations to implement the General Health (International Hygiene) Act of February 1985 and to the provisions of Mexican Official Standard NOM-005-STPS-1999. According to section 28 of the above Regulations, any vessel undertaking an international voyage must have a first-aid kit on board. Mexican Official Standard NOM-005-STPS-1999 contains guidelines based on the Red Cross first-aid manual as to the content of the kit. The Committee reminds the Government that, pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Article, the medicine chest, its contents and the medical equipment must be properly maintained and inspected at regular intervals. Paragraph 5 provides furthermore that the competent authority must ensure that the contents of the medicine chest are listed and labelled with generic names, expiry dates and conditions of storage. The Committee requests the Government to indicate and send the legislative or regulatory provisions that ensure implementation of these two paragraphs.

Article 7 of the Convention. Medical advice by satellite. In its previous report, the Government said that there was no pre-arranged system whereby medical advice by radio or satellite, including specialist advice, is available for ships at sea. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether any such arrangements have been established since that report. It reminds the Government that such consultations must be made available free of charge to all vessels regardless of the territory in which they are registered (Article 7, paragraph 2); that all ships must be equipped with an efficient communication system so as to ensure that optimum use is made of facilities available for medical advice (Article 7, paragraph 3); that seafarers on board requesting medical advice must be instructed in the use of the ship’s medical guide and the medical section of the most recent edition of the International Code of Signals so that they are able to understand the advice given (Article 7, paragraph 4); and that doctors providing medical advice receive appropriate training (Article 7, paragraph 5).

Article 8, paragraph 1. Medical doctor on board ships carrying 100 or more seafarers. The Government indicated in its previous report that there were no specific provisions to implement this Article of the Convention, and referred the Committee to section 504(2) of the Federal Labour Act, according to which any employer with more than 100 workers is required to set up a sickbay with the necessary emergency supplies of medicine and medical and surgical equipment; and the sickbay must be in the hands of competent staff under the management of a surgeon. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the surgeon in charge of emergency personnel must be on board the vessel in all voyages.

Article 8, paragraph 2. Medical doctor on board ships carrying less than 100 seafarers. Section 504(1) of the Federal Labour Act provides that all employers must have the necessary medicines and materials for first aid at the workplace and must train the personnel responsible for the provision of first aid. The Committee infers from this provision that there is no requirement for crews with fewer than 100 seafarers to include a doctor. The Committee nevertheless reminds the Government that, according to the Convention, national laws or regulations must determine which other ships shall be required to carry a medical doctor as a member of their crew, taking into account such factors as the duration, nature and conditions of the voyage and the number of seafarers on board. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that, where factors such as the duration, nature and conditions of the voyage so require, ships shall have doctors as members of their crew.

Article 9. Persons in charge of medical care. For the application of this Article, the Government refers the Committee to its previous reports in which it referred to the provisions of section 504(1) of the Federal Labour Act. The Government indicated that training based on programmes submitted by the enterprises themselves would be provided for personnel in charge of first aid. The Committee notes that this provision applies to all workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the specific courses for persons in charge of medical care on board who are not doctors. It reminds the Government in this connection that such courses must have the approval of the competent authority and be based on the content of the most recent edition of the International Medical Guide for Ships, the Medical First Aid Guide for Use in Accidents Involving Dangerous Goods, the Document for Guidance – An International Maritime Training Guide published by the IMO, and the medical section of the International Code of Signals as well as similar national guides. It also points out that the persons referred to must undergo refresher courses at approximately five-year intervals to enable them to maintain and increase their knowledge and skills and to keep abreast of new developments.

Article 10. Medical assistance. The Government indicated in its previous report that there was no provision in the national legislation requiring ships to provide medical assistance to other vessels which may request it. According to the Convention, such assistance must be provided where practicable. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that ships registered in Mexico provide medical assistance to any other vessel which may request it, where this is practicable.

Article 11, paragraphs 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. Separate hospital accommodation. The Government stated in its previous reports that it had no information on this matter and referred the Committee to the provisions of section 504(2) of the Federal Labour Act. The Committee points out that under this provision of the Convention, any ship of 500 or more gross tonnage carrying 15 or more seafarers and engaged in a voyage of more than three days’ duration must have separate hospital accommodation. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that there is hospital accommodation on such vessels. It reminds the Government that the competent authority must ensure that such premises are properly equipped and, inter alia, prescribe the number of berths needed for the various categories of vessels. The Committee also points out that the hospital accommodation must be so located as to be easy of access, that the occupants must be comfortably housed and able to receive proper attention in all weathers. The accommodation must also be designed so as to facilitate consultation and the giving of first aid.

Article 12. Medical reports. According to the Mexican Confederation of Workers (CTM), although the collective agreement concluded with maritime shipowners provides that seafarers must undergo a general examination before embarking, the examination is not carried out in accordance with a model adopted by the competent authority. The Committee points out that, according to the Convention, the competent authority must adopt a standard medical report form for seafarers for use by ships’ doctors, masters or persons in charge of medical care on board and hospitals or doctors ashore. The form must be specially designed to facilitate the exchange of medical and related information concerning individual seafarers between ship and shore in cases of illness or injury. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on this matter and to state which provisions of the national legislation give effect to this Article.

Part V of the report form. Practical application. The Committee requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied together with information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, the number of infringements reported, the action taken on them and extracts of inspection reports.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the information provided in the report. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Termination of the agreement. For over 30 years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to take steps to amend section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act, under the terms of which it is unlawful to terminate the employment relationship when the vessel is in foreign waters. In contrast, the Convention provides that an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that the notice specified in the agreement shall have been given, which shall not be less than 24 hours.

In 2003, the Government referred to the provisions of Article 9, paragraph 3, of the Convention which, in its view, allowed it to maintain in force the provisions of section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act. In 2005, the report did not contain any information on this subject. The Committee notes, however, that the Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM) has submitted an initiative for the amendment of this section. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the action taken as a result of this initiative and requests it once again to take all the necessary measures to ensure that the agreement can be terminated at any time by either party provided that the notice specified shall have been given.

