Issuu on Google+

THE CENTER FOR SEAFARERS’ RIGHTS The Seamen’s Church Institute of New York and New Jersey 118 Export Street • Port Newark, NJ 07114 TEL: 973-589-5828 FAX: 973-817-8565 seamenschurch.org

2011 Seafarer Shore Leave Survey During the week of May 1-7, 2011, the Seamen’s Church Institute’s Center for Seafarers’ Rights conducted its tenth annual Seafarer Shore Leave Survey. Port ministries throughout the United States kept records during the survey week and reported the data to the Center for Seafarers’ Rights. The survey collected data on the number of seafarers denied shore leave and reasons why their shore leave was denied. Survey participants also provided information about individual terminals placing restrictions on seafarer and chaplain access through their terminals. Twenty-six ports participated in this year’s survey. Twenty of these ports noted that at least some seafarers were denied shore leave. In addition, seven ports reported on individual terminal’s restrictive policies. With few exceptions, chaplains reported that their access to terminals had improved over the past year. Some terminals, however, continue to prohibit chaplains and seafarers from transiting through their terminal and others impose high fees to escort seafarers through their terminals. Several terminals have no provisions for escorting seafarers through their terminals, relying on maritime ministries or taxis to transport seafarers. Although many maritime ministries provide transport services for seafarers through terminals, they lack sufficient resources to provide transport for all seafarers wishing to go ashore. The number of seafarers who where denied shore leave due to terminal restrictions is under-reported. This is because some of the terminals that do not allow seafarers to transit the terminal also prohibit chaplains from entering the terminal, thereby preventing them from collecting the data. Similarly, the data does not reflect the number of seafarers who were prevented from going ashore because they could not afford to pay high escort fees imposed by some terminals.


Statistical Shore Leave Restrictions Data from Ship Visiting In this year’s survey, 483 ships were visited by port ministries, on which 84 had at least one seafarer denied shore access. Seventeen percent of the ships surveyed had at least one seafarer detained on board. There were approximately1 9,865 seafarers aboard the 483 surveyed ships. Approximately 1036, or 10.5 percent of them were denied shore leave. The overwhelming reason for denying shore leave, about 75 percent of the instances, was because seafarers did not have a valid visa. Other reported reasons for denying shore leave included: denials by ship management, terminal restrictions, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) detentions, and vessel arrests. There were few reported instances, about one percent, where CBP denied shore leave to seafarers possessing valid visas. Some ship management companies continue to prohibit Myanmar seafarers from going on shore leave in the United States as a condition of their employment. The 2011 survey contained reports of seafarers’ national background from 299 of the 483 ships visited. Seafarers from 49 different countries are represented in this year’s report. Filipinos made up the largest seafaring group with at least one Filipino crewmember on 170 of the reporting vessels. Russian, Indian, Ukrainian, and Polish seafarers rounded out the five most represented nationalities. Of those 299 ships from which national demographics of seafarers were reported, 36 vessel reports also included nationalities for individual seafarers who did not have valid visas. Of these 555 individual seafarers recorded2, Chinese nationals made up the largest segment. There were 178 Chinese seafarers denied shore access for lack of a visa, followed by 165 Filipinos. This sampling group represents slightly more than 60 percent of the total number of detained seafarers. Access Restrictions to Port Terminals Section 811 of the 2010 Coast Guard Authorization Act, signed into law on October 15, 2010, requires each facility security plan to “provide a system for seamen assigned to a vessel at that facility, pilots, and representatives of seamen's welfare and labor organizations to board and depart the vessel through the facility in a timely manner at no cost to the individual.”3 Regulations necessary to implement the statute have not yet been promulgated. The survey validates the need for the statute and regulations by identifying several private terminals that continue to place onerous restrictions on seafarers and chaplains transiting the terminal between the ship and the terminal entrance gate. Although terminal access improved over the past year, reports of restrictions imposed by individual terminals were consistent with reports from previous surveys. Eight terminals require escorts for seafarers wishing to leave the port. Because the terminal operator does not provide escorts, seafarers must rely on maritime ministries or private escort services. Although most maritime ministries provide escort services for seafarers, they are not sufficiently resourced to accommodate all of the seafarers needing transport. One terminal 1

For reports that did not indicate the total number of seafarers aboard an individual ship, an estimated crew size of 22 has been used for statistical purposes. 2 Included in this group are 88 seafarers from Myanmar, who are assumed to be subject to denial of shore leave based upon contracting provisions, and not for reported lack of valid visas. 3

