Rue du Midi 165
B-1000 Brussels
Telephone +32 2 285 46 60
Fax +32 2 280 08 17
Email: [email protected]
www.etf-europe.org
European Transport Workers’ Federation
Fédération Européenne des Travailleurs des Transports
Europäische Transportarbeiter-Föderation
Federación Europea de los Trabajadores del Transporte
KBC Bank, Rue d´Arenberg 11, B-1000 Brussels
Account number: 430-0386621-67
Towards a Future Maritime Policy for the Union
ETF response on the Green Paper of the European Commission
The European Transport Workers' Federation (ETF) represents more than 2.5 million transport
workers from 223 transport unions and 40 European countries, in the following sectors:
railways, road transport, maritime transport, inland navigation, civil aviation, ports & docks,
tourism and fisheries. The ETF is the recognised social partner in six European Sectoral Social
Dialogue Committees including those for Sea Transport and for Maritime Fisheries.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive summary ...................................................................................................... 3
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 4
1.
The integrated approach as a key factor for backing a sustainable maritime
policy ............................................................................................................................. 5
2.
Maritime Policies need a balanced implementation of the Lisbon strategy ..... 5
3.
The human element is part of the competitiveness of the maritime industry .. 6
4.
Reducing the impact of human activities in the maritime environment ........... 7
5.
For a sustainable and quality employment ......................................................... 8
Mobility and clusters.................................................................................................... 8
The discriminatory treatment of EU seafarers ............................................................. 9
The decline in the number of seafarers ....................................................................... 9
6.
A regulatory framework with no exclusion of the maritime sector ................. 11
7.
State Aid Guidelines............................................................................................ 12
8.
Maritime Governance .......................................................................................... 13
Coast guard............................................................................................................... 13
Short Sea Shipping (SSS)......................................................................................... 14
2
Executive summary
In this report, ETF provides its response to the key policy questions raised by the
Commission Green Paper. ETF wishes to seize this opportunity for elaborating further
its vision of a European Maritime Policy capable of achieving its ambitions on the allimportant human element.
First of all, given the huge importance of the EU maritime sector, the ETF considers as
essential to have a strategic approach and a broad vision to coordinate and integrate its
various elements. Such an integrated approach will require a lot of determination from
the Commission, and the ETF is keen to back this strategy - as long as it will serve to
guarantee the sustainability of the maritime activities and to challenge the dominant
profit-directed spirit which is frequently a synonym for erosion of employment and
deterioration of the environment. Therefore, the ETF calls for a balanced
implementation of the so-called Lisbon strategy in maritime policies.
The ETF would like to make it clear that the human factor is an essential part of the
competitiveness of the maritime industry. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that
the EU stimulates further measures to protect EU seafarers by addressing, in particular,
the following issues: the need for the highest possible level of qualifications and for an
investment in technology skills; the eradication of unfair competition; and the creation of
“level playing field conditions” at European level. Any EU maritime policy worthy of the
name should set the conditions for sustainable and high-quality seagoing employment.
The only way to achieve this objective is to address properly the following issues:
tackling the decrease in the number of EU seafarers and the shortage of young
seafarers initiating a maritime career, promoting an adequate “career path”, putting a
end to the discriminatory treatment of EU seafarers paid on the home/residence
conditions, eradicating the competitive advantage from non-compliance with EU and
international legislation under Flags of Convenience and second registers.
In its contribution to the Green Paper, the ETF would also like to express its vision of an
EU regulatory framework which does not allow the exclusion of any seafarers in the
maritime sector, particularly in the field of social legislation, and its firm opposition to
have self-regulation and corporate social responsibility replacing long awaited legally
binding mechanisms.
Furthermore, the ETF calls for a better use of State Aid Guidelines by strengthening the
link between State Aids and employment of EU nationals, for deepening further the idea
of creating an EU coastguard, and for progress on the recognition of “common maritime
space” in EU internal waters. The ETF sees this latter point as an opportunity to
improve the protection of European seafarers’ jobs and provide for competition to be
based on quality of service and not on the lowest employment costs.
3
Introduction
Some of the ETF expectations from the Green Paper entitled “Towards a future
Maritime Policy for the Union: a European vision for the oceans and seas” were
elaborated in November 2005 in a paper1 which focused on the ingredients that any
future Maritime Policy should necessarily include. The most significant of these were:
equal treatment for EU seafarers; enforcement of relevant legislation; safety and
security; careers; training and certification; employment conditions; and quality shipping.