Article 14, paragraph 1, and Article 5. Discharge of the seafarer. Under the terms of the Convention, every seafarer shall be given a document containing a record of his employment on board the vessel and also indicating that he has been discharged, whatever the reason for the termination or rescission of the agreement. As the Committee noted that the maritime book, issued in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention, does not provide any space for such entries, it requested the Government in its previous comment to take the necessary measures to give effect to these provisions. As the report contains no information in this respect, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the discharge of the seafarer is recorded in the maritime book and that no statement as to the quality of the seafarer’s work or as to his wages may be contained in this document.

Article 14, paragraph 2. Certificate as to the quality of the seafarer’s work. Under the terms of the Convention, the seafarer has the right to obtain from the master a separate certificate as to the quality of his work or, failing that, indicating whether he has fully discharged his obligations under the agreement. Section 132(VIII) of the Federal Labour Act provides that employers are under the obligation to issue to workers who so request or who leave their employment, within three days, written testimony as to the work performed. The Committee requests the Government to indicate: (i) the specific information to be contained in this document; and (ii) whether this section is applicable to seafarers.

Article 15. Application of the Convention. The CTM indicates in its comments that, although there are legal texts respecting labour inspection, no inspections are carried out on the application of the provisions of the Convention due to the lack of resources available to the inspection services.

The trade union organization also indicates that there is no periodic inspection of vessels. It adds that, at the present time, only two inspectors of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) take responsibility at the national level for foreign vessels flying flags of convenience and for receiving complaints from seafarers. Unfortunately, these inspectors do not benefit from any support from the authorities in their work. The Government indicates that, in order to reply to these observations, it needs to obtain more information from the CTM. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on this matter in its next report.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2007.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. It draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Article 2, paragraph 3, of the Convention. Statistics. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate clearly the department on board ship (for instance, deck, engine, catering) and the area (for instance, at sea or in port) where accidents occurred. Such indications are particularly important where an investigation has to be undertaken by the competent authority, in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article, with a view to establishing the causes and circumstances of occupational accidents resulting in loss of life or serious personal injury.

The Government reiterates the information that it provided previously, namely that Mexican Official Standard NOM-021-STP-1993, which is generally binding by all those in charge of workplaces, does not apply exclusively to work on ships. It cannot therefore establish the obligation to indicate the department of the ship on which an accident occurs. Furthermore, it reaffirms that a joint reading of points 20 and 27 of form CM-2A “occupational accident report” and section 3.3.1, Chapter XVI, of the above Mexican Official Standard means that the department of the ship in which the accident occurred can be inferred. The Committee once again requests the Government to envisage the possibility of adopting a provision which requires that statistics concerning accidents on board ship should determine clearly the department of the ship (for instance, deck, engine, or catering) and the area (for instance, at sea or in port) where the accident occurred so as to give full effect to the provisions of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraphs 2 and 3(d). Provisions for the prevention of accidents. In 1991, the Government indicated that the Crew Safety Manual was being reviewed with a view to the inclusion of provisions on the prevention of accidents specifically applicable to the work of seafarers and special safety measures on and below deck. Since then, the Committee has requested the Government to keep it informed of any developments in the situation and to provide a copy of this document once it had been revised. The Government has still not provided any indication on this matter in its last report.

The Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM) indicates that, to its knowledge, the port authorities have not adopted measures for the prevention of accidents on board vessels. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the Crew Safety Manual has been modified and to provide a copy of this document with its next report. If not, it requests the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that provisions concerning the prevention of occupational accidents applicable to the work of seafarers and special safety measures on and below deck are laid down in the near future.

Article 8. Programmes for the prevention of accidents. The CTM observes in its comments that, contrary to the provisions of the Convention, there is no national programme for the prevention of accidents on board vessels involving the establishment of joint committees specifically entrusted with the prevention of maritime accidents. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the existence of programmes for the prevention of accidents.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide general information on the application of the Convention in practice. The Government includes with its report a table on the workers affiliated to the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS). The Committee requests the Government to provide general information in its next report on the manner in which the Convention is applied, including extracts from the reports of the inspection services, information on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and nature of the registered accidents, as well as on any contraventions reported and the action taken as a result.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government. It draws its attention to the following points.

Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Maximum duration of service periods on board. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide additional information on the application of this Article. The Confederation of Industrial Chambers of the United States of Mexico (CONCAMIN) indicated in 2002 that the national legislation did not contain a provision relating to the maximum duration of service periods on board giving entitlement to repatriation. As the report does not contain any information on this point, the Committee requests the Government once again to indicate the maximum duration of service periods on board following which a seafarer is entitled to repatriation and it recalls in this regard that, under the terms of the Convention, such periods shall be less than 12 months.

Article 3, paragraph 2. Destinations of repatriation. As the Committee indicated previously to the Government that the national legislation did not give full effect to the provisions of this Article of the Convention, it requested it to take the necessary measures to remedy this situation. Section 196 of the Federal Labour Act provides that, in the absence of a clause respecting the destination of repatriation in the articles of agreement, the seafarer shall be repatriated to the place where he agreed to enter into the engagement. In contrast, under the terms of the Convention, the seafarer shall have the right to choose from among several destinations, namely the place at which he agreed to enter into the engagement, the place stipulated by collective agreement, his country of residence or such other place as may be mutually agreed at the time of engagement. The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report does not contain any indication relating to the application of this Article. It therefore once again requests the Government to take all necessary measures to bring national law and practice into conformity with these provisions.

Article 4, paragraph 1, and Article 5. Responsibility of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation. In its previous comment, the Committee drew the Government’s attention to the fact that, contrary to the provisions of the Convention, the national legislation limits the duty of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation (Article 4, paragraph 1, of the Convention). It also requested the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation requiring the competent authority to meet the cost of repatriation of the seafarer if the shipowner fails to discharge his responsibilities (Article 5 of the Convention). The Government refers once again to section 28(III) and section 204(IX) of the Federal Labour Act, and to article 123(XXVI) of the Political Constitution of the United States of Mexico and indicates that specific measures are not envisaged in relation to the application of Article 5 of the Convention, as the shipowner is held responsible by the national legislation for repatriating the seafarer.

