Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC 2006)

The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC 2006) is the International Labour Organization’s consolidated treaty on seafarer employment standards. Adopted in Geneva on 23 February 2006 and entering into force on 20 August 2013, it replaced 37 prior ILO maritime conventions and 31 recommendations with a single, enforceable instrument. Its five Titles govern the minimum age and medical fitness requirements for going to sea, the terms of seafarer employment agreements, wages, working and rest hours, leave, repatriation, and career development; the standard of accommodation, recreational facilities, food, and catering aboard; health protection, medical care, welfare, and social security; and the compliance and enforcement responsibilities of flag states, port states, and recruitment services. As of 2025, more than 100 states representing over 90% of world fleet tonnage by gross tonnage have ratified MLC 2006, making it one of the most widely adopted instruments in international maritime law. ShipCalculators.com’s MLC Rest Hours Compliance and Seafarer Wage Protection tools apply its numerical thresholds directly.

Contents

Background and origins

ILO and maritime labour regulation before 2006

The International Labour Organization (ILO) began regulating conditions at sea shortly after its foundation in 1919. Over eight decades it adopted 37 maritime labour conventions and 31 recommendations - instruments covering minimum age, crew accommodation, wages, hours of work, medical examinations, repatriation, and related subjects. By the late 1990s that body of law had grown internally inconsistent, difficult to apply uniformly, and frequently unratified by key shipping states. Conventions drafted in different decades reflected the vessel technology and employment relationships of their era rather than the realities of a globalised merchant fleet.

A 2001 ILO High-Level Tripartite Working Group on Maritime Labour Standards concluded that a consolidation was necessary. The group identified the fragmented structure as a barrier to ratification: a state wishing to cover the field had to adopt more than a dozen separate instruments, each with its own ratification procedure. The recommendation to proceed to a single comprehensive convention was endorsed at the 29th Session of the Joint Maritime Commission in Geneva in January 2001. The ILO’s 94th Maritime Session began drafting work the same year, producing successive drafts reviewed by tripartite delegations from governments, shipowners, and seafarers between 2001 and 2006.

Adoption and structure

The convention was adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 94th (Maritime) Session in Geneva on 23 February 2006 by an overwhelming vote. It was designed from the outset as the “fourth pillar” of international maritime regulation alongside the SOLAS convention, MARPOL convention, and STCW convention.

MLC 2006 replaced the following principal prior instruments, among others: the Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920 (No. 7); the Seamen’s Articles of Agreement Convention, 1926 (No. 22); the Repatriation of Seamen Convention, 1926 (No. 23); the Crew Accommodation (Seafarers) Convention, 1949 (No. 75); the Wages, Hours of Work and Manning (Sea) Convention, 1958 (No. 109); the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147); and the Seafarers’ Hours of Work and the Manning of Ships Convention, 1996 (No. 180). In total 36 of the 37 superseded conventions were closed to further ratification upon MLC 2006’s entry into force. The Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention, 1958 (No. 108) was not revoked because its successor (No. 185) had not yet achieved sufficient ratification.

Entry into force

Article VIII of the convention established a dual threshold for entry into force: ratification by at least 30 ILO member states representing at least 33% of gross world merchant fleet tonnage, with entry into force occurring 12 months after that threshold was met. The threshold was crossed on 20 August 2012 when the Philippines deposited its ratification. The convention therefore entered into force on 20 August 2013. On that date, states that had previously ratified individual maritime labour conventions saw those instruments cease to apply and the new consolidated regime take effect.

Ratifications accumulated rapidly after 2013. By 2025 more than 100 states had ratified MLC 2006, with the ratifying states representing in excess of 90% of world fleet tonnage by gross tonnage. The swift uptake reflected both the convention’s design as a consolidation of existing obligations and the commercial pressure on flag states: vessels flagged to non-ratifying states became visible targets for heightened scrutiny by port state control authorities in ratifying states.

Instrument structure

MLC 2006 uses a three-layer architecture: Articles, Regulations, and the Code. The Articles establish the framework obligations and the institutional machinery. The Regulations define the core substantive requirements. The Code is divided into Part A (mandatory standards) and Part B (non-mandatory guidelines). Part B contains guidance on how to implement Part A but a member state may achieve the Part A outcome by alternative means if it can demonstrate equivalent compliance. This “flexibility” mechanism was a key concession to secure ratification by states with varying legal traditions.

The five Titles group the Regulations and Code provisions thematically:

Title 1 - Minimum requirements for seafarers to work on a ship
Title 2 - Conditions of employment
Title 3 - Accommodation, recreational facilities, food and catering
Title 4 - Health protection, medical care, welfare and social security protection
Title 5 - Compliance and enforcement

This grouping mirrors the structure of most domestic maritime labour legislation and was deliberately designed to map onto the inspection frameworks used by flag state administrations and port state control regimes.

Tripartite structure and the Special Tripartite Committee

A feature of MLC 2006 that distinguishes it from most IMO instruments is its embedded tripartite governance. Article XIII establishes the Special Tripartite Committee (STC), composed of representatives of governments, shipowners, and seafarers in equal measure. The STC is mandated to keep the Code under continuous review and to propose amendments to the International Labour Conference. This structure reflects the ILO’s broader constitutional framework, which requires that labour standards be developed and maintained with the direct participation of the social partners rather than by governments alone.