Following the adoption of the Green Paper on 7 June 2006, the ETF Maritime Transport
Section would like to complete and deepen some of the main points that were made
earlier, and further formulate the contribution of the seafarers to the ongoing debate.
1
ETF First Contribution on the Future EU Maritime Policy – 17 November 2005
4
1. The integrated approach as a key factor for backing a sustainable maritime
policy
As a preliminary remark, the ETF would like to welcome the exercise led by the
European Commission in addressing the need for a coordinated EU Maritime
Policy. The Commission acknowledges that its sea-related policies have been
developed separately without examining how they could be combined to reinforce
each other. The ETF agrees on the need to remedy a situation where, in the
absence of a common strategy towards a sustainable use of the seas and
oceans, the different sectors have developed their own ways of dealing with the
common area which constitutes the maritime environment. The Commission
must be fully aware that any attempt to promote increased cooperation between
all the maritime-related parties and to effectively coordinate its policies will
require a lot of determination and leadership. This new orientation will
undoubtedly clash with the interests of the existing and dominant profit-directed
spirit, which is the driving force for many companies in the maritime transport
sector. In fact the EU shipping industry tends to look for short-term investments
and lacks a long term vision. As a result, the industry is increasingly suffering
from the shortage of expertise, well trained and qualified professionals, instead of
recruiting workers with lesser qualifications. This attitude generates unfair
competitive pressures, breaching of international standards and an attempt to cut
costs in the more unproductive way in an industry whose globalised nature is
widely recognised. To change such attitudes will necessitate dialogue, training
and setting clear goals and paths for operational changes. Therefore, the ETF
asks the Commission to better clarify how it intends to tackle the possible
resistance to progressive strategies in this area.
2. Maritime Policies need a balanced implementation of the Lisbon strategy
The underlying principles as presented in the Green paper (in page 5) insist on
the fact that an all-embracing policy should rest firmly on twin pillars, namely, the
Lisbon Strategy and the ocean itself. The ETF is resolved to give substance to
the Lisbon objectives - particularly if the Community approach merely confines
itself to prioritizing the stimulation of growth, to the detriment of other key
objectives, such as the need for more and better jobs while pursuing
environmental goals. The ETF deplores the fact that, until now, the Lisbon
Strategy has failed to keep the right balance between its three pillars. The
European Union has put the main emphasis on the economic pillar of
competitiveness without restricting its negative effects such as social dumping
and environmental impact. Although the ETF welcomes the inclusion of a social
dimension in its approach to the development of a sustainable maritime policy as
presented in paragraphs 2.5. and 2.7. (see paragraph 5 below), we do hope that
the Commission is not setting pious objectives and that, this time, the Lisbon
Strategy will be able to provide answers and solutions to employment-related
matters for the benefit of those working in the maritime sector. Any investment in
the human element will also be for the benefit of the entire sector.
5
3. The human element is part of the competitiveness of the maritime industry
The European shipping industry already represents 25% of world tonnage and
we should also acknowledge that more than 40% of the global fleet is controlled
by EEA based owners. The consistent economic impact of European shipping is
demonstrated not only in the scale of maritime transportation to and from Europe,
but also in the impact on global trade flowing from its important role in transports
between continents outside Europe. There is clear evidence showing that a
substantial share of the turnover of EU shipping is earned outside Europe.
The Green paper rightly states that the maritime related sectors have a great
potential for growth, particularly for shipping with world seaborne trade volumes consistently increasing - and this should be translated into creating increased
employment. 2
However, reality shows a marked and prolonged decrease in the number of EU
seafarers while general employment within the maritime sector remains stable.
Against this background of increased growth, we reject the idea that the
decrease of the number of seafarers should be compensated by jobs generated
ashore: protecting the employment of those at sea now has to be seen as a
priority so that Europeans will stand a good chance of preserving their maritime
know-how, which is an integral part of Europe’s competitive edge.
Under the heading “the importance of being competitive”, the Commission
highlights how important to invest in the introduction of new technologies, in
research and development programmes, in scientific knowledge, and in
entrepreneurship is. Though we agree on the importance of such investments, a
narrow concept of competitiveness should be avoided. Thus, equal attention has
to be paid to investing in the human factor which cannot and should not be
reduced to a mere production factor. One of the most crucial competitive factors
of the EU maritime industry is the high level of qualification of its workers. By
providing good working conditions and attractive remunerations, the industry can
avoid having to face shortages of skilled personnel and the number of candidates
might even exceed those on offer.
