Cheap labour

The president of the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation Alex West recently went public saying that is “an alarming fact that there are not enough people coming into the fishing industry [which is] characterised by hard work and long hours and with not that great pay… …and the situation is getting worse”.

This has been happening for decades and is typical of many industrial countries where young people find other trades more attractive. Apart from the hard work and long hours on ever rocking and rolling decks, crew are cut off for long periods from home and on-shore activities. And then there are the risks and dangers inherent in every fisherman’s working life.

There has to be a realistic incentive to persuade people to work and even risk their lives in what can be an extremely harsh environment. That incentive varies and in low-income countries it does not need to by anything like as high as would be needed to attract staff in countries such as the UK, USA or Japan. In low-income states, prices and the costs of buying a flat or house or investing in a business are much lower.

Enter the other side of the recruitment coin: owners, especially those of large vessels. Increasingly they prefer to employ transitory or immigrant staff, and tap a cheap labour source with ample supply. In low-income countries, people who live a hand-to-mouth existence dream that a member of their family may get a better-paid job aboard, which means they can send money home. They may take enormous risks in terms of personal safety and harsh conditions, including work fishing at sea, for any wages that seem acceptable to them, however low they may be to northern eyes.

In many instances foreign fishermen, often unskilled, are recruited to supplement national crews. For example, Peruvian, Filipino, Chinese and Vietnamese fishermen have been employed alongside national crews, but earn much lower wages. Throughout the world, trawlers, longliners, and squid-jiggers have foreigners working on inferior terms to local crews. The usual answer of the employers is: “These people are happy with what they get. The few hundred dollars they save monthly is a treasure in their country… etc.”

Mistreatment

The trend of employing ‘foreigners’ on board what are mainly large, distant-water vessels is a dubious aspect of globalisation. They are taking the place of national fishermen and in some cases the low-paid crews are badly treated. This practice occurs in many fisheries, not to speak when such people are employed by international poachers. Conditions sometimes border on semi-slavery and there is usually extreme exploitation: the workers labourers are often mistreated, poorly accommodated and in some cases cheated out of their wages. Shocking reports have been coming through on what’s going on with authorities complaining of the mistreatment and physical abuse dealt the crews by their captains, both at sea and in port.

Safety

The freedom to employ cheap labour is only one reason for the trend towards registering ships under FOC. The other is the steady ageing of the fishing fleet. Even ten years ago, nearly half of all fishing vessels were more than 20 years old. FOC registration enables shipowners not only to evade taxes, but also to side-step safety and labour regulations and fishery catch controls. Some owners, usually well insured, while aware of seaworthiness problems, would for commercial reasons ‘pressurise’ skippers and crews to fish in bad weather. Where the risk is greater the chances are that national crews would demand more pay to go to sea than foreign workers. Skippers may think that they’re paid sufficiently well to take risks, but ‘cheap labour’ crews, even if aware of the risk, can only keep their mouths shut.

Social legitimacy

Mr West in Scotland complains about poor recruitment of young people in industrialised countries, but this represents only one element of the complex problem of labour in fisheries. Potential income is one of the most important factors in choosing a profession. Labour costs are one of the most important factors in choosing employees. With an infinite supply of cheap manpower and a constant influx of immigrant labour there’s little chance of having national fishing fleets in high-income countries manned by national fishermen.

The question is whether a fishery, or for that matter any other industry, is allowed to cross the red line of social legitimacy. What I mean is that whether where there’s legislation or social customs that provide national employees with certain basic conditions (such as, social insurance, pension, health care, etc., and a generally accepted scale of remuneration). These should be in place and not avoided by employing illegal or otherwise imported ‘cheap’ labour in order to make more money for employers.

Illegal or unacceptable practices come at the expense of local fishing people and their communities. If you come to think of it, it also comes at the expense of the general national interest. Where large and medium-scale fishing fleets employ cheap labour and or are forced to operate at catch levels which would not earn enough to pay regular national (let us say ‘northern’ rates) then such fleets are more apt to overfish stocks to make up the revenue.

The ‘cheap labour’ trend can only be countered by assuring decent minimum wages and employment conditions, accompanied by legislation providing that all on board fishing vessels come under national standards which are strictly enforced. This can be reinforced by ruling that only the people and entities obliged to follow such national laws may own vessels flying national flags. In addition, national quotas and fishing licenses must be associated with such vessels and such owners. Also, labelling, by various certification bodies to show that fish are safe, ‘green’ and sustainably fished etc., should not apply to catches of vessels where fail to offer decent and equal employment conditions.

Will such action be taken in the foreseeable future? This is a question for the money-rich fishing countries and their government counterparts to answer.