as far as practicable<\/strong>, that the recruitment service meets the requirements of Standard A1.4. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe agency does not become automatically “MLC-certified” simply because the shipowner uses it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Instead, the shipowner needs a reasonable basis for showing that the service meets the required standards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The ILO FAQ says the shipowner may consider information collected by the flag State as well as audits or certifications concerning the quality of services<\/strong> operating in countries that have not ratified the MLC. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/span>Why can certification help in this situation?<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\nCertification can provide documentary evidence that an agency has been assessed against relevant requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It can make due diligence easier for:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n- Shipowners<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Ship managers<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Flag State authorities<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Recognized organizations<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Commercial partners<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Seafarers<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
However, the certificate still needs to be acceptable to the relevant flag State competent authority. The ILO FAQ expressly places that decision with the competent authority of the flag State. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Practical example:<\/strong>
<\/strong>An agency located in a non-ratifying country wants to supply crew to vessels flying a ratifying flag. The shipowner may ask for evidence that the agency complies with Standard A1.4. An accepted audit or certification can help the shipowner document its due diligence, but the agency should not assume that every certificate will automatically satisfy every flag state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n