Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) - Latvia (Ratification: 2011)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the Government’s third report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). The Committee notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference, in 2018 entered into force for Latvia on 26 December 2020.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee refers to the observations of the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) and the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), received by the Office on 1 and 26 October 2020 and 4 October 2021, alleging that ratifying states have failed to comply with certain provisions of the Convention during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes that it did not have the opportunity to examine the application of the MLC, 2006 by Latvia during the peak of the pandemic. Noting with deep concern the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic had on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Convention, the Committee refers to its general observation of 2020 and its comments in the general report of 2021 on this issue and requests the Government to ensure that any remaining restrictions are lifted in order to guarantee full compliance with the MLC, 2006.

Article II, paragraphs 1(f) and 2. Definition and scope of application. Seafarers. The Committee requested the Government to indicate how a distinction was drawn between persons who provide passenger entertainment-related services for short periods on board (defining such periods) and those who work on board on a more permanent basis, the latter being considered as seafarers for the purposes of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government indication that, although persons who provide passenger entertainment-related services are excluded from the definition of “seafarer”, section 272(2)(4)(b) of the Maritime Code provides that essential rights provided for in the MLC, 2006 with respect to minimum age, work and recreational facilities, hours of work and hours of rest, shore leave, the liability of shipowner for health protection and medical treatment, the right to submit a complaint, complaint handling procedure on board ship, and repatriation, apply to these persons. The Government also indicates that the aspects of employment of these persons not covered by the Maritime Code are regulated by the Labour Law applicable to shore-based employees which provides protection comparable to that provided for under the MLC, 2006. The Committee further notes that section 273 of the Maritime Code stipulates that in case of doubt regarding Article II (3), (5) and (6) of the MLC, 2006, such issues shall be examined, and decisions shall be taken by the Maritime Administration of Latvia after consultations with the representatives of shipowners and of the trade union. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that there are no MLC, 2006 passenger ships under Latvian flag where the voyage takes more than 48 hours and therefore passenger entertainment-related services on such ships are temporary work (up to 48 hours). The Committee takes note of this information.

Article II, paragraph 1(i) and 4. Definitions and scope of application. Ships. The Committee notes that section 272(2)(2)(b) of the Maritime Code provides that the MLC, 2006 shall not apply to “ships intended for navigation exclusively in coastal or inland waters or for navigation in port waters”. The Committee recalls that while ships navigating “exclusively in inland waters or waters within, or closely adjacent to, sheltered waters or areas where port regulations apply” are excluded by the scope of the Convention (Article II, paragraph 1(i)), the latter applies to ships navigating in coastal waters. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide detailed information on the definition of “coastal waters” and, if applicable, to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the protection afforded by the Convention is guaranteed to all seafarers working on board ships within the meaning of the Convention.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. Minimum age. Hazardous work. The Committee notes that section 284(3) of the Maritime Code provides that "[s]eafarers under the age of 18 years are prohibited from being employed in works which may endanger their health or safety. These types of work, and also their exceptions, shall be determined in accordance with the laws and regulations regarding employment of adolescents”. The Committee observes that Cabinet Regulation No. 206, adopted on 28 May 2002, entitled “Regulations regarding Work in which Employment of Adolescents is prohibited and Exceptions when Employment in such Work is Permitted in Connection with Vocational Training of the Adolescent” contains a comprehensive list of types of hazardous work prohibited for adolescents and a list of work environment risk factors for which it is prohibited for adolescents to be subjected. The Committee notes, however, that this list does not include hazardous types of work in the maritime sector. The Committee further observes that paragraph 3 of this Cabinet Regulation provides that “[e]mployment of the adolescents in work referred to in these Regulations is permissible only in exceptional cases if it is related to vocational training of the adolescent, the work is performed in direct presence of the supervisor of the work or a trusted representative, and compliance with regulatory enactments related to labour protection has been ensured”. The Committee recalls that Standard A1.1, paragraph 4, does not allow for any exception to the prohibition of hazardous work for persons under 18 years of age. The Committee accordingly requests the Government, after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned, to adopt the list of types of work considered hazardous as required by Standard A1.1, paragraph 4 for which the employment, engagement or work of seafarers under the age of 18 is prohibited, taking into account the specific conditions of work and risks on board ships for young seafarers, clearly distinguishing between types of work that are to be prohibited, without exception, and those that can only be undertaken under adequate supervision and instruction.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Repatriation. Financial security. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Standard A2.5.2, the Government shall ensure the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. It notes with interestthat the amendments made to section 304 of the Maritime Code which came into force on 6 December 2017 give effect to the requirements of Standard A2.5.2. The Committee takes note of this information.

Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1, paragraph 2. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Implementation. The Committee notes that, in response to its previous request, the Government states that compliance with the requirements which do not relate to ship construction and equipment for ships constructed before the date when the MLC, 2006 came into force in Latvia, are ensured by direct application of Article 15, paragraph 3, Article 12, paragraph 2 and Article 17 of the Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92) and Article 7 of the Accommodation of Crews (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1970 (No. 133). The Government further indicates that section 30 of the Maritime Administration and Marine Safety Law states that shipowners shall ensure that the work and recreation rooms of the crew of Latvian ships comply with the requirements of Conventions of the International Labour Organization and other international laws and regulations and that the premises of the crew should be inspected periodically with the results recorded in the ship's logbook. The Government indicates that reference to Cabinet Regulation No. 18 of 14 January 2014, entitled “Regulations on the applicable requirements of Maritime Labour Convention regarding accommodation and recreational facilities on board and compliance conditions” (hereinafter, Cabinet Regulation No. 18) is included in the DMLC Part I as requested by the Committee and that relevant amendments to Cabinet Regulation No. 18 will be reconsidered in future to also include requirements for ships constructed before the MLC, 2006 entered into force. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to keep it informed on any development in this regard.

Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1, paragraph 12. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Hospital. The Committee notes that, while Cabinet Regulation No. 18 does not have a tonnage limit above which requirements concerning hospital accommodation apply, Cabinet Regulation No. 44 adopted on 18 January 2022 “ Regulations with respect to Safety and Health Protection Requirements and Medical Treatment on board Vessels” (hereinafter, Cabinet Regulation No. 44), to which the Government refers, prescribes that a vessel with gross tonnage exceeding 500 and with a crew of 15 or more persons which is engaged on a voyage of more than three days, shall have a separate room (hospital) in which medical treatment can be provided using appropriate materials and with hygienic conditions. Recalling that the requirements concerning hospital accommodation under Standard A3.1, paragraph 12, apply to all ships carrying 15 or more seafarers and engaged in a voyage of more than three days’ duration, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2, paragraphs 1 and 2. Food and catering. Minimum standards. The Committee notes that, in response to its previous request, the Government states that, compliance withthe requirement that seafarers are provided food and drinking water of appropriate nutritional value as well as quality and quantity is ensured through Cabinet Regulation No. 1050, adopted on 16 November 2010, entitled “Procedures for the Implementation of Public Health Measures”. Paragraph 11 of Cabinet Regulation No. 1050 provides that the Health Inspectorate carries out inspections of ships and issues Ship Sanitation Control Certificates. The Government further indicates that paragraph 26 of Cabinet Regulation No. 44 states that the Health Inspectorate can participate in flag state inspections of the Maritime administration of Latvia and carry out ship sanitation control or investigation of possible unconformities. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(b). Medical care on board and ashore. Qualified medical doctor on board. The Committee notes that, under paragraph 11 of Cabinet Regulation No. 44, if there are 100 crew members or more on board and the vessel is engaged in international voyages for more than 72 hours, there should be a certified physician on bord a ship responsible for the medical care of the crew members of the ship. The Committee recalls that Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(b), provides for the obligation of having a qualified medical doctor for “ships carrying 100 or more persons …”. The general expression “persons” does not only include seafarers but may include other persons on board not in the quality of seafarers, such as passengers. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to bring its legislation into conformity with this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 4.2 and Standard A4.2.1, paragraphs 8 to 14, and Standard A4.2.2. Shipowners’ liability. Financial security. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that pursuant to Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, national laws and regulations shall provide that the financial security system to assure compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard meet certain minimum requirements. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest that the Government refers to the amendments made to section 298 of the Maritime Code which came into force on 6 December 2017, which comply with the new provisions of the Convention. The Committee takes note of this information.

Regulation 4.3 and the Code. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. The Committee notes that, in response to its previous request, the Government states that Cabinet Regulation No. 359 has ceased to be valid with the issuance of a new Cabinet Regulation No. 44, which came into force on 21 January 2022. The Committee observes that this new Cabinet Regulation establishes minimum labour protection requirements on board vessels under section VI and refers to requirements of Standard A4.3 of the MLC, 2006. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that during the revision of Cabinet Regulation No. 359, there were discussions as to whether it was necessary to include the regulation on the ship’s safety committee and it was considered that Standard A4.3, paragraph 2(d) is applicable directly in Latvia, in addition to the employees’ right to elect representatives on labour protection issues as prescribed by section 20 of the Labour Protection Law. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the enforcement of Standard A4.3, paragraph 2(d) in respect of establishing of ship’s safety committee is also controlled by the flag State inspection and that there are safety committees established on all Latvian ships. The Committee notes the examples of approved DMLC, Part II, provided by the Government which refer to the establishment of a safety committee. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 5.1 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Noting that no information has been provided with respect to the national provisions giving effect to the detailed requirements of Standards A5.1.1, A5.1.3 and A5.1.4, the Committee requested the Government to indicate how it gives effect to these provisions of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that reference to the MLC, 2006, in Paragraph 3.6 of Cabinet Regulation No. 439 adopted on 7 June 2011, entitled “Regulations Regarding the Implementation of Flag State Supervision of Ships” means that all provisions on inspection and certification contained in Cabinet Regulation No. 439 applies also to the inspection and certification in respect to the MLC, 2006. The Government further indicates that specific provisions of the MLC, 2006 on flag State responsibilities are applied directly. The Committee also notes that the Government indicates that there is a Quality Management System procedure of the Maritime Administration of Latvia for issuing MLC certificates on Latvian flagged ships, as well as instruction and control lists for flag State inspectors of the Maritime Administration of Latvia. Flag State supervisions over almost all Latvian ships to which the MLC, 2006 applies, are delegated to the classification societies (recognized organizations), whose work is supervised by the Maritime Administration of Latvia, in accordance with the agreement concluded between the Maritime Administration of Latvia and every recognized organization, and with national and international laws. The Committee takes note of this information.

Regulation 5.1.3 and Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10. Flag State responsibilities. Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance. Content. Noting that the DMLC, Part I does not provide concise information on the main content of the national requirements, the Committee requested the Government to review it to fully implement Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it plans to review the DMLC, Part I to make it more understandable for everyone. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give full effect to this requirement of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the Government’s second report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). The Committee notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2014 and 2016 entered into force for Latvia on 18 January 2017 and 8 January 2019, respectively. It further notes that the Government’s report was received before the entry into force of these amendments. Based on its second review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following issues.