The STC meets every three to five years. Its sessions have produced all of the substantive Code amendments since entry into force. The process is deliberately more agile than the IMO amendment cycle: a Code amendment adopted by the STC and confirmed by the International Labour Conference enters into force 12 months after the adoption notice unless a specified proportion of ratifying states object. This tacit acceptance mechanism was modelled on the IMO’s amendment procedure for the MARPOL convention and allows gaps and deficiencies identified during implementation to be corrected without requiring fresh ratification by all member states.

The tripartite architecture also means that the content of MLC 2006 reflects collective bargaining outcomes at the international level. ITF and the International Maritime Employers’ Council (IMEC) present joint positions to the STC, and the minimum wage figure for able seafarers is itself reviewed by the ILO’s Joint Maritime Commission - a bipartite body of shipowners and seafarers’ representatives - rather than set unilaterally by governments. This distinguishes the MLC wage floor from minimum wage levels in domestic shore-based legislation, where governments typically retain sole authority.

Substantial equivalence

Standard A1, paragraph 5 of Article VI introduces the concept of “substantial equivalence” - a mechanism allowing ratifying states to implement a Standard A provision through different means provided those means are at least as effective as the measures prescribed by the standard. A substantial equivalence must be specifically identified in the DMLC Part I, setting out both the standard being substituted and the alternative measures in place. Port state control officers and flag state inspectors may then assess whether the alternative measures in fact achieve substantial equivalence during an inspection.

The substantial equivalence mechanism has been invoked primarily in relation to accommodation standards on vessel types that present structural design constraints, and in relation to medical fitness certification in states where specialist maritime physicians are in short supply outside major ports. No substantial equivalence is permitted in relation to the fundamental rights provisions - minimum age, freedom of association, collective bargaining, forced labour, and discrimination - which reflect ILO core conventions and are not derogable under any circumstances.

Title 1: Minimum requirements for seafarers

Minimum age

Regulation 1.1 prohibits the employment, engagement, or work of any person below the age of 16 on a ship. No exceptions are permitted. The standard in Standard A1.1 raises the threshold to 18 for night work as defined in MLC 2006, and also to 18 for work that is likely to jeopardise the health or safety of young seafarers. States must maintain a list of types of work hazardous to young persons’ health, safety, or morals; Standard A1.1, paragraph 4 provides a non-exhaustive list of factors to consider when compiling such lists, including exposure to noise and vibration, manual handling of heavy loads, and work in engine spaces. The 1976 Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, which this provision effectively replaced, had set the minimum at 15, so MLC 2006 represented a tightening of the existing international standard.

Medical fitness

Regulation 1.2 requires that seafarers hold a valid medical certificate attesting that they are medically fit to perform their shipboard duties. Standard A1.2 specifies that certificates must be issued by a duly qualified medical practitioner or, in the case of a certificate concerning only eyesight, by a qualified person accepted by the competent authority. Certificates are valid for a maximum of two years for adults (one year for those under 18), except for certification of colour vision which may be valid for up to six years. A shorter period applies for seafarers serving on ships that call at ports where there is a yellow fever risk. Where a certificate expires during a voyage the certificate remains valid until the next port of call where a qualified practitioner is available, provided the period of extension does not exceed three months.

The medical standards in MLC 2006 complement those in the STCW convention. STCW medical fitness requirements address competency-related physical and mental fitness; MLC 2006 requirements address fitness to perform the specific duties the seafarer will carry out aboard. The two sets of certificates are distinct documents and both may be required by a port state inspection.

Recruitment and placement

Regulation 1.4 requires member states to ensure that seafarers recruited or placed by private employment services on ships flying their flag are protected by a system that includes a licensing or certification regime for recruitment services, a register of complaints, and financial security ensuring that seafarers are not left stranded. Standard A1.4 imposes specific requirements on private recruitment services, including prohibition on charging fees directly to seafarers for placement, maintenance of a complaints procedure, and mandatory insurance or equivalent protection against claims by seafarers arising from the failure of a recruitment service to meet its obligations. These provisions gained heightened importance following documented cases where unregulated crewing agents deducted placement fees from wages in advance, leaving seafarers in debt bondage.

Training and qualifications

Regulation 1.3 requires that seafarers are trained or certified as competent or otherwise qualified to perform their duties. Standards under this regulation cross-reference the STCW convention directly. MLC 2006 does not duplicate the STCW competency regime but ensures that the requirement to hold valid certificates extends to all seafarers on MLC-covered ships, and that flag state administrations verify that their ships carry only properly certificated personnel. The ShipCalculators.com calculator catalogue includes the Minimum Safe Manning calculator, which applies both STCW and MLC criteria.

Title 2: Conditions of employment

Seafarer employment agreement

Regulation 2.1 requires every seafarer to have a seafarer employment agreement (SEA) - a written and legally enforceable contract setting out the terms of their employment before they depart for the ship. Standard A2.1 specifies the minimum content of an SEA, which must include the seafarer’s full name and date of birth, the name and address of the shipowner, the place and date of engagement, the position to be occupied, the amount of wages or the formula for calculating wages, the amount of paid annual leave or the formula for calculating it, the conditions for termination, and the health and social security protection benefits to be provided. The SEA must be signed by both the seafarer and the shipowner or the shipowner’s representative.

