See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/383062546

Navigating the Currents: The Transnational Challenges of Migrant Fishers

from Southeast Asia

Research · August 2024

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28063.57762

CITATIONS READS

0 62

5 authors, including:

Johnson Montana Mangapul

Universitas Paramadina
6 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Johnson Montana Mangapul on 13 August 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Navigating the Currents:
The Transnational Challenges
of Migrant Fishers
from Southeast Asia

Benni Hasbiyalloh, Bimantoro Pramono, Mariko Hayashi,

Johnson Siahaan, and Anugerah Muhammad

August 2024
 Navigating the Currents:
The Transnational Challenges of
Migrant Fishers from Southeast Asia
Benni Hasbiyalloh, Bimantoro Pramono, Mariko Hayashi,
Johnson Siahaan, and Anugerah Muhammad

Better Engagement Between Southeast and East Asia

(BEBESEA)

August 2024
Navigating the Currents:

Navigating the Currents: The Transnational Challenges

of Migrant Fishers from Southeast Asia
Authors: Benni Hasbiyalloh, Bimantoro Pramono, Mariko Hayashi,
Johnson Siahaan, and Anugerah Muhammad
First Published in August 2024

Lay-out: Harhar Muharam

Language Editor: Steven Saxby

Cover Image: Kaohsiung City, Taiwan. Taken by BEBESEA on 17th July 2024

BEBESEA (Better Engagement Between East and Southeast Asia)

website: https://bebesea.org/
e-mail: info@bebesea.org
Facebook / Instagram / Twitter: @bebeseaorg

Human Rights Working Group (HRWG), Indonesia’s Non-Governmental Organization

Coalition for Human Rights Advocacy
website: https://www.hrwg.or.id/
e-mail: info@hrwg.or.id
Facebook: HRWG.Indonesia / Instagram: @indonesia.hrwg / Twitter: @HRWG_Indonesia

Copyright © 2024 BEBESEA

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, published
or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other
electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written consent of the publisher, except
in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial
uses permitted under copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher,
addressed “Attention: Permissions Coordinator,” at <bebeseaorg@gmail.com>.

ii
 Acknowledgment

Acknowledgment

This report represents a collaborative effort supported by numerous parties.

First and foremost, we extend our heartfelt appreciation to the Sasakawa Peace
Foundation (SPF) for their generous financial support and encouragement
which enabled us to successfully complete our research and produce this
report. Special recognition goes to the team of researchers from Paramadina
University and Better Engagement Between East and Southeast Asia (BEBESEA),
which was led by Benni Hasbiyalloh.

Our sincere thanks are also due to the representatives of organizations, led
by or working closely with migrant fishers in various locations in East and
Southeast Asia, who entrusted us and shared their knowledge, experiences
and expertise. Their contributions were essential in making this research more
relevant and meaningful.

Southeast Asia is one of the largest regions of origin of migrant fishers for
the fisheries industry in the East Asian economies including those of China,
Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea. However, many migrant fishers from ASEAN
countries are trapped in exploitation and forced labor, and are victims of
human trafficking on board foreign fishing vessels. This situation is due to
the absence of robust national policy to protect migrant fishers and market-
driven governance, including a cheap labor regime in this sector. The ASEAN
Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers adopted at
the 42nd ASEAN Summit held in Indonesia, in May 2023 was a significant step
forward, following active advocacy of civil society organizations and workers’
unions.

This report is produced by BEBESEA as part of our advocacy efforts to contribute

to the development of the ASEAN Guideline on the Placement and Protection
of Migrant Fishers, following the adaptation of the ASEAN Declaration on
the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers. This report provides an in-
depth background analysis to complement the “Policy Paper: Proposal by the
Regional Civil Society Consultation for the ASEAN Guideline on the Placement
and Protection of Migrant Fishers and Their Families” which was consolidated
by BEBESEA and the Human Rights Working Group Indonesia (HRWG). This
policy paper can be downloaded from BEBESEA’s webpage (https://bebesea.
org/2023/10/policy-paper-asean-migrant-fishers-proposal/).

BEBESEA Secretariat
August, 2024

iii
Navigating the Currents:

Executive Summary

This report examines the complex challenges faced by Southeast Asian migrant
fishery workers throughout their migration journey. Prior to employment,
Indonesian workers, for instance, are often enticed by promises of higher
wages on foreign vessels but these offers frequently conceal additional costs
and harsh working conditions, leading to debt and exploitation exacerbated by
language barriers and unclear contracts.

The pre-departure phase often involves debt bondage, with recruitment fees
reaching as high as US$1,289 in Indonesia, compounded by opaque credit
systems. Furthermore, the complexity of employment contracts and varied
visa regulations in destination countries, like Taiwan, create a precarious legal
environment.

Upon arrival at their assigned vessels, migrant workers face isolation, exploitation,
and limited communication due to the retention of their documents by ship
captains or agencies. Lack of access to adequate healthcare and insurance
further jeopardizes their well-being, and the absence of union representation
denies them collective bargaining power.

Post-return challenges include unpaid wages, exacerbating financial

vulnerabilities, and the often self-financed repatriation process hinders
reintegration into their home countries. These multifaceted challenges
underscore the need for comprehensive strategic interventions to ensure
adequate protection and support for migrant fishery workers.

Strategies for Protection and Support

To address these challenges, this report advocates a comprehensive approach.

• Preventive Measures: Establishing fair working conditions, monitoring

shipworthiness, and ensuring transparent wage payments are crucial.

• Responsive Actions: Implementing interventions, such as High Seas

Boarding Inspection and providing safe shelters and transit facilities, are
vital in addressing human rights violations.

• Remedial Solutions: Focusing on insurance systems, compensation

processes, and legal actions against perpetrators is necessary to restore
workers’ dignity and welfare.

iv
 Executive Summary

Additionally, fostering a supportive environment - through bilateral agreements,

adherence to ILO conventions, and collaboration with NGOs - is essential for
creating systems which respect and safeguard the well-being of migrant fishers.

In short, this report highlights the multidimensional nature of the challenges

faced by migrant fishery workers from Southeast Asia and the vital need for
integrated, sustainable solutions. This calls for collaborative efforts to create
just and equitable systems that uphold the dignity and rights of migrant fishery
workers throughout their migration journey.

v
Navigating the Currents:

Contents

Acknowledgment.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Executive Summary.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Contents.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
List of Abbreviations.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
I Introduction.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Southeast Asia Migrant Fishers’ Migration Pathways.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 International Norms for (Migrant) Fishers and The Emergence of ASEAN
Declaration on The Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers. . . . . . . 6
1.2.1 Four Pillars of Fishery Worker Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.2 ASEAN Declaration on The Placement
and Protection of Migrant Fishers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
II Research Approach and Methodological Framework.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers
Across Migration Phases . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.1 Pre-Employment Phase: Initial Stage in the Migration Cycle of
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.1.1 Misinformation in the Pre-Employment Phase of Indonesian
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.1.2 Characteristics and Challenges of Unskilled
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.1.3 Fishing Company Profit Maximization and
Labor Cost Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2 Pre-Departure Phase: Preparation and Challenges for
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2.1 Debt Bondage and High Recruitment Fees: Predicaments
of Migrant Fishery Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2.2 Diverse Visa Classifications and Their Impact on
Migrant Fishery Workers in Taiwan and Japan.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2.3 Language Barriers and Their Impact on
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2.4 Complexities in Employment Contracts for
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3 Post-Arrival and Return Phase Challenges: Experiences of
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3.1 Document Retention: Implications for Migrant Fishery Workers.. . 20

vi
 Contents

3.3.2 Communication Challenges and Isolation for

Migrant Fishery Workers at Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3.3 Risk to Mental Ill-Health .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3.4 Challenges in Healthcare and Insurance Access for
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3.5 Unionization Access and Awareness Among
Migrant Fishery Workers .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3.6 Repatriation Challenges for Migrant Fishery Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.7 Challenges in the Post-Return Phase for Migrant Fishery Workers:
Impact of Wage Withholding and Deductions .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers
from Southeast Asia. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.1 Preventive Strategies in Migrant Fishery Sector for
Human Rights Protection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.1.1 The Role of Seafarer Employment Agreements as
a Preventive Measure.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.1.2 Regulation of Working Conditions as a Preventive Measure.. . . . . . . . . 28
4.1.3 Shipworthiness Standards as a Preventive Measure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.1.4 Supervision of Private Manning Agencies as
a Preventive Measure.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.1.5 Standards and Methods of Wage Payment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.1.6 Licensing of Manning Companies: A Preventive
Regulatory Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.1.7 Placement Costs: Enhancing Transparency and Legality in
Recruitment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.1.8 Comprehensive Training and Skill Development for
Migrant Fishery Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.1.9 The Role of Labor Unions in Preventive Advocacy for
Migrant Fishery Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.1.10 Preventive Efforts Through Entrepreneurial Norms in Thailand.. 35
4.2 Responsive Efforts for the Protection of Migrant Fishery Workers
from Southeast Asia. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2.1 High Seas Boarding Inspection: An Instrument for
Human Rights Enforcement in Fisheries.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2.2 Communication Access: A Key Responsive Measure for
Migrant Fishery Workers’ Welfare. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2.3 Direct Wage Payment for Migrant Fishery Workers:
Ensuring Transparency and Fairness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

vii
Navigating the Currents:

4.2.4 Integrated Work Condition Monitoring Systems

in the Fishing Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.2.5 Shelters and Transit Facilities: A Responsive Solution
for Migrant Fishery Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.2.6 Responsive Labor Organizing in the Fishing Industry.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.3 Remedial Measures for Protecting Migrant Fishery Workers
from Southeast Asia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3.1 Insurance as a Remedial Approach for Migrant Fishery Workers’
Protection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.3.2 Enforcement Measures Against Perpetrators in
the Fishery Industry. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
4.3.3 Access to Health Support Facilities for Migrant Fishery Workers.. 44
4.3.4 Complaint Mechanisms for Migrant Fishery Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.3.5 Remedial Efforts for Job Mobility in the Migrant Fishery Sector. . . 46
4.3.6 Progressive Remedial Actions for Undocumented
Migrant Fishery Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.4 Fostering a Supportive Environment for Migrant Fishery Workers from
Southeast Asia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.4.1 Enhancing Bilateral Cooperation for Migrant Fishery Workers’
Protection.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.4.2 Addressing Disparities in Worker Status: The Taiwan Case
of LG and Non-LG Workers.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.4.3 Ratification of ILO C188 and Other Relevant Conventions and
Protocols: Strengthening Migrant Fishery Workers’ Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.4.4 Labor Rights Traceability in the Fisheries Industry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.4.5 Ethical Recruitment Practices and Migrant Worker Contracts. . . . . . . . 52
4.4.6 Collaborative Action with Domestic and International NGOs.. . . . . . . . 53
V. Conclusion: The Need for an Integrated and Holistic Approach in the
ASEAN Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

References .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

viii
 List of Abbreviations

List of Abbreviations

ACDM ASEAN Committee on Disaster Management

ACMW ASEAN Committee on the Implementation of Declaration
on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant
Workers
ACSC ASEAN Civil Society Conference
ACWC ASEAN Commission on the Promoti Protection of the Rights
of Women and Children
AICHR ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights
AKP Indonesian Fishing Vessel Crew
ALICOM ASEAN Labour Inspection Committee
ALMM ASEAN Labour Ministers Meetings
APF ASEAN People’s Forum
APIL Advocates for Public Interest Law
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
B2B Business-to-Business
BP2MI Indonesia’s Agency for the Protection of Indonesian
Migrant Workers
BST Basic Safety Training
CBAs Collective Bargaining Agreements
CCCIF Command Center for Combating Illegal Fishing
DWF Distant Water Fishing
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EJF Environmental Justice Foundation
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FKSU Federation of Korean Seafarers’ Unions
FRN Fishers’ Rights Network
G2G Government-to-government
HSBI High Sea Boarding Inspection
ILO International Labour Organization
ILO C188 Work in Fishing Convention
ILO P29 Protocol of the Forced Labour Convention
IMO International Maritime Organization
IOJI Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative
IOM International Organization for Migration
ITF International Transport Workers’ Federation
IUU Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated

ix
Navigating the Currents:

KMFU Keelung Migrant Fishermen Union

KOFA Korea Overseas Fisheries Association
LG Letters of Guarantee
NFFC National Federation of Fishing Cooperatives
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
OWWA Overseas Workers Welfare Association
PIPO Port-in Port-out
POEA Philippine Overseas Employment Administration
POLO Philippine Overseas Labor Office
PrEAs Private Employment Agencies
PSMA Port State Measures Agreement
SEA Seafarer Employment Agreement
SIP3MI License for Placement and Protection of Indonesian Migrant
Workers
SIUPPAK Commercial Vessel Crew Provider Licenses
SLOM ASEAN Senior Labour Officials Meeting
SMK Indonesian Vocational School
SOMHD ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Health Development
SOMSWD ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Social Welfare and
Development
SOMTC ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime
SPPI Indonesian Fisheries Workers Union
SSW Specified Skilled Worker
STCW Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers
STCW-F International Convention on Standards of Training,
Convention Certification, and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel
TITP Technical Internship Training Program
VMS Vessel Monitoring System
WCPFC Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission
YMFU Yilan Migrant Fishermen Union

x
I Introduction

The mainstreaming of protection for migrant fishery workers has strengthened

following the creation by the International Labour Organization (ILO) of the
Work in Fishing Convention (ILO C188) in 2007 which established labor norms
in the fisheries sector. This reinforcement has been advocated by civil society
organizations, labor unions, and researchers in collaboration with governments
and the private sector (Lozano et al., 2022). Broadly, this convention regulates
the minimum standards for work eligibility, recruitment, and social security for
both local and distant water fishing workers (ILO, n.d.). Following numerous
violations, such as forced labor (Greenpeace & SBMI, 2019), lack of social
security and insurance (Nur, 2021), prohibition of union rights (Chantavanich &
Jitpong, 2023), and substandard working conditions (Asada-Miyakawa, 2023),
this mainstreaming has gained momentum and prompted a response from
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the form of the ASEAN
Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishery Workers, which
was adopted in May 2023 (Greenpeace Indonesia, 2023a).

ASEAN’s response reflects member countries’ interest and the need for
commitment from all parties to prioritize protection both within and outside
the ASEAN region. Southeast Asia itself is a region that actively sends its labor
force to the capture fisheries sector, both within and beyond Southeast Asia.
In Taiwan alone, over 95% of migrant fishery workers come from Indonesia, the
Philippines, Vietnam, Myanmar, and Thailand (Taiwan Fisheries Agency, 2022).
In Japan, Southeast Asia is home to over 340,000 technical internship trainees
and 100,000 migrant workers who are classified as specified skilled workers.
The total number of technical internship trainees and specified skilled workers
in the fishery sector reached over 6,000 in 2022 (Ministry of Health, Labour, and
Welfare, 2023). Meanwhile, as of 2022, Thailand has 36,034 legally registered
migrant fishery workers (Chantavanich & Jitpong, 2023). Despite these
specific figures, the overall scale of fishery worker migration from Southeast
Asia remains difficult to quantify accurately, owing to the prevalence of non-
procedural placements. The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates
that approximately 125,000 fishery workers in East Asian countries are from
Southeast Asia, underscoring the regional and global impacts of this migration
(ILO, 2022).

1
Navigating the Currents:

Several factors drive the emigration of fishery workers from Southeast Asian
countries, including the declining interest of local workers in host countries to
work as crew members in distant water fishing. This decline is attributed to the
high risk being disproportionate to the salaries received. The reduction in local
fishery workers has led recipient countries to seek migrant labor, predominantly
from Southeast Asia, due to the perception of these workers accepting lower
wage standards (Ratnawulan et al., 2021; Tseng et al., 2023) and changes in the
economic structure of the fishing industry (Hung et al., 2022; Knott, Christine
& Neis, Barbara, 2017). Apart from wage factors, Southeast Asian communities
have also been involved in the fishing industry historically (Nur, 2021).

In addition to wage factors, the culture and perceptions of Southeast Asian

fishery workers also play a significant role. Employers perceive Filipino workers
as obedient, hardworking, and reliable (cultivated behavior), making them
their preferred choices for recruitment (Djohari & White, 2022). Indonesian
migrant fishery workers are considered tenacious and hardworking (FairSquare
Projects, 2021). Furthermore, Yea’s research revealed that migrant workers
perceive themselves as heroes for their families and communities back home,
thereby driving migration from Indonesia (Yea, 2020). With such perceptions,
migrant workers tend to normalize their exploitation and weaken their efforts
for protection.