Article II, paragraphs 1(f) and 2. Definition and scope of application. Seafarers. In its previous comment, noting that, pursuant to section 272(4)(b) of the Maritime Code, persons who provide passenger entertainment-related services (such as performers) are excluded from the definition of “seafarer”, the Committee requested the Government to provide further information in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the determinations regarding the non-applicability of the Convention to specific categories of persons, including performers, was extensively discussed with seafarers’ and shipowners’ organizations. The Committee recalls that the persons who regularly spend more than short periods aboard, even where they perform tasks that are not normally regarded as maritime tasks, may still be regarded as seafarers for the purpose of the Convention regardless of their position on board. Accordingly, the Committee considers that no question of doubt can arise concerning the fact that persons providing passenger entertainment-related services who regularly spend more than short periods aboard are to be considered seafarers for the purpose of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that a distinction is drawn between persons who provide passenger entertainment-related services for short periods on board (defining such periods) and those who work on board on a more permanent basis, the latter being considered as seafarers for the purposes of the Convention.

Regulation 1.4 and the Code. Recruitment and placement. The Committee noted that while section 12 of Cabinet Regulation No. 364 of 17 May 2011, entitled “Procedures for Licensing and Supervision of Merchants – Providers of Recruitment and Placement Services in Ship Crew Manning” (hereafter CR No. 364), prohibits recruitment and placement services from charging seafarers, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, fees or other charges for their services, section 11.6 of CR No. 364 states that recruitment and placement services must, among other requirements, inform seafarers regarding potential expenses which may occur during the recruitment and placement process. The Committee requested the Government to identify what those costs may consist of and how it is ensured that seafarers are not charged, directly or indirectly, for the costs other than those provided for in paragraph 5(b) of Standard A1.4. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the purpose of section 11.6 of CR No. 364 is to ensure that recruitment and placement services are responsible for informing seafarers regarding potential expenses which may occur during the recruitment and placement process with respect to the costs of obtaining a national statutory medical certificate, the national seafarer’s book and a passport or other similar personal travel documents. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1(a) and (c). Seafarers’ employment agreements. Signed original by both the seafarer and shipowner or a representative. The Committee requested the Government to identify the national laws or regulations which require that the seafarers’ employment agreement is signed by both the seafarer and the shipowner or representative of the shipowner and that both have an original of the agreement as required under paragraphs 1(a) and (c) of Standard A2.1. With respect to the requirement that the employment agreement be signed by both the seafarer and the shipowner or representative of the shipowner, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the expression “agreement entered into in the writing” in the English version of the Maritime Code stands for the expression in Latvian “rakstveida noslegts darba LĪgums” which means that the agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. With respect to the requirement of Standard A2.1, paragraph 1(c), that both the shipowner and the seafarer have a signed original of the agreement, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the expression “one copy” in the English version of the Maritime Code stands for the expression in Latvian “viens darba liguma eksempliirs” which refers to the original of the agreement. Section 40(5) of the Labour Law also states that an employment contract shall be prepared in duplicate, one copy to be kept by the employee, the other by the employer. The Government indicates that the national provisions above-mentioned therefore require that the seafarers’ employment agreement shall be signed by the seafarer and the shipowner in two originals and one original of the agreement shall be submitted to the seafarer and the other original to the shipowner. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Repatriation. Financial security. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Standard A2.5.2, the Government shall ensure the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) does national legislation require the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in the event of their abandonment? (if yes, specify if the financial security system was determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned); (b) has your country received requests to facilitate repatriation of a seafarer and, if yes, how did your country respond?; (c) what are the circumstances under which a seafarer is considered abandoned according to national legislation?; (d) does national legislation provide that ships that need to be certified according to Regulation 5.1.3 must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence must contain the information required by Appendix A2–I and has to be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (e) does national legislation require that the financial security system is sufficient to cover outstanding wages and other entitlements, all expenses incurred by the seafarer (including the cost of repatriation), and the essential needs of the seafarers, as defined in Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 9?; and (f) does national legislation provide for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the above-mentioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A2–I of the Convention (Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 7).

Regulation 2.8 and the Code. Career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers. The Committee requested the Government to provide updated information concerning the implementation of career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers, including within the framework of the “Transport Development Guidelines 2014–2020”, which give effect to Regulation 2.8 and the Code. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the national policy planning document “Transport Development Guidelines 2014–2020” aims to improve the Latvian seafarers’ vocational training system and therefore increase the conformity of Latvian seafarers’ professional competences with respect to the needs and requirements of the labour market. In this context, measures have been taken with respect to (i) promoting the rank-up activities among ratings by using modern distance learning possibilities; (ii) reviewing the vocational maritime school concept by improving attractiveness of maritime school programmes therefore strengthening linkage with labour market needs and development tendencies, and; (iii) promoting the seafarer’s profession attractiveness among youngsters, initiating events aimed at popularization of maritime education and seafarer occupation. The Committee takes note of this information.

Regulation 3.1 and Standard A3.1, paragraph 2. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Implementation. The Committee noted that, while Cabinet Regulation No. 18 of 14 January 2014 entitled “Regulations on the applicable requirements of Maritime Labour Convention regarding accommodation and recreational facilities on board and compliance conditions” (hereafter CR No. 18), implements the provisions of Regulation 3.1 and the Code, the Government’s Declaration of maritime labour compliance (DMLC) Part I does not refer to CR No. 18 under the applicable provisions for accommodation or on-board recreational facilities. The Committee accordingly requested the Government to include a reference to CR No. 18 in the DMLC Part I, to avoid uncertainty with respect to the applicable national legislation. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that in accordance with Regulation 3.1, paragraph 2, CR No. 18 is only applicable to ships constructed on or after the date when the Convention came into force and does not apply to existing ships which were constructed before 20 August 2013. The Government indicates that given that there are no ships constructed on or after 20 August 2013 registered under the Latvian flag, the DMLC Part I provided is intended for existing ships and does not contain reference to CR No. 18. The reference to CR No. 18 will be included in the DMLC Part I in case it will be issued for the ship constructed on or after 20 August 2013. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that according to Regulation 3.1, paragraph 2, the requirements in the Code implementing this Regulation which relate to ship construction and equipment apply only to ships constructed on or after the date when this Convention comes into force for the Member concerned. Other requirements, such as those provided for in Standard A3.1, paragraphs 16, 17 and 18, apply to all ships regardless of their date of construction. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that all ships flying its flag comply with these requirements of the Convention.

Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2, paragraphs 1 and 2. Food and catering. Minimum standards. Noting the absence of applicable national provisions, the Committee requested the Government to provide information with respect to: (i) the catering standards that apply to meals provided to seafarers on ships that fly its flag (Standard A.3.2, paragraph 1); (ii) the training and instruction of catering staff (paragraph 2(c) of Standard A.3.2.); (iii) the frequency of inspections regarding food and catering; and (iv) the provision of food and drinking water of appropriate nutritional value as well as quality and quantity. With respect to Standard A.3.2, paragraph 2(c), the Government indicates that a crew of a Latvian ship shall be recruited in conformity with the specifications of the minimum manning certificate. This certificate shall be issued to Latvian ships by the Maritime Administration of Latvia in accordance with Cabinet Regulation No. 80 adopted on 24 January 2006, entitled “Regulation on minimum manning of ships”, paragraph 7, which requires that there shall be a fully qualified cook on ships with ten or more than ten crew members. On ships operating with a prescribed manning of less than ten crew members and without a fully qualified cook, anyone processing food in the galley shall be trained or instructed in areas including on MLC, 2006 standards on food and personal hygiene as well as handling and storage of food on board ship. With respect to the requirement that seafarers are provided food and drinking water of appropriate nutritional value as well as quality and quantity, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Law on the Supervision of the Handling of Food adopted on 19 February 1998 and several Cabinet Regulations for catering services on hygiene and quality of food, requirements for personnel, and traceability of food apply and that the Food and Veterinary Service controls the enforcement of these requirements. The Committee, however, observes that it is not clear how the above-mentioned provisions apply to ships and also notes that those provisions are not mentioned in the DMLC, Part I. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate: (i) how these provisions, which are not specific to seafarers apply to ships; and (ii) how the Food and Veterinary Service controls the enforcement of these requirements on board ships. It further requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure full compliance with this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1. Medical care on board ship and ashore. Dental care. Noting that the existing legislation does not appear to provide for essential dental care, as required under Standard A4.1, paragraph 1, the Committee requested the Government to indicate how it gives effect to this requirement of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 298 of the Maritime Code prescribes that a seafarer is entitled to receive emergency medical assistance and the shipowner has a duty to compensate the expenditures that may arise. The treatment expenses of the seafarer shall be borne by the shipowner if not provided by the state in accordance with general arrangements or is not covered by health insurance. The expenses shall be borne by the shipowner if (1) a seafarer has suffered injuries on board – until he/she has completely recovered, or when the doctor admits the seafarer to be incapable of work; (2) a seafarer has become ill on board – not less than 16 weeks from the date when a seafarer has become ill. The Government indicates that the above-mentioned provisions also covers the shipowner’s obligation to provide essential dental care to the seafarer, although not explicitly mentioned. The Committee observes that the LSUMF Uniform “TCC” Collective Agreement for crews on fag of convenience ships submitted by the Government incorporates in paragraph 21.1 the right to dental care. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 4.2, Standard A4.2.1, paragraphs 8 to 14, and Standard A4.2.2. Shipowners’ liability. Financial security. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that pursuant to Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, national laws and regulations shall provide that the financial security system to assure compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard meet certain minimum requirements. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) what is the form taken by the system of financial security and was it determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned?; (b) how do national laws and regulations ensure that the system of financial security meets the following minimum requirements: (i) payment of compensation in full and without delay, (ii) no pressure to accept payment less than the contractual amount, (iii) interim payments (while situation is being assessed) to avoid undue hardship, (iv) offsetting payment against any damages resulting from any other claim made by the seafarer against the shipowner and arising from the same incident, and (v) persons who can bring the claim for contractual compensation (seafarer, her/his next of kin, representative or designated beneficiary)?; (c) does national legislation provide that ships must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence has to contain the information required in Appendix A4–I, be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (d) does national legislation provide: (i) for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease, (ii) that the competent authority is notified by the financial security provider if a shipowner’s financial security is cancelled or terminated, and (iii) that seafarers receive prior notification if a shipowner’s financial security is to be cancelled or terminated?; and (e) how does national legislation ensure that effective arrangements are in place to receive, deal with and impartially settle contractual claims relating to compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard, through expeditious and fair procedures? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the above-mentioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A4–I of the Convention (Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 14).

Regulation 4.3 and the Code. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. The Committee requested the Government to indicate how it gives effect to the requirement under Standard A4.3, paragraph 2(d), that a safety committee be established on board a ship on which there are five or more seafarers. It also requested the Government to provide information with regard to the adoption, after consultation with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations, of national guidelines relevant to occupational safety and health protection of seafarers in accordance with paragraph 2 of Regulation 4.3. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the main principles and guidelines for the management of occupational safety and health on board Latvian ships are prescribed by Cabinet Regulation No. 359 adopted on 1 July 2003, entitled “Regulations with respect to Safety and Health Protection Requirements and Medical Treatment on board Vessels” (hereinafter CR No. 359). The Government indicates that CR No. 359 is currently in the process of being revised and will introduce the requirements of Standard A.4.3, paragraph 2(d), with respect to the ship’s safety committee. The new CR will specify the obligation of the shipowner with respect to occupational safety and health, taking into account Guideline B4.3.1, paragraph 1, and relevant ILO guidelines and other international standards. The new CR will also require that the matters specified by paragraph 2 of Guideline B4.3.1 be described in the regulations on the ship’s safety prepared by the shipowner. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard to ensure full compliance with the Convention.