A copy of the SEA must be available to the seafarer at all times and another copy must be held on board. Where the ship’s flag state requires a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) to meet the SEA requirements, the relevant CBA must also be available on board. The ISM code safety management system documentation and the MLC 2006 SEA are distinct instruments, but the SMS should cross-reference employment obligations relevant to crew safety duties.

Wages

Regulation 2.2 establishes that seafarers must be paid at regular intervals at least monthly and must receive a statement of account each time they are paid. Standard A2.2 requires that member states maintain a system for the regular transmission of seafarer earnings to their families ashore. The convention does not itself fix a minimum wage level but gives effect to the minimum wage for able seafarers established by the ILO Joint Maritime Commission. The ILO’s Joint Maritime Commission periodically reviews the minimum basic wage for able seafarers (AB rating); the figure in force as of 2025 stands at US$671 per month for an AB, having been adjusted upward through the 2022 MLC amendment cycle. The MLC 2006 - Seafarer Wage Protection calculator on ShipCalculators.com applies the current ILO minimum wage threshold and flags shortfalls.

Wages must be paid in full; deductions are only permissible if authorised by the seafarer in writing, required by applicable law, or provided for in a CBA. Deductions for accommodation and food beyond what is permitted by Standard A2.2 are prohibited. Allotments - voluntary transfers of a specified portion of wages to a designated recipient ashore - must be handled at no cost to the seafarer beyond any exchange-rate conversion cost.

Hours of work and hours of rest

Regulation 2.3 addresses the hours of work and rest framework that had previously been governed by ILO Convention No. 180 (1996) and the 1995 STCW amendments. MLC 2006 adopted a dual approach: states may regulate either maximum hours of work or minimum hours of rest.

Under the minimum rest model, the applicable limits in Standard A2.3 are:

Minimum rest of 10 hours in any 24-hour period.
Minimum rest of 77 hours in any seven-day period.

Under the maximum work model:

Maximum work of 14 hours in any 24-hour period.
Maximum work of 72 hours in any seven-day period.

Rest periods must not be divided into more than two periods, one of which must be at least six hours in length, and the interval between consecutive rest periods must not exceed 14 hours.

Exceptions are permitted in cases of emergency or safety drills. Standard A2.3, paragraph 14 allows derogations through collective bargaining agreements, subject to compensatory rest. Musters, fire-fighting and lifeboat drills, and other safety drills required by SOLAS must be conducted in a manner that minimises disturbance to rest periods and does not induce fatigue, but participation in them does not count as a breach of the rest-hour limits.

Hours of rest records must be maintained in a format approved by the competent authority, posted in an accessible place on board, and available for inspection. The STCW / MLC - Rest-Hours Compliance calculator and the MLC - Hours of Work (Alternative) calculator on ShipCalculators.com allow operators to verify compliance with these numerical thresholds.

Annual leave

Regulation 2.4 guarantees paid annual leave. Standard A2.4 sets the minimum at 2.5 calendar days per month of employment, pro-rated for incomplete months. Annual leave may not be substituted by a cash allowance except upon termination of the SEA or in other circumstances prescribed by the competent authority. The leave entitlement is non-waivable and any agreement purporting to forgo leave in exchange for payment during employment is void. The practical effect is that a seafarer completing a standard nine-month contract is entitled to a minimum of 22.5 days of paid leave.

Repatriation

Regulation 2.5 guarantees every seafarer the right to repatriation at no cost to the seafarer in specific circumstances: expiry of the SEA, termination of the SEA by the shipowner, inability of the seafarer to continue performing duties due to illness or injury, and shipwreck or total loss of the vessel, among others. Standard A2.5.1 specifies that the maximum continuous service period before a seafarer is entitled to repatriation may not exceed 11 months. In practice, many CBAs set this period at eight or nine months.

The cost of repatriation must be met by the shipowner unless the seafarer has been dismissed for serious misconduct as defined in the SEA or CBA. This includes the cost of transport to the destination agreed in the SEA (typically the seafarer’s home country or the country of recruitment), accommodation and food in transit, and medical treatment where necessary.

The 2014 amendments, discussed below, significantly strengthened the financial security provisions that support repatriation when a shipowner becomes insolvent or abandons the crew. The Crew Change - Cost and P&I Cover calculator on ShipCalculators.com estimates the direct cost components of a crew change, including repatriation flights and transit accommodation.

Manning levels

Regulation 2.7 requires that every ship is sufficiently and safely manned. Standard A2.7 obliges flag states to establish a system for determining safe manning levels that takes account of the need to avoid or minimise excessive hours of work, to ensure sufficient rest, and to limit fatigue. The safe manning document (SMD), issued by the flag state administration and required to be carried aboard under SOLAS Chapter V, gives effect to this requirement by specifying the minimum number and categories of seafarers required on the vessel. The STCW - Minimum Safe Manning calculator applies these thresholds.

Career and skill development

Regulation 2.8 obliges member states to have national policies that promote employment in the maritime sector and encourage career and skill development. Guideline B2.8 recommends vocational guidance, seafarer training, and a system of recording service for use in career development. This provision has less direct operational effect than the wage and rest hour provisions but underpins national schemes such as maritime academies, training levies, and manning registers.