Given that maritime industries compete in a global market and that the EU can
hardly compete on costs, the objectives of having the best possible working and
living conditions have to be fulfilled by providing an international level playing
field for the maritime industry. Therefore, the ETF welcomes the idea of the
Commission to encourage such level playing globally. Thus, it is of paramount
importance that these objectives take shape in the ratification of the ILO Maritime
Labour Convention, which means a significant step towards the improvement of
working and living conditions on board merchant vessels. That’s why the
European social partners in the maritime sector have been encouraging the
ratification process at national level, with the aim of speeding up the entry into
force of this Convention. Furthermore, they agreed to enter into negotiations for
considering the integration of this major piece of legislation into EU law via a
possible sectoral agreement.
Having said that, although ETF agrees that the EU should encourage the
ratification of the MLC in the Member States, we would like that existing
legislation with higher standards will not be undermined by means of the
2
Employment trends in all sectors related to the sea or using sea resources, European Commission, DG
fisheries and maritime affairs, September 2006
6
ratification of this convention; while recognising the importance of such exercise,
we believe this must not prevent or stop the EU from promoting higher standards
for EU seafarers with specific regional legislation.
With respect to ILO convention 185, it is urgent that the Commission increases
the pressure on the Member States for a fast ratification, which will ensure the
rights of seafarers to obtain shore leave and to transit in security.
4. Reducing the impact of human activities in the maritime environment
The Green Paper highlights several times the impact of shipping as a large
emitter of air pollutants, while admitting that there is a need to shift from road to
maritime transport for alleviating environmental pressure. Though the introduction
of environmental criteria is often criticised and opposed because of the financial
costs involved, we believe it is evident that the impact of human activities should
be drastically reduced in the global environment and the maritime environment in
particular. However, the ETF asks the Commission to place a priority on the
collection of clear data and statistics, and to support the development of
environment-friendly engines. Furthermore, the ETF calls on the Commission to
further clarify its proposals for addressing maritime pollution, and to provide
further details on the way it will seek to achieve tighter pollutant emissions
standards on shipping. ETF would also like to stress the negative trend of
shipping towards an unfair and excessive competition where a lack of
accountability enables those responsible for substandard shipping operations to
gain from unfair practices over those who, on the contrary, are committed to
quality operations and social responsibility.
The ERIKA and PRESTIGE disasters had already illustrated in the past the
destructive consequences driven by a lack of regulatory framework and a failure
in complying with and in ensuring an effective means of controlling and enforcing
seafarers international standards
ETF has always been worried by substandard merchant fleet in European waters
carrying hazardous, dangerous and potentially polluting goods which constitute a
potential risk for marine environment.
Having regard to the fact that the human element is widely acknowledged to be
the cause of 80 % of accidents at sea, and that there is a close link between on
board social and working conditions and how the vessel is operated and
maintained, ETF would like to underline the importance of ILO international
standards in preserving the maritime safety and recognise that a lot of work is still
to be done to promote and guarantee the correct implementation of ILO’s
maritime conventions. Fatigue, excessive workloads and poor motivation through
inadequate reward systems influence crew performance and consequently raise
the percentage of risk of accidents. ETF welcomes the Green Paper when it
states that effective decision making must integrate environmental concerns into
maritime policy and give the maritime sectors the predictability that they need
and is particularly interested in following closely the recently proposed third
package on maritime safety which aims at reinforcing existing regulations as
regards classification societies, port state control, monitoring of maritime traffic,
responsibility of flag states, maritime accident investigations and liability of
shipowners. ETF is fairly satisfied with Transport Council conclusions on Port
State Control of last 11 December which focus on high risk vessels appearing in
the black list of the Paris MoU.
Furthermore, ETF calls on the European Commission to put in place a more
effective monitoring system and risk assessment on the potential dimension and
7
scale of environmentally unfriendly practices; a new system should be based on
better information on maritime incidents and traffic.
