30
QUESTION 2
31
REPLIES OF THE GOVERNMENTS
24
whatever the reason which requires him to do so, possess a minimum of professional capacity proved by a certificate. It is, of course, understood that this minimum capacity may be the result of the possession of the certificate which such a seaman, with an officer's qualifications, may have obtained after an examination covering a wider programme than the minimum knowledge required for the issue of a certificate of capacity; but a person who is not an officer (petty officer or deck hand) and who performs the duties of officer in charge of a watch should prove that he has obtained the more or less elementary certificate showing that he possesses the minimum professional capacity required for the operations which have to be carried out when two ships meet at sea.
The foregoing consideration implies the reply of the French Government to a subsidiary question raised at the Thirteenth Session, viz. whether a seaman on whom it devolves during a voyage to perform the duties of master, skipper or officer in charge of a watch must show that he possesses the minimum professional capacity required by the Draft Convention. Admittedly there are exceptional cases and cases of force majeure where such a condition would be impossible of realisation. But, except in such exceptional cases, which should only be contemplated once a vessel has set sail, it should be understood that a seaman even when required temporarily to perform one of the duties mentioned in Question 2 should as far as possible possess the minimum professional capacity required. As an illustration, reference may simply be made to the following case provided for in French regulations. When in a particular port there are not sufficient certificated engineers to perform on board duties involving supervision or night watch duty, a seaman who is not in possession of one of the certificates for engineer officer may be engaged. Such seaman, however, must previously pass an examination before the shipping inspector to show that he possesses as far as possible the practical knowledge required. Exceptions of this kind are essentially of a temporary nature and are limited to a voyage already begun by a specified ship or to a very restricted period.
1193
25
GREAT BRITAIN
See reply under Question 1, ante, p. 15.
INDIA
2. The Government of India consider that the scope of the Draft Convention should be determined on the basis of the general definitions proposed by the International Labour Office; these definitions are considered suitable.
IRISH FREE STATE
2. The reply is in the affirmative.
2.
ITALY
The Italian Government is of opinion that, for the purposes of the scope of the Draft Convention, the following terms should be defined as follows:
(a) Master or skipper - Any person having command or charge of a vessel;
―
(b) Navigating officer in charge of a watch Any person, including a pilot, having charge of a watch on deck;
(c) Chief engineer Any person permanently responsible for the engine room staff :
Any person
(d) Engineer officer in charge of a watch responsible for the engine room watch.
JAPAN
2. The reply is in the affirmative.
LATVIA
2. See reply to Question 1, ante, p. 17.
NETHERLANDS
GERMANY
2. A definition of the classes of officers mentioned in Question 1 (a) to (d) might be dispensed with. If, however, it should be considered necessary, the definitions given in the English and French versions would appear suitable. Proposals must be reserved as to their subsequent translation into German.
2.
2.
The reply is in the affirmative.
NORWAY
"
The reply is in the affirmative. But it is desirable that navigating officer in charge of a watch and engineer officer in charge of a watch" should be clearly defined as officers responsible for watches.