Compensation in case of ship’s loss or foundering

Regulation 2.6 requires that seafarers are compensated for injury, loss, or unemployment arising from the ship’s loss or foundering. Standard A2.6 obliges shipowners to pay an indemnity to each seafarer engaged on board equal to at least two months’ wages where employment is terminated by ship loss. This provision exists separately from personal injury compensation and is intended to address the gap between the termination of the SEA and the seafarer’s next employment.

Title 3: Accommodation, recreational facilities, food and catering

Accommodation standards

Title 3 consolidates the Crew Accommodation (Seafarers) Conventions (No. 75 of 1949 and No. 92 of 1949) and the more recent No. 133 (1970). Standard A3.1 sets minimum floor areas for sleeping rooms. For ships of 3,000 GT or more: individual sleeping rooms for each seafarer; minimum floor area of 4.5 m² per person in a single-berth room. On ships with fewer than 3,000 GT the floor area per person may be reduced to 3.75 m². Officers must be provided with a separate bedroom as part of a sitting room suite on ships of 3,000 GT or more.

All sleeping rooms must be fitted with proper light and ventilation, a fixed bunk, storage space, and a desk or writing surface. Each sleeping room must have access to sanitary facilities within the same accommodation block, and the number of sanitary facilities per seafarer must meet specified ratios. Noise levels in sleeping rooms must comply with the IMO Code on noise levels on board ships (MSC.337(91)).

Standard A3.1 also sets requirements for mess rooms (separate messes are required for officers and ratings only on larger ships; combined messing is permissible on smaller vessels), recreation facilities, laundry facilities, and medical facilities. Ships carrying 15 or more persons and engaged on voyages exceeding three days must have a hospital space that is properly equipped, accessible, and ventilated. The 2022 amendments extended A3.1 to address the provision of internet connectivity for seafarers - discussed below.

Food and catering

Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2 require that food and drinking water must be of appropriate quality, nutritional value, and quantity for the duration of the voyage. The cook must hold a valid certificate issued by the competent authority. Catering arrangements must take account of the seafarers’ differing religious and cultural practices. On ships with 10 or more crew, a properly qualified ship’s cook (holding a cook’s certificate) must be maintained whenever possible and in any case when the ship carries 10 or more persons and is engaged on an international voyage of more than three days. Inspection of food and water must be carried out at intervals of not more than seven days and records kept.

Drinking water standards must comply with the World Health Organization’s Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality or an equivalent national standard accepted by the flag state. Standard A3.2, paragraph 2 specifically requires that water is protected from contamination and that tanks and pipework are regularly inspected and records maintained. Fresh water testing intervals and the records required form part of the DMLC Part II documentation and are examined during flag state and PSC inspections.

Guideline B3.2 recommends that the ship’s cook have formal training in food safety and that food storage, preparation, and service be managed to prevent foodborne illness. In practice, the catering function is a frequent source of PSC deficiency citations: inspectors regularly find expired provisions aboard, inadequate refrigeration temperatures, food storage conditions below standard, or a cook without a valid certificate. These deficiencies are categorised under the accommodation and catering inspection items in the Paris MOU and Tokyo MOU standard inspection forms and contribute to deficiency counts under MLC 2006.

Medical care on board and ashore

Standard A4.1 requires that ships carry a medicine chest and medical equipment sufficient for the voyage, and that ships of 500 GT or more on international voyages carry a ship’s medical guide and have radio or satellite access to medical advice ashore. Ships carrying 100 or more persons on international voyages of more than three days must carry a medical doctor. Guideline B4.1.1 recommends that medical practitioners aboard receive training in practical medical treatment. Port states must also provide medical facilities for the treatment of seafarers coming ashore, with costs to be met by the ship in cases of illness or injury incurred in service.

The interaction between MLC 2006 medical care obligations and the ISM code safety management system is significant: the SMS must address the management of medical emergencies, including procedures for radio medical advice, management of a medical repatriation, and for infectious disease outbreaks aboard ship. The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020-2021 exposed weaknesses in the medical care provisions when ports closed, crew changes became impossible, and seafarers serving aboard had no access to routine medical treatment ashore. The practical consequences for seafarers with expiring SEAs and medical conditions drew attention to these provisions’ limitations in force-majeure scenarios, which the 2018 and 2022 amendments subsequently addressed.

Shipowner liability

Standard A4.2 requires shipowners to provide financial protection against the cost of illness, injury, and death. Where a seafarer is hospitalised or incapacitated by illness or injury, the shipowner must bear the cost of medical treatment, board and lodging away from home, and repatriation. Standard A4.2.1, introduced by the 2014 amendments (discussed below), replaced the prior discretionary provisions with mandatory financial security requirements backed by insurance, P&I Club cover, or equivalent instruments.

Welfare facilities and seafarers’ centres

Standard A4.4 requires that member states provide welfare facilities in ports, including seafarers’ centres with facilities for recreation, communication, and social services. The ILO’s International Labour Standards on Maritime Labour provide for the establishment of welfare boards in ports. The International Seafarers’ Welfare and Assistance Network (ISWAN) and the Mission to Seafarers coordinate welfare provision in major ports. Welfare ashore has practical value because ships on modern schedules may spend as little as a few hours in port.