Although the provisions contained in section 28(III) of the Federal Labour Act and article 123(XXVI) of the Political Constitution of the United States of Mexico establish certain guarantees with regard to the repatriation of Mexican seafarers engaged on foreign vessels, they do not however give full effect to the provisions of the Convention, particularly since, under the terms of section 204(IX) of the Federal Labour Act, the obligation of the shipowner to repatriate the seafarer is limited to cases in which the cessation of the employment relationship can be attributed to the shipowner. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take all the necessary measures to bring national law and practice into conformity with Article 4, paragraph 1, and Article 5 of the Convention.

Article 7. Paid leave. In accordance with this Article, time spent awaiting repatriation and repatriation travel time shall not be deducted from paid leave accrued to the seafarer. The Government indicates that the fact that the expenses of repatriation have to be covered by the shipowner affords sufficient guarantees to the seafarer. Nevertheless, under the terms of section 79 of the Federal Labour Act, days of holiday accrued to the worker, which have not been used, do not, in principle, have to be paid.

The Committee recalls that this Article of the Convention addresses leave periods, and not the financial aspects of leave. As the national legislation does not contain any guarantee that time spent awaiting repatriation and repatriation travel time shall not be deducted from paid leave accrued to the seafarer, it accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give full effect to this Article.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government with regard to the impact of the 1997 Social Security Act on the application of the provisions of the Convention. It notes the statistical information on work-related risks, as well as the examples of clauses stipulated in collective labour agreements. The Committee requests the Government to provide samples of service substitution agreements concluded between the Mexican Social Security Institute and shipping companies.

2. The Committee also notes that, according to the observations made by the Confederation of Workers of Mexico (CTM), the labour authority has never intervened on board vessels calling in at national ports and that it is not within the competence of the labour and social security authority to deal with disputes for reasons relating to extra-territoriality. The Committee notes that, with a view to dealing with the above occurrences, the Government requested the CTM to provide more information in this regard. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard and to provide extracts of reports of inspections carried out on board vessels and information relating to the number and nature of contraventions reported and any other details related to the application of the Convention in practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It further notes the Government’s indication that under Article 175(I)(e) of the Federal Labour Law of 1970 (as amended), the work of young persons under 16 years of age shall be prohibited in dangerous or unhealthy occupations. The Committee asks the Government to clarify whether under the national legislation or decisions of courts, the work on vessels is considered as dangerous or unhealthy. Please also clarify whether the General Directorate of the Federal Labour Inspection has the authority to inspect the labour conditions on board ships and whether there are any labour inspectors specializing in the inspection of such conditions (Part III of the report form).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

Articles 5 and 14 of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to these provisions of the Convention. It notes that the maritime book (Libreta de Mar) transmitted by the Government in 2000 does not provide any space for entries that the seaman has been discharged. The Committee recalls that an intention behind the inclusion of Article 14 into the text of the Convention was that an entry should be made in the document referred to in Article 5 of the Convention as well as in the list of crew, stating merely the fact that the seaman had been discharged and not the ground for such discharge (ILC, 9th Session, Record of Proceedings, ILO, Geneva, 1926, p. 524). The Committee asks the Government to take all measures to give full effect to this provision of the Convention and to report on any progress made in this regard.

Article 9. For more than 30 years the Committee has been asking the Government to amend section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act, according to which it is unlawful to terminate the employment relation when the vessel is in foreign waters, in places where there are no towns, or unpopulated places, or in port (in the latter case, if the vessel is exposed to some risk on account of bad weather or other circumstances). Under Article 9 of the Convention, however, an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that the notice specified in the agreement shall be given, which shall not be less than 24 hours. Notice shall be given in writing; national law shall provide such manner of giving notice as is best calculated to preclude any subsequent dispute between the parties on this point. National law shall determine the exceptional circumstances in which notice even when duly given shall not terminate the agreement.

The Committee notes that in spite of its repeated requests, section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act still has not been brought into conformity with the requirements of the Convention. To the extent that in Mexico under article 130 of the Constitution international Conventions form part of the national legislation and are the supreme law, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the jurisprudence recognizes the duality of the system and applies, at the same time, international Conventions, the Committee considers that the Government has the possibility and the duty to bring section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act into conformity with Article 9 of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also notes comments on the application of the Convention made by the Confederation of Industrial Chambers of the United States of Mexico (CONCAMIN).

With reference to Article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Convention, the Committee recalls that in its previous direct request it asked the Government to indicate whether any standard medical form has been adopted by the competent authority to facilitate the exchange of medical and related information concerning individual seafarers between ship and shore in cases of illness or injury, and not for use in the process of medical examinations aimed at determination of fitness for work at sea. The Committee notes the Government’s response that in Mexico there is no such standard medical form for seafarers, but there is a form for reporting occupational accidents within 72 hours after their occurrence. The Committee asks the Government to undertake all necessary measures so that full effect is given to Article 12 of the Convention and the standard medical form for seafarers is adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also notes comments on the application of the Convention made by the Confederation of Industrial Chambers of the United States of Mexico (CONCAMIN). The Committee asks the Government to provide further information on the following points.

Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee expressed the hope that the Government would report the measures adopted to ensure that the legislation was consistent with this provision of the Convention. It notes the Government’s response that there have been no modifications in the legislation with respect to this provision of the Convention. The Committee recalls that under Article 3, paragraph 2, the repatriation destinations prescribed by national laws or regulations shall include the place at which the seafarer agreed to enter into the engagement, the place stipulated by collective agreement, the seafarer’s country of residence or such other place as may be mutually agreed at the time of engagement, and that the seafarer shall have the right to choose from among the prescribed destinations the place to which he or she is to be repatriated. The Committee asks the Government to take all necessary measures to give full effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that while Article 4, paragraph 1, of the Convention does not limit the duty of the shipowner to arrange for repatriation in cases attributable to the employer, article 204(IX) of the Federal Labour Act actually establishes such limitation. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring national legislation into conformity with this provision of the Convention in the near future.