In addition, ETF would like to remind the role of the guidelines developed by the
joint IMO/ILO ad Hoc working group on the fair treatment of seafarers in the
event of a Maritime accident which last met in June 2006. These guidelines aim
at ensuring that seafarers are treated fairly following a maritime accident and
during any investigation and detention by public authorities and that the detention
is no longer than necessary. ETF deplores the growing use of criminal
proceeding against seafarers after a maritime accident, in particular it is against
the detention or application of unjustified high fines or unfair jail sentences
against officers and shipmasters.
ETF is happy to acknowledge that the European Commission share these
concerns but wonders how they will be transformed in concrete measures and
asks to be properly informed and consulted on the methods and means to reach
these goals.
5. For a sustainable and quality employment
The ETF particularly welcomes the references made by the Commission in
paragraph 2.5. (“Developing Europe’s Maritime Skills and Expanding Sustainable
Maritime Employment”) to a number of concerns which we share. We particularly
highlight the decline in the number of EU seafarers, the fact that many jobs
aboard vessels are now taken up by personnel from third countries, the need to
reverse the low status attached to the maritime profession and improve the
image of the sector, the need to get better working conditions, how to keep high
training, education and certification standards and - more importantly - the
question of the Flags of Convenience (FOCs).
Mobility and clusters
According to the Commission, a key objective in reversing the trend of seagoing
employment is to encourage job mobility between sectors.
ETF admits that maritime clusters can enhance the maritime identity and promote
the image of the maritime sector but at the same time warns against the
tendency to disguise the discussions on seafarers’ employment under the
umbrella of the collective interest of the wider concept of “maritime cluster”.
Although the ETF supports the idea of bringing the maritime industry together
with other stakeholders and related industries, we do not accept the argument
that the decrease in the number of seafarers could be compensated by a certain
number of jobs generated ashore.
The Green Paper states that “many sectors such as port state control authorities,
classification societies, require a steady flow of former seafarers, particularly
pilots, engineers, shipyard managers, ship safety inspectors and instructors”.
Such a statement is endorsed by the ETF, and the interdependence of maritime
services and industries must be recognised - as long as this means maintaining
and further developing the level of skills and experience of those mariners from
the shipping industry who plan moving towards activities ashore. In this
perspective, much more needs to be done to promote an adequate “career path”.
Furthermore, this move should be used as a means to encourage the recruitment
of high quality young people into seafaring. Recruiting and retaining well trained
and competent seafaring crews should be considered as an utmost priority for
the survival of the European maritime industry, so that Europe will be able to
8
sustain safe and competitive Merchant Navies, while offering more and better
jobs.
Furthermore, the idea mentioned on page 18 of the Green Paper of having the
clusters financing the creation of training schemes in order to ensure the
maintenance of the European maritime know-how which is later used in related
sectors ashore, should be further discussed. Having said that, the ETF reiterates
its core argument that the worrying decrease in the number of EU seafarers and
the shortage of young seafarers initiating a maritime career cannot be purely
compensated by a certain number of jobs generated ashore. In addition, it is well
known in the maritime industry that seagoing skills and experience are essential
in many shore-based positions and cannot be substantiated by training ashore.
The discriminatory treatment of EU seafarers
The Green Paper raises a critically important issue, namely the question of
seafarers’ remuneration conditions. By acknowledging that sometimes EU
seafarers are paid on the “home/residence conditions”, the EC concedes that,
where social partners have concluded agreements on wages, such practices may
be problematic. The ETF welcomes the acknowledgement that these conditions
exist, which has been denounced on many occasions by seafarers’
representatives. Such practices which disrespect the EU social legislation and
which are still used too many times on board some EU flagged vessels should be
eliminated. Any discriminatory treatment should not be possible in the context of
the wider EU.
The decline in the number of seafarers
ETF would like to express its dissatisfaction with the growing problems caused
by the decline in the number of seafarers and the shortage of young skilled
maritime professionals. According to statistics, while employment from the EU 15
slightly declined between 1996 and 2002, the number of non EU seafarers
increased by 19%. If we look more in detail into the different categories of
workers, we note an increase in the supply of officers over the last decade but a
substantial decline in the supply of ratings in the EU countries. This confirms the
trend in the sourcing of ratings, in which there has been a significant shift from
the EU and the other traditional maritime like Western Europe, Japan and North
America towards the Far East, Indian subcontinent and Eastern Europe.
