Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2011, publiée 101ème session CIT (2012)

Convention (n° 166) sur le rapatriement des marins (révisée), 1987 - Guyana (Ratification: 1996)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Repetition

Article 1(4) of the Convention. Definition of “seafarer”. In its previous comments the Committee noted that the term “seaman” in the Shipping Act did not cover masters and apprentices. As a consequence, under the Shipping Act these two categories of persons did not appear to be entitled to repatriation, because sections 188–213 of the Shipping Act are applicable only to “seamen”. It asked the Government to take all necessary measures to give full effect to this provision of the Convention. In response to these comments, the Government reports that the definition of “seaman” includes the master, except while the ship is in port. In the light of this information received from the Government, apprentices continue to be excluded from repatriation under the Shipping Act. Furthermore, as the Government informs, the Act applies to masters only while at sea. This implies that a master is still excluded from repatriation under the Shipping Act when in port. The Committee once again points out that the term “seafarer” in the Convention means any person who is employed in any capacity on board a seagoing ship, be it in port or at sea, and thus has the right to repatriation under the conditions set out in the Convention. The Committee again urges the Government to take all necessary measures to amend the national legislation in order to give full effect to the requirements of Article 1(4) of the Convention.