28
REPLIES OF THE GOVERNMENTS
2.
FRANCE
22
The French Government replies to this Question in the affirmative, having regard to the definitions proposed by the International Labour Office.
P
This question is really a corollary and supplemental to the first one.
When the Thirteenth Session was discussing the subject, the enumeration of the different duties for which it was proposed to require a minimum of professional capacity gave rise to certain reservations on the part of a number of delegations, and for this reason it is necessary that the duties enumerated should be followed by their definition, or, to be more precise, the definition of the rôle on board of the persons responsible for these duties, whether permanently, temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.
It appears to the French Government that there is a definite criterion of the obligation which should be laid down inter- nationally. This criterion is the actual nature of the functions exercised and their importance in the sailing of the ship. It would be inadmissible that the navigation of a ship should be left to an inexperienced staff, and in speaking of the running of a ship, this would include the duties on board such as maritime custom has divided them, i.e., deck duties and engine-room duties.
As regards duties on deck, it must be considered that it is mainly the initiation of the operations for ensuring the move ment and steering of the ship which is, from the point of view of safety at sea, the essential element of the question.
As regards engine-room duties, the essential elements is the direction of the operations ordered by the competent persons on deck, for moving the ship. In reality, the engine room duties are for present purposes the immediate auxiliary to duties on deck.
In both cases, from the point of view defined by the question under consideration, the persons referred to are not those who actually carry out the operations but those who initiate them or are responsible for them. Most if not all maritime laws have very clearly defined the persons, whether on deck or in the engine-room, in whom the initiation of the operations or responsibility for them lies. There are, however, certain ambi- guities in the definitions adopted, and according to the termi- nology used a skipper may or may not be the person who on deck is in charge of the operations. These exceptions will be easy to limit and the Draft Convention itself will be sufficient if agreement is reached on the definitions proposed in the Questionnaire. The master or skipper necessarily has command or charge of the ship, and it is accordingly he in whom at all times lies the initiation of operations on his ship. These responsibilities,
23.
QUESTION 2
which put him in a special position, impose on him the obliga tion to possess sufficient professional capacity. This obligation is even irrespective of the fact that he might not, in particular circumstances, be included in the roster of officers who take a watch at sea or do night watch duty in port. Further, the duties of the master call for greater capacity than that which he might be required to possess as officer in charge of a watch. For duties on deck, there are, in addition to the master, those officers who assist him and who take their turn in charge of a watch or on night watch duty in port. It appears to the French Government in this connection that the expression officer in the Questionnaire may give rise to difficulties. The expression has different meanings. It represents both a rank and duties, and this certainly caused confusion at the Thirteenth Session. Reference to the minutes of the sittings shows that different amendments proposed referred to the number or the rank of deck or engine-room officers on board ships of certain categories in the mercantile marine. It was not clearly brought out that the object of the Draft Convention was not to create an international certificate of professional capacity but to make it obligatory for persons performing certain duties to possess such professional capacity, or, to be more accurate, a minimum of professional capacity. It matters little whether such persons have the rank of officer or not, i.e. whether they possess a certificate or diploma conferring this rank upon them, irrespective of the duties for which they are responsible on board. It may be observed that the posses- sion of such a certificate or diploma is evidence that they have more than the minimum of professional capacity which might be required by the Convention. On the other hand, seamen performing the duties of officers are in certain cases seamen not possessing the diploma or certificate of an officer of the mercantile marine.
It is for this reason that a deck or engine room hand should in certain cases come under the provisions of the Convention, by reason of his duties, even if he has not the rank of officer. The confusion which has been produced on this matter arises chiefly from the terminology in use in maritime countries and from the meaning given to the term officer and for that reason it may be excused. For the benefit of the discussions at the next Session, however, the French Government desires to draw attention to it, with a view to method and clarity.
The French Government accordingly urges that the defini- tion given by the International Labour Office should be adhered to. while at the same time specifying that the term officer applies to the duties performed and defined under Question 2 and not to the rank of the individual performing these duties. A seaman who performs these duties should,
*
"
29
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.