Regulation 4.5 and Standard A4.5, paragraph 6. Social security. Comparable benefits for seafarers in the absence of adequate coverage. The Committee requested the Government to clarify the manner in which social security protection is extended to seafarers ordinarily resident in Latvia who are working on ships flying another flag. It also requested information with respect to any arrangements that have been adopted to provide protection to seafarers ordinarily resident in Latvia when working on board ships flying the flag of another European Union member or Switzerland or a member of the European Economic Area. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government stating that seafarers who are ordinarily resident in Latvia and employed on ships flying the flag of Latvia or from another European Union member, Switzerland or a member of the European Economic Area are covered by the system of Latvian social security laws and regulations, based on mandatory contributions by the employer and the employee. For seafarers resident in Latvia who are employed on foreign ships flying other flags, they can join social insurance on a voluntary basis. The Committee takes note of this information. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that no measure has been adopted for providing benefits to non-resident seafarers working on ships flying its flag who do not have adequate social security coverage.

Regulations 5.1 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. The Committee observes that Cabinet Regulation No. 439 adopted on 7 June 2011, entitled “Regulations Regarding the Implementation of Flag State Supervision of Ships” (hereafter CR No. 439) provides in section 3.6 that the inspectorate shall implement the flag State supervision of Latvian ships by performing the following activities: … supervision of the compliance with the requirements of the MLC, 2006, Convention. The Committee observes, however, that no information has been provided with respect to the national provisions giving effect to the detailed requirements of Standard A5.1.1, A5.1.3 and A5.1.4. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it gives effect to these provisions of the Convention.

Regulation 5.1.3 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Maritime labour certificate and declaration of maritime labour compliance. The Committee requested the Government to specify how it ensures the inspection of all ships and not just ships engaged in international voyages and with a gross tonnage of 500 and higher, who are required to carry and maintain a maritime labour certificate and declaration of maritime labour compliance. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that CR No. 439 regulates flag State supervision of all ships registered under the Latvian flag. Pursuant to paragraph 4 of the CR No. 439, the inspection and certification of the Latvian ships of 500 gross tonnage and over, engaged in international voyages, is performed by a recognized organization authorized by the Maritime Administration of Latvia. paragraph 5 of CR No. 439 states that Latvian ships under 500 gross tonnage which do not engage in international voyages should also be inspected and certified. The shipowner can however choose for his/her ship to be inspected and certified by the Maritime Administration of Latvia or a recognized organization. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Regulation 5.1.3 and Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10. Flag State responsibilities. Declaration of maritime labour compliance. Noting that the Declaration of maritime labour compliance (DMLC) Part I that was submitted sets out a list of references to the implementing legislation without providing concise information on the main content of the national requirements, the Committee requested the Government to consider amending the DMLC Part I to better implement the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has reconsidered the Latvian DMLC Part I from the point of view of Guideline B5.1 .3 and considers that no additional explanation should be included in the DMLC Part I. The Committee notes however that the DMLC Part I does not provide enough information on national requirements, where they relate to matters for which the Convention envisages some differences in national practice. For example, in connection with minimum age, the DMLC Part I, refers to “Maritime Code (Part G), Cabinet Regulation No. 206 adopted 28 May 2002, ‘Regulations regarding Work in which Employment of Adolescents is prohibited and Exceptions when Employment in such Work is Permitted in Connection with Vocational Training of the Adolescent’”, but does not actually state what the minimum age is or what period is considered as night. Concerning the DMLC Part II, the Committee also noted that although the example of an approved DMLC Part II provided by the Government sets out some additional information, in a number of cases it simply confirms compliance with the requirements and refers to other documents concerning internal system manuals and procedures. The Committee also suggested that the Government instruct its inspectors to review DMLC Part IIs to ensure that they provide more information on the ways in which the national requirements are to be implemented between inspections. The Committee observes that the Government has not provided other examples of approved DMLC, Part II, drawn up by a shipowner. The Committee recalls that unless all the referenced documents are carried on board ship and easily accessible, it would be difficult for port State control officers or seafarers to understand what the national requirements are on these matters. The Committee reiterates that the DMLC Part I as currently drafted does not appear to fulfil the purpose for which it, along with the DMLC Part II, is required under the Convention, which is to help all persons concerned, such as flag State inspectors, authorized officers in port States and seafarers, to check that the national requirements on the 16 listed matters are being properly implemented on board ship. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to review the DMLC Part I to fully implement Standard A5.1.3, paragraph 10, and to submit examples of DMLC, Part II approved by the competent authority.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

General questions on application. Implementing measures. Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance, Parts I and II. The Committee notes the Government’s first report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006). The Committee also notes, in this respect, the Government’s reference to legislation implementing the Convention, including the Maritime Code, the Maritime Administration and Marine Safety Law, the Labour Code, and various Cabinet Regulations (CR). The Committee notes that the Government also provided a copy of the Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance (DMLC) Part I and an example of an approved DMLC Part II and a Maritime Labour Certificate. The Committee also notes that, on many matters, the Government refers to the DMLC Parts I and II as providing sufficient information on national implementation; however, the Committee notes that the DMLC Part I that was submitted sets out, instead, a list of references to the implementing legislation. For example, in connection with minimum age, the DMLC Part I provides the following information: “Maritime Code (Part G), Cabinet Regulation No. 206 adopted 28 May 2002, ‘Regulations regarding Work in which Employment of Adolescents is prohibited and Exceptions when Employment in such Work is Permitted in Connection with Vocational Training of the Adolescent’.”