Article 5. The Committee asks the Government to indicate specific provisions of the national legislation requiring the competent authority to arrange for and meet the cost of repatriation of the seafarer, if a shipowner fails to perform its responsibilities under the Convention with respect to the repatriation of this seafarer.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

1. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its latest report. In particular, it notes the adoption of the new Act on social security which, according to its section 12 I, applies to seamen. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply in its next report detailed information on any impact of this new legislation on the application of Articles of the Convention and on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including statistics, in accordance with Part V of the report form.

2. The Committee notes that in its previous reports the Government referred to agreements concluded by certain maritime companies and the Mexican Social Security Institute under Agreement No. 183015 of 1967 with a view to guaranteeing seamen, in practice, the real enjoyment of social security benefits. In view of the adoption of the new legislation on social security, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these agreements are still in force and whether new agreements have been concluded in this sphere; if so, please supply the texts.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

With regard to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report. The Committee recalls that in its previous comment, in relation to Article 2, paragraph 3, of the Convention, the Government was asked to indicate clearly the department on board ship (for example, deck, engine or catering) and the area (for example, at sea or in port) where the accident occurred. The Committee then emphasized that such indications are particularly important in the event of an investigation, which must be conducted in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article by the competent authority, into the causes and circumstances of occupational accidents resulting in loss of life or serious personal injury. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that there was an increase in the number of both these types of accidents, according to the statistics supplied with the report. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that Mexican Official Standard NOM 021 STP 1993 is binding generally for all officials in charge of work centres, is not exclusive for work on ships, and hence there is no need to indicate clearly in which part of the ship the accident occurred. Nevertheless, the Government points out, by taking point 3.3.1, subsection XVI of Mexican Official Standard NOM 021 STP 1993 in conjunction with points 20 and 27 of the form CM 2A occupational accident report, it can be established in which part of the ship the accident occurred. While noting this information, the Committee asks that the Government might consider the possibility of adopting a provision which requires that statistics concerning accidents on board ship should enable the part of the ship where the accident occurred to be clearly identified. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM) points out, in the comment concerning implementation of the Convention, attached to the Government’s report, that Mexico currently does not have a national fleet engaged in distant trade.

Article 4, paragraphs 2 and 3(d). The Committee recalls that in its previous direct request it had insisted on the need to adopt provisions concerning the prevention of occupational accidents which prescribe special safety measures on and below deck. The Committee noted that the safety manual for personnel on board had not been amended. The Committee then asked the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention. The Committee recalls its request and asks the Government to take the necessary measures to this end. The Committee considers that this is all the more urgent due to the fact that the CTM indicates in the abovementioned comments that occupational safety and health regulations are inadequate with regard to the regulation and prevention of accidents on board ships. The CTM emphasizes that a legal framework should be established to regulate occupational safety and health conditions. Finally, the Committee reiterates its request and hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

The Committee had noted with interest the statistical information attached to the report that the Government sent in 1996. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide, in conformity with Part V of the report form, general information on the way in which the Convention is implemented, data on the number of workers covered by the legislation, the number and type of accidents, etc.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It requests the Government to provide further information on the following points.

Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Convention. Please indicate whether any consultations have taken place pursuant to this provision of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraphs (a), (c) and (d). The Committee asks the Government to indicate specific provisions of the national laws, regulations or collective agreements relating to occupational health protection and medical care for seafarers peculiar to work on board; specific measures adopted to guarantee seafarers the right to visit a doctor without delay in ports of call where practicable and to ensure that, in accordance with national law and practice, medical care and health protection while a seafarer is serving on articles are provided free of charge to seafarers.

Article 5, paragraphs 3-7. Please provide particulars concerning the status and qualifications of persons responsible for inspecting medicine chests and medical equipment, as well as an indication of specific measures undertaken or envisaged to give effect to these provisions of the Convention.

Article 7, paragraphs 1, 2, 4 and 5. The Committee asks the Government to provide details of the pre-arranged system for providing medical advice by radio and satellite; details on the instruction of seafarers in the use of the ship’s medical guide and the medical section of the most recent edition of the International code of signals; details on the training of doctors providing medical advice in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention; and information concerning other measures undertaken or envisaged to give effect to these provisions of the Convention.

Article 7, paragraph 3(a)-(c), of the Convention. The Committee notes that the list of radio and satellite stations authorized to provide medical advice is still in the process of preparation by the Secretariat of Communications and Transport. It trusts that the Government will take all necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 8, paragraph 2. Please indicate whether any ships or classes of ships have been determined by national laws or regulations for the purpose of giving effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 9, paragraphs 2 and 3. The Committee asks the Government to provide information concerning courses aimed at persons in charge of medical care on board who are not doctors; and to describe how the contents of the most recent edition of the International medical guide for ships, the Medical first aid guide for use in accidents involving dangerous goods, the Document for guidance - An international maritime training guide published by the IMO, and the medical section of the International code of signals, as well as similar national guides has been taken into account in the process of composition of the programme of the courses.

Article 11, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that while under this provision of the Convention separate hospital accommodation shall be provided in any ship of 500 or more gross tonnage, carrying 15 or more seafarers and engaged in a voyage of more than three days’ duration, under article 504(III) of the Federal Labour Law the employer has the duty to set up a hospital with necessary medical and support personnel when it has at its service more than 300 workers. The Committee trusts that the Government will take all necessary measures to bring its national legislation into conformity with this provision of the Convention.

Article 11, paragraph 7. Please indicate the number of hospital berths prescribed by the competent authority for various categories of ships.

Article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2. Please indicate whether any standard medical form has been adopted by the competent authority to facilitate the exchange of medical and related information concerning individual seafarers between ship and shore in cases of illness or injury, and not for use in the process of medical examinations aimed at determination of fitness for the work at sea.

Article 13, paragraphs 1-3. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken in accordance with this Article, including copies of relevant bilateral or multilateral agreements.

The Committee also asks the Government to indicate specific provisions of national legislation which give effect to Article 6, paragraph 1; Article 9, paragraphs 1 and 6; Article 10; Article 11, paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9; and Article 12, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. Please provide information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention.