Port welfare boards established under Standard A4.4 are tripartite bodies bringing together port authorities, shipowners’ representatives, and seafarers’ welfare organisations to coordinate the provision of transport, telephones, internet access, places of worship, recreational facilities, and crisis support. Guideline B4.4.2 recommends that welfare services be provided regardless of nationality, religion, or political opinions. The ILO’s Global Network of Welfare Boards maps active port welfare facilities by location and is used by ship managers to brief seafarers before port calls.

Mental health has received increasing attention under the welfare provisions. Post-pandemic surveys by ISWAN and the Mission to Seafarers documented elevated rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation among seafarers, attributable in part to prolonged time aboard, limited access to welfare facilities, and uncertainty about crew change schedules during the pandemic. The ILO’s Seafarers’ Welfare Fund, maintained through the tripartite structure, has supported research and programme development in this area. The 2022 connectivity amendment to Standard A3.1 is partly a response to these mental health findings, recognising that internet access allowing regular contact with family significantly reduces psychological distress during long voyages.

Regulation 4.5 requires that member states ensure social security protection for seafarers, covering as a minimum three of the nine branches of social security: medical care, sickness benefit, unemployment benefit, old-age benefit, employment injury benefit, family benefit, maternity benefit, invalidity benefit, and survivors’ benefit. The standard was initially considered limited given the optional choice of branches, but subsequent ILO guidance has pressed towards wider coverage. The 2022 amendments tightened the social security provisions, as described below.

Title 5: Compliance and enforcement

Flag state responsibilities

Regulation 5.1 makes every flag state responsible for ensuring that ships flying its flag comply with MLC 2006. Each flag state must establish and maintain a system of flag state inspection and certification covering ships of 500 GT or more engaged on international voyages or sailing between ports in different countries. The Maritime Labour Certificate (MLC Certificate) is the documentary evidence of compliance issued following a successful flag state inspection. It must be accompanied by a Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance (DMLC).

The DMLC consists of two parts:

Part I - issued by the flag state administration, lists the national laws, regulations, and collective bargaining agreements that implement MLC 2006 and any substantial equivalences granted.
Part II - issued by the shipowner, records the measures the shipowner has put in place to ensure ongoing compliance with the requirements in Part I on that specific vessel.

The DMLC Part II must be kept on board, be available to seafarers, and be subject to inspection. The Maritime Labour Certificate is valid for a maximum of five years and is subject to an intermediate inspection between the second and third anniversary of issue. Flag states may authorise recognised organisations (classification societies) to carry out MLC inspections and issue certificates on their behalf. The leading classification societies - Lloyd’s Register, Bureau Veritas, DNV, ClassNK, and ABS - have all been accepted by major flag states as authorised bodies for MLC certification.

Port state control

Regulation 5.2 establishes port state control (PSC) authority under MLC 2006. A port state officer boarding a ship from a ratifying state may inspect whether the vessel holds a valid Maritime Labour Certificate and DMLC. If those documents are in order and there are no clear grounds indicating non-compliance, the inspection is generally limited to that documentary check. Detailed inspections are triggered by: absence of a valid MLC Certificate; complaints from seafarers or their organisations; evidence of non-compliance; or information from another state that the ship may not be in compliance.

Where serious deficiencies are found, the port state may detain the vessel. Grounds for detention under MLC 2006 include: non-payment of wages for more than one month; manning level below the safe manning document; hours-of-rest violations recorded over a period indicating systemic non-compliance; and failure to provide adequate food and water. The Paris MOU, Tokyo MOU, and other regional PSC organisations have incorporated MLC 2006 into their inspection regimes. Annual MOU reports track MLC-related deficiencies and detentions, and MLC deficiencies have regularly appeared among the top five most cited categories in those reports since 2013.

Complaints procedures

Standard A5.1.5 requires that every ship must have an on-board complaints procedure that allows seafarers to make complaints about MLC 2006 non-compliance directly to the master and, if unresolved, to external authorities. The procedure must be described in writing and must protect complainants from victimisation. Standard A5.2.2 requires port states to accept and investigate complaints from seafarers - including those who are not nationals of the port state - concerning conditions aboard ships calling at their ports.

Labour-supplying and recruitment service state responsibilities

Regulation 5.3 addresses the obligations of member states that supply seafarers or operate recruitment services without being the flag state of the ships on which their seafarers serve. These states must regulate their recruitment and placement services (see Regulation 1.4 above), ensure that seafarers have access to the complaints procedures, and report breaches to the flag state and to the ILO.

ITF inspections

The International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) operates an inspection programme that supplements official PSC inspections. ITF inspectors, typically drawn from the membership of dockworkers’ and seafarers’ unions, board vessels in ports to check for compliance with MLC 2006 and with ITF-approved CBAs. Where a vessel is operating under an ITF-accepted CBA, the inspectors verify that the terms of the CBA are being observed. ITF inspections have contributed to the recovery of unpaid wages in numerous documented cases. The ITF’s inspector network is particularly active in ports where PSC is relatively resource-constrained.