The Committee recalls that paragraph 10(a) of Standard A5.1.3 provides that the DMLC Part I drawn up by the competent authority shall not only “identify the national requirements embodying the relevant provisions of this Convention by providing a reference to the relevant national legal provisions” but also provide, “to the extent necessary, concise information on the main content of the national requirements”. The Committee also recalls that paragraph 1 of Guideline B5.1.3 provides guidance with respect to the statement of national requirements including recommending that “where national legislation precisely follows the requirement stated in this Convention, a reference may be all that is necessary.” However, in many cases a reference will not provide enough information on national requirements where they relate to matters for which the Convention envisages some differences in national practices. For example, in connection with minimum age, in cases where national determinations, after consultation, have been made that seafarers under 18 years of age may engage in, or are prohibited from, certain types of work, additional national information is needed as required under paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Standard A1.1.

Similarly, concerning the DMLC Part II, which is intended to identify the measures adopted by shipowners to implement the national requirements, the Committee notes, that although the example of an approved DMLC Part II provided by the Government sets out some additional information, in a number of cases it simply confirms compliance with the requirements and refers to other documents concerning internal system manuals and procedures. For example, in connection with hours of work or rest, the DMLC Part II states that: “The work schedule and the list of working hours are posted up. Records of work are maintained and possible suspension of the schedule must be noted. DC0001718 Record of Working Hours and Hours of rest (LAT).”

Unless all of these referenced documents are carried on board ship and easily accessible to all concerned, the Committee notes that it would be difficult for flag State inspectors or port State control officers or seafarers to understand what the national requirements are on these matters and how they are to be implemented on board ship. The Committee considers that the DMLC Parts I and II do not appear to fulfil the purpose for which they are required under the Convention which is to help all persons concerned, such as flag State inspectors, authorized officers in port States and seafarers, to check that the national requirements on the 14 listed matters are being properly implemented on board ship. The Committee requests the Government to consider amending the DMLC Part I to better implement paragraph 10 of Regulation 5.1.3 giving due consideration to Guideline B5.1.3, so as to ensure not only that it provides a reference to the relevant national legal provisions embodying the relevant provisions of the Convention, but that it also provides, to the extent necessary, concise information on the main content of the national requirements. It also suggests that the Government instruct its inspectors to review DMLC Part IIs to ensure that they provide more information on the ways in which the national requirements are to be implemented between inspections.

General questions on application. Scope of application. Article II, paragraphs 1(f), 3, 5 and 6. Seafarers and ships. The Committee notes that section 272, paragraph 4, of the Maritime Code defines the term “seafarer” as any person who is employed or works in any capacity on board, with the exception of two categories of workers: (a) persons working on board for a short period of time (up to 48 hours), for example, carrying out inspections, repairs, providing pilotage services, research, or scientific work; (b) persons who provide passenger entertainment-related services (such as performers).

Concerning the exclusions set out in subparagraph (b), the Committee notes that this section further provides that such persons shall be subject to certain provisions of the Maritime Code concerning minimum age (section 284), work and recreational facilities conditions on board, (section 285); hours of work and hours of rest (section 291); seafarer’s right to shore leave (section 294); shipowner’s liability concerning health and medical care (section 298); the seafarer’s right to submit a complaint (section 299); and, the on board complaints procedure (Chapter XXX2). The Committee recalls that the term “seafarer” under paragraph 1(f) of Article II of the MLC, 2006, includes all persons, working in any capacity, which would include people working in the performing arts and staff ancillary to performances. In the event of doubt as to whether any categories of persons are to be regarded as seafarers, a determination, as provided for under paragraph 3 of Article II would be necessary. The Committee also recalls that the 94th Session of the International Labour Conference adopted a resolution concerning information on occupational groups (resolution VII) which provides guidance on the criteria that Members should consider when making a national determination on this matter.

The Committee notes, in this respect, that section 273 of the Maritime Code provides that, where uncertainty exists, questions arising under Article II, paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of the Convention shall be considered and decisions shall be taken by the Latvian Maritime Administration after consultation with representatives of shipowners and seafarers’ union representatives. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, to date, no cases of doubt have arisen. The Committee observes, however, that many of the national requirements, such as those relating to shore leave or hours of work and rest, suggest that persons in category (b) referred to above, unlike the persons in category (a), would be working on board a ship for an extended period of time. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether any determinations have been made under paragraph 3 of Article II of the Convention with respect to categories of persons that are not considered to be seafarers. It also requests the Government to clarify whether the exclusions set out in section 272, paragraph 4, of the Maritime Code were made after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned.

Regulation 1.4 and the Code. Recruitment and placement. The Committee notes that in the statistical information requested in the report form, the Government indicates that there are 58 private seafarer recruitment and placement services registered as operating in its territory. The Government indicates that these services are regulated by CR No. 364 of 17 May 2011, entitled “Procedures for Licensing and Supervision of Merchants – Providers of Recruitment and Placement Services in Ship Crew Manning”, which sets out the detailed requirements for obtaining the special permit or license to engage in private recruitment and placement services and identifies the list of registered operators in the country. In addition, the Committee notes that section 24 of the Maritime Law, as well as section 12 of the CR No. 364, prohibits recruitment and placement services from charging seafarers, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, fees or other charges for providing recruitment and placement services. It further notes, however, that among the list of requirements for recruitment and placement services under section 11.6 of CR No. 364, the services must, among others, inform seafarers about the possible costs that may arise in the process of placement. In that regard, the Committee recalls that paragraph 5(b) of Standard A1.4 provides that a Member “shall, in its laws and regulations or other measures, at a minimum require that no fees or other charges for seafarer recruitment or placement or for providing employment to seafarers are borne directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by the seafarer, other than the cost of the seafarer obtaining a national statutory medical certificate, the national seafarer's book and a passport or other similar personal travel documents, not including, however, the cost of visas, which shall be borne by the shipowner”. Noting that section 11.6 of CR No. 364 of 17 May 2011 anticipates that possible costs may arise in the process of recruitment and placement of seafarers, the Committee requests the Government to identify what those costs may consist of and how it is ensured that seafarers are not charged, directly or indirectly, for the costs other than those provided for in paragraph 5(b) of Standard A1.4.