Moreover, in many European countries we observe a worrying trend of an ageing
maritime population and the retention of old officers beyond the normal age for
retirement in order to address the lack of young labour force with adequate
training and experience. At present, more than 25% of officers from OECD
countries is over 50 years old, and well over 50% is over 40.
However, we regret that it is such a difficult task to have a comprehensive and
informed analysis of the employment situation, because only a small proportion
of figures on employment on European shipping are available. In fact, many
European ships are registered outside the EU and many European seafarers
work on vessels trading between continents outside Europe and are often
employed on a short term basis. However, the existing data shows a total of
9
303,000 jobs for EU and non EU nationals in 2004/2005 under EU, EEA and third
country flags working on board and ashore. 3
In the Commission’s view, the causes of the decline in EU seafarers are to be
found on both the demand and supply sides. The ETF would like to reiterate what
was said earlier in its first contribution to the Future Maritime Policy: there is no
evidence to substantiate that young EU nationals do not wish to seek a maritime
career. Young EU seafarers are prevented from embarking on a maritime career
because shipowners and some member states favour the employment of third
country nationals simply because this means reducing the manning costs. It is
also clear that the number of officer cadets recruited each year in the majority of
member states has, for a sustained period, failed to meet even half the figure
needed to provide a sustainable supply for the future. Both EU ratings and
officers are heavily affected by this situation. In fact we believe the European
Commission is referring to maritime officers to the exclusion of ratings despite the
fact that ratings are essential for underpinning maritime skills within the EU, so
that any Community Maritime Policy will have to reverse these worrying trends.
The question then comes on how this situation could be reversed. The ETF
believes this must be achieved by the re-flagging of EU controlled tonnage back
to EU flags. The only way to ensure such a transition is the elimination of FOC
tonnage and second registers, where appropriate.
We welcome the Green Paper reference to the problematic situation where
shipowners decide to flag out, use second registers, or even replace EU
seafarers with third country nationals while the social partners of the flag state
have agreed higher pay rates than those agreed in the home/residence state.
The ETF condemns the creation of such registers, in particular where they are
used to prevent seafarers from exercising their collective and individual rights to
avoid compliance with both national and international legislation.
The competitive advantage from non-compliance with EU and international
legislation under FOCs and second registers has been denounced by the OECD.
The practice introduces unfair competition and social dumping to the detriment of
those EU shipowners under first national registers who are committed to
employing EU seafarers.
ETF welcomes the suggestion put forward by the Commission to give further
consideration to this situation in close cooperation with the social partners.
However, we wonder whether the Commission would be prepared and willing to
take initiatives aiming at the elimination of the economic advantage enjoyed by
FOC shipping and second registers. The competitive advantage from noncompliance with EU and international legislation under FOCs and second
registers has to be confronted by a “zero tolerance” approach to the hard core
that continues to flout accepted standards. Unless the EU institutions and
Member States are willing and prepared to address this issue seriously, no
solutions will be found that will fundamentally and sustainably reverse the decline
of EU seafarers’ employment. It should be emphasized that flags of convenience
and second registers are symptoms of the economic system which has
developed within world-maritime trade. In reality, FOCs, as well as the second
registers, represent a convenient device by which major shipping interests can
both minimize their costs, by lowering standards and avoid obligations to
seafarers. Additionally, the ETF notes with interest the reference made in the
3
Employment trends in all sectors related to the sea or using sea resources, European Commission, DG
fisheries and maritime affairs, September 2006
10
Green Paper regarding the question of the “genuine link”. In this respect, the ETF
calls on the Commission to develop further the debate on this issue in order to
improve seafarers’ protection and to demand more responsibility and
accountability from flag states.
Finally, ETF would like to point out that the competitive disadvantage from the
higher salaries of EU seafarers could be addressed through the adoption of
similar conditions for third country seafarers employed in EU vessels engaged in
regular ferry services.
The ETF welcomes some of the Commission’s proposals, namely the recognition
of qualifications, the reviewing of the current maritime education and training
curricula for shipping and related sectors.
ETF believes that a sustainable “maritime space” cannot exist without a clear
commitment from governments to invest in skills and training and that recruiting
competent and qualified seafarers is an essential prerequisite for delivering safe
efficient and high quality services and an ingredient for the maintenance of the
competitiveness of the sector.