A vessel without an ITF-accepted CBA is not automatically non-compliant with MLC 2006, because MLC 2006 does not require that ships operate under a CBA where none exists in the applicable national law. However, ITF inspectors treat the absence of an ITF-accepted CBA as a risk indicator and will examine whether the on-board SEAs and working conditions meet MLC 2006 minimum standards. Where they find wages below the ILO minimum, hours violations, or accommodation deficiencies, ITF inspectors may lodge a formal complaint triggering a port state inspection or seek to negotiate an ITF CBA to be signed before the vessel departs port.

The ITF maintains the Fair Practices Committee and the Seafarers’ Section, which coordinate the global inspector network across more than 100 countries. The practical effect of ITF inspection activity is to extend MLC 2006 enforcement into ports of states that have not fully resourced their PSC programmes, and to apply commercial pressure on flags of convenience registries. Shipowners operating under ITF-accepted CBAs and flags with strong compliance records generally receive shorter and less intrusive ITF inspections.

Subsequent amendments

2014 amendments: financial security for abandonment and personal injury

The 2014 amendments, which entered into force on 18 January 2017, addressed two major gaps that had been identified before MLC 2006 itself entered into force. The first was the situation of abandoned seafarers - crew members left aboard a vessel whose owner has become insolvent, disappeared, or refused to pay wages and fund repatriation. The second was the inadequacy of provisions on compensation for death and long-term disability arising from occupational causes.

Standard A2.5.2 (introduced by the 2014 amendments) requires ships of 500 GT or more to carry documentary evidence that the shipowner has in place financial security enabling the repatriation of seafarers without cost to them. The financial security - typically provided by a P&I Club certificate or equivalent insurance document - must cover the cost of return transport, accommodation and food in transit, and wages and entitlements outstanding.

Standard A4.2.1 requires that ships of 500 GT or more carry evidence of financial security for shipowner liabilities arising from death or long-term disability due to occupational injury, illness, or hazard. The required security must cover contractual compensation up to the amount provided by applicable law or CBA, whichever is higher, with a minimum threshold equivalent to 30 months’ wages per seafarer. Both requirements must be documented aboard ship and be available for inspection during port state control examinations.

The abandoned seafarers database maintained by the ILO and the IMO jointly - the IMO/ILO abandonment database - recorded over 200 cases between 2004 and 2024, involving more than 2,500 seafarers. The 2014 amendments aimed to reduce the frequency and duration of such cases by ensuring that financial recourse existed before a ship was certificated. Notable abandonment cases prior to the amendments involved bulk carriers and general cargo vessels, particularly in Middle Eastern and Asian ports, where vessels were arrested for debt and left crewless with the seafarers unable to leave.

2016 amendments: harassment and bullying

The 2016 amendments, which entered into force in January 2019, added provisions on harassment and bullying to Standard A3.1. The amendments require shipowners to establish on-board anti-harassment and anti-bullying policies and procedures, consistent with Standard A5.1.5 on complaints procedures. Flag states must address harassment and bullying in their MLC inspection criteria. The amendments reflected a pattern of complaints received through the ILO’s complaints mechanisms and surveys of seafarers documenting the incidence of bullying, particularly towards women seafarers and towards those from certain nationalities who formed numerical minorities aboard multinational crews.

2018 amendments: certificates during force majeure

The 2018 amendments, which entered into force on 26 December 2020, addressed the scenario where MLC 2006 certificates expire during a voyage as a result of circumstances beyond the control of the shipowner or seafarer - most notably, inability to arrange an inspection during a voyage. The amendments allow for an extension of the Maritime Labour Certificate’s validity by up to five months where inspection cannot take place due to force majeure, with the flag state administration notified and the reason recorded aboard ship. These amendments gained particular significance during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020-2021, when inspection agencies were unavailable in many ports and flag state administrations struggled to conduct remote inspections.

2022 amendments

The 2022 amendments, which entered into force on 23 December 2024, represent the most extensive revision to the Code since 2006. The key changes are:

Connectivity. A new Standard A3.1, paragraph 6bis requires that seafarers have access to adequate internet connectivity on board. Flag states must ensure that ships provide reasonable access to internet communication. The provision recognises the mental health and family wellbeing dimension of prolonged isolation aboard ship. Guideline B3.1 recommends that connectivity be available in accommodation spaces and mess rooms and that charges not be excessive. The connectivity requirement had been recommended in Guideline B3.1 since 2006 but the 2022 amendment elevates it to a mandatory Standard.

Food and drinking water. Standard A3.2 was amended to require that ships’ cooks, catering staff, and the management system consider documented dietary requirements based on religion, culture, or medical need. The amendment reflects the increasingly multicultural composition of crews and the growing proportion of seafarers with medically mandated dietary restrictions.

Maritime Labour Certificate scope. The 2022 amendments extend the scope of MLC 2006 certification to ships below 500 GT on international voyages where not previously subject to flag state certification under Article V. This partially closes a gap that had excluded smaller international trading vessels from the certificate and DMLC requirements, leaving their seafarers without the same level of documented protection.

Social security. Standard A4.5 was amended to expand the recommended minimum coverage. States are encouraged to ensure that seafarers are entitled to at least 10 of the 14 social security contingencies now identified in the revised standard. The 2022 revision also strengthens bilateral agreement frameworks to address gaps arising where the seafarer’s country of domicile and the flag state provide overlapping or contradictory social security coverage.

