Legal recourse for international drilling/maritime personnel


#21

Because the ISM code covers ALL Company policy. If an HR manual states that there will be no discrimination based on race, religion, marital status etc etc etc? And this policy letter is stating something directly contradictory to that? That would be a company nonconformamce and should be caught either through the audit from Class or internal audit (HAR!). Noncinformities get reported to Class, who administers ISM for Flag State.


#22

At least that’s how it worked in my former neck of the woods.


#23

You could make a start by naming the company. Then others would know who not to apply to. If you are not absolutely certain it is happening - and I admit it is difficult to believe - then you could use the words “it is alleged that”. (I just edited a typo)


#24

I absolutely agree but since it’s not my battle directly I will ask the the guys directly involved if they are ok with that (since that may mean they may suffer some back lash over it). It certainly is difficult to believe and if it were someone else and I didn’t see part of the policy I wouldn’t! As far as others applying to work there - since it’s an offshore drilling company, well, there’s no real chance anyone is going to be hired in the next couple of years anyway?


#25

If they had been in Australia there MAY have been some help from the Unions and Maritime Authorities.
A bulker has been banned from Australia for breach of both the ISM Code and the MLC’06 Convention: http://splash247.com/trojan-maritime-bulker-banned-australian-ports/

In this case ITF was the instigator and reported to AMSA on behalf of the crew, who had outstanding part payment for several months.

What we don’t know is if the crew got changed in the next port, after the ship was released in Australia.


#26

Drillers get away with it as they are either in international waters or never go into port