The concepts of “quality pays” should be further developed, so that those
operators complying with international rules on safety standards and working
conditions are rewarded good practices and are given economic incentives. In
contrast, those undermining international recognised standards and failing port
state controls should be pursued with adequate and progressive penalties, with
the possibility to prohibit the loading of goods for vessels calling at European
ports.
ETF would like to reiterate the concept by which security on the sea can be put in
danger if the shipping industry cannot rely on well-trained, skilled, motivated and
committed personnel. It must be recognised negligence in working conditions of
seafarers -namely fatigue, long working hours, insufficient resting time etc.- is a
prime underlying cause of accidents at sea.
ETF would like to see more concrete initiatives and measures aiming at putting
into practice recommendations on training, recruiting and employment of EU
nationals.
6. A regulatory framework with no exclusion of the maritime sector
The ETF agrees with the observation made in the Green Paper, namely the
systematic exclusion of maritime sectors from most of the European labour and
social legislation. As stated in the background document n°2 accompanying the
Green Paper, the specific situation of the Maritime Sector has led to certain
shortcomings concerning the legal situation. The Commission acknowledges that
some exclusions in general labour and social legislation remain although on
close examination there is not necessarily a substantive ground for such
exclusions (e.g. Directive on transfer of undertakings, insolvency or information
and consultation of workers). A better protection of seafarers and the
improvement of the image of the sector will not be achieved unless the
Community legislation is finally systematically framed to put an end to this
discriminatory situation.
ETF would also like to draw attention to the fact that we are experiencing
pressure to relax officer and crew nationality rules from an increasing number of
traditional maritime nations. In addition, ETF would also like to stress that the
11
present regulatory framework failed to ensure the effective control and
enforcement of international standards for seafarers, and we insist on the need to
monitor more attentively the consistent application of regulations in the
international shipping industry.
The Commission suggests that this situation should be reassessed with the close
cooperation of the social partners. However, the ETF wants to raise some doubts
on the effectiveness of the Social Dialogue as a substitute for genuine legislative
initiatives. However, the ETF stresses the need to stimulate the sectoral social
dialogue in all EU Member States, particularly in those countries where dialogue
between social partners is weak or even non-existent. The ETF calls on the
Commission to do its utmost to encourage such a dialogue.
As an answer to the question on which exclusions of the maritime sector from
some EU social legislation are still justified, the ETF’s answer is “none”.
Furthermore, the ETF intends to encourage further specific legal instruments on
employment conditions in this sector. In this respect, the ETF deplores the fact
that, since the withdrawal of the Manning Directive by the European Commission
in 2004, a legal instrument to address the problem of social dumping in the
European ferry sector is still pending. ETF draws particular attention to the
worrying trend led by the recent social disputes within the ferries sector, where
one of the last strongholds of EU seafarer employment faces gradual
replacement of EU seafarers with cheaper labour from third countries and
Eastern European member states. In particular, the discrimination on pay rates
continues even amongst EU seafarers within certain Member States: this is
unacceptable. Against this background, the ETF urges the Commission to do its
utmost to address this lack of an effective regulatory framework.
The Commission puts forward the idea of having self-regulation and corporate
social responsibility as an alternative to the creation of a regulatory framework.
The ETF wants to firmly oppose this idea. Self-regulation and corporate social
responsibility cannot replace and be used as alternatives to legally binding
mechanisms. Additionally, one way to increase the respect for the existing
regulations and improving working conditions would be the creation of a black list
of registers which systematically fail to comply with the rules.
As regards the idea of making an optional EU register available, the ETF does
not want to close the door on discussing further this issue but we were wondering
whether the time is really opportune to re-open the debate now at a time when
almost all EU Member States have set up second or international/off-shore
registers. ETF is unsure about the fact that an EU register will prove to be
attractive to the States concerned. Furthermore, ETF wants to make it clear that
we will give our support to any optional EU register provided that such a register
will contribute to the promotion of employment opportunities for EU seafarers.
7. State Aid Guidelines
The ETF supports the use of State Aid Guidelines in the maritime sector. State
aids are necessary to alleviate the unfair competition with unregulated flags,
which do little or nothing to regulate and ensure compliance in their registers, and
who allow unscrupulous ship-owners to exercise the worst forms of exploitation
of seafarers.
12
According to statistics, in 2003, the implementation of the guidelines by several
Member States succeeded in having a considerable growth of tonnage back to
the national flags and in obtaining an important growth in the number of cargo in
the EEA countries (50% growth in 2003 compared to 2002)4.