Repatriation. Minor amendments clarify that the maximum continuous service period (not more than 11 months under Regulation 2.5) is measured from the time the seafarer leaves home, not from the date of signing on the SEA, closing a loophole where transit time was excluded from the service period calculation.

STCW convention

The STCW convention and MLC 2006 address adjacent aspects of seafarer employment. STCW governs the certification of competency - what a seafarer must know and be able to do - while MLC 2006 governs the conditions under which they are employed. The two conventions share several numerical standards: the hours-of-rest limits in STCW and in MLC 2006 Standard A2.3 are identical, having been harmonised in the 1995 STCW amendments and reproduced in MLC 2006. Inconsistencies between STCW and MLC 2006 rest-hour provisions on specific ship types (particularly vessels on short-sea trades) have occasionally been raised in PSC inspections; the prevailing interpretation is that both standards apply and that the stricter provision governs.

SOLAS convention

SOLAS Chapter V, Regulation 14 requires every vessel to carry a minimum safe manning document issued by the flag state administration. MLC 2006 Regulation 2.7 requires that the manning level determined in the SMD be sufficient to avoid excessive hours of work and to ensure adequate rest. In practice, cases arise where a vessel is technically compliant with its SMD but where hours records show systematic rest-hour violations, which flag state inspectors and PSC officers treat as evidence that the SMD has been set at too low a level. The STCW - Minimum Safe Manning calculator supports assessments of whether a proposed manning level is viable under the hours framework.

ISM code

The ISM code safety management system obliges shipowners and masters to manage operational risk, including human factors. MLC 2006 intersects with the ISM code through the fatigue management provisions: a safety management system that does not address work-rest hour monitoring, rest period scheduling, and fatigue risk during cargo operations is unlikely to meet ISM requirements. Several PSC detentions for ISM non-conformities have cited hours-of-rest violations as evidence of inadequate safety management. The DMLC Part II, which records the shipowner’s specific implementation measures, is sometimes reviewed alongside the ISM SMS procedures during combined PSC inspections.

ISPS code

The ISPS code ship security assessment requires that the minimum number of shipboard security personnel be identified and that their duties not compromise safety operations. Where MLC 2006 manning levels are tight, security watch duties carried out in addition to safety duties can create rest-hour compliance problems. The two regimes must be read together when preparing the ship security plan.

Polar code

Ships operating in polar waters must comply with the Polar Code, which imposes additional manning requirements - specifically the requirement for officers with enhanced training in polar operations. The Polar Code - Minimum Manning and Advanced Training calculator addresses the overlay of Polar Code manning requirements with MLC 2006 minimum manning provisions. When combined with the shorter rest periods and extended operational demands of polar voyages, the resulting manning requirements typically exceed those applicable in temperate latitudes.

Hong Kong Convention and ballast water management

Vessels subject to the Hong Kong Convention on ship recycling and the Ballast Water Management Convention carry additional documentation obligations that may impose administrative work on officers. MLC 2006 hours-of-rest records must be maintained concurrent with the ship’s Ballast Water Record Book and, for ships approaching end of life, the Inventory of Hazardous Materials. The cumulative administrative burden of these parallel record-keeping systems has been raised in the IMO’s human element sub-committee as a contributing factor to officer fatigue.

Practical compliance considerations

Rest-hour record systems

The requirement in Standard A2.3, paragraph 12 to maintain hours-of-rest records has generated an industry of dedicated software. Many flag state administrations accept proprietary software systems (Nautical Systems, ORCA, Helm CONNECT) in place of paper-based tabular logs, provided the software produces a printout in the format specified by the flag state. The records must be signed by the seafarer and the master or a designated officer and retained for a minimum of one year. During a port state control examination, inspectors typically request records for the preceding 30 days and compare them with cargo, log, and watch-keeping records to identify discrepancies. The STCW / MLC - Rest-Hours Compliance calculator and MLC - Hours of Work (Alternative) calculator allow operators to verify that planned or recorded schedules satisfy both the 10-hour daily and 77-hour weekly rest thresholds.

Collective bargaining agreements and flexible schedules

MLC 2006 Standard A2.3, paragraphs 13 and 14 allow derogations from the standard hours-of-rest limits through collective bargaining agreements covering at least a sector, provided the CBA has been negotiated by representative seafarers’ and shipowners’ organisations and that the derogation provides compensatory rest. ITF-accepted CBAs and agreements reached within the International Bargaining Forum (IBF) between the ITF and the International Maritime Employers’ Council (IMEC) are the principal instruments through which such derogations are implemented in internationally trading vessels.

The DMLC as an operational document

The DMLC Part II has practical value beyond its inspection function. When a vessel is sold or transferred to a new owner, the DMLC Part II must be updated and a new MLC inspection triggered within three months unless the interim Maritime Labour Certificate allows additional time. This creates a transactional consideration in vessel acquisition: the buyer must assess whether the seller’s existing DMLC Part II procedures can be adopted or whether new policies must be developed and inspected before the vessel enters service under the new owner’s flag.