The Committee also asks the Government to transmit copies of relevant collective agreements dealing with the matters of health protection and medical care for seafarers (Article 2 of the Convention).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and reverts to its previous comments on the application of the Convention.

Article 5, paragraphs 1 and 2, and Article 14, paragraph 1.   The Committee notes from the Government’s report that it is aware that sections 42, 47 and 408 of the Federal Labour Act do not give effect to the provisions of the Convention as to recording the reason for discharge in the seaman’s service book and issuing a separate certificate concerning quality of work/discharge of obligations.

The Committee further notes from the Government’s report that a draft discharge book (Libreta de Navegación) is being prepared. It requests the Government to report on developments in this regard and to send a specimen when this is issued.

Article 7.  The Committee renews its request to the Government to indicate the legislative or regulatory texts which give full effect to this Article.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2003.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report and recalls its previous comments on the application of the Convention, in particular regarding the formalities in completing the articles and the modalities for terminating the agreement. The Committee also takes note of the comments of the Confederacion de Camaras Industriales de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, according to which the provisions of section 209 III of the Federal Labour Act provide additional protection to seafarers by not allowing termination of an agreement for an indefinite period in a foreign port.

Termination of agreement

In its previous comments the Committee has addressed the problem of legislation prohibiting termination of an agreement for an indefinite period in a foreign port. The right is specifically guaranteed in Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. While recognizing that a prohibition on terminating articles of agreement in a foreign port could be viewed as a form of protection, in particular against seafarers being abandoned or otherwise stranded abroad, the Committee recalls that this right to give notice and terminate an agreement for an indefinite period is expressly set forth in the Convention. In this respect, if the period of notice and formalities of termination are respected, the seafarer’s motivation for so doing, which the Government questioned in its report, would not affect the legality of the act. Similarly, with regard to the Government’s concern that the employer could evade his repatriation obligations by terminating the agreement abroad, the employer’s responsibility for repatriation would be determined according to applicable national and international instruments, including the Repatriation of Seafarers Convention (Revised), 1987 (No. 166), ratified by Mexico.

Formalities and safeguards in completing the articles

Article 3, paragraph 6.  The Committee notes that the Government considers the prohibition on termination abroad of an agreement for an indefinite period as part of the further formalities and safeguards intended to protect the interests of the shipowner and the seafarer. However, the Committee notes that the "further formalities and safeguards" set forth in this Article refer to the "completion of the agreement", and not to other forms of protection. Under no circumstances could this permissive clause be understood to invalidate rights expressly conferred under the Convention.

The Committee renews its request for the Government to bring the aforementioned provisions of the Federal Labour Act into conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to indicate the measures taken in its next report.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2003.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Article 7 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that section 39(c) of the Navigation Act requires the presentation of the crew list for the authorization of a vessel to moor in a port. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislation which provides that the articles of agreement shall be either recorded in the list of crew or annexed to this list.

Articles 14, paragraph 1, and 5, paragraphs 1 and 2. In its previous comments, the Committee pointed out to the Government that the record book issued to seafarers provides for the entry of the reason for the seafarer's discharge, which is inconsistent with the above Articles of the Convention. The Government replied that there is no legal obligation making it compulsory for the employer to record the reason for the worker's discharge. In its latest report, the Government repeats this information and states that sections 42, 47 and 208 of the Federal Labour Act prevent the recording of the reason for discharge in the record book issued to seafarers being used against the worker. Section 133(IX) of the Federal Labour Act also prohibits the practice of "keeping an index" of workers who leave or are discharged from work for the purposes of denying them re-employment. The Committee is bound to point out that sections 42, 47 and 208 of the Federal Labour Act, mentioned by the Government, refer to the temporary suspension of employment and the reasons for the termination of the contract of employment and that section 133(IX) does not prevent the recording by the master of the reason for discharge, since this is explicitly authorized in the record book issued to seafarers.

The Committee recalls that Article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention provides that an entry shall be made in the document issued to the seafarer showing that he has been discharged in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention and that Article 5, paragraph 2, of the Convention explicitly provides that "this document shall not contain any statement as to the quality of the seaman's work or as to his wages". The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to give effect to these provisions of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. For several years, the Committee has been pointing out that section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act, which provides that seafarers may not be discharged when the ship is abroad, is contrary to this provision of the Convention, which provides that an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated by either party in any port where the vessel loads or unloads, provided that the notice specified in the agreement which shall not be less than 24 hours shall have been given. The Committee notes the Government's opinion expressed in its report that this Article of the Convention coincides with the provisions of section 196 of the Federal Labour Act and that the eighth clause of collective agreement CC-713-87 gives effect to this provision of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 196 refers to the port of return of the seafarer when the articles of agreement are completed, and is therefore related to the repatriation of the seafarer, but that it does not cover the possibility provided by this provision of the Convention for both parties to terminate an agreement for an indefinite period in any national or foreign port where the vessel loads or unloads. With regard to the clause aforementioned, the Committee is bound to point out once again that this refers exclusively to the conclusion of an agreement "for a voyage" and not "for an indefinite period", as set out in Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation in order to bring it into compliance with this provision of the Convention.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

Article 7 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to inform it whether there is legislation which requires a list of crew to be carried on board.

Article 14, paragraph 1. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the record book issued to seamen provides for entry of the reason for the seafarer's discharge, which is inconsistent with Article 14(1) of the Convention. Indeed, this provision provides that only the discharge shall be entered in the record book, and on the list of crew, and not the reason for the termination or rescission of the agreement. The Committee notes that in its latest report the Government indicates that the legislation does not oblige the employer to record in writing in the record book the reason for dismissal. The Committee notes, however, that the record book allows for the reason for discharge to be entered whereas Article 14(1) of the Convention does not, inter alia, leave the employer free to enter the reason for termination in the record book. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the application of this provision, in both legislation and practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

Article 2, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention. The Committee notes clauses 231 and 232 of the Collective Contract of Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and article 93 of the Service Regulations governing "personnel in positions of trust" of Petróleos Mexicanos and its subsidiary bodies and the contracts of crew members and clerical and teaching staff of the training ship "Náuticas México" mentioned by the Government. The Committee also notes that collective agreement No. 287-XXIV YUC establishes that in the event of illness or occupational risk crew members shall be repatriated from foreign ports; that collective agreement No. 835/87 XXIV.BC establishes the City and Port of Ensenada or the place of engagement as the destination for repatriation from a foreign port, and the place of engagement as the destination for repatriation from a Mexican port where the sailor is unable to be transferred to the "Clinico del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social". The Committee asks the Government to inform the measures adopted or envisaged for "workers on board ship" whose categories or cases are not included in the above-mentioned collective agreements to claim entitlement to repatriation.