The high migration drive is not matched by adequate protection during the
pre-employment, and post-employment phases. Pre-departure potential
fishery workers often face debt (FairSquare Projects, 2021; Ratnawulan et al.,
2021), employment agreements that restrict access to other employers (Djohari
& White, 2022), inadequate competencies leading to workplace accidents or
death, and a lack of union support (Chantavanich & Jitpong, 2023). During
employment, issues include isolation (Kadfak & Widengård, 2022) and
microdisciplinary violence practices (Djohari & White, 2022). Post-employment
issues involve unpaid wages, manipulative payroll systems (Yea & Stringer,
2022), and post-work stigma (Yea, 2020).

The lack of protection is due to inadequate governance, such as confusing

maritime employment agreements (FairSquare Projects, 2021), weak
supervision (Chantavanich & Jitpong, 2023; Nur, 2021), insufficient bilateral
and regional cooperation (ILO, 2020; Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative, 2023a),
limited complaint mechanisms, visa systems misaligned with job types (Djohari
& White, 2022), and broader issues in the overall safe migration approach
promoted by international organizations and states (Resi, 2023).

To address the weaknesses and gaps in protection measures effectively,

a comprehensive protection paradigm is essential, which should include
preventive, responsive, remedial, and environment-building strategies. The
International Organization for Migration (IOM) (2023) identified seven key

2
 I Introduction

issues and challenges that are crucial for evaluating the preparedness of both
the sending and receiving countries to adhere to the ASEAN declaration. The
issues and challenges are as follows:

1. Complex Recruitment Processes: This involves scrutinizing the intricacies of

recruiting migrant workers and ensuring transparency and fairness.

2. Access to Protection at Various Stages: This includes safeguarding

workers before departure, during their integration into the workforce, and
throughout the employment registration process.

3. Policy Frameworks and Regulatory Regimes: Evaluating the effectiveness of

existing policies and regulations in protecting migrant workers.

4. Tools, Operational Mechanisms, and Frameworks: The development and

implementation of practical tools and mechanisms for protection.

5. Capacity, Knowledge, and Skills of Field Officers: Enhancing the capabilities

of those directly involved in the implementation of protection measures.

6. Bilateral and Multilateral Cooperation: Strengthening partnerships between

countries for better protection of migrant workers.

7. Collaboration with Private Entities and Non-state Actors: Involving

shipowners, employers, and other stakeholders in the protection regime.

Collectively, these elements emphasize the necessity of regional cooperation,

as well as private sector and non-governmental organizational involvement in
the protection regime. The integration of effective tools and joint operational
mechanisms is crucial for gauging the effectiveness of protection efforts (Resi,
2023).

In the non-governmental sector, one aspect that requires more research

attention is the integration of the labor process within the protection
regime. Given the lack or absence of unions in both sending and receiving
countries (Auethavornpipat, 2022; FairSquare Projects, 2021), and their notable
success in countries such as Thailand, Taiwan, and South Korea (Anwar, 2019;
Chantavanich & Jitpong, 2023), the role of unions in building an environment
conducive to worker organization is essential for increasing migrant fishery
workers’ bargaining power. The evaluation could focus on three aspects: labor
standards, the organization of migrant fishery workers, and the recruitment
and placement process.

As observed in this study, regulations in various recipient countries generally

recognize the strategic role of labor unions in representing workers, facilitating
more effective collaborations with governments or employers. Unions play a
critical role in identifying labor violations and ensuring that work processes

3
Navigating the Currents:

comply with international standards and norms. The gaps in protection

often stem from weak collective bargaining mechanisms, limited freedom
of association, and inadequate complaint procedures, which leave workers
vulnerable and disadvantaged in labor disputes or when seeking to assert their
rights in the event of labor violations (Rogovin, 2020).

This study explores the integration of work processes and migration cycles
of migrant fishery workers in and from Southeast Asian countries. It seeks to
understand the efforts made by these nations to protect migrant fishery workers,
whether they migrate within or beyond the region. Utilizing literature reviews
and discussion notes from stakeholders at the ASEAN Civil Society Conference/
ASEAN People’s Forum (ACSC/APF) 2023, this study also endeavors to assess
the feasibility of implementing the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and
Protection of Migrant Fishers by committed countries.

1.1 Southeast Asia Migrant Fishers’ Migration Pathways

Southeast Asian migrant fishery workers predominantly originate from
Indonesia and the Philippines, working outside the region, and from Myanmar,
Laos, and Cambodia, who are employed on Thai fishing vessels. These workers
undergo similar processes during recruitment and placement. Typically, most
employees are recruited through Private Employment Agencies (PrEAs).
Recruitment can also commence through government-to-government (G2G)
relationships, enabling candidates to register with designated agencies in
their countries, such as Indonesia’s Agency for the Protection of Indonesian
Migrant Workers (BP2MI) and the Philippine Overseas Labour Office (POLO).
This is followed by a relationship between the worker and the agent which then
connects them with foreign agents.

In Indonesia, the recruitment process has been bifurcated. Experienced migrant

fishery workers tend to directly contact official and licensed PrEAs, whereas
new and inexperienced workers often go through informal channels such as
referrals from family, friends, or neighbors. This involves sponsors acting as
informal agents or brokers to bridge the gap between migrant workers and
licensed recruitment agencies. These agencies often collaborate with sponsors
and coordinate with international agents for placement on foreign-flagged
vessels. This complex process involves multiple parties, leading to challenges
in understanding the correct procedures for migrant fishery workers (ILO, 2020;
Palmer et al., 2023). The Indonesian government also sends migrant workers to
South Korea, including the fishing sector, through a G2G scheme managed by
BP2MI. By 2022, 54 of the 470 workers dispatched to South Korea worked in
the fishery sector (Kamalina, 2022)​​.

4
 I Introduction

A similar process, involving agents, sponsors, and international agents,

occurs in Thailand. However, recruitment there is marked by challenges and
complexities, with migrant workers, particularly those without legal status,
being vulnerable to exploitation during recruitment. They often pay high fees
to agents or employers for job placement and legal documentation, leading
to situations akin to debt bondage and restricted freedom of movement
(Casey, 2022). Since 2014, the Thai government has implemented a Pink Card
scheme to regularize unprocedural workers. This card acts as a temporary
work permit tied to a work contract, allowing holders to access national health
services and stay in Thailand for the contract’s duration (Kadfak & Widengård,
2022). However, this system has been criticized for creating an environment
susceptible to abuse, where Pink Cards have been used by unscrupulous actors
to conceal coercion and deception behind a facade of compliance, with routine
rights violations going undetected due to reliance on paper records submitted
by fishing companies (Borgen Project, 2018; Human Rights Watch, 2018).

There are two recruitment models for migrant fishery workers in the Philippines.
The first is through licensed labor agencies (FairSquare Projects, 2021), similar
to the processes in Indonesia and Thailand. The second is the Philippines’
Special Recruitment Program, which has been available to Taiwanese producers
since the 2001 Memorandum of Understanding between the Philippines and
Taiwan, outlining various roles and responsibilities of government entities
facilitating the program. This model eliminates the role of Filipino private
recruitment agents in the process, potentially reducing the costs workers pay
for employment in Taiwan (FairSquare Projects, 2021).

Thus, in the Southeast Asian context, the recruitment and placement practices
of migrant fishery workers exhibit various complexities and challenges. Workers
from Indonesia, the Philippines, Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia experience
recruitment processes involving private employment agencies, government-to-
government bilateral mechanisms, and informal channels. Experienced workers
are often recruited through official agencies, whereas new and inexperienced
workers typically rely on informal routes, often mediated by sponsors. In
Thailand, this recruitment process is linked to exploitation and debt bondage,
particularly for workers without legal status. The Thai government’s pink card
scheme attempts to address this, albeit with criticism of potential abuse.

The next focus is on existing international instruments for the protection of

migrant fishery workers and how these initiatives are bolstered through regional
efforts, particularly the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and Protection of
Migrant Fishers. This declaration is a significant step in addressing the challenges
faced by Southeast Asian migrant fishery workers by offering a framework to
improve working conditions, protection, and justice. The following subsection
details this declaration’s contents, its implementation in ASEAN countries, and
its impact on enhancing the conditions of migrant fishery workers in the region.

5
Navigating the Currents:

1.2 International Norms for (Migrant) Fishers and The

Emergence of ASEAN Declaration on The Placement
and Protection of Migrant Fishers
The global fishing industry is crucial not only for food security and economic
growth but also for its array of challenges, including labor exploitation, unsafe
working conditions, and environmental impacts. To address these issues,
international bodies have developed four pivotal agreements and standards:
the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) Port State Measures Agreement
(PSMA); the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for Fishing
Vessel Personnel (STCW-F Convention); the IMO’s Cape Town Agreement; and
the ILO’s Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (ILO C188). These instruments play
vital roles in enhancing the safety, working conditions, and legal protection of
fishery workers.

However, weak participation and low membership levels of Southeast Asian

labor-sending countries and East Asian host countries in these norms have led
ASEAN to recognize the need for a specific normative framework to ensure
the protection of migrant fishery workers. This chapter begins with a concise
explanation of the aforementioned four agreements and concludes with a brief
discussion of the emergence of the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and
Protection of Migrant Fishers and its relevance to the protection of migrant
fishery workers from ASEAN countries.

1.2.1 Four Pillars of Fishery Worker Protection

The FAO’s PSMA is a pivotal instrument for combating Illegal, Unreported, and
Unregulated (IUU) fishing. By empowering port states to inspect foreign fishing
vessels and deny port entry to those engaged in IUU fishing, the agreement
significantly impedes illegal operators. This not only aids in marine resource
conservation but also ensures fair labor practices by curbing illegal fishing
activities, often underpinning exploitative working conditions​(FAO, n.d.). In
Southeast Asia, Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand,
Timor-Leste, and Vietnam have joined the PSMA, with Japan and South Korea
of East Asia also being members (FAO, n.d.). However, the PSMA’s primary focus
on curtailing IUU fishing, particularly concerning foreign vessels in member
state ports, may limit its effectiveness for migrant fishery workers.

The IMO’s STCW-F Convention, adopted in 1995, legally binds signatories to

establish minimum certification and training requirements for fishing vessel
personnel at sea. Its main objective is to enhance maritime safety and protect
the marine environment, acknowledging the unique characteristics of the
fishing industry and the working conditions aboard fishing vessels (IMO, 1995).

6
 I Introduction

The convention, applicable to personnel serving on seagoing fishing vessels,

specifically addresses the captains and officers in the deck department of fishing
vessels over 24 meters in length as well as officers in the engine department
of vessels powered by main engines of at least 750 kW. This regulation aims
to ensure that operating fishing vessels meet specific training and certification
standards, contributing to the safety of the crew and the marine environment
(IMO, 1997, 1995).

The STCW-F Convention, which covers personnel of seagoing fishing vessels,

sets requirements for certification, training, and safety standards. This includes
provisions for captains, officers, engineering officers, and radio operators on
these vessels. The convention also mandates basic safety training for all fishing
vessel personnel, covering areas such as survival techniques, fire prevention,
emergency procedures, first aid, marine pollution prevention, and accident
prevention aboard (IMO, 1997; Zoolfakar & Rahman, 2013). States can exempt
personnel on smaller fishing vessels, less than 45 meters in length, and
operate exclusively within their waters from certain convention provisions. The
document comprises 15 articles, one annex with technical regulations, three
additional annexes, and nine resolutions. The STCW-F Convention has been
under comprehensive review since March 2020 by the IMO Sub-Committee
on Human Element, Training, and Watchkeeping to update its standards in line
with the current industry needs and challenges (IMO, 1995). In Southeast Asia,
only Indonesia has acceded to STCW-F 1995 as of 2019 (IMO, 2019), with no
sign-up by East Asian countries and other significant destinations for migrant
fishery workers (IMO, n.d.). Limited accession indicates minimal commitment
to certified skilled workers along migrant fishery worker routes.

The Cape Town Agreement, established by the IMO in 2012, marks a significant
shift in maritime safety standards, targeting larger fishing vessels (24 meters
in length, longer, or equivalent in gross tonnage). This international legal
instrument outlines the minimum safety requirements of these vessels. Its
primary goal is to facilitate better control over the safety of fishing vessels,
focusing on flag, port, and coastal states. Notably, the agreement is not yet in
force, highlighting the gap between establishment and implementation in the
maritime sector ​​(IMO, 2012).

Furthermore, the agreement includes comprehensive standards for the

design, construction, and equipping of fishing vessels. It also encompasses
regulations aimed at protecting the safety of crews and observers. This holistic
approach ensures that every aspect of vessel safety, from structural integrity to
operational protocols, is addressed. The inclusion of mandatory international
safety requirements underscores the agreement’s commitment to enhancing
overall safety conditions aboard, thereby reducing the risks inherent in maritime
fishing activities ​​​​(IMO, 2020; SAFETY4SEA, 2020). The Cape Town Agreement is

7
Navigating the Currents:

crucial for establishing equitable competition in the global fishing industry. By

setting uniform safety standards, the agreement not only protects the welfare
of fishers but also ensures fair competition among various fishing operations
worldwide. The implementation of these standards is vital for fostering a
fair and safe fishing industry, reflecting the commitment of the international
community to the well-being of those engaged in one of the world’s most
hazardous occupations (Pew, 2018)​​. Unfortunately, no Southeast or East Asian
countries are members of this agreement.

The ILO C188 aims specifically to improve working conditions and living
standards for workers in the fishing sector. It covers various aspects, including
safe and healthy working conditions, basic worker rights, working hours, and
provisions for health and safety services for fishing vessels. The key points
addressed by ILO C188 include standards for health and safety, working and
resting hours, fundamental workers’ rights, migrant worker protection, and
education and training (ILO, 2017). The ILO and the IMO established labor
standards for seafarers through the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) of
2006. However, the standards set out in the MLC explicitly exclude seafarers
employed on fishing vessels. Consequently, the ILO C188 is arguably the only
convention that specifically sets out working standards for fishing vessel crew.

The ILO identifies the fishing sector as one of the most hazardous industries with
a high incidence of accidents in dangerous work environments. Consequently,
the ILO initiated the development of standards for decent working conditions
and the fulfillment of the rights of commercial fishing workers. At its 96th
session in Geneva in 2007, the ILO established the Work in Fishing Convention
(ILO C188). This convention aims to ensure that workers in the commercial
fishing sector work in fair conditions and respect their rights.

The ILO C188 revises several existing international conventions, including the
Minimum Age (Fishermen) Convention, 1959 No. 112; the Medical Examination
(Fishers) Convention, 1959 No. 113; the Fishermen’s Articles of Agreement
Convention, 1959 No. 114; and the Accommodation of Crews (Fishermen)
Convention, 1959 No. 126. The contents of this convention outline the
responsibilities of governments as competent authorities, shipowners, crewing
agencies, captains, and fishers in implementing the established international
standards. ILO C188 also provides detailed explanations of the crew’s work
process, from pre-employment to during employment to return to land (Rosida
et al., 2022).

The ILO C188 applies to all workers and vessels involved in commercial fishing,
whether in rivers, lakes, canals, or at sea. It covers vessels 24 meters in length
or more, and vessels agreed upon by member states of the convention. Its
regulations govern not only migrant fishery workers but also workers engaged

8
 I Introduction

in local and national fishing activities. With its reach extending to the local
level, the ILO C188 strengthens protection for workers in the fishing sector.

The ILO C188, aimed at improving fishery governance and protecting both
migrant and local crew members, contains a series of important rules. First,
the convention establishes a minimum age limit of 16 years for crew members,
and provides special protection for crew members under 18, including
prohibiting night work (Article 9). Secondly, regarding vessel provisions, the
Convention requires adequate and efficient crew numbers and work systems
to ensure sufficient rest (Articles 13-14). Thirdly, ILO C188 grants fishers the
right to repatriation after their contracts end, prohibits payment for obtaining
employment, and forbids blacklisting practices (Articles 21-22). Fourthly, the
Convention sets requirements for occupational safety and health, including
basic medical care for fishing vessels and standards for security and welfare,
including food and facilities (Articles 31-33, Articles 25-28, and Annex III).
Fifthly, the Convention stipulates that safety responsibilities lie between the
shipowner and captain (Article 8). Sixthly, the Convention requires every
fishing vessel to have a crew list, and that every fisherman have a written work
agreement detailing employment terms (Articles 15-20, and Annex II). Finally,
the Convention requires regular medical examinations for fishers working on
fishing vessels (Articles 10-12). Through these rules, ILO C188 aims to ensure
sustainable fishery resources while maintaining the welfare of workers.