Available at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3619


providing escort services charges escort fees as high as $500.00, and another $75.00 for transit from the ship to the terminal security gate. Another terminal that provides seafarers free transportation within the terminal during work hours, charges transport fees of up to $500 after 5:00 p.m., when seafarers are most likely to be off work and allowed shore leave. Two ports either denied access to maritime ministries or required a lengthy notice period before granting access. Terminal Access Restrictions by Port Baltimore, MD: • Five terminals require escorts for seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. The terminal operator does not provide escorts for seafarers. Boston, MA: • Gulf Oil terminal requires an escort for seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. The terminal operator does not provide escorts for seafarers. Greater New York/New Jersey: • Carteret – KMI terminal provides free a shuttle once a day with pick-up and 12:30 p.m. and return at 5:00 p.m. There is a charge of $450-$500 for transport at other times, • Elizabeth - Maher terminal does not provide transit to and from the terminal. • Linden - Bayway terminal requires 4-hour notice for chaplain’s entry and does not allow seafarers to go through the terminal. • Linden – Nu Star terminal allows chaplains allowed to visit, but not to transport seafarers; only agents are allowed to escort seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. • Perth Amboy - KMI OBT allows chaplains entry but does not allow them to transport seafarers. Terminal allows only the shipping agent to escort seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. • Seawarren - Chevron terminal does not allow seafarers to leave the terminal. • Seawarren - Motiva I and II terminals do not allow seafarers to leave the terminal. Port ministries are denied access to the terminal. • Yonkers – Domino Sugar terminal will not allow chaplains to transport seafarers and charges seafarers $500.00 for transit out of the terminal. Hueneme, CA: • Terminal requires an escort for seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. Escort fees are $75.00. Norfolk, VA • Norfolk International terminal does not provide transit through the terminal. Portland, ME: • Portland Pipeline terminal requires an escort for seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. The terminal operator does not provide escorts for seafarers.


•

Sprague South Portland terminal requires an on duty security guard be present when seafarers leave the terminal. The terminal operator does not pay the cost of retaining a security guard. Ship owners have been paying for the security guard.

Portsmouth, NH: • Sprague River Road terminal requires an escort for seafarers wishing to leave the terminal. The terminal operator does not provide escorts for seafarers.


Percentage of Detained Seafarers by Nationality Nationalities comprising greater than 1% 60   50   40   30   20   10   0  

Nationalities comprising less than 1% 1.2   1   0.8   0.6   0.4   0.2   0  

Note. 49 total nationalities reported.


Percentage of Reported Seafarers Without a Visa by Nationality Compared With Percentage of Reported Nationality Present on Ships Visited 70  

60  

50  

40  

30  

20  

10  

0  

Percentage  of  ships  visited  with  this  na=onality  represented  in  crew.  Note:  Data  reported  for  only  73%  of  total  ships  visited.   Percentage  of  reported  seafarers  of  this  na=onality  denied  shore  leave  based  on  visa.  Note:  Data  reported  for  only  8.9%  of  total  ships  visited.  


Total Number of Seafarers Detained by Port 500   450   400   350   300   250   200   150   100   50   0  

Note. 1036 total number of seafarers detained.


Five Year Comparison of Total Ships Visited and Ships With Detained Seafarers 600  

500  

400  

300  

200  

100  

0  

2005  

2006  

2007  

2008  

2009  

2010  

2011  

Total  number  of  ships  visited:  

189  

364  

332  

515  

301  

337  

483  

Total  number  of  ships  with  detained  seafarers:  

21  

67  

50  

103  

73  

62  

84  

11%

18%

15%

20%

24%

18%

17%

Percentage of ships with detained seafarers:


Reason for Shore Leave Denial by Percentage

Terminal  Restric=on   8%  

Company  Policy   13%   Vessel  Arrested   3%   CBP  Deten=on   1%  

No  Visa   75%  


Five Year Comparisons of Total Detentions and Detentions For Lack of Visa

1036  

2011  

751   767  

2010  

615   790  

2009  

625   1066  

2008  

2007  

740   196   134   1288  

2006  

2005  

1163   399   384  

Total  Seafer's  Detained  

Seafarer's  Detained  for  Lack  of  Visa  


Number of Ships Visited and Number of Ships with Detained Seafarers 180   160   140   120   100   80   60   40   20   0  

Number  of  visited  ships   Number  of  visited  ships  with  detained  seafarers  


Summary of Seafarer Detentions Port

No. Ships Visited

No. Ships with Seafarers detained

No. Seafarers Detained

Reason (s) if any, for Detaining

4

0

0

23

6

113

Terminal restriction; Myanmar crew (company policy); no visas

5

1

15

No visas

Brunswick, GA

11

1

14

No visas

ChTerminal, SC

16

1

15

Myanmar crew (company policy)

4

0

0

11

0

0

Duluth, MN

5

0

0

Galveston, TX

5

1

16

Gulfport, MS

1

0

0

Houston, TX

158

39

454

2 vessels under arrest; no visas

5

2

4

No visas

11

3

21

No visas

Manatee, FL

6

1

22

No visas

Newark, NJ

38

2

15

Myanmar crew (company policy); no visas

Norfolk, VA

5

1

16

Myanmar crew (company policy)

Oakland, CA

20

1

15

Myanmar crew (company policy)

Philadelphia, PA

33

3

51

No visas

Port Everglades, FL

42

4

44

No visas, one CPB hold for attempted desertion

Portland, ME

5

3

66

Terminal restriction

Portsmouth, NH

3

3

35

Terminal restriction; no visas;

San Diego, CA

2

1

12

No visas

Seattle, WA

5

2

31

No visas

Tampa, FL

23

7

69

No visas, no shore pass

Vancouver, WA

30

0

0

Wilmington, DE

12

2

8

483

84

1036

Albany, NY Baltimore, MD Boston, MA

Corpus Christi, TX Destrehan, LA

Hueneme, CA Lake Charles, LA

TOTALS:

No visas

No visas


SCI's 2011 Shore Leave Survey Report