Wage arrear recovery

Where wages are unpaid, seafarers may seek recovery through the ITF’s welfare assistance programme, through the flag state (which is obliged under Regulation 5.1.2 to inspect conditions of employment), or through the P&I Club financial security instrument required under the 2014 amendments. Port state detention for wage arrears is available where wages have been unpaid for more than one month. In several documented cases, detained vessels have been sold under court order with the proceeds used to settle wage claims. The MLC 2006 - Maritime Labour Convention reference calculator on ShipCalculators.com provides a consolidated reference for the key thresholds. The MLC 2006 - Seafarer Wage Protection calculator applies the ILO minimum wage benchmark to verify that an individual seafarer’s contract meets or exceeds the floor.

Coverage and applicability

Ships and seafarers covered

Article II of MLC 2006 defines its scope by reference to “ships” and “seafarers”. A ship is any vessel other than one that navigates exclusively in inland waters, sheltered waters, or waters within or closely adjacent to sheltered waters or areas where port regulations apply. A seafarer is any person who is employed or engaged or works in any capacity on board a ship. Both definitions have been the subject of national interpretations, particularly in relation to offshore vessels (mobile offshore drilling units, platform supply vessels, anchor handlers) and domestic ferry services.

The ILO’s guidance on the application of MLC 2006 to offshore vessels clarifies that most offshore support vessels fall within the scope of MLC 2006 when engaged on international voyages, while MODUs operating under flag state authority may be subject to MLC in some jurisdictions and to equivalent domestic legislation in others. Several major flag states have extended MLC 2006 to domestic vessels by national legislation, effectively applying the convention to trades that would otherwise be outside its formal scope.

Ships excluded

Article II(4) allows member states to exclude, after consultation with representative shipowner and seafarer organisations, ships below 200 GT not engaged on international voyages. This exclusion is discretionary and not all ratifying states have adopted it. Ships of war and ships engaged in fishing are outside the scope of MLC 2006 (as are non-commercial government vessels). Commercial fishing vessels are instead subject to the ILO Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188), which entered into force in November 2017 and uses a structural approach similar to that of MLC 2006.

Statistical and enforcement context

The number of seafarers subject to MLC 2006 protection is estimated at approximately 1.9 million, based on BIMCO/ICS Seafarer Workforce Reports. The global merchant fleet subject to MLC 2006 by tonnage is concentrated in a small number of flag states: Panama, Marshall Islands, Liberia, Bahamas, Singapore, Malta, Cyprus, and China collectively account for a large majority of world fleet tonnage. All of these states have ratified MLC 2006. The Philippines, the largest supplier of seafarers by nationality, ratified MLC 2006 and deposited its instrument - triggering the threshold for entry into force - on 20 August 2012. China, India, Indonesia, and Ukraine are among the other large labour-supplying states that have also ratified.

Paris MOU annual reports have consistently shown MLC-related deficiency categories among the most frequently cited, with deficiencies related to working hours records, wages, and accommodation recurring across inspection years. Detention rates specifically attributed to MLC 2006 non-compliance have remained in the range of a few per cent of total detentions annually, reflecting both the improving baseline of compliance and the concentration of detentions on vessels from specific registries with lower compliance rates. The Tokyo MOU, covering the Asia-Pacific region, and the Indian Ocean MOU show similar patterns.

The IMO/ILO joint database on abandoned seafarers records cases by vessel name, flag, and port. The cases span all vessel types, with bulk carriers and general cargo ships historically over-represented relative to their fleet share - a pattern attributed to the tighter operating margins and more fragmented ownership structures typical of those sectors. The average duration of recorded abandonment episodes before resolution - through owner payment, P&I Club intervention, vessel arrest, or charter cancellation - has historically exceeded three months, placing significant financial and psychological strain on stranded crews. The 2014 amendments’ financial security requirements, by requiring that evidence of insurance against abandonment be carried aboard before certification, aim to reduce both the frequency and duration of such cases by ensuring a solvent insurer can be identified and called upon before the owner’s disappearance or insolvency triggers the abandonment situation.

References

International Labour Organization, Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (Consolidated), ILO, Geneva, 2006 (as amended 2014, 2016, 2018, 2022).
ILO, Official Bulletin, Vol. LXXXIX, 2006, Series A, No. 1: records of the 94th (Maritime) Session of the International Labour Conference, Geneva, 7-22 February 2006.
ILO, Handbook of Procedures Relating to International Labour Conventions and Recommendations, ILO, Geneva, 2012.
ILO, MLC, 2006 - 2014 Amendments (Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2; Regulation 4.2 and Standard A4.2), entered into force 18 January 2017.
ILO, MLC, 2006 - 2016 Amendments (Standard A3.1, harassment and bullying), entered into force January 2019.
ILO, MLC, 2006 - 2018 Amendments (force majeure extension of certificates), entered into force 26 December 2020.
ILO, MLC, 2006 - 2022 Amendments (connectivity, food/water, certificate scope, social security, repatriation), entered into force 23 December 2024.
Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control, Annual Reports, various years 2014-2024.
Tokyo Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control, Annual Reports, various years 2014-2024.
BIMCO and ICS, Seafarer Workforce Report, 2021 edition.
Doumbia-Henry, Cleopatra, “The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006: A New Paradigm for the Regulation of Seafarers’ Work”, International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, Vol. 21, 2005.
ITF, ITF Seafarers’ Bulletin, various issues 2013-2024.