In Southeast Asia, only Thailand ratified ILO C188, and none of the East Asian
countries ratified this convention (ILO, 2017). The low number of ratifications
both regionally and globally suggests a lack of consensus on international
labor standards for the fisheries sector. Consequently, the quality of work
standards for migrant fishers is largely determined by the regulatory capacity
of individual countries, rather than a unified set of international norms.

In short, the various agreements and conventions discussed demonstrate

significant international efforts to regulate and enhance fishing industry
standards, particularly concerning illegal fishing, crew training and certification,
and worker safety and welfare. The FAO’s PSMA is effective in combating illegal
fishing by empowering port states to inspect and reject vessels involved in
IUU, while the IMO’s STCW-F Convention establishes training and certification
standards for fishing vessel crews, focusing on safety and environmental
protection. Although only Indonesia has acceded to the STCW-F, this indicates
an awareness of the importance of adequate training and certification. The
Cape Town Agreement, although not yet in force, targets improved safety
standards for large fishing vessels, emphasizing the importance of vessel safety
control, design, and equipment. The ILO C188 highlights the need for better
working standards in the fishing sector, including safe working conditions, basic

9
Navigating the Currents:

worker rights, and protection of migrant workers. Overall, despite progress

in establishing international standards, widespread implementation and
ratification of these agreements and conventions remains weak, particularly
in the Southeast Asian and East Asian regions, indicating the need for further
efforts to ensure the welfare and safety of fishery workers and the sustainability
of marine resources.

1.2.2 ASEAN Declaration on The Placement

and Protection of Migrant Fishers
The ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers
is a continuation of the operational guideline development related to the
ASEAN Declaration on Social Security for Migrant Workers, adopted at the
40th and 41st ASEAN Summits in 2022. The declaration, focusing on protection
of migrant fishers throughout the migration cycle, was adopted at the 42nd
ASEAN Summit, chaired by Indonesia, in 2023 (ASEAN, 2023). This declaration
was signed by all ASEAN member states present at the 2023 ASEAN Summit:
Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei, Thailand, Laos,
Cambodia, and Vietnam. Although not invited to the Summit, Myanmar was
also included in the document (Ulya & Saptohutomo, 2023).

Prior to the declaration at the May 2023 ASEAN Summit, a multi-stakeholder

consultation workshop on the development of the ASEAN Declaration on the
Protection of Migrant Workers on Board Fishing Vessels was held on March 16-
17, 2023. This workshop aimed to provide input to the Senior Labour Officials
Meeting (SLOM) regarding protection points to be included in the declaration
(Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative, 2023a).

Representatives attending the workshop included the ASEAN Senior Labour

Officials Meeting (SLOM), the ASEAN Committee on the Implementation of
Declaration on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers
(ACMW), the ASEAN Labour Inspection Committee (ALICOM), the Senior
Officials Meeting on Health Development (SOMHD), and the ASEAN Committee
on Disaster Management (ACDM). Other official attendees included the Chair
of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), the
Chair of the Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC), and
SOMTC’s Lead Shepherd for Trafficking in Persons, as well as the Chairs and
Vice-Chairs of the ASEAN Commission on the Promotion and Protection of
the Rights of Women and Children (ACWC) and the Senior Officials Meeting
on Social Welfare and Development (SOMSWD). Representatives of worker
organizations, employer organizations, and civil society organizations from
ASEAN Member States also participated (ILO, 2023).

10
 I Introduction

The ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers,

adopted at the 42nd ASEAN Summit, commits to protecting the rights of migrant
workers, particularly in the fishing industry. It recognizes the vulnerabilities
faced by migrant fishery laborers, including poor working conditions, abusive
recruitment practices, and inadequate labor inspections in the hazardous
fishing sector.

Fundamentally, the declaration commits to ending forced labor and human

trafficking practices in the recruitment and placement of Southeast Asian
migrant fishers on fishing vessels (Greenpeace Indonesia, 2023a). It also
acknowledges the economic contribution of migrant fishers in the region
as well as their human rights, as stipulated in the ASEAN Human Rights
Declaration. The new declaration emphasizes that protecting and fulfilling
the rights of migrant fishers throughout the migration cycle (recruitment,
placement, and repatriation) is a shared responsibility among ASEAN Member
States (Greenpeace, 2023).

The ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers

resolves to take various actions, including incorporating migrant labor
protection into migration policies, improving working conditions, addressing
violence and exploitation, enhancing migration processes, facilitating bilateral
agreements, and promoting cooperation among ASEAN member states and
external partners. In terms of implementation, the declaration encourages
the ASEAN Labour Ministers Meetings (ALMM) to analyze and share available
resources to address the issues mentioned in the declaration.

Clearly, implementing the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and Protection

of Migrant Fishers necessitates a coordinated and comprehensive approach,
involving strong commitment from all ASEAN member states and a focus on
developing a fair and sustainable working environment for migrant fishery
workers. Such an approach should be human-rights and worker-welfare
oriented, considering the complexities and challenges presented. However, to
achieve these objectives, the declaration needs to comprehensively identify
issues and map out ongoing efforts.

11
Navigating the Currents:

II Research Approach and

Methodological Framework

This report presents data derived through two principal methodologies: a

literature review and consultations with 25 stakeholders during the ASEAN
Civil Society Conference/ASEAN People’s Forum (ACSC/APF) 2023 in Jakarta,
Indonesia.1 Employing this approach, the analysis aims to map challenges in
mainstreaming the protection regime as well as the extent to which regulations
and policies in sending and receiving countries can accommodate the mandates
of the 2023 ASEAN Declaration. The initial focus was to review academic and
non-academic studies to comprehend the implementation of regulations and
policies related to the mandate of the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and
Protection of Migrant Fishers of 2023. This analysis categorizes countries based
on their characteristics as receivers and senders using an analytical framework
that includes preventive, responsive, remedial, and environment-building
aspects. Additionally, this report classifies issues in the pre-employment,
pre-departure, and post-arrival phases. The report also addresses problems
emerging in the return phase, when migrant fishery workers often encounter
issues after returning and completing their employment period.

This analytical framework, encompassing preventive, responsive, remedial, and

environment-building aspects, was adapted from a presentation by the IOM
Thailand (Resi, 2023) at the ACSC/APF 2023. This research assesses the extent
to which these four points of the protection regime are integrated into labor
standards, recruitment, and worker organization. This provides an overview of
the regulatory gaps and role of each stakeholder in fulfilling the mandate of
the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers.
Sources from previous research and annual reports were utilized as references
to evaluate how regulations have incorporated protection regime points and
to review the best practices undertaken by each country.

1 The list of stakeholder organizations: ASEAN Study Center at Mataram University;

ASEAN Task Force on Migrant Workers; Asia Pacific Mission for Migrants (APMM);
Better Engagement Between East and Southeast Asia (BEBESEA); Environmental Justice
Foundation (EJF); Human Rights Working Group (HRWG); International Migrant Alliance
(IMA); International Seafarers Action Center (ISAC); Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative
(IOJI); Indonesian Fisheries Workers Union (SPPI); Indonesian Migrant Workers Union
(IMWU); Institute for Education Development, Social, Religious, and Cultural Studies
(INFEST), Indonesia; Legal Support for Children & Women (LSCW); Lingnan University;
Mekong Migration Network (MMN); Migrant Forum Asia (MFA); Migrante International
(MI); National University of Malaysia; Our Journey; Paramadina Southeast Asia Peace and
Diplomacy Lab, Paramadina University; Pejuang Suara Pelaut (PSP); Serikat Awak Kapal
Transportasi Indonesia (SAKTI); Stella Maris; Women’s Education for Advancement and
Empowerment (WEAVE); Work Better Innovations.

12
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers Across Migration Phases

Safeguarding the human rights and well-being of migrant workers necessitates

a multifaceted approach. Preventive measures aim to mitigate risks of
abuse, exploitation, and oppression. Responsive actions address identified
violations and abuse patterns to prevent recurrence and alleviate immediate
harm. Remedial efforts focus on restoring dignity and providing support
to victims of violence and exploitation. Environment building strives to
create conditions free from rights violations through standards, norms, and
strengthened protection mechanisms. This approach requires collaborative
efforts from diverse stakeholders to foster a safe and dignified environment
for migrants.

This study, while highly informative, acknowledges that there are some
limitations in methodology, empirical scope, and analysis. Reliance on secondary
data restricts the comprehensive understanding of violations faced by migrant
fishery workers. Unreported violations likely contribute to underrepresentation
of challenges. Enhancing representativeness necessitates primary data collection
directly from workers, incorporating work process aspects into the migration
analysis framework. Additionally, the study’s focus on recipient countries with
larger migrant worker populations may overlook nuances in experiences within
other nations. These limitations in data collection and analysis subsequently
constrain the environment building within the analytical framework. Further
investigation is required to identify commonalities across recipient countries,
particularly regarding regulatory gaps and associated challenges.

III Analysis of Challenges Faced by

Migrant Fishery Workers Across
Migration Phases

To map the challenges faced by migrant fishery workers, this study divides
issues within the entire migration cycle into four phases: pre-employment, pre-
departure, post-arrival, and post-return. The classification and diversification
of problems in each phase are crucial for mapping issues from upstream to
downstream, ensuring that no problem is overlooked. Each phase has distinct
characteristics in terms of the approach and actors involved.

For example, in the pre-employment and pre-departure phases, placement

agents from the sending countries play a significant role in the emergence of
issues, such as misinformation about jobs, as migrant fishers and the potential
workers, who notably lack the capacity as fishery workers. In the post-arrival
phase, or upon arrival in the destination country and aboard foreign-flagged

13
Navigating the Currents:

vessels, workers often experience normalized violence, both physical and

verbal, as a common aspect of offshore fishing work. The challenges do not
cease upon completion of work; upon returning, workers face several problems,
such as the absence of compensation upon contract termination, difficulties in
accessing legal proceedings in disputes with employers, unpaid wages, and
debt entanglements that originate from the pre-departure phase.

3.1 Pre-Employment Phase: Initial Stage in the Migration

Cycle of Migrant Fishery Workers
The pre-employment phase refers to the initial stage of the migration cycle of
migrant fishery workers, which occurs in the country of origin. During this phase,
prospective migrant workers consider overseas employment as a livelihood
option (ILO, 2022a). Accurate information about overseas job opportunities is a
critical element for consideration. If the information circulating about offshore
fishing jobs is accurate, potential migrant workers have the opportunity to make
informed choices based on a more precise assessment of risks, challenges, and
benefits. In this phase, several issues emerge, as outlined below.

3.1.1 Misinformation in the Pre-Employment Phase of Indonesian

Migrant Fishery Workers
In Indonesia, migrant fishery workers who decide to work on foreign vessels
generally come from a background of working on local fishing boats. These
local fishers often feel that the wages earned on local vessels are too low and
are enticed by the promise of higher wages offered for working on foreign
vessels. According to a report by the Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative (2022),
the average number of local fishery workers earned between US$9 to US$210
per month. In comparison, the minimum wage of US$450 offered by Taiwanese
vessels represents a significant difference. Additionally, on local boats, a profit-
sharing system is in place, where fishers must share profits with boat owners,
often resulting in minimal earnings.

Given these conditions, Indonesian local fishers are attracted when they receive
recruitment information through social media platforms, such as Facebook or
WhatsApp (Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative, 2022). There are also practices
where recruitment “brokers” offer jobs as migrant fishers in their local areas.
At this point, misinformation occurs when prospective migrant fishery workers
do not receive complete information, often regarding fees and costs relating
to the recruitment, such as: their obligation to pay for document processing,
competency certificates, and deposits to brokers, and the working conditions
of distant fishing vessels (Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative, 2022). In some
cases, workers are uninformed about the location of fishing vessels where they
will be employed.

14
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers Across Migration Phases

Individuals not originating from a fishing background, such as farmers, are also
exposed to recruitment misinformation (Palmer et al., 2023; Yea & Stringer,
2022). The recruitment and placement of Filipino and Indonesian migrant
workers is marked by significant deception and a lack of transparency. This
deceitful practice begins when fishers are not informed of the additional costs
they incur before departure, such as accommodation and meal expenses.
Furthermore, the bribery requirements for immigration checks, especially in
response to increased scrutiny at major airports, represents another layer
of undisclosed costs (Palmer et al., 2023; Yea et al., 2023). This unexpected
financial burden is compounded by reliance on informal credit systems with
high interest rates, which deepen the debt trap for these fishers. Adding to
this problem is the misleading portrayal of the migration process by recruiters,
often depicted as easy and financially accessible but in reality involving hidden
costs and complexities (Yea et al., 2023).

Consequently, Indonesian and Filipino migrant fishery workers find themselves

locked in a cycle of debt and exploitation orchestrated through systematic
campaigns of misinformation by recruiters and agents, significantly hindering
their ability to withdraw from increasingly exploitative situations.

3.1.2 Characteristics and Challenges of Unskilled

Migrant Fishery Workers
The majority of prospective migrant fishery workers predominantly emerge
from two backgrounds: those already employed as fishers on local boats; and
individuals from mountainous communities who opt for fishing jobs due to
insufficient agricultural yields (Indonesian Ocean Justice Initiative, 2022). As
previously explained, these prospective workers are drawn to this profession
by the allure of high wages and the success stories of other fishery workers,
former workers, or acquaintances who migrated abroad for work from their
communities.

However, working on foreign fishing vessels requires different conditions.

First, in terms of size, distant water fishing vessels are generally over 30 gross
tonnage, unlike local fishing boats, which range in size from 5 to 20 gross
tonnage. This difference necessitates workers to acquire specific competency
certifications that align with the features and technology of the vessel as well
as the type of catch. If workers with a background in local fishing need to
standardize their competencies, then the demand for prospective workers
from non-fishing backgrounds is even greater.

The required certifications encompass not only hard skills related to operational
procedures or equipment usage on the vessel, but also soft skills such as
foreign language proficiency both for communication with the staff or captain
and for understanding the employment contracts they sign. However, these

15
Navigating the Currents:

workers face language barriers, which are detailed in the section on language
challenges.

3.1.3 Fishing Company Profit Maximization and Labor Cost Reduction

The recruitment of migrant fishery workers from Southeast Asian countries
like Indonesia, Thailand, or the Philippines is primarily driven by the desire to
secure cheap labor and maximize corporate profits (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021). For
instance, the recruitment of Southeast Asian migrant fishery workers in Taiwan
surged as the domestic labor supply dwindled due to declining interest among
locals in long-distance fishing and rising minimum wages for local workers (Yen
& Liuhuang, 2021). Furthermore, the pressure to meet ILO C-188 standards for
decent work on fishing vessels compelled shipowners to reduce production
costs by suppressing wages. Consequently, Southeast Asian workers, known
for their low wages, have become a preferred choice.

In addition to shipowners, recruitment agencies also seek to maximize their

profits by charging exorbitant recruitment fees. These fees often include inflated
charges for document processing, a practice known as mark-up (Indonesian
Ocean Justice Initiative, 2022).

3.2 Pre-Departure Phase: Preparation and Challenges for

Migrant Fishery Workers
In the pre-departure phase, prospective migrant fishery workers decide to work
abroad and prepare all necessary documents for migration (ILO, 2022a). These
documents include requirements for passports, visas, police background checks,
medical check-ups, and skill certifications. In Indonesia, recruitment agencies
for migrant fishery work are required to pay up to IDR 20,000,000 (US$ 1,880)
to fulfill these administrative requirements (Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative,
2022). Prospective workers lacking the initial capital to cover these expenses
are often forced to incur debts to recruitment agents, with repayment schemes
involving deductions from their monthly salaries (Greenpeace & SBMI, 2019;
Yea et al., 2023). This phase marks the beginning of the debt cycle for many
migrant fishery workers.