Article 2, paragraph 1(e). The Government states that in the event of legally declared bankruptcy or insolvency, whatever agreement has been reached by the parties shall prevail. The Committee points out that the Convention establishes entitlement to repatriation in the event of the shipowner not being able to fulfil his legal or contractual obligations and does not mention the need for any prior legal statement. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged for the application of this provision.

Article 2, paragraph 1(f). The Government stated previously that it would consult the Conciliation and Arbitration Board as to the existence of collective agreements giving effect to this provision. The Committee hopes that the Government will adopt the necessary measures in the near future to ensure that this provision of the Convention is applied.

Article 2, paragraph 1(g). The Committee notes that the Government has provided no information on the existence of any provisions giving effect to this paragraph. The Committee asks the Government to adopt measures ensuring that the legislation is consistent with this provision of the Convention.

Article 2, paragraph 2. The Committee notes that section 40 of the Federal Labour Act would appear to refer to work in mines. The Committee asks the Government to state whether any arbitration awards or court decisions apply section 40 to seafarers and, if not, to supply information on any measures adopted or envisaged to bring the legislation into line with the Convention on this point.

Article 3, paragraph 2. In relation to the different places of repatriation established by this Article of the Convention the Committee notes that according to the Government this provision of the Convention has not been incorporated in the legislation. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government, whatever has been agreed by the parties shall apply and, failing that, the legislation prescribes the place of engagement as the destination (section 196 of the Federal Labour Act). The Committee recalls that, according to this Article, the destinations prescribed are the place of the seafarer's engagement, and other place as may be mutually agreed at the time of engagement, the place stipulated by collective agreement and the seafarer's country of residence and that the seafarer has the right to choose from among the prescribed destinations. The Committee trusts that the Government will report the measures adopted to ensure that the legislation is consistent with this provision of the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 1. The Committee asks the Government to report on the measures adopted or envisaged to apply this provision.

Article 4, paragraph 2. The Committee notes that under section 209(V) and (VI) of the Federal Labour Act, the shipowner or freighter is responsible for repatriating the worker in the event of loss of the vessel by capture or shipwreck, or change of nationality (in such cases the employment relationship is terminated). The Committee notes, however, that under section 204(IX), the employer must repatriate the worker except in the event of separation for reasons not attributable to the employer. The Committee observes that section 204(IX) could be construed as exempting the shipowner from responsibility in the event of force majeure or acts of God. For these two cases the Convention requires the shipowner to bear the cost of repatriation. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention.

Article 4, paragraph 3, paragraph 4(a), (b), (d) and (e), and paragraphs 5 and 6. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the legislation which applies these provisions of the Convention, particularly in the cases referred to in Article 2, paragraph 1(c), (e), (f) and (g).

Article 5(a), (b) and (c). The Government is asked to indicate the measures taken and the provisions made to give effect to this Article.

Article 6. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the legislation which applies this Article.

Article 7. The Committee trusts that the Government will adopt the necessary measures for the application of this provision.

Article 9. The Committee notes the texts of the collective agreements and the Service Regulations governing personnel in "positions of trust" in Petróleos Mexicanos and its subsidiary bodies. The Committee notes that although these texts establish entitlement to repatriation in the event of disembarkation for the purpose of repairs to the vessel or in the event of accident or illness of the crew member, they do not apply other provisions of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will ensure the application of the provisions of the Convention.

Article 10. The Committee notes articles 23 and 42(X) of the Regulations of the General Population Act concerning the repatriation of crew members. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures adopted to facilitate the replacement of seafarers on board.

Article 12. The Committee notes that in its report the Government states that this Article is complied with. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of any text which applies this Article.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention.The Committee has indicated in comments for many years that the provision of section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act providing that seafarers may not be discharged when the ship is in a foreign port is contrary to the relevant provision of the Convention. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its latest report and the clauses of collective agreements (CC-35/88, CC-713/87) which the Government deems applicable to this Article of the Convention. Nevertheless, the Committee notes that these clauses are not related to the application of Article 9, paragraph 1, and refer to the right recognized by the Conventions for the employer to dismiss crews which renounce their trade union membership and the termination of the agreement entered into for a voyage. The Committee expresses once again its hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to amend its legislation to bring it into line with this provision of the Convention.

[The Government is requested to supply a detailed report in 1998.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes Mexican Official Standard NOM-23-STPS-1993 establishing requirements for the parts and safety devices of lifting appliances in work centres, and its two annexes containing a number of provisions which give effect to Article 4, paragraph 3(h) of the Convention (provisions for the prevention of occupational accidents requiring special safety measures for the handling of cargo and ballast).

1. Article 2. The Committee notes Mexican Official Standard NOM-021-STPS-1993, establishing the requirements and characteristics of reports on occupational hazards, to include statistics, which contains a number of provisions applying paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article (compulsory notification to the competent authorities of all occupational accidents). The Committee notes that according to points 3.3.1 and 3.3.3 of the above Official Standard and the corresponding form (CM-2A), the statistics show the nature, causes and effects of accidents. The Committee points out that, according to paragraph 3 of this Article, the statistics must indicate clearly the department on board ship - for instance, deck, engine or catering - where the accident occurred. These indications are particularly important in the event of an investigation, which must be conducted in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article by the competent authority, into the causes and circumstances of occupational accidents resulting in loss of life or serious personal injury. According to the statistics supplied with the report, in 1995 there was an increase in the number of both these types of accidents. The Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to give full effect to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Article.

