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

Note. 49 total nationalities reported.

0  

10  

20  

30  

40  

50  

60  

Nationalities comprising greater than 1%

0  

0.2  

0.4  

0.6  

0.8  

1  

1.2  

Nationalities comprising less than 1%

0  

10  

20  

30  

40  

50  

60  

70  

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.  

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

Total Number of Seafarers Detained by Port

Note. 1036 total number of seafarers detained.

0  

50  

100  

150  

200  

250  

300  

350  

400  

450  

500  

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  

0  

100  

200  

300  

400  

500  

600  

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

Percentage of ships with detained seafarers:

11% 18% 15% 20% 24% 18% 17%

No  Visa  75%  

CBP  Deten=on  1%  

Vessel  Arrested  3%  

Company  Policy  13%  

Terminal  Restric=on  8%  

Reason for Shore Leave Denial by Percentage

384  

1163  

134  

740  

625  

615  

751  

399  

1288  

196  

1066  

790  

767  

1036  

2005  

2006  

2007  

2008  

2009  

2010  

2011  

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

Total  Seafer's  Detained   Seafarer's  Detained  for  Lack  of  Visa  

Number of Ships Visited and Number of Ships with Detained Seafarers

0  

20  

40  

60  

80  

100  

120  

140  

160  

180  

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

Albany, NY 4 0 0

Baltimore, MD 23 6 113 Terminal restriction; Myanmar crew (company policy); no visas

Boston, MA 5 1 15 No visas

Brunswick, GA 11 1 14 No visas

ChTerminal, SC 16 1 15 Myanmar crew (company policy)

Corpus Christi, TX 4 0 0

Destrehan, LA 11 0 0

Duluth, MN 5 0 0

Galveston, TX 5 1 16 No visas

Gulfport, MS 1 0 0

Houston, TX 158 39 454 2 vessels under arrest; no visas

Hueneme, CA 5 2 4 No visas

Lake Charles, LA 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 No visas

TOTALS: 483 84 1036