3.2.1 Debt Bondage and High Recruitment Fees: Predicaments of

Migrant Fishery Workers
Debt bondage is a prevalent issue identified in numerous reports and studies
of migrant fishery workers recruited in Southeast Asia. The inception of this
debt cycle typically begins in the recruitment phase prior to departure. Initially,
workers are required to cover expenses for document processing and to obtain
the necessary certifications for skills or health. A similar practice is observed in

16
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers Across Migration Phases

the Philippines and Thailand, where prospective workers must pay a deposit to
“brokers” and recruitment agents in Indonesia for the first six to eight months
of their contract (FairSquare Projects, 2021; Greenpeace & SBMI, 2019; Yea &
Stringer, 2022). This deposit is designed to ensure that workers will complete
their contracts. However, in some cases, workers do not later recover the
deposit amount deducted from their wages (Greenpeace & Serikat Buruh
Migran Indonesia, 2019).

The ILO document titled ‘General Principles and Operational Guidelines for Fair
Recruitment and Definition of Fees and Related Costs,’ issued in 2019, stipulates
that prospective migrant workers should not be charged any fees (either directly
or indirectly) related to their recruitment. Despite this, recruitment agents still
impose fees on prospective workers, as observed in the Philippines and Taiwan.
In a case found in the Philippines, migrant fishery workers aspiring to work on
Taiwanese-flagged vessels were required to pay approximately US$6,554 to
local recruitment agents (Human Rights At Sea, 2019). These workers, typically
from financially weak backgrounds, had to seek loans to cover these costs from
either unregulated moneylenders or family members, thus entangling them in
debt even before they started working.

Secondly, debt bondage also arises from the way migrant workers meet their
daily needs on the vessel, often through cash advances or ‘kas bon’ (Greenpeace
& Serikat Buruh Migran Indonesia, 2021). As noted in discussions at the ACSC/
APF 2023, cash advances still occur, especially in long-distance Taiwanese and
South Korean vessels, where workers must purchase items such as toiletries,
cigarettes, and other non-essential items at high prices from the captain. These
expenses are typically deducted from wages or catch bonuses on landing.
For those not receiving bonuses, this model is burdensome as there are no
alternatives on the vessel to meet daily needs other than purchasing onboard.

Thirdly, the consequences of debt bondage extend beyond the workers

themselves, affecting their families who remain in their home countries. Delayed
or unpaid wages frequently result in a lack of remittances, compelling spouses
or family members to resort to borrowing to cover daily expenses, as many
migrant fishery workers are the primary income providers for their households
(Ratnawulan et al., 2021). This situation is exacerbated when migrant fishery
workers cannot monitor payment status because of a lack of communication
on the vessel.

Therefore, “debt bondage” in the pre-departure context reflects the beginning

of a series of challenges faced by migrant fishery workers. It starts with a high
financial burden prior to departure, followed by ongoing economic difficulties
during employment, and ultimately affects the welfare of families left at home.

17
Navigating the Currents:

3.2.2 Diverse Visa Classifications and Their Impact on Migrant Fishery

Workers in Taiwan and Japan
Migrant fishery workers in Taiwan and Japan are subject to distinct visa
classifications, influencing their legal protections and working conditions. In
Taiwan, “Legal Crew” members, recruited under the foreign worker scheme
and protected by the Employment Service Act, fish within territorial waters
(Parhusip, 2018). Conversely, “Letters of Guarantee (LG) Crew” members,
engaged in distant water fishing (DWF) under tourist/transit visas, are not
afforded the same protections and receive lower wages (Parhusip, 2018).

Similarly, Japan employs various visa categories for migrant fishery workers.
The Technical Internship Training Program (TITP) allows workers to engage in
sectors like fisheries for up to five years, subject to skills tests and visa renewals
(Japan International Trainee & Skilled Worker Cooperation Organization, n.d.).
The Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) status, introduced in 2019, offers a pathway
for those completing TITP to work and potentially settle in Japan (Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Japan, n.d.). However, pelagic (open-sea) fisheries utilize the
“maru ship system”, excluding workers from Japanese labor law protections
due to their employment by foreign corporations (Sasaki, 2021).

These varying visa classifications reflect corporate strategies to exploit regulatory

gaps, minimizing labor costs. This discrepancy affects workers’ social mobility,
job opportunities, and freedom of movement. These visa types, established in
the pre-departure phase, significantly impact migrant workers’ experiences,
influencing costs, administrative burdens, legal protections, safety, and overall
well-being while working abroad.

This visa classification difference aligns with corporate efforts to maximize

profits by exploiting regulatory loopholes to reduce labor costs. This discrepancy
also extends to various worker-related issues such as reduced social mobility,
job mobility or even physical mobility for entering and exiting the destination
countries. However, workers require flexible access to manage documents and
obtain healthcare services. Consequently, the diverse visa types in the context
of migrant fishery workers in Taiwan and Japan are directly linked to the pre-
departure phase. The decisions made at this stage not only influence the costs
and administrative requirements that migrant workers must fulfill but also
determine their level of legal protection, safety, and well-being while working
abroad.

3.2.3 Language Barriers and Their Impact on Migrant Fishery Workers

Language barriers constitute a major issue for migrant fishery workers,
beginning with the pre-departure process. Workers from diverse cultural and
ethnic backgrounds often find themselves in a multicultural and multiethnic

18
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers Across Migration Phases

environment on the vessel, where language differences pose significant

challenges. In addition to causing difficulties in daily interactions on the
ship, these language barriers also affect workers’ ability to access essential
information.

The pre-departure process frequently fails to provide adequate preparation to

address language issues. Workers usually do not receive sufficient language
training before departure, leading to communication difficulties upon arrival
at the destination country. This not only impacts the efficiency and safety of
work on the vessel but also hinders workers from accessing healthcare services
and negotiating solutions to problems on the ship, which should be readily
accessible. For example, in Taiwan, although migrant fishery workers are entitled
to health insurance, they often depend on recruitment agents for language
assistance when visiting hospitals or doctors (Vandergeest & Marschke, 2021).
This dependency can create discomfort and even exploitation as workers
become reliant on agents for basic affairs that they should be able to manage
independently.

The lack of language proficiency and dependence on recruitment agents

reflect shortcomings in the pre-departure system which fail to equip migrant
workers with the necessary language skills for independent living and working
in the destination country. This highlights the importance of effective language
training and other supporting resources during the pre-departure stage to
reduce communication barriers and enhance the well-being of migrant workers
in multicultural and multiethnic work environments.

3.2.4 Complexities in Employment Contracts for Migrant Fishery Workers

The pre-departure phase often presents migrant fishery workers with complex
employment contracts, a significant source of difficulties. In Taiwan, for
example, workers must navigate both a service contract with their recruitment
agency and an employment contract with their future employer (Wong, 2023).
This complexity is compounded by discrepancies in the form and content
of employment contracts between Taiwan and workers’ home countries, as
highlighted in discussions at ACSC/APF 2023. Similarly, in the Philippines,
migrant fishery workers are mandated to sign employment contracts stipulated
by their government (Wong, 2023).

Language barriers further exacerbate this issue, as contracts are

frequently written in a language unfamiliar to the workers. This can lead to
misunderstandings by workers or an inability to fully grasp their rights and
responsibilities, potentially trapping them in unfair agreements and increasing
their vulnerability to exploitation and disputes (Wong, 2023). Contractual
ambiguities also complicate dispute resolution due to differing interpretations
and enforcement between sending and destination countries.

19
Navigating the Currents:

Therefore, the complexity of employment contracts originating in the pre-

departure phase poses a substantial challenge for migrant fishery workers before
they even commence their employment. Without adequate comprehension of
the contracts they sign, workers face potential legal and financial repercussions.

3.3 Post-Arrival and Return Phase Challenges: Experiences

of Migrant Fishery Workers
Upon arrival in the destination country or boarding fishing vessels, migrant
workers face a post-arrival phase marked by vulnerability and exploitation. This
phase often involves physical and verbal abuse, modern slavery, and human
trafficking due to the isolated nature of their work environment. Workers are
frequently deprived of their passports and communication channels, limiting
their ability to seek help or leave the ship.

Beyond physical harm, these conditions contribute to significant mental health

issues, exacerbated by the lack of support services on board. Inadequate
access to healthcare further jeopardizes the physical well-being of migrants, a
critical concern considering the dangerous nature of their work. Moreover, the
absence of unionization hinders their ability to collectively advocate for better
working conditions and rights.

Post-arrival challenges extend beyond the vessel, impacting workers’

financial security. Wage withholding and deductions, both during and after
employment, create economic hardship for workers and their families. These
disproportionately affect women, who often shoulder greater financial burdens.

Addressing these multifaceted issues necessitates a comprehensive approach

that prioritizes the well-being and rights of migrant fishery workers throughout
their employment journey. This includes ensuring access to communication,
safeguarding personal documents, providing adequate healthcare and mental-
health support, guaranteeing fair compensation, and facilitating the right to
organize.

3.3.1 Document Retention: Implications for Migrant Fishery Workers

The practice of retaining documents such as passports or seafarer books during
the post-arrival or on-board phase for migrant fishery workers leads to serious
issues that directly impact their freedom and security. Typically enacted by ship
captains or recruitment agency affiliates, this tactic is intended to ensure that
workers fulfill their contractual obligations. However, its effects are significantly
detrimental (Greenpeace & Serikat Buruh Migran Indonesia, 2021; Indonesia
Ocean Justice Initiative, 2022).

20
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers Across Migration Phases

First, the retention of documents restricts the mobility of workers, limiting their
ability to leave ship, whether for emergencies or to seek legal assistance in
situations of exploitation or abuse. Without their documents, workers become
highly vulnerable to violence, modern slavery, and human trafficking, as they
lack the necessary means to escape dangerous working conditions or seek
protection. Secondly, this situation causes workers to remain in potentially
hazardous or unfair employment contracts with little or no option for negotiation
or termination. This effectively traps workers in a cycle of exploitation where
they have no control over their working conditions. Thirdly, the retention of
documents effectively renders workers powerless, as they are unable to access
consular services or legal assistance that may be necessary to protect their rights
and interests. This means that workers are cut off from support and resources
that may be available to them in their destination country.Lastly, the retention
of documents is a clear indicator of forced labor, as defined in ILO Convention
No. 29 on Forced Labor. This practice represents a serious violation of workers’
human rights and reflects the detrimental and exploitative working conditions
faced by migrant fishery workers in their destination country. It creates a work
environment that is not only physically and emotionally demanding, but also
legally and ethically questionable.

3.3.2 Communication Challenges and Isolation for Migrant Fishery

Workers at Sea
In the post-arrival phase, migrant fishery workers often encounter substantial
difficulties due to their remote offshore work locations and limited access to
communication tools and networks. This isolation hinders their ability to report
rights violations at sea. For instance, the tragic death of Supriyanto, a migrant
fishery worker on a Taiwanese vessel, highlights the fatal consequences of
inadequate healthcare and communication limitations. Supriyanto endured
repeated physical abuse and torture by the captain and machinist, as
documented in video recordings by fellow crew members (Yen & Liuhuang,
2021). Despite exhibiting signs of distress as early as July 23, 2015, his condition
deteriorated rapidly, leaving him unable to speak. The captain failed to arrange
prompt medical treatment, ultimately leading to Supriyanto’s death in late
August 2015 (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021). This case demonstrates how the inability
to communicate and seek external help can have devastating consequences
for migrant fishery workers facing abuse and neglect at sea.

Moreover, limited access to communication adversely affects workers’

relationships with their families on land. They are unable to communicate
regularly with their families, leading to worries and uncertainty regarding their
families’ conditions. In some cases, they may remain unaware of significant
events at home until their return. This situation also affects the mental health
of workers who experience intense isolation and loneliness (Stella Maris
Kaohsiung, 2023).

21
Navigating the Currents:

The importance of Wi-Fi access to vessels, as advocated by various non-

governmental organizations (NGOs) in Indonesia and Taiwan, extends beyond
the communication and welfare aspects. It is also crucial for the basic rights
and freedoms of workers to assemble and negotiate collectively in line with
international legal standards and ILO C188. Without Wi-Fi, fishery workers endure
severe isolation, impacting not only their ability to report labor violations and
communicate with unions or advocates but also their capacity for emotional
and psychological connections with family and friends. Wi-Fi enables access
to various forms of communication and information crucial for empowering
workers and raising awareness of their rights (Lee et al., 2023). Without them,
they are isolated and cut off from essential support and resources, exacerbating
the challenges faced during the post-arrival phase at sea.

3.3.3 Risk to Mental Ill-Health

In the post-arrival context, the mental health of migrant fishery workers,
predominantly males, is of significant concern, particularly given the dynamics
of hegemonic masculinity, which often compels them to suppress emotions
and normalize exploitative situations. Limited access to communication at sea
exacerbates this issue, as workers frequently endure excessive worries about the
conditions of families left behind, directly impacting their mental health (Stella
Maris Kaohsiung, 2023). In a male-dominated work environment, there exists
unspoken social pressure to exhibit resilience and toughness, often preventing
workers from acknowledging and addressing mental health concerns.

Vandeergest (2021) indicated that mental ill health among migrant fishery
workers often results from regular experiences of violence, both by ship captains
and fellow crew members. This situation is worsened by isolated working
conditions at sea, coupled with uncertainty about return times, creating an
environment of high stress and unpredictability (Stella Maris Kaohsiung, 2023).
Such conditions can lead to various mental-health conditions including anger,
anxiety, stress, memory loss, and aggression (Nicola Mucci et al., 2019).

In the context of hegemonic masculinity, men are not expected to exhibit

weakness or vulnerability, often hindering them from seeking help or support.
Hegemonic masculinity, as a pattern of practices that enables men’s dominance
over women to continue, also influences how men in male-dominated
professions, such as fishery work, understand, and express emotions and
concerns (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). In a harsh and isolated working
environment at sea, the pressure to adhere to these norms of hegemonic
masculinity can be overwhelming. Male migrant fishery workers may feel
compelled to demonstrate strength and endurance, eschewing displays of
vulnerability or the need for support, aligning with the patterns of masculinity
considered most honorable. Consequently, they may tend to normalize
their exploitative experiences, further exacerbating existing mental-health

22
III Analysis of Challenges Faced by Migrant Fishery Workers Across Migration Phases

conditions. In a harsh and isolated work environment, where the expression of

concerns or emotions is seen as inappropriate, male migrant fishery workers
often feel that they have no choice but to internalize their emotions and stress,
ultimately adversely affecting their mental health and overall well-being.

3.3.4 Challenges in Healthcare and Insurance Access for

Migrant Fishery Workers
The lack of access to healthcare and insurance for migrant fishery workers
has emerged as an issue of grave concern in the post-arrival phase. Working
on vessels operating in open seas is among the most hazardous occupations,
underscoring the crucial need for adequate insurance and healthcare services
(Greenpeace & Serikat Buruh Migran Indonesia, 2021). However, reality often
falls short of meeting these needs.

The tragic death of Supriyanto in 2015 aboard the Taiwanese-flagged vessel

“Fu Tsz Chiun” exemplifies the dire consequences of inadequate healthcare
access. He died from an infection arising from a knee wound, a preventable
condition requiring proper medical care (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021). The fact that
he did not receive adequate treatment from the ship’s captain highlights the
urgent need for accessible healthcare services.

Supriyanto’s case is not isolated. Numerous migrant fishery workers experience

work-related accidents or illnesses without access to adequate health care
services. Even though sending countries, such as Thailand and Indonesia, have
mandated insurance in employment contracts, difficulties in insurance claims
are prevalent, especially for undocumented migrant workers (Auethavornpipat,
2022). This lack of access not only results in injustice for migrant fishery workers
but also signifies a systemic failure in providing basic protection for those
employed in one of the most hazardous industries.

3.3.5 Unionization Access and Awareness Among

Migrant Fishery Workers
During the post-arrival phase, the involvement of migrant fishery workers in
labor unions plays a crucial role in protecting their rights yet it often fails to
materialize effectively. Despite the significant role of labor unions in enhancing
workers’ bargaining power against companies, membership rates among
commercial fishers in Asia remain low (ILO, 2022b). This presents a serious
issue in the post-arrival context when workers are in the destination country or
aboard vessels where they are vulnerable to exploitation and rights violations.

For instance, in Thailand, there have been cases where migrant fishery workers
are prohibited from forming or leading labor unions (ILO, 2022b). This situation
diminishes their ability to collectively negotiate or seek protection from

23
Navigating the Currents:

exploitative practices. In Indonesia, while labor unions play an active role in

tripartite dialogues and have succeeded in increasing bargaining power against
companies, challenges such as geographic reach and legal discrepancies limit
unions’ ability to optimally protect their members.