The ETF has been positive in this process all the way through, and has acted
alongside with other relevant stakeholders. We have recognised the importance
of fighting unfair competition in the interests of all. But state aids have been
agreed not only to favour the competitive capacity of the European maritime
industry: they should equally enable and promote the maintenance of a
European seafaring know how and employment. The guidelines should aim at
delivering higher level of training for EU seafarers.
Member States can avoid one of the main objectives defined in the 1997
guidelines, that is, the safeguard of EU employment, because the European
Commission, following the 2003 revision, now defines Community seafarers as
being “all seafarers liable to taxation and/or social security contributions in a
Member State”, regardless of their nationality, except for those involved in
scheduled passenger services between Community ports. EU tax payers’ money
is therefore now being used to employ non-EU seafarers.
We also believe that there are insufficient training opportunities and a lack of
provision of cadetships on board ships. The ETF would therefore suggest that
definition to be revised in order to strengthen the link between state aids and
employment of EU nationals and that the granting of these aids should be linked
to a certain percentage of EU registers.
The ETF also opposes access to State aids for vessels flying Flags of
Convenience. We believe that it is not in the interest of EU citizens that EU state
aids are provided to operators who disregard the use of a EU flag and indeed the
employment of EU seafarers.
8. Maritime Governance
Coast guard
The Green Paper stresses the need to combine efforts and cooperate in order to
maximize the use of existing means. To this end the creation of an EU
coastguard should receive further consideration given that it could assist to the
pressing situations in terms of illegal immigration, pollution and other illegal
activities.
To this end ETF is fairly positive regarding the creation of a EU coast guard given
that it could assist to the pressing situations, such as the respect of the
environment and the prevention of pollution, particularly it could facilitate an
homogenous and uniform enforcement and monitoring of safety, security and
environmental regulations. ETF is aware that the setting up of an EU coast guard
is a sensitive issue as it entails the principle of subsidiarity and a domain of
competence of Member States with different rules governing organisations of
different nature (public, private, military), and that some of them would be very
reluctant to accept such initiative. Nonetheless, ETF is persuaded that this issue
needs serious consideration and calls for a better assessment by the European
4
Employment trends in all sectors related to the sea or using sea resources, European Commission, DG
fisheries and maritime affairs, September 2006
13
Commission. ETF welcomes the Commission proposal for a feasibility study on a
European coastguard service. We believe that a soft way of implementing it could
include firstly a more coordinated and integrated approach, for instance Belgium,
France and UK are already cooperating on coastal elements, even if it doesn’t
imply a common regulatory framework. On the other hand, an EU coast guard
will help as well in fighting against illegal immigration and other illegal activities,
such as trafficking of human beings, black work and illegal trading. In conclusion,
ETF agrees that at least a more coordinated and integrated approach in this
respect could bring efficiency to the management of territorial waters and would
constitute an added value for an integrated maritime policy.
Short Sea Shipping (SSS)
ETF welcomes the reference made in the Green Paper to a “Common EU
maritime space” and the fact that SSS could be assimilated in the same situation
as transport on land between Member States. ETF would support the idea of
moving towards the redefining of intra-EU voyages as “domestic” and not
“international” voyages. ETF feels satisfied to acknowledge that such an
orientation could lead to the creation of EU-wide legislation in this respect.
Indeed, European Seafarers’ unions have on many occasions regretted the fact
that voyages from one EU port to another are still considered “international”
whilst the same trip by road is retained an “internal market trip”. The recognition
of a “Common maritime space”’ in EU internal waters would be a huge step
forward for the protection of European seafarer’s jobs and provide for competition
in EU national waters to be based on quality of service and not on the lowest
employment costs. In any case, ETF is resolved to participate in this debate and
insists on the need to be duly consulted by European legislators, particularly at
the stage where the desirable change in the existing regulatory framework would
incur.
In conclusion, the ETF is resolved to contribute very actively to the consultation process
which has been launched by the Green Paper and will produce a more comprehensive
position paper aiming at addressing the questions related to Fisheries, Ports and Docks
before the closure of this consultation round. At the same time, the ETF calls – as a
matter of emergency – on the Commission and policy makers in general for reversing
the decline of EU first register shipping and promoting the employment of EU nationals
on EU flag ships.
14