Regulation 2.1 and the Code. Seafarers’ employment agreements. The Committee notes that section 283(3) of the Maritime Code stipulates that the employment relationship between a seafarer and shipowner must be set out in: (1) a written contract of employment, one copy of which is to be provided to the seafarer on board and the other to the shipowner; (2) a collective agreement (if concluded). It further notes that, pursuant to section 11.6 of CR No. 364 of 17 May 2011 entitled “Procedures for Licensing and Supervision of Merchants – Providers of Recruitment and Placement Services in Ship Crew Manning”, the private recruitment service must provide the seafarer with an opportunity to consult the terms of the employment contract before signing it, and must provide the seafarer with a copy of the contract of employment, to inform them about their rights and responsibilities, working conditions and the possible costs that may arise in the process of placement. The Committee also notes that section 286 of the Maritime Code provides a list of the information that must be set out in a seafarer’s contract of employment, but it does not appear to require that the employment agreement be signed by both the seafarer and the shipowner or representative of the shipowner and that both are to have a signed original of the agreement in accordance with paragraphs 1(a) and (c) of Standard A2.1 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to identify its national laws or regulations which require that the seafarers’ employment agreement is signed by both the seafarer and the shipowner or representative of the shipowner and that both have an original of the agreement as required under paragraphs 1(a) and (c) of Standard A2.1.

Regulation 2.8 and the Code. Career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers. The Committee notes that section 5 of CR No. 1065 of 22 December 2008 stipulates that the Seafarers Register shall develop the standard of the training courses program in line with provisions of the STCW regarding minimum standards of competency and mandatory additional training. Similarly, the Government indicates that the measures that will be put in place to implement the career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers are described in the national policy planning document “Transport Development Guidelines 2014–20”. The Committee requests the Government to provide updated information concerning the implementation of career and skill development and employment opportunities for seafarers, including within the framework of the “Transport Development Guidelines 2014–20”, which give effect to Regulation 2.8 and the Code.

Regulation 3.1 and the Code. Accommodation and recreational facilities. The Committee notes that CR No. 18 of 14 January 2014 entitled “Regulations on the applicable requirements of Maritime Labour Convention regarding accommodation and recreational facilities on board and compliance conditions”, implements the provisions of Regulation 3.1 and the Code. The Committee notes, however, that the Government’s DMLC Part I does not refer to CR No. 18 under the applicable provisions for accommodation or on-board recreational facilities. Instead, it refers to the 1970 Act regulating the accommodation of crews as well as other CRs regulating safety and supervision of ships. The Committee also notes that the example of an approved DMLC Part II submitted by the Government is not clear as to the applicable accommodation and recreational facility requirements, as it merely indicates that they should be “consistent with promoting the seafarer’s health and well-being”. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to include a reference to CR No. 18 in the DMLC Part I, as well as to provide information on the specific accommodation requirements, to avoid uncertainty with respect to the applicable national legislation on seafarer accommodation and recreational facilities.

Regulation 3.2 and the Code. Food and catering. The Committee notes that, under section 285(2) of the Maritime Code, the master shall ensure that seafarers are provided an adequate quality and quantity of food and drinking water. Under section 286(14), the provision of food is included within the terms of the Seafarers’ Employment Agreement. It also notes that section 4 of CR No. 18, above, stipulates certain requirements for catering facilities, such as preventing the risk of exposure to hazardous levels of noise and vibration and other ambient factors, but does not appear to contain any regulations concerning the catering standards that apply to meals provided to seafarers on ships that fly its flag, as required under paragraph 1 of Standard A.3.2, the training and instruction of catering staff (paragraph 2(c) of Standard A.3.2.) or the provisions of Guideline B3.2 on food and catering.

Finally, the Committee notes that section 30 of Maritime Administration and Marine Safety Law requires a ship’s officer, who has been authorised by the master of the ship for this purpose, to “regularly inspect” the premises of the crew of the ship and record the results in the logbook of the ship, but does not specify the frequency of inspections. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to identify any additional legislation which may implement the requirements in Regulation 3.1 and the Code concerning the minimum standards for catering services and, if not, to indicate any measures taken or envisaged in this respect. It further requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that seafarers are provided food and drinking water of appropriate nutritional value as well as quality and quantity, as specified in Regulation 3.2.

Regulation 4.1 and the Code. Medical care on board ship and ashore. The Committee notes that section 298 of the Maritime Code and CR No. 359 of 1 July 2003 entitled “Regulations with respect to Safety and Health Protection Requirements and Medical Treatment on board Vessels” sets out measures concerning the provision of medical care at no cost to the seafarer, including provisions to ensure emergency medical care when in port, medical training, consultation centres, annual inspections of medicine chests and medicine equipment. Nevertheless, the Committee notes that neither the Maritime Code nor CR No. 359 appear to provide for essential dental care, as required under paragraph 1 of Standard A4.1. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures it has adopted to ensure that seafarers working on board a ship that flies its country’s flag are provided with essential dental care.