2. Article 4, paragraphs 2 and 3(d). With regard to its previous comments on the need to lay down provisions concerning the prevention of occupational accidents which prescribe special safety measures on and below deck, the Committee notes that the Safety Manual for personnel on board has not been amended. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee notes that the record book issued to seamen provides for entry of the reason for the seafarer's discharge, which is inconsistent with this provision of the Convention. Article 14, paragraph 1, provides that only the discharge shall be entered in the record book and the list of crew, and not the reason for the termination or rescission of the agreement. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps to ensure that this provision of the Convention is properly applied.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the content of the two clauses on termination of employment relationships in collective agreements CC-35/88 and CC-713/87 referred to in the Government's report. It notes, however, that these clauses refer to the application not of Article 9 of the Convention, but Article 11 (circumstances in which the owner or master may immediately discharge a seafarers). Furthermore, the Committee would like to point out once again that Article 9(3) does not give States which ratify the Convention an unlimited right to depart from the general rule established in Article 9, paragraph 1, but establishes a special rule to be applied in exceptional circumstances to be determined by the national legislation, in which notice even when duly given shall not terminate the agreement. Since the circumstances are exceptional which is not the case for vessels in foreign ports they do not warrant the adoption of a general rule to replace the rule of Article 9(1). Consequently, the provision of section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act cannot be regarded as consistent with the Convention since it provides that agreements cannot be terminated when the vessel is abroad; it amounts to a normal circumstance which is inconsistent with Article 9, paragraph 1.

The Committee again urges the Government to take the necessary steps to amend the national legislation to bring it into conformity with this provision of the Convention.

The Committee raises another point in a direct request to the Government.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1996.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its first report. It notes that, according to this information, national law in general gives effect to the Convention. Nevertheless, the Committee would be grateful for additional information on the following points:

Article 4(a) of the Convention. Please indicate the special provisions on occupational health protection and medical care relating to work on board.

Article 4(b). Please indicate to what extent the health protection and medical care provided to seafarers differ from that which is generally available to workers ashore.

Article 4(e). The Committee notes that section 509 of the Federal Labour Act provides that safety and health committees consisting of an equal number of representatives of the workers and the employer shall be established in order to investigate the causes of accidents and diseases, to propose preventive measures and to ensure compliance therewith. It would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the establishment and operation of the above committees in the maritime sector. The Committee also notes that documents are being prepared on the promotion of health, health education and first aid. Please supply any relevant information concerning the preparation of the above documents and supply copies of them when they have been finalized. Please also describe health promotion and health education programmes which have been prepared in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 5, paragraphs 2 to 6. The Committee notes that the maritime and port authorities are to take various measures to give effect to these provisions of the Convention. Please supply detailed information in this respect.

Article 6. Please supply a copy of the medical guide adopted by the competent authority.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Please supply copies of the lists referred to in this paragraph.

Article 7, paragraphs 4 and 5. Please give details on the instruction and training provided to seafarers and doctors, in accordance with these provisions of the Convention.

Article 9, paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Please give details of the various courses and training referred to in these provisions, specifying, in the case of the refresher courses provided for in accordance with paragraph 4, the time intervals at which they shall be taken.

Article 11, paragraphs 1, 2 and 7. Please supply the information called for in the report form under these provisions of the Convention.

Article 12. Please supply a sample copy of the medical report form adopted.

Article 13. Please supply information on any measures taken in accordance with this Article, including copies of relevant bilateral or multilateral agreements.

Point V of the report form. Please give a general indication of the manner in which the Convention is applied and attach information on the number of seafarers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention and the number and nature of the contraventions reported.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes with interest the information supplied in the Government's first report. It requests the Government to furnish replies on the following points in order for it to examine the application of the Convention in more detail:

Article 9 of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in addition to the provisions of section 123(A)(XXVI) of the Constitution, which provides that the expenses of repatriation shall be borne by the contracting employer, only the Federal Labour Act contains legal provisions relating to the application of the Convention. Nevertheless, in national practice the Convention can also be applied by means of collective agreements, employment rules established between shipowners, seafarers and fishermen, as well as arbitration decisions issued by judicial bodies. In order to enable it to undertake a fuller analysis of the application of the Convention, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply a copy of the collective agreement for Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) to which it refers in its report and any collective agreements applicable to other maritime sectors, labour regulations or judicial rulings which are relevant in this respect.

Point V of the report form. The Committee notes that the Government hopes to obtain from the authorities responsible for the application of the Convention, from PEMEX and from the organizations of employers (CONCAMIN) and of workers (CTM), the data called for under this point of the report form. It requests the Government, when supplying this information, to specify the number or percentage of seafarers covered by the collective agreement for PEMEX and those who are covered by collective agreements applicable to other sectors of maritime activity, with an indication of the manner in which these latter agreements also give effect to the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

1. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report and the appended laws and regulations, in particular instruction No. 19 concerning the constitution, registration and functioning of the joint safety and health committee in work centres, several provisions of which give effect to Article 3 of the Convention (research into general trends concerning accidents and into hazards, undertaken in order to provide a sound basis for the prevention of accidents).

2. Article 2. The Committee has for a number of years drawn the Government's attention to the need to take appropriate measures to ensure the keeping of statistics of occupational accidents of seafarers, recording the numbers, nature, causes and effects of occupational accidents, as well as the part of the ship and the area (at sea or in port) where they occurred (paragraphs 1 and 3); it also has stressed the need to ensure that occupational accidents of seafarers are adequately reported and investigated and that in particular the competent authority undertakes an investigation into the causes and circumstances of occupational accidents resulting in loss of life or serious personal injury, and such other accidents as may be specified in national laws or regulations (paragraphs 1 and 4). The Government refers in its report to comments by the General Coordination of Labour Policies, Studies and Statistics of the Secretariat for Labour and Social Security (STPS) that no means are available for collecting the required data to establish statistics of occupational accidents occurring to seafarers on board ships under Mexican flag. It indicated however that according to the General Direction of Labour, Medicine and Security of the Secretariat, revision of instruction No. 21 is being finalized and the modification of this instruction will aim at improving the compilation of reports on occupational accidents.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that occupational accidents of seafarers will be adequately investigated and reported and that detailed statistics on these accidents, including the data mentioned in Article 2, will be kept and analysed.