Without effective access to labor unions or the inability to participate in them,

migrant fishery workers lose a vital channel for advocacy, protection, and
support. This limitation also affects the pre-departure phase, where workers
need the role of unions to assist in negotiations for signing Collective Bargain
Agreements (CBAs). In the destination country, a lack of union representation
weakens workers’ protection from poor working conditions, unfair wages, and
other human rights violations. These difficulties create a challenging and often
exploitative work environment for migrant fishery workers who are already in
vulnerable positions.

3.3.6 Repatriation Challenges for Migrant Fishery Workers

Repatriation for migrant fishery workers often presents a phase fraught with
challenges, affecting both those completing contracts and those forcibly
repatriated. Indonesian migrant workers, for example, face issues such as
currency manipulation, inflated transportation costs, and illegal fees during
their return (Hidayah et al., 2015). Unauthorized deductions from insurance
and check encashment difficulties further illustrate the exploitation that
persists even at this final stage. Self-financed returns, illicit transportation,
and prolonged airport stays compound the uncertainty and vulnerability
experienced by workers during repatriation (Hidayah et al., 2015).

Despite ILO C-188 mandating employer-funded repatriation (unless the worker

violates the contract), workers who have fulfilled their contracts are often left
to arrange their own return (Nur, 2021). Some are even abandoned in foreign
countries or ports near the ship’s flag state without adequate support to return
home (Nur, 2021).

These challenging repatriation conditions highlight systemic injustices and

failures in safeguarding migrant workers’ rights. Without sufficient support, they
face logistical and financial burdens, along with significant stress and anxiety,
particularly after enduring harsh and often exploitative working conditions.

3.3.7 Challenges in the Post-Return Phase for Migrant Fishery Workers:

Impact of Wage Withholding and Deductions
The post-return phase for migrant fishery workers, defined as the transition
back to their home communities (IOM, 2019), presents significant challenges
regardless of whether their return is voluntary or involuntary. One critical issue
faced by these workers is wage withholding or deduction, which can occur

24
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

both during their employment and upon return (ILO, 2022b; Indonesia Ocean
Justice Initiative, 2022).

These wage issues extend beyond mere income shortages, creating economic
hardship for workers and exacerbating gender-based vulnerabilities, particularly
for women and their families. Women in these households often bear the brunt
of financial responsibilities, seeking alternative income sources or incurring
debt to meet daily needs (ILO, 2022b). This not only increases their workload
and stress but also reinforces gender inequality. Additionally, children in these
families may experience educational setbacks due to financial constraints,
potentially perpetuating a cycle of instability.

Wage withholding also contributes to mental-health issues among workers,

fostering distrust in recruitment systems and diminishing motivation for future
overseas employment (ILO, 2022b). Workers may return without savings,
hindering their ability to plan for the future. Furthermore, these practices violate
workers’ rights and international labor law norms, reflecting systemic failures
in worker protection. The long-term impact can lead to sustained poverty and
economic instability, affecting the overall quality of life for workers and their
families.

IV Bridging the Protection Gap for

Migrant Fishery Workers from
Southeast Asia

The preceding section reveals that the migration process for migrant fishers
from Southeast Asian countries is fraught with significant challenges. These
challenges manifest in every stage of the process, with fishers facing a range of
obstacles and uncertainties. These begin with misinformation and exploitation
prior to employment, and continue with wage and repatriation concerns, even
upon their return. These findings highlight the complex issues confronting
migrant workers in this sector and underscore the need for further analysis.

To address the challenges above, this section outlines strategic initiatives

aimed at closing the gaps in protection for these workers. It begins with an
assessment of preventive strategies already in place, highlighting necessary
improvements in areas such as fisheries sector policies, working conditions,
working agreements, shipworthiness standards, and oversight of manning
agents.

25
Navigating the Currents:

A key focus is placed on ensuring appropriate work conditions. Workers’ limited

awareness of their rights often leads to challenging work environments and a
heightened risk of accidents. Emphasizing a holistic, collaborative approach
among governments, industry players, and civil society groups, emphasis is
placed on human rights and worker protection, essential for fostering a fair
and sustainable work environment for migrant fishery workers.

Additionally, the analysis addresses strategies to combat illegal and informal

practices, along with the complexities of repatriation and capacity building
within ASEAN member states, encompassing funding, training, and technical
support. Notably, regulatory discrepancies between sending and receiving
countries significantly impact workers, affecting wage standards and social
security due to differing employment statuses. The importance of raising
awareness of migrant workers’ rights and promoting fair labor practices is
emphasized. The following subsections (e.g., Taiwan and South Korea) further
highlight the critical issue of regulatory mismatches.

This section provides a comprehensive perspective on the necessary measures

to improve the conditions and protection of migrant fishery workers in and
from Southeast Asia. Through the exploration of integrated and sustainable
solutions, it seeks to guide and inspire collaborative efforts to enhance the
standards of living and rights of workers in this sector, ensuring a more just
and equitable system that respects and safeguards migrant fishers’ well-being.

4.1 Preventive Strategies in Migrant Fishery Sector for

Human Rights Protection
Preventive efforts to reduce the risk of human rights violations and exposure to
violence, exploitation, and oppression in the migrant fishery sector necessitate
a comprehensive approach involving various aspects, including employment
agreements, work conditions, vessel eligibility standards, and the oversight of
crewing agents. The fishing industry, often characterized by challenging and
isolated working conditions at sea, has significant potential for human rights
abuse. Therefore, it is crucial to implement mechanisms that ensure worker
protection and prevent exploitative practices detrimental to both workers and
the industry.

Seafarer employment agreements (SEAs) are vital in establishing the rights

and obligations of workers and employers. However, discrepancies often exist
between the regulations of sending and receiving countries, creating gaps in
debt bondage and high recruitment costs, as seen among Indonesian migrant
workers. Furthermore, working conditions that fail to meet international
standards can lead to work-related accidents and inhumane situations for
workers.

26
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

Setting standards for vessel eligibility is also an essential part of preventive

efforts given that non-compliant vessels can pose serious hazards to workers.
Stringent monitoring of private crewing agents is another critical step,
considering their role in the recruitment and placement processes. Establishing
transparent and fair standards and methods for wage payments is fundamental
to ensuring economic justice for migrant fishery workers.

Each element of the migrant fishery industry chain must be carefully scrutinized
to ensure the effectiveness of these preventive efforts. Through this approach,
a fair and humane work environment can be created, ultimately benefiting all
parties involved in the fishing industry

4.1.1 The Role of Seafarer Employment Agreements as

a Preventive Measure
SEAs play a crucial role in the context of preventive efforts to mitigate human
rights violations, exposure to violence, exploitation, and oppression in the
fishery sector. Central issues concerning these agreements include worker
competence, working conditions, and employment status, with a primary focus
on the substance and process of signing these agreements. Migrant fishery
workers, particularly from Indonesia and the Philippines, often face challenges
in understanding the content of employment contracts because of language
barriers or complex terms, creating gaps that lead to debt bondage and high
recruitment costs.

The implementation of SEAs reveals discrepancies or inconsistencies between

the sending and receiving countries’ regulations. For instance, while sending
countries may consider their workers to be migrant workers, receiving countries
such as South Korea and Taiwan differentiate worker status based on fishing
zones, impacting wage standards and social security provisions.

In Taiwan, for example, migrant fishery workers are categorized into local and
distant water fishing (DWF) workers. The Taiwanese government’s regulations
on the authorization and management of foreign crew members’ overseas
employment outline the responsibilities of employers and manning agencies,
including the obligation to provide government-compliant contracts, free-of-
charge recruitment, direct wage transfer to workers, and emergency dispute
resolution. The latest amendment in 2019 emphasized work safety and
health, including documenting the process of introducing SEAs and digitizing
employment contracts (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021). South Korea has a stringent
contract validation system to ensure that employment contracts do not violate
labor regulations, requiring contract signatures before visa issuance, although
this can potentially lead to contract signature manipulation (APIL & IOM, 2017).

27
Navigating the Currents:

These SEA practices underscore the importance of a clear and transparent

understanding of employment contracts to avoid debt bondages and high
recruitment fees. Properly structured and clear regulations are expected
to reduce the risk of human rights violations, violence, exploitation, and
oppression among migrant fishery workers. However, discussions at ACSC/APF
2023 suggest recommendations to limit the duration of employment contracts
to one year, with priority extension options after shore leave, to ensure that
fishers do not stay at sea indefinitely. Migrant fishery workers should have
the right to terminate contracts at any time if employers breach the terms,
including the right to return home with the assistance and costs covered by
the employer.

4.1.2 Regulation of Working Conditions as a Preventive Measure

In preventive efforts to reduce the risk of human rights violations, including
violence, exploitation, and oppression, regulating the working conditions of
migrant fishery workers is crucial. Often, workers’ limited awareness of decent
working conditions leads to working beyond capacity, with inadequate rest and
facilities that do not meet the standards of ILO C188. This not only increases
the risk of workplace accidents but can also lead to fatalities.

The South Korean government has responded to reports on illegal fishing

practices and human rights abuses in the South Korean fishing fleet by
reforming regulations related to work hours, minimum wages, and vessel
logistics standards in the distant water fishing (DWF) fleet. This initiative involves
the Korea Overseas Fisheries Association (KOFA) disseminating questionnaires
to migrant fishery workers for analysis and progress reporting (Anwar 2019).
However, challenges arise because of regulatory differences between workers
in the DWF sector and those in South Korea’s territorial waters, particularly
regarding legal protection and work standards.

In Taiwan, recent regulations mandating ship standards and working hours in

accordance with international norms represent a positive step. Random ship
inspections and requirements for shipowners to verify vessel standards before
departure are a part of these efforts. Nonetheless, there are shortcomings,
particularly in monitoring work hours. The Taiwanese government has placed
investigators in several international ports to inspect alleged labor violations
on ships (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021).

These collective efforts indicate positive steps towards implementing decent

work standards for migrant fishery workers. However, there is still room
for improvement, particularly in terms of the consistent monitoring and
enforcement of regulations. Such preventive measures are essential to ensure
that migrant fishery workers operate in safe and fair conditions and are
protected from the risks of accidents, exhaustion, and exploitation.

28
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

4.1.3 Shipworthiness Standards as a Preventive Measure

In the context of preventive efforts to enhance shipworthiness standards and
minimize forced labor practices, countries such as Taiwan and Thailand have
taken significant steps. Taiwan, for instance, has launched fishing vessels that
comply with the ILO standards, including medical facilities and logistical support
for life on board. However, the effectiveness of these ship inspections is often
hindered by the limited number of inspection personnel and the adherence of
shipowners to shipworthiness standards (Strong, 2022).

In Thailand, according to reports from the Thai Union, there has been a push
to implement minimum standards for shipworthiness, including necessary
facilities and logistics, based on the size of the vessel and the duration of the
voyage. Key areas of focus include the provision and support of worker health
equipment and standardized medication according to the type of illness (Thai
Union, 2020). Challenges primarily arise from trawler vessels, often involved
in IUU fishing. Considering that 50% of Thailand’s 61,000 fishing vessels are
trawlers (EJF, 2023), it is evident that ship worthiness standards are yet to fully
meet labor standards.

These preventive measures are crucial in ensuring that vessels not only meet
technical safety standards but also safety and welfare standards for workers.
This includes ensuring that ships are equipped with adequate medical facilities,
safety gear, and living conditions that meet the basic needs of workers. If these
measures are consistently applied and supported by effective inspections, they
can help reduce the risk of exploitation, workplace accidents, and inhumane
working conditions in the fishing industry.

4.1.4 Supervision of Private Manning Agencies as a Preventive Measure

In preventive efforts to reduce debt bondage, manipulative employment
agreements, violence, and indications of forced labor, the supervision of
private manning agencies plays a crucial role. The misalignment between
the institutions responsible for creating adequate working environments
and ensuring workers’ rights is a core issue. In some instances, the differing
responsibilities between ministries in recipient countries and the limited labor
inspection capacities in both sending and receiving countries add to the
complexity of this situation. For example, the Philippine government has taken
steps to ensure the professionalism of employers and agencies recruiting
citizens. Accreditation issued by the Philippine Overseas Employment
Administration (POEA) mandates that Filipino agencies cooperate only with
accredited employers or agencies. This accreditation, which must be renewed
every four years, can be revoked or disqualified in the case of labor violations
against Filipino migrant fishers. However, this system has weaknesses, as it fails

29
Navigating the Currents:

to detect companies that have previously violated the law but then establish
new companies to obtain certification (FairSquare Projects, 2021).

In Taiwan, the government has implemented an A-C ranking system for ship
operators and their agencies to encourage the private sector to be more
cautious in choosing work partners. This system relies on the goodwill of
the private sector and consumer awareness of human rights. Following the
2019 regulatory amendment, Taiwan implemented strict oversight of manning
companies including administrative sanctions, fines, and imprisonment.
Individuals are not allowed to be recruiters, and only licensed companies that
can provide significant deposits are allowed to operate. If violations occur either
during the recruitment process or post-employment, manning companies can
face fines or lose their licenses (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021).

These measures are crucial in ensuring that migrant fishery workers are recruited
and placed under conditions that comply with decent labor standards. Despite
the challenges and weaknesses of the system, these preventive efforts are vital
for reducing the risk of exploitation, violence, and human rights violations in
the migrant fishery sector.

4.1.5 Standards and Methods of Wage Payment

South Korea and Taiwan have taken significant steps to establish fair wage
standards for migrant fishery workers. In South Korea, standard monthly
wages of US$450 for inexperienced workers (under three years) and US$725
for experienced workers were set based on the standards of the International
Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF). However, there is a significant wage gap
between migrant fishery workers and South Korean citizens in the same sector,
with the latter earning much higher monthly wages, up to US$1,965. This
difference is not a result of government regulation but an agreement between
the Federation of Korean Seafarers’ Unions (FKSU) and shipowners (APIL & EJF,
2023).

In Taiwan, the government has implemented rules regarding standard wages,

including setting a minimum wage and method of payment. The minimum
monthly wage for migrant fishery workers is set at US$550 as per the latest
regulations. The method of payment is also regulated, with direct payments to
workers or their families bypassing recruitment agencies. Proof of payment must
be maintained for at least five years to ensure that the Taiwanese government
can verify that the amount of wages, insurance, and payment methods comply
with regulations (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021).

These measures are crucial for creating fairer and more transparent wage
standards for migrant fishery workers. By establishing a minimum wage and
regulating payment methods, we hope that wage exploitation risks can be

30
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

reduced and that workers receive fair compensation for their labor. Additionally,
keeping proof of payment allows for better supervision and helps resolve wage
disputes if necessary. These steps are progressive in preventing wage injustice
and in enhancing worker protection in the migrant fishery industry.

Related to income management, discussions at ACSC/APF 2023 highlighted

vulnerabilities to financial manipulation, often perpetrated by recruitment
agencies that manipulate workers’ wages. Clear guidelines are needed
to prevent agencies from holding workers’ bank accounts or engaging in
exploitative financial practices.

4.1.6 Licensing of Manning Companies: A Preventive

Regulatory Approach
In the context of preventive efforts to strengthen regulations related to the
placement and protection of migrant fishery workers, both Indonesia and
the Philippines face distinct challenges. In Indonesia, regulatory weaknesses
are often associated with overlapping regulations, particularly concerning
the issuance of Commercial Vessel Crew Provider Licenses (SIUPPAK) and
the License for the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers
(SIP3MI). This overlap results in a lack of clarity regarding which institution
serves as the primary operator regulating the placement and protection of
Indonesian migrant fishery workers (Palmer et al., 2023; Sawengi & Rijal, 2022).

In the Philippines, the process of issuing licenses to manning companies involves

contributions from Philippine government representatives in the host country.
One of the requirements for establishing a manning company is to demonstrate
evidence of job vacancies as verified by government representatives in the host
country. The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA), which
issues licenses to manning companies, also requires the fulfillment of three
other conditions involving government representatives in the host country
(Hung et al., 2022).

These preventive measures are crucial for ensuring that manning agencies and
the worker placement process are conducted transparently and responsibly. In
Indonesia, resolving regulatory overlap is necessary to create a clearer and more
effective framework for regulating the placement and protection of workers.
In the Philippines, the involvement of government representatives in the job
vacancy verification process and license issuance helps ensure that migrant
fishery workers are placed in conditions that meet decent labor standards.