Regulation 4.3 and the Code. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that its general legislative acts on labour protection do not require the establishment of a safety committee. It also notes the Government’s reference to section 20(1) of the Labour Protection Law, which states that in an undertaking or a unit thereof where five or more employees are employed, these employees or their representatives, taking into account the number of employees, the nature of the work of the undertaking and the working environment risks, may elect one or more trusted representatives. The Committee further notes that the example of an approved DMLC Part II submitted by the Government indicates that “a safety committee on board exists on ships with five or more seafarers”. Nevertheless, the Committee notes that there do not appear to be any national guidelines in accordance with paragraph 2 of Regulation 4.3. The Committee wishes to draw the attention, in this respect, to the ILO Tripartite Expert Meeting on Maritime Occupational Safety and Health, held from 13 to 17 October 2014, which discussed and adopted guidelines for implementing the occupational safety and health provisions of the MLC, 2006. The Committee requests the Government to identify its laws and regulations and other measures that implement the requirement under paragraph 2(d) of Standard A4.3 that a safety committee be established on board a ship on which there are five or more seafarers. It also requests the Government to provide information with regard to the adoption, after consultation with shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations, of national guidelines relevant to occupational safety and health protection of seafarers.

Regulation 4.5 and the Code. Social security. The Committee notes that, upon ratification of the Convention, Latvia specified that the branches for which it provides social security protection to seafarers in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 10 of Standard A4.5 are sickness benefit, unemployment benefit, old-age benefit, family benefit, maternity benefit and survivors’ benefit. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Latvian health insurance policy is a voluntary type of insurance and commercial insurance offered to its residents. It further notes the Government’s reference to the Law on State Social Allowances, which provides certain social security allowances for Latvian citizens, non-citizens, aliens and stateless persons who permanently reside in the country. The Committee notes, in that respect, that the social security scheme is made up of mandatory contributions by the employer and the employee pursuant to section 14 of the Law. The Committee understands, however that the term “employer” as defined under section 1(1) of the Law appears to refer to employers from Latvia, or the other members of the European Union, or the Swiss Confederation or the European Economic Area.

The Committee recalls paragraphs 2 and 3 of Standard A4.5 of the Convention, which require each Member to take steps according to its national circumstances to provide at least three branches of social security to all seafarers ordinarily resident in its territory. The Committee requests the Government to clarify the manner in which social security protection is extended to seafarers ordinarily resident in Latvia who are working on ships flying the flag of a country other than Latvia. It also requests information with respect to any arrangements that have been adopted to provide protection to seafarers ordinarily resident in Latvia when working on board ships flying the flag of another European Union member or Switzerland or a member of the European Economic Area.

Regulations 5.1 and 5.1.3. Flag State responsibilities. System of inspection. The Committee notes that CR No. 439 of 7 June 2011 entitled “Regulations Regarding the Implementation of Flag State Supervision of Ships” regulates flag State supervision and contains the procedures for the implementation of flag State inspections of Latvian-flagged ships inspection, the granting of certificates of ships and the suspension or revocation of certificates. Under section 4, Latvian ships engaged in international voyages with a gross tonnage of 500 and higher must undergo inspection and certification by the recognized organizations. Under section 5, owners of Latvian ships not engaged on international voyages or a gross tonnage of less than 500 may choose to undertake an inspection and certification. The Committee recalls, in this respect, that while paragraph 1 of Regulation 5.1.3 of the Convention provides that ships of 500 gross tonnage or over, engaged in international voyages or flying the flag of a Member and operating from a port or between ports in another country, must carry and maintain a maritime labour certificate and declaration of maritime labour compliance, the flag State’s system of inspection applies to all ships under the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to specify how it ensures the inspection of all ships and the certification of ships 500 gross tonnage or over, flying the Latvian flag and operating from a port, or between ports, in another country, in accordance with paragraph 1(b) of Regulation 5.1.3.

Additional documentation requested. The Committee notes that the Government has omitted to provide some of the documents requested in the report form. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the following documents and information: an example of the approved document for seafarers’ record of employment (Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1 and 3); a standard form example of a seafarers’ employment agreement (Standard A2.1, paragraph 2(a)); the relevant portion of any applicable collective bargaining agreement (Standard A2.1, paragraph 2(b)); an example of the kind of documentation that is accepted or issued with respect to the financial security that must be provided by shipowners, indicating that it covers repatriation (Regulation 2.5, paragraph 2) and compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard (Standard A4.2, paragraph 1(b)); a copy of the relevant national guidelines for the management of occupational safety and health on board ships (Regulation 4.3, paragraph 2); a copy of the document(s) used for reporting unsafe conditions or occupational accidents on board ships (Standard A4.3, paragraph 1(d)); a copy of a report or review prepared by a welfare board, if any, on the welfare services (Standard A4.4); the Agreement governing the delegation of Statutory Certification services for vessels registered in the Republic of Latvia between Maritime Administration of Latvia and relevant Recognized Organization (RO), to which the Government refers in its first report (Regulation 5.2); a standard document issued to or signed by flag State inspectors setting out their functions and powers and a copy of any national guidelines issued to them (Standard A5.1.4, paragraphs 7 and 8); a copy of the form used for flag State inspector’s reports (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 12); a copy of the national guidelines issued to flag State inspectors on the kinds of circumstances justifying detention of a ship (Standard A5.2.1, paragraph 7); statistical information regarding the number of cases where significant deficiencies were detected and the number of detentions of foreign ships due, wholly or partly, to conditions on board ship that are clearly hazardous to the safety, health or security of seafarers, or constitute a serious or repeated breach of the requirements of the Convention (including seafarers’ rights) (Standard A5.2.1).

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