3. Article 4, paragraphs 2 and 3(d) and (h). In its previous comments the Committee noted that in the national legislation there were no provisions for the prevention of occupational accidents which are due to particular hazards of maritime employment, concerning in particular special safety measures on and below deck, and dangerous cargo and ballast.

In its report, the Government mentions among measures to prevent accidents of seafarers the current revision of the safety manual for personnel employed on board ship which is aimed at supplementing it and bringing it up to date. More particularly regarding the provisions on the prevention of accidents in relation to dangerous cargo and ballast, the Government refers to instruction No. 23, being drafted, on the safety elements and devices for lifting appliances.

The Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure the application of these provisions of the Convention and that the Government will indicate in its next report the provisions adopted to this end.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments respecting section 209(III) of the Federal Labour Act, the Committee notes the interpretation of this section by the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board to the effect that it prohibits the termination of an agreement for an indefinite period (a) when the vessel is abroad, (b) when the vessel is in an uninhabited place and (c) when it is in port, on condition in the latter case that the ship is exposed to risk due to bad weather or other circumstances.

The Committee notes that this new interpretation differs from the one given by the Government to section 209 in its reports for the periods 1980-82 and 1982-86. At that time the Government considered that condition (a) was only fulfilled when it coincided with condition (b) or (c). In the interpretation given by the Federal Board, condition (a) is valid per se and no longer depends on the other two, since the Board considers that Article 9, paragraph 3, of the Convention explicitly empowers national legislation to determine the exceptional circumstances in which the period of notice shall not terminate the agreement. The Committee wishes to point out that paragraph 3 does not give States which ratify the Convention an unlimited right to disregard the general rule established in paragraph 1, nor to replace it by another general rule under which an agreement for an indefinite period may be terminated only in a port of the country of registration of the vessel. However, the Committee wishes to point out that the Government, under the provisions of Article 1, paragraph 2(c) and (g), of the Convention, may determine which categories of vessels remain outside the scope of the Convention, by applying the criteria set out in this provision.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take into account the above and will take the necessary measures to bring the legislation into harmony with this Article of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments.

Article 4, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee notes, in particular, the detailed explanations in the report concerning the interpretation of section 204-IV of the Federal Labour Act. It would be grateful if the Government would supply with its next report copies of the collective agreements concluded by the Mexican Institute of Social Security with shipping enterprises of the country, to which reference is made in the report.

Article 7. The Committee takes due note of the explanations in the report concerning different situations, treated under the national legislation, in which the right to insurance benefit shall continue in respect of sickness occurring during a definite period after the termination of the last engagement. The Committee recalls in this connection that in accordance with Article 7 the said period shall be fixed in such a way as to cover the normal interval between successive engagements. The Committee therefore asks the Government once again to indicate whether the period of eight weeks provided for in section 118 of the Social Security Act is sufficient to cover the normal interval between successive engagements in conformity with the provision of this Article.

It would also be grateful if the Government would forward, in its next report, a copy of the resolution 12/85 of the Technical Council of the Mexican Institute of Social Security which extends up to one year the period during which the right to insurance benefit shall continue in respect of an insured person who is deprived of a remunerated work.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1988, published 75th ILC session (1988)

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report, in reply to its previous comments, and of the appended documentation including the statistics and investigation forms concerning occupational accidents.

The Committee notes the Government's statements concerning the practical difficulties which it encounters in gathering statistical data that would enable it to conduct investigation and research with a view to preventing occupational accidents in general and accidents to seafarers in particular. It also notes the efforts undertaken in this area and, in particular, the fact that the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (of tripartite membership) plans to propose certain modifications to Instruction No. 21 (concerning the prescriptions and characteristics of reports on occupational risks with a view to including them in the statistics), to provide for the obligation for enterprises to report occupational accidents; these modifications will also cover maritime enterprises. Furthermore, the Committee takes note of the instructions issued by the Ministry of Labour, pursuant to the Law on statistical and geographical information, to implement a programme of periodical inquiries into occupational risks with a view to formulating a national policy designed to reduce the number of such accidents.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to ensure that occupational accidents occuring to seafarers are the subject of appropriate investigations and reports and that detailed statistics on such accidents, including the data referred to in Article 2 of the Convention, are compiled and analysed. The Committee also hopes that it will be possible to undertake research into general trends in accidents due to particular hazards of maritime employment in order to provide a sound basis for the prevention of such accidents, in accordance with Article 3.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken and results obtained in this area.

Article 4, paragraphs 2 and 3(d) and (h). In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide a copy of the Manual of Safety Above and Below Deck which was drawn up in accordance with the indications contained in its previous reports, on the basis of standards established by the International Maritime Organisation. In its last report, the Government states that certain amendments have been made to the above Manual and provides the text of a Safety Manual for Personnel on Board Ship (Manual de seguridad para personal embarcado).

The Committee notes that the Manual in question contains no provision giving effect to the above-mentioned paragraphs of the Convention. It therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures it intends to take (for example, within the framework of specific instructions applicable to seafarers and issued under the General Regulations on Occupational Safety and Health) with a view to preventing accidents due to particular hazards of maritime employment, and ensuring more effective application of the above provisions of the Convention. The Committee also hopes that it will be possible for such measures to give effect to subparagraphs (d) (special safety measures on and below deck) and (h) (dangerous cargo and ballast) of paragraph 3 of Article 4 of this instrument.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1987, published 74th ILC session (1987)

Article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government maintains its position in its report that section 209 (III) of the Federal Labour Act should be read in the sense that termination of an employment agreement for an indefinite period is only prohibited abroad when the vessel is in an uninhabited place or in port, and in this latter case, only when this would expose the vessel to some risk. However, in view of the ambiguous nature of the present text of section 209 (III) which has given rise to various interpretations, and recalling that the Government had considered in earlier reports the possibility of amending it, the Committee hopes that this possibility will be borne in mind in any future revision of the above Act. In any event, for the purpose of avoiding any doubts on the part of those concerned about the scope of the above section, the point in question should be clarified for the seafarers and authorities concerned through appropriate circulars or directives.