Both approaches highlight the importance of cooperation among various

government entities to ensure the protection of migrant fishery workers. With
stronger regulations and effective inter-agency coordination, it is hoped that

31
Navigating the Currents:

the risk of human rights violations can be reduced and better protection can
be provided for migrant fishery workers.

4.1.7 Placement Costs: Enhancing Transparency and Legality in

Recruitment
In preventive efforts to address differing perceptions of recruitment costs
between agencies and workers and to ensure transparency and legality in
the recruitment process, significant challenges arise. Agencies in Taiwan view
recruitment fees as a commitment from Filipino agencies to provide quality
labor, while Filipino agencies regard these fees as a guarantee for contract
completion. This discrepancy in perception often confuses workers, making it
difficult for them to assess the legality of the fees and choose the right agency
(FairSquare Projects, 2021).

In the Philippines, existing regulations prohibit the imposition of placement

fees on migrant workers employed as seafarers, including Filipino migrant
fishery workers categorized as seafarers. This means that they should not be
burdened by placement fees (Hung et al., 2022). However, there are some costs
for primary documents which may be necessary, such as the seaman’s book,
passport, seafarer’s registration letter, and certificates from the National Bureau
of Investigation. Filipino recruitment companies can also charge departure-
related expenses to the principal or shipowner, including medical certificates,
visas, or other competency certificates. If prospective workers cancel their
departures without a valid reason, they are required to pay these departure
costs (Verité, 2021).

Preventive measures involve the implementation of clear and transparent

regulations regarding recruitment and placement fees. This transparency
is crucial to prevent the unfair imposition of fees on workers and to reduce
their risk of falling into debt traps. The Philippine government’s prohibition of
placement fees for seafarer workers demonstrates its commitment to protecting
migrant workers from exploitative practices. However, clarity on allowable fees
and strict oversight of their applications remain key to ensuring that workers
are not burdened with unfair or illegal costs. This also assists workers in making
informed decisions when selecting recruitment agencies and in avoiding illegal
or unethical agencies.

Regarding placement costs, inputs from the ACSC/APF 2023 discussions suggest
implementing stricter regulations and transparency in recruitment agencies.
This aims to protect workers’ rights by monitoring the fees charged by agents,
ensuring fair and ethical recruitment practices, and preventing exploitation.

32
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

4.1.8 Comprehensive Training and Skill Development for

Migrant Fishery Workers
In the realm of fishery employment, especially for migrant workers, navigating
through employment challenges involves more than just the physical aspects of
the job. Workers often grapple with the complexities of employment contracts,
language barriers, and the need for specific skills relevant to their roles. Illegal
practices such as the procurement of unearned Basic Safety Training (BST)
certificates exacerbate the situation, leaving many workers ill-prepared for the
realities of working on modern fishing vessels, particularly those equipped with
advanced technologies.

To address these challenges, South Korea implemented policies that require

proficiency in essential fishing skills. These include occupational safety,
health, and basic Korean language proficiency, which have been mandated
since 2016. The necessary competency documents for workers include the
Korean Language Proficiency Test (EPS-TOPIK), a fishing skill certificate from
a recognized fishing school, basic safety training accredited by the Ministry of
Transportation, and a letter of work experience from previous employers. This
comprehensive approach aims to align worker capabilities with the operational
demands of the industry, thereby reducing accidents and ensuring a safer
working environment (Anwar, 2019).

In the Philippines, the approach to migrant fishery worker training focuses more
on crew member roles, centering primarily on basic safety training. However,
there is a noticeable lack of regulations for specialized skill certification in areas
such as fishing gear usage and ship technology operation. This gap underscores
the need for broader training and certification standards to ensure that workers
are sufficiently prepared for the technical demands of modern fishing vessels
(Hung et al., 2022).

Collaborative training programs, such as those initiated by the Indonesian

Fisheries Workers Union (SPPI) in South Korea and Indonesia, play a pivotal
role in enhancing worker competence. By partnering with Vocational High
Schools (SMK) in fisheries, maritime academies, and government agencies,
the SPPI focuses on developing competency-based best practices. Although
these programs are sometimes perceived as market-oriented, they incorporate
elements of basic safety education, fishing competency, and awareness of
migrant workers’ rights (Anwar 2019).

The Fishers’ Rights Network (FRN) in Thailand, in collaboration with the

International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), emphasizes the importance of
education for migrant fishery workers. Their efforts, which include distributing
pamphlets and posters and providing a digital communication platform, are
aimed at raising awareness of working conditions, safety at sea, and legal rights.

33
Navigating the Currents:

This educational outreach is vital for empowering workers and mitigating

occupational risk (Rogovin, 2020).

In addition to training workers, there is growing recognition of the importance

of educating their families. The ACSC/APF 2023 discussion highlights the need
for training that covers workers’ rights, safety measures, and available support
resources for families. This holistic approach not only empowers the workers
themselves, but also engages their families in monitoring and advocating for
workers’ safety, especially in potentially hazardous situations.

Overall, these initiatives across different countries demonstrate a commitment

to address the multifaceted training needs of migrant fishery workers. These
programs significantly contribute to creating a safer and more rights-respecting
environment in the fishery sector by enhancing language proficiency, job-
specific skills, safety training, and legal rights awareness. This integrated
approach, involving collaborations among labor organizations, educational
institutions, and governmental agencies, is essential for ensuring the safety
and efficacy of migrant fishery workers in an industry that is both challenging
and dynamic.

4.1.9 The Role of Labor Unions in Preventive Advocacy for

Migrant Fishery Workers
In the context of preventive efforts to enhance protection and advocacy for
migrant fishery workers, the involvement of local labor unions in host countries
is crucial. Migrant workers often face challenges due to a lack of access to local
unions which can assist in negotiations, rights advocacy, handling workplace
grievances, and collaborating with other organizations and civil society. Labor
unions can operate independently from recruitment agencies or from employers
under effective oversight by relevant ministries (Human Rights Watch, 2018).

For instance, in Thailand, the absence of a robust local fishery workers’ union
poses a challenge for migrant workers. However, the Thai government is
considering allowing migrant workers to become officials in labor unions.
This step could signal a positive development for migrant workers wishing to
pursue long-term employment in Thailand’s fishing industry, enabling them to
be more actively involved in negotiations and governance related to working
conditions. Regulations allowing migrant fishery workers to join or form unions
represent a significant transformative step in strengthening their bargaining
positions with employers (Chantavanich & Jitpong, 2023).

In South Korea, the Indonesian Fisheries Workers Union (SPPI) plays an active
role in safeguarding migrant fishery workers. The head of the union points
out the necessity of the SPPI’s presence in South Korea due to the widespread
recruitment by illegal manning agencies in Indonesia and poor working

34
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

conditions on South Korean fishing vessels. SPPI focuses on organizing workers

and building solidarity and unity among its members, and, as of April 2019, it
claims a membership of 4,550 individuals (Anwar, 2019).

These preventive efforts highlight the importance of labor unions in ensuring

that migrant fishery workers receive adequate protection and actively participate
in advocating for their rights. The involvement of labor unions is crucial not
only in curative and preventive stages but also in transformative phases, where
workers can more effectively communicate and negotiate with employers to
improve their working conditions and protection. This helps to create a fairer
and more humane working environment for migrant fishery workers across
various countries.

4.1.10 Preventive Efforts Through Entrepreneurial Norms in Thailand

In the context of preventive efforts to improve working conditions for
migrant fishery workers, Thailand has shown significant initiative through
active engagement with non-governmental organizations and labor unions.
Organizations such as the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF),
Stella Maris, and the Fishers’ Rights Network, which are part of the Migrant
Working Group, play an active role in advocating domestic regulatory changes
to align with international standards. The main focus of advocacy by these
groups includes several key aspects of the fishery industry, such as social
security, decent working conditions, fair wage payment methods, establishment
of minimum wages, and vessel eligibility. These efforts aim not only to enhance
protection for migrant workers but also to ensure that Thailand’s fishery industry
complies with the international standards set forth in ILO C188, ILO Freedom
of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (C87), and
ILO Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention (C98). From 2017
to 2019, these organizations engaged in a series of intensive consultations and
meetings with the Thai government and fishing industry associations. These
efforts involved rigorous and often challenging negotiations, given the need
to align the interests of various parties, including the government, employers,
and workers (Auethavornpipat, 2022).

These advocacy and lobbying activities highlight the importance of a multi-

stakeholder approach to address critical issues in the fishing sector. By
prioritizing dialogue and cooperation, normative and regulatory changes are
expected to benefit migrant fishery workers and enhance the sustainability
and ethics of the entire fishery industry. Collaboration between civil society
organizations, labor unions, and the government in this context is a significant
example of efforts to build a sustainable and fair working environment. Through
this approach, Thailand is striving to develop a fishery industry that not only
respects human rights and international labor standards but also promotes
responsible and sustainable fishing practices.

35
Navigating the Currents:

4.2 Responsive Efforts for the Protection of Migrant

Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia
In this section, the primary focus is on responsive actions aimed at addressing
and alleviating human rights violations and various forms of abuse that
frequently occur in the migrant fishery industry. These efforts include a series
of interventions designed to prevent the recurrence of violations and to
address their direct impact on workers. Key aspects in this context encompass
the critical role of high sea boarding inspection (HSBI), the effectiveness of
communication access, transparency in wage remittance, the implementation
of work condition monitoring systems, and the importance of providing
safe/transit house facilities. This chapter delves into the various responsive
strategies implemented by countries and related organizations to ensure
adequate protection for migrant fishery workers. This reflects the importance
of good coordination, strong commitment, and collaboration among various
stakeholders in creating a fair and safe working environment for migrant fishery
workers, supporting the sustainability and responsibility of the fishery industry
as a whole.

4.2.1 High Seas Boarding Inspection: An Instrument for Human Rights

Enforcement in Fisheries
In the realm of responsive efforts to address human rights violations and
patterns of abuse, high sea boarding inspection (HSBI) has emerged as a crucial
instrument. HSBI is a process in which vessels in the high seas can be inspected
by member states of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission
(WCPFC) to ensure compliance with fisheries regulations and worker protection.
Conducted in open waters, this inspection is part of an international effort to
conserve fish stocks and enforce labor standards.

The implementation of the HSBI, although in place, faces several challenges.

To date, active inspections have been more prevalent among nations like New
Zealand and the United States, while migrant fishery worker-receiving countries
such as South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, also members of the WCPFC, have
not consistently executed these inspections (Fujii, Iwao et al., 2021; WCPFC,
2021). Taiwan, for example, has benefited from this inspection regime through
reports received from other member states, and has actively sanctioned its
vessels found in violation of IUU Fishing provisions (FiskerForum, 2018; The
Maritime Executive, 2021).

In discussions at the ACSC/APF, the HSBI is recognized as playing a vital role in

preventing and mitigating human rights abuses and exploitation at sea. These
inspections aim to ensure that vessels operating in international waters adhere
to global fishing regulations and labor standards, including the protection
of migrant fishery workers. The effectiveness of the HSBI depends on the

36
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

commitment and collaboration of WCPFC member states and their capability

to conduct inspections effectively and consistently.

To enhance the efficacy of the HSBI, improved coordination and collaboration

among member states, increased capacity and resources for inspections, and
a strong commitment to law enforcement and human rights protection are
needed. In doing so, the HSBI can serve as an effective tool to prevent the
recurrence of violations and address their direct impact on migrant fishery
workers.

4.2.2 Communication Access: A Key Responsive Measure for Migrant

Fishery Workers’ Welfare
In the context of responsive efforts addressing issues faced by migrant fishery
workers, such as working beyond capacity with minimal rest and substandard
facility conditions as per ILO C188, the importance of communication access
and direct intervention from state representatives or labor unions is paramount.
These conditions often lead to work-related accidents, exhaustion, and, in the
worst cases, fatalities. However, the ability of workers to contact representatives
from their own or host countries or unions can help to prevent such situations.

Communication access plays a crucial role in mitigating factors such as

boredom and lack of recreational facilities, which contribute to safety and work
effectiveness. This is particularly vital given the nature of distant water fishing
(DWF), which lacks a definite landing schedule. Additionally, communication
access provides workers with updates about their families and remittance of
wages to their home countries, reducing household issues stemming from
uncertainty about information and wages (Siggs et al., 2023). In line with inputs
from the ACSC/APF 2023 discussions, the referred context of communication
access entails Internet access for workers, allowing them to stay connected
with others and take action against exploitative practices.

Some countries have implemented responsive initiatives, such as hotlines

in South Korea and Taiwan, as well as assistance centers established by the
Indonesian government in South Korea. However, the Indonesian government’s
help centers have been criticized for their slow responses (Anwar, 2019). In
Taiwan, government and telecommunications companies have supported the
installation of Wi-Fi facilities as a reporting channel between crew members
and their representatives. However, Wi-Fi installation involves high costs and
commitments from various stakeholders in the supply chain, including vessel
owners. Some owners express concerns that Wi-Fi usage might disrupt rest
hours meant for effective recuperation (Council of Agriculture, 2022; Siggs et
al., 2023).

37
Navigating the Currents:

The amount of time that can be used for communication in fishing areas
also presents a challenge. A feasible solution is to reach an agreement on
communication time, entirely determined by ship officers, requiring them to
find a good implementation pattern. These efforts form part of the critical
responsive measures to enhance the safety and well-being of migrant fishery
workers, ensuring that they have access to the necessary support to tackle
workplace challenges.

4.2.3 Direct Wage Payment for Migrant Fishery Workers: Ensuring

Transparency and Fairness
In the context of responsive efforts towards issues of wage non-transparency
and deductions in migrant fishery employment, the transparency of wage-
transfer systems becomes crucial. A primary issue in wage payments is the lack
of access to financial services (Human Rights Watch, 2018), leading to financial
losses for workers due to unclear wage deductions. Field observations indicate
that in addition to high recruitment costs, wage withholding and deductions
are prevalent, resulting in workers’ uncertainty about their exact wage and
bonus amounts. This issue is often attributed to non-transparent wage transfer
systems or salary transfers through crewing agents, potentially leading to
unfair deductions owing to currency differences or catch-related bonuses.

As a responsive measure, direct payment of wages to workers or their families is

highly recommended to enhance transparency and ensure workers receive the
correct wage amounts. In Taiwan, a coalition of civil society organizations and
labor unions formulated a work plan to address this issue. The plan includes
direct cash payments or bank transfers from vessel owners to workers (Yen &
Liuhuang, 2021). This approach aims to minimize crewing agents’ involvement
in the wage payment process, which is often a source of problems.

However, there are challenges in implementing this plan, particularly

regarding the private sector’s willingness to comply. Recruitment practices
involving crewing agents in both the sending and receiving countries often
complicate these efforts. Furthermore, clarity is lacking regarding the extent
of the responsibility of crewing agents and vessel owners in the case of wage
disputes. Issues arise when vessel owners pay wages but crewing agents in
Taiwan or workers’ home countries fail to distribute them properly (Council of
Agriculture, 2022).

This responsive measure is crucial to ensure transparency in wage payments

and to protect workers’ rights from unfair wage deductions, as mentioned in
the ACSC/APF 2023 discussions. Improvements in the wage payment system
and better cooperation among vessel owners, crewing agents, civil society
organizations, and labor unions can help address these issues. Thus, migrant

38
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

fishery workers can receive the compensation they deserve, commensurate

with their hard work, and contributions.

4.2.4 Integrated Work Condition Monitoring Systems in the Fishing

Industry
In the context of responsive efforts towards work condition monitoring in the
fishing industry, Thailand and Taiwan have taken significant steps. In particular,
Thailand has implemented an innovative integrated monitoring system
through the Port-in Port-out (PIPO) program and work-hour recording for
vessels. This system is managed by Thailand’s Command Center for Combating
Illegal Fishing (CCCIF), with monitoring conducted at 89 fishing piers across
coastal areas bolstered by 22 PIPO officers. Furthermore, Thailand collaborated
with the USAID Oceans and Fisheries Partnership to trial a traceability system
utilizing Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) technology (for vessels over 30 gross
tonnage) and e-logbooks, aimed at facilitating the supervision of each vessel’s
operational activities (Kadfak & Widengård, 2022).

Noteworthy are the efforts of NGOs in Thailand that implement similar

monitoring using satellite technology to track vessel movements at sea. This
program complements government initiatives, allowing for broader surveillance
that is not limited to vessels equipped with VMS devices.

In Taiwan, the integrated monitoring system currently applies only to vessels

operating within Taiwan’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and has not yet been
implemented in distant water fishing (DWF) vessels. In response, the Taiwanese
government has proposed installing Wi-Fi on DWF vessels to monitor working
conditions (Council of Agriculture, 2022). This measure aims to enhance the
transparency and supervision of work conditions for vessels operating in
distant waters.

Discussions at ACSC/APF 2023 emphasize the importance of such responsive

measures in ensuring compliance with decent work standards and reducing the
likelihood of exploitation and human rights violations in the fishing industry.
Effective and integrated monitoring, whether through the PIPO system, VMS
technology, or closed-circuit television (CCTV), aids receiving countries in
overseeing work conditions on fishing vessels and ensuring adherence to labor
and fishing regulations. These efforts also support the protection of migrant
fishery workers and promote a more responsible and sustainable fishing
industry.

39
Navigating the Currents:

4.2.5 Shelters and Transit Facilities: A Responsive Solution for Migrant

Fishery Workers
In responsive efforts to address the challenges faced by migrant fishery
workers, especially those related to worker status and visa type in Taiwan
and South Korea, the concept of a safe shelter or transit facility is crucial. The
establishment of safe shelters and transit facilities is a significant step toward
offering additional protection to migrant fishery workers. These facilities allow
workers to escape difficulties or separate from their vessels to have a safe
place while awaiting resolution of their issues. They also help to ensure that
workers are not trapped in unsafe or exploitative situations while on land. The
difference in worker status, such as working on local vessels or distant water
fishing (DWF) vessels, determines the type of visa utilized by workers. This
affects their ability to settle on land and poses additional challenges if they
encounter problems while working.

Taiwan has taken a responsive step by providing safe shelters and transit
facilities as a solution for workers of DWF vessels who face issues or require
temporary accommodation on land. These safe shelters and transit facilities
function as temporary shelters for workers who are stranded or need legal and
social support while on land. The facilities provide temporary lodging and are
often equipped with access to legal, medical, and social support services.

This responsive approach demonstrates Taiwan’s commitment to address

the issues faced by migrant fishery workers, particularly those in vulnerable
situations. It also highlights the importance of providing adequate infrastructure
support to protect the rights and well-being of migrant fishery workers. Similar
efforts could be made in other countries with significant migrant fishery
industries to ensure better protection and support for workers in emergencies
or transitional situations.

4.2.6 Responsive Labor Organizing in the Fishing Industry

In response to labor violations in the fishing industry, various organizations
have taken significant steps to provide support and advocacy for migrant
fishery workers. Labor unions, NGOs, and government agencies in several
countries have developed effective response mechanisms and strategies to
address complaints and violations of workers’ rights.

The Indonesian Fisheries Workers Union (SPPI) established the SPPI South
Korea Task Force in 2018 to respond to member complaints communicated
through SPPI’s social media channels. This task force offers advice, assistance,
and reports to vessel owners, law offices, the South Korean Coast Guard, and
the Indonesian Embassy concerning various issues, especially delayed wage

40
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

payments. This collaboration successfully pressured vessel owners to pay

outstanding wages (Anwar, 2019).

In Taiwan, labor unions such as the Keelung Migrant Fishermen Union (KMFU)
and the Yilan Migrant Fishermen Union (YMFU) initiated the Fishermen Service
Center through the Migrant Workers’ Human Rights Coalition. This center
addresses labor violations in vessels. The unions also successfully lobbied the
United States Department of Labor to include Taiwanese fishery products in
the List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor in 2020 (Kao, 2021).

In Thailand, the Fishers’ Rights Network (FRN) identified numerous shortcomings

in the Port-in Port-out (PIPO) mechanism due to a lack of seriousness and weak
vessel inspections. FRN collaborated with ILO and PIPO officers to conduct joint
inspections and provide assistance to vessels lacking adequate equipment.
However, classic violations, such as document withholding, inadequate medical
supplies, and a reporting process that does not protect the reporter’s identity,
still persist (FRN, 2023).

These initiatives underscore the importance of responsive efforts to address

labor violations in the fishing industry. By providing effective reporting
mechanisms, offering direct support to workers, and collaborating with
governmental and international bodies, these organizations help ensure that
migrant fishery workers receive the protection they need and can report unfair
or hazardous working conditions. Such responsive approaches are crucial for
preventing recurring violations and mitigating their immediate impact on
workers.

4.3 Remedial Measures for Protecting Migrant Fishery

Workers from Southeast Asia
This section focuses on remedial measures and support for migrant fishery
workers who have experienced violence and exploitation. This concept
emphasizes the importance of providing concrete and practical solutions to aid
in restoring the dignity and welfare of the impacted workers. Through various
subsections on insurance, compensation for contract termination, actions
against perpetrators, access to health support facilities, complaint mechanisms,
job mobilities, and measures for undocumented migrant workers, this section
investigates a range of strategies implemented in various countries to address
the complex issues faced by migrant fishery workers. This includes an analysis of
insurance systems designed to offer financial guarantees in cases of accidents
or death as well as efforts to strengthen complaint mechanisms and legal
support for workers experiencing employment contract violations. The section
also explores challenges and solutions related to workers’ rights to change
jobs or employers under certain conditions as well as national approaches to

41
Navigating the Currents:

dealing with irregular migrant labor issues. Through this discussion, this section
aims to delve deeper into how various countries and organizations are striving
to provide effective and adequate support for workers exposed to violence and
exploitation while also endeavoring to restore their dignity and rights in the
fishing industry.

4.3.1 Insurance as a Remedial Approach for Migrant Fishery Workers’

Protection
In the realm of migrant fishery workers’ protection, financial safety nets,
including insurance mechanisms and compensation processes for terminated
contracts, play pivotal roles in safeguarding migrant rights and welfare. The
complexity of these mechanisms varies across countries, reflecting different
approaches to ensure adequate protection and assistance for workers exposed
to occupational hazards or contractual disputes (Human Rights Watch, 2018).

Thailand, for instance, has instituted the Workmen Compensation Fund,

where vessel employers contribute 0.2% of their annual revenue to support
workers who suffer accidents, deaths, or disappearances. However, this fund
is accessible only to legal migrant workers. The Social Security Office (SSO) in
Thailand undertakes the validation of missing or deceased workers, offering
compensation and monthly wages for up to eight years. However, challenges
arise in cases where a body is not found, leading to difficulties in the validation
and compensation processes (Chantavanich & Jitpong, 2023).

In Taiwan, the insurance approach has evolved significantly, especially after

the 2019 regulatory amendment. The state mandates a minimum insurance
fund of NT$1,000,000 to cover work-related or unrelated accidents, medical
handling, and life insurance. This comprehensive coverage is attached from the
start to the employment contract, ensuring compliance with the regulations
(Yen & Liuhuang, 2021). However, the regulation of insurance amounts in
Indonesia remains unclear, demonstrating the need for more transparent and
robust policies.

South Korea presents a dual model of insurance, offering one system under
the Industrial Insurance Act for land-based workers and another for distant
water fishing (DWF) workers provided by the National Federation of Fishing
Cooperatives (NFFC). However, there are concerns that the compensation
values under these models do not meet the adequate labor standards. Efforts
to minimize expenditures through low-premium insurance options have led to
minimal compensation for work-related accidents and deaths, highlighting the
need for more equitable insurance schemes (EJF & APIL, 2023).

42
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

Beyond insurance, contract termination without compensation poses a

significant challenge for migrant fishery workers, especially in Taiwan. Workers
often face a disadvantageous situation in which they risk losing their right to
compensation or being compelled to pay damages to employers for alleged
labor violations (Verité, 2021) To address this, a more robust legal framework
is required that revises employment contract provisions to protect workers’
rights in cases of forced labor or rights violations. This includes providing
legal support and advocacy to assist workers in navigating legal systems, and
claiming fair compensation.

International collaboration also plays a vital role in ensuring the protection

of migrant workers’ rights. Cooperation between states and international
institutions can create global pressure, encouraging host governments and
employers to uphold migrant workers’ rights. Educating and raising awareness
among workers about their rights and available legal services is crucial for
empowering them to access the support they need.

In short, the establishment of financial safety nets for migrant fishery workers,
encompassing insurance mechanisms, social security, and compensation
processes for terminated contracts, is essential. These systems provide crucial
support in tragic and challenging situations, aiding in restoring the dignity of
migrant workers and ensuring that they receive adequate protection and fair
compensation. Adequate insurance and social security schemes, coupled with
strong legal frameworks and international cooperation, are key components in
providing effective protection and assistance for migrant fishery workers.

4.3.2 Enforcement Measures Against Perpetrators in the Fishery Industry

In remedial efforts towards regulating recruitment agencies in the fishery
industry, Taiwan has taken significant steps by implementing stringent licensing
and sanctions through The Act of Distant Water Fisheries of 2016. Under
this regulation, agencies or vessel operators engaging in non-procedural
recruitment or violations can face severe penalties, including revocation or
suspension of licenses and substantial fines for illegal entities ranging from
NT$4 million to NT$20 million. While this regulation is indicative of a serious
effort to address violations, its field implementation often proves challenging,
especially as many onboard activities occur at sea, in international waters, or
in other jurisdictions. Additionally, despite the provision of prison sentences
for violators, the regulation does not specifically mention imprisonment, and
there have been few cases sentenced by courts, typically under the Human
Trafficking Law with relatively short imprisonment periods of 10-18 months
(FairSquare Projects, 2021).

43
Navigating the Currents:

Taiwan has also demonstrated a willingness to follow up on serious cases

through its judicial system. For instance, in the case of the death of Supriyanto
in 2015, an Indonesian migrant crew member allegedly subjected to abuse,
the Taiwanese courts reopened the case for further investigation, including
summoning eyewitnesses from Indonesia to testify to partially government-
funded travel and accommodation expenses (I-ting, 2023).

Thailand emphasizes surveillance and protection through the Port-in Port-

out (PIPO) mechanism to identify violations. Reports from the Fishers’ Rights
Network (FRN) indicate that from 2019 to 2022, there were 159,807 inspections
but only 119 violations were found (less than 1% of total inspections). Of these,
only 61 were brought to court. The FRN notes that the low number of cases
may be due to stigma among inspection officers who avoid high violation
findings to create a positive image for the PIPO program (Fishers’ Rights
Network, 2023).

These remedial measures reflect the efforts of the governments in Taiwan and
Thailand to address violations in the fishery industry; however, there is still a
need to improve the implementation of surveillance and law enforcement. The
importance of the effective application of regulations and sanctions, as well as
fair and transparent judicial processes, is key to ensuring that labor and human
rights violations can be effectively addressed and provide adequate redress for
victims.

4.3.3 Access to Health Support Facilities for Migrant Fishery Workers

In the context of remedial efforts to improve access to health support facilities
for migrant fishery workers, there is a significant discrepancy in the level of
protection provided depending on their work location. In Taiwan, workers in
territorial waters are covered by an insurance system that grants access to
health facilities, but this protection does not extend to those working on distant
water fishing (DWF) vessels (Yen & Liuhuang, 2021). A similar situation exists
in South Korea, where migrant fishery workers in territorial seas have access to
national health facilities equivalent to those of local citizens, whereas those in
the DWF sector are only provided with limited private insurance (Monterey Bay
Aquarium, 2022).

Several remedial steps have been implemented to address this inequality. First,
there is an urgent need to expand health insurance coverage to include all
migrant fishery workers irrespective of their operational location. This would
ensure that all workers have access to adequate healthcare services, whether
they work in territorial waters or on DWF vessels. Secondly, it is crucial to ensure
that DWF-operating vessels are equipped with adequate medical facilities,
including first-aid equipment and trained healthcare personnel, to handle
medical emergencies. Thirdly, enhancing the accessibility of healthcare services

44
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

for migrant fishery workers while on land is vital. This can be achieved through
collaboration with healthcare facilities at ports and by ensuring that workers
are informed about how to access these services. Fourthly, ongoing health
education and advocacy should be provided to the migrant fishery workers.
This includes information about their right to access healthcare services and
how to effectively utilize them.

These measures aim to ensure that migrant fishery workers, especially those in
more vulnerable situations in DWF vessels, have equitable and adequate access
to healthcare services. Implementing these remedial efforts not only protects
the physical health of workers but also supports their welfare and dignity in the
fishing industry. This approach is a crucial part of broader efforts to improve
the working conditions and protect the rights of migrant fishery workers.

4.3.4 Complaint Mechanisms for Migrant Fishery Workers

In the context of remedial efforts, complaint mechanisms are crucial for
addressing disputes and violations of the rights of migrant workers. Through
the Philippine Overseas Labour Office (POLO) and the Overseas Worker Welfare
Association (OWWA), the Philippines has implemented strategic measures
to facilitate the complaint process for Filipino migrant workers involved in
industrial relations disputes. In 2020, the Philippine government allocated a
special legal aid budget for migrant workers engaged in judicial processes
in other countries (FairSquare Projects, 2021). This initiative enables migrant
workers to access the necessary legal support to navigate the legal system of
their host countries.

Moreover, to resolve industrial disputes between migrant workers and domestic

manufacturing companies, Filipino migrant workers can file their cases with
the National Labor Relations Commission of the Philippines. This provides
an effective channel for workers to legally resolve their issues in their home
countries, offering access to a more familiar and potentially more accessible
judicial system.

These remedial measures demonstrate the Philippine government’s

commitment to supporting citizens working abroad. By providing efficient
complaint mechanisms and access to legal assistance, Filipino migrant workers
are equipped with the necessary tools to protect their rights and seek justice
in cases of violation. This not only enhances legal security for migrant workers
but also assures them that they are not alone in facing challenges in their
overseas workplaces.

This approach can serve as a model for other countries in their efforts to
enhance migrant worker protection. It is crucial for migrant-sending countries
to ensure that their citizens have access to effective legal support and complaint

45
Navigating the Currents:

mechanisms, especially in cases of human rights violations and unfair working

conditions. Through such efforts, sending countries can play a significant role
in strengthening the legal protection and support for migrant workers globally.

4.3.5 Remedial Efforts for Job Mobility in the Migrant Fishery Sector
In the context of remedial efforts to protect the rights of migrant fishery
workers, especially the right to change jobs or employers, significant differences
exist between Taiwan and Thailand. In Taiwan, policies enabling workers to
change jobs or employers have been implemented in response to hyper-
dependency situations where workers are heavily reliant on a single employer.
Such conditions often exacerbate labor rights violations and render workers
vulnerable to stress and health deterioration. Taiwan has made progressive
strides, including the operation of a 24-hour complaint and protection hotline.
However, this right remains constrained to certain situations such as ship
damage or salary non-payment, with final decisions often held by manning
agencies (FairSquare Projects, 2021). This indicates that, despite progress, the
freedom of workers to change jobs or employers remains limited, particularly
in cases of labor violations or dissatisfaction with working conditions.

In contrast, Thailand implements a stricter system, disallowing job changes due

to the migrant workers’ registration system. If workers wish to terminate their
contract, they must secure a new employer to avoid deportation, a procedure
that adds complexity and challenges for workers seeking to exit unfavorable
work situations.

In the realm of remedial efforts, enhancing workers’ access to changing jobs

or employers is crucial. Measures should include clarifying and expanding
the right to change jobs beyond conditions such as ship damage or salary
nonpayment. Enhancing access to complaint mechanisms and protection, such
as 24-hour hotlines, must ensure effectiveness for all workers, and decisions
to change jobs or employers should be more worker centric than agency
driven. Furthermore, inter-country cooperation is necessary to facilitate worker
transfers between companies and countries, especially in situations where
workers wish to terminate their contracts.

These measures will help ensure that migrant fishery workers have greater
control over their working conditions and reduce the risk of exploitation while
also improving their welfare and rights in the fishery industry. This approach is
a vital part of broader efforts to enhance working conditions and protect the
rights of migrant fishery workers globally.

46
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

4.3.6 Progressive Remedial Actions for Undocumented

Migrant Fishery Workers
Addressing the challenges of irregular migration and the vulnerabilities of
workers ensnared in such practices, Thailand has taken a significant remedial
step with its Pink Card program. This initiative was a direct response to the urgent
need to protect undocumented migrant workers from exploitation and abuse.
It allows these workers to legalize their status and gain legitimate employment
rights, reducing the risk of legal action and opening access to workers’ rights,
such as healthcare services and potential work contract extensions (Kadfak &
Widengård, 2022).

Thailand’s approach to addressing the plight of undocumented migrant

workers by providing an opportunity for legalization represents a meaningful
step in worker rights protection. The Pink Card program enables these workers
to emerge from the shadows and integrate into the formal economy, access
basic services, and enhance protection. This move also reflects the Thai
government’s acknowledgment of the significance of migrant workers in their
economies and the necessity to shield them from exploitation.

However, it is crucial to ensure that this legalization process is straightforward,

accessible, and free of exploitation. This means designing a program to prevent
abuse by entities that might take advantage of migrant workers during the
legal process. Additionally, there should be education and outreach to migrant
workers about their rights and how to access the services available through the
Pink Card program.

Remedial measures such as Thailand’s Pink Card program demonstrate an

effective way to address irregular migration while respecting human rights
and ensuring the protection of migrant workers. This approach can serve as a
model for other countries in their efforts to provide worker-centric solutions
to irregular migration issues, focusing on the integration, protection, and
empowerment of migrant fishery workers.

4.4 Fostering a Supportive Environment for Migrant

Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia
The primary emphasis of this chapter is to establish conditions conducive
to human rights protection for migrant fishery workers. This involves the
implementation of higher standards and norms, strengthening of protection
mechanisms, and legal compliance. The topics covered include bilateral
agreements, worker statuses, ratification of ILO conventions, worker rights
traceability, business-to-business (B2B) contracts, and collective action with
domestic and international NGOs.

47
Navigating the Currents:

Bilateral agreements between countries, such as between Taiwan and the

Philippines, are crucial for ensuring migrant worker protection through
international dialogue and cooperation. These agreements create a framework
that ensures that both the sending and receiving countries share responsibility
for the welfare and protection of migrant workers.

The discussion of worker status differences in Taiwan and South Korea reveals
issues of inequality in wage standards and working conditions, highlighting
the need for transparency and fairness in recruitment processes and contract
management. The ratification of ILO conventions and protocols related to
forced labor, as undertaken by Thailand, is a critical step in enhancing labor
standards and protecting migrant workers’ rights.

The significance of worker rights traceability in fishery industry certification

emphasizes the need to extend the focus from environmental sustainability
to social sustainability, ensuring that fishery products come from fair labor
practices. The issue of B2B work contracts reveals challenges in ensuring
transparency and fairness in employment agreements, demanding the
development of clearer standards and best practices at the international level.

Finally, collective action with domestic and international NGOs underscores the
importance of partnerships and collaborations among various stakeholders in
advocating migrant workers’ rights. Active involvement is crucial in ensuring
a supportive work environment for migrant workers, where their rights are
respected and they are afforded adequate protection.

This subsection explores how various approaches and strategies can be used to
create a supportive and fair working environment for migrant fishery workers.
This includes understanding how regulations, policies, and practices can be
improved to create better working conditions and ensure that the rights of
migrant workers are protected in the global fishery industry.

4.4.1 Enhancing Bilateral Cooperation for Migrant Fishery Workers’

Protection
One of the key recommendations from the ACSC/APF 2023 discussion
emphasizes the augmentation of bilateral cooperation, especially involving
sending, receiving, and vessel-flagging countries due to the multinational
nature of migration. Bilateral cooperation is crucial in effectively managing
migration, aiming to establish conditions free from rights violations by
setting standards and norms and bolstering protection mechanisms and legal
compliance. Bilateral agreements, such as those between Taiwan and the
Philippines, exemplify effective international cooperation focused on migrant
worker protection (FairSquare Projects, 2021). Through annual dialogues, these

48
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

countries strive to address and respond to grassroots aspirations from both

sides, ensuring that the issues faced by migrant workers are addressed directly.

The significance of offices such as the Philippines Overseas Labour Office

(POLO), staffed with labor attachés and related departments, lies in their ability
to provide direct supervision and support for migrant workers in the host
countries. The presence of such institutions in strategic countries strengthens
the support network for migrant workers, ensuring that they have access to the
necessary resources and protection when far from home.

Indonesia has forged bilateral agreements with China and South Korea, although
the implementation of these agreements is perceived to have weaknesses. In
particular, cooperation with South Korea has resulted in a government-to-
government (G2G) recruitment program and specialized training facilities for
Indonesian migrant workers (Gokkon, 2022). These initiatives demonstrate
efforts to improve the quality and condition of Indonesian migrant workers,
ensuring that they possess the skills and knowledge required for a safe and
protected working environment.

The obligation to establish bilateral relations aims not only to enhance migrant
worker protection but also to ensure that the sending countries can actively
participate in protecting their citizens abroad. This includes provisions such as
requiring at least one crew member on board to have medical skills, which is
crucial in emergencies at sea.

With these bilateral agreements, countries strive to create a safer and fairer
work environment for migrant workers, strengthen adherence to international
labor standards, and promote the exchange of information and best practices.
These efforts are vital for creating a global environment that supports the
rights and well-being of migrant workers.

4.4.2 Addressing Disparities in Worker Status: The Taiwan Case of

LG and Non-LG Workers
In the effort to create an environment supportive of migrant workers’ rights,
the issue of different worker statuses, as observed in Taiwan between Letters of
Guarantee (LG) and non-LG workers, warrants special attention. Taiwan, similar
to South Korea, exhibits a disparity in wage standards based on fishing location,
with higher standards for territorial waters than for distant water fishing. This
creates inequality among migrant fishery workers and potential manipulation
in maritime employment agreements (Anwar, 2019; Yen & Liuhuang, 2021).

LG workers in Taiwan often face less favorable working conditions than their
counterparts in territorial waters. Practices such as signing blank employment
contracts or creating new maritime agreements upon arrival in the host

49
Navigating the Currents:

country make migrant workers vulnerable. This situation underscores the need
for transparency and fairness in contract signing and management of maritime
employment agreements.

Several steps are necessary to address these issues and build a fairer and more
transparent environment for migrant workers. First, oversight and regulation
of maritime employment agreements should be increased to ensure that
all contracts are signed fairly and with complete information. This includes
combating the practice of signing blank contracts or altering contracts
without the worker’s knowledge or consent.Secondly, more equitable and
standardized wage policies between territorial and distant water workers can
minimize existing disparities. Such policies should be guided by international
labor standards and consider the needs and rights of migrant workers. Thirdly,
the sending and receiving governments should collaborate to ensure that the
rights and welfare of migrant workers are respected. This can be achieved
through bilateral agreements focused on the protection of migrant workers
and ensuring adherence to agreed-upon labor standards.

These steps will not only help strengthen legal protection and compliance
with labor standards for migrant workers but also create a fairer and more
sustainable work environment for them. This approach is crucial to ensure that
migrant workers are recognized as an integral part of the global economy and
are afforded rights equal to those of other workers.

4.4.3 Ratification of ILO C188 and Other Relevant Conventions and

Protocols: Strengthening Migrant Fishery Workers’ Rights
The development of an environment that supports the protection of migrant
fishery workers’ rights necessitates a strong commitment from countries in
the region. In this context, Thailand’s ratification of the ILO C188, governing
the protection of fishery workers both in territorial waters and distant water
fisheries, represents a significant step in enforcing decent work standards, and
it signifies Thailand’s commitment to improving the working conditions of
fishery workers. By contrast, countries such as Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar, the
Philippines, South Korea, Japan, and China have not yet ratified ILO C188 (ILO,
2017; Yusriza et al., 2023). Their absence from ratification indicates an urgent
need to raise awareness and encourage similar actions in these countries. The
ratification of this convention is crucial, as it establishes global standards for
occupational safety and health, working hours, rest, employment contracts,
and other aspects of working conditions in the fisheries sector.

Furthermore, Thailand is the only country in the region that has ratified the
Protocol of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (ILO P29), a critical instrument
in combating forced labor and protecting the rights of migrant workers.
Thailand’s ratification of these conventions and protocols demonstrates a

50
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

proactive stance in combating forced labor practices and enforcing decent

labor standards.

To encourage other countries to follow Thailand’s lead, intensive diplomacy

and advocacy at regional and international levels is necessary. Organizations
such as the ILO, along with NGOs and labor unions, can play an active role in
advocating the importance of ratifying these conventions. This approach can
include inter-country dialogues, the exchange of best practices, and capacity
building to implement the standards set by conventions.

Supporting the protection of migrant fishery workers in the industry requires

comprehensive policy transformation and close collaboration among
governments, industry, and other stakeholders. The ratification of ILO C188
and ILO P29 by more countries in the region would be a crucial step in creating
a fairer and more sustainable fishery industry where the rights and welfare of
migrant fishery workers are respected and protected.

4.4.4 Labor Rights Traceability in the Fisheries Industry

In the endeavor to construct an environment that upholds worker rights, the
concept of labor rights traceability within the fisheries industry is of paramount
importance. Currently, the majority of international certifications in the fishery
sector are predominantly focused on the origins and processing methods
of seafood, with the dominant discourse largely confined to environmental
sustainability, protected species, and fishing methods (Kadfak & Widengård,
2022). However, an essential aspect that is often overlooked is the traceability
of labor rights, encompassing working conditions, wages, protections, and
fundamental rights of workers in the fisheries industry.

To develop a more inclusive and equitable environment in the fisheries sector,

it is imperative to expand the scope of certification to include labor rights
traceability. This means that, in addition to verifying the origin of seafood
products, certifications should also scrutinize whether these products are
produced under working conditions that comply with international human
rights and labor standards. This approach will ensure that fishery products are
sustainable, not only environmentally but also in terms of workers’ rights.

Advancing labor rights traceability involves engaging stakeholders from various

sectors, including governments, industry, labor unions, and NGOs, in the
development and implementation of comprehensive certification standards.
These certifications should encompass assessments of working conditions
on fishing vessels, the recruitment process of workers, adherence to labor
regulations, and the presence and accessibility of complaint mechanisms and
conflict resolution.

51
Navigating the Currents:

Integrating labor rights traceability into fishery industry certifications will

enhance transparency and accountability in the supply chain and encourage
improvements in working conditions and the protection of worker rights. This
approach is crucial for creating a fishery industry that is not only environmentally
sustainable, but also fair and respectful of workers’ rights. Thus, the development
of an environment that supports worker rights can be realized where workers
are recognized not just as a part of a labor force but as individuals with rights
and needs that must be respected and protected.

4.4.5 Ethical Recruitment Practices and Migrant Worker Contracts

In the context of creating an environment that supports migrant workers’ rights,
issues involving manipulative practices in labor contracts, such as additional
agreements, blank contracts, or addendums, present a serious concern.
Practices where workers are compelled to sign additional agreements without
full consent or face threats of repatriation and bearing the cost of departure
highlight significant injustices and a lack of transparency in the migrant worker
recruitment process. The ambiguity regarding good practices or standards in
this matter indicates an urgent need for the development of clear and fair tools
or standards that can serve as a reference for all involved parties.

Moreover, the difference in perceptions between recruitment agencies in Taiwan

and the Philippines regarding recruitment fees adds a layer of complexity to
this issue. On the one hand, Taiwanese agencies view recruitment fees as a
commitment from Filipino agencies to provide quality labor; on the other,
Filipino agencies perceive these fees as a guarantee that workers will fulfill their
contracts. This disparity complicates workers’ ability to assess the legitimacy of
recruitment fees and choose legal and ethical agencies (FairSquare Projects,
2021).

In the Philippines the shared responsibility between domestic and foreign

manning companies is emphasized, with the legalization of these agreements
through notarization. The concept of shared responsibility encompasses
ethical recruitment, responsiveness to worker complaints, and agreements for
worker repatriation (Verité, 2021). This step is part of the effort to create a more
transparent and fair working environment for migrant workers.

It is important to develop clear and consistent international best practice and

standards to build an environment that supports migrant workers’ rights. This
includes adopting effective oversight mechanisms to ensure that all work
contracts are signed in a fair and transparent manner, and to prevent contract
manipulation. Additionally, clarification and mutual agreement between sending
and receiving countries regarding recruitment fees can reduce confusion and
potential exploitation of migrant workers. Based on discussions at ACSC/APF
2023, the aforementioned efforts can be undertaken by strengthening the

52
 IV Bridging the Protection Gap for Migrant Fishery Workers from Southeast Asia

involvement of the private sector. The involvement of private sector entities,

such as ship owners, plays a role in establishing good working environment
standards as part of migrant workers’ rights.

These efforts should be accompanied by adequate education and information

for migrant workers regarding their rights and proper procedures in the
recruitment and contract signing process. Thus, an environment that supports
migrant workers’ rights can be achieved, in which workers are protected from
exploitation and treated fairly and transparently throughout the recruitment
and placement process.

4.4.6 Collaborative Action with Domestic and International NGOs

Collective actions involving NGOs including workers’ unions are crucial for
establishing an environment conducive to the protection of migrant fishery
workers’ rights. The Indonesian Fisheries Workers Union (SPPI) in South Korea
exemplifies this by actively collaborating with entities such as the Indonesian
Embassy in South Korea, the Labor Attaché, the Directorate for Protection at
the Agency for the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers
(BP2MI), the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Korea’s Support Centers
for Foreign Workers, the National Pension Fund of South Korea, and the
Keumseong Law Office in South Korea (Anwar, 2019).

Parhusip (2023) argues that NGOs and their networks play a more active role
in advocating migrant fishery workers in Taiwan than state efforts. Parhusip’s
study highlights the importance of social networks and connections with
humanitarian infrastructure in successful advocacy initiatives for migrant
fishers. The Stella Maris International Seafarers’ Service Center in Kaohsiung
and Indonesian migrant organizations in Taiwan’s fishing ports are examples
of this collaborative approach.

In Taiwan, the Keelung Migrant Fishermen Union (KMFU) and Yilan Migrant
Fishermen Union (YMFU) pioneered migrant fishery workers’ rights protection.
Their focus is on advocacy, stabilization, and services for migrant workers,
collaborating with domestic and international NGOs to form a Coalition for
the Human Rights of Migrant Fishers. One of their initiatives is an educational
program for high-school students in Taiwan to increase awareness of working
conditions on ships (Kao, 2021).

In Indonesia, civil society and union efforts are considered more active than
governmental initiatives. Government Regulation No.22 of 2022 concerning
the Protection of Migrant Commercial and Fishing Vessel Crews was propelled
by active NGO involvement and legal actions against the regulation’s delayed
issuance (Palmer & Hasbiyalloh, 2022). The ACSC/APF 2023 discussions reveal
various civil society coalition efforts, such as coordinating teams to accelerate

53
Navigating the Currents:

the ratification of ILO C188 by Indonesia (Greenpeace Indonesia, 2023b) and

initiating dialogue to push the protection agenda. For example, Indonesia
Ocean Justice Initiative (IOJI) (2023b) hosted a workshop to strengthen the
protection of Indonesian fishing vessel crews in Taiwan, focusing on protection
initiatives and emphasizing human rights in the context of worker migration

These collaborative efforts represent a holistic approach to building an

environment that supports migrant workers’ rights. Through partnerships
between labor unions, NGOs, and government agencies, a strong advocacy
network ensures the protection and improvement of migrant workers’
working conditions. This collective action not only fosters public awareness
and community capacity building but also provides broader social and moral
support for migrant workers.

V. Conclusion: The Need for an

Integrated and Holistic Approach
in the ASEAN Context

Evaluating the effectiveness of the ASEAN Declaration on the Placement and

Protection of Migrant Fishers in protecting Southeast Asian migrant fishery
workers reveals the complexities and the urgent need for a comprehensive
approach. Implementation challenges highlight significant discrepancies
in labor standards and regulations among member states, including
inconsistencies in maritime work agreements. Harmonizing these standards is
crucial to ensure consistent worker protection. The upcoming ASEAN guideline
on the placement and protection of migrant fishers, scheduled for adoption
in 2024 under Lao PDR’s ASEAN chairmanship, is a promising step towards
addressing these gaps. This guideline must be practical, supportive of migrant
fishers’ protection, and serve as a regional standard for policy development.

Effective monitoring and enforcement are crucial amidst isolated and remote
operations in the fishery industry. Implementing the declaration requires robust
monitoring systems coupled with the effective enforcement of regulations.
Critical aspects include the protection of workers’ rights and welfare. Issues
such as misinformation, exploitation, and poor working conditions demand
enhanced protective efforts, requiring broader collaboration among
governments of ASEAN countries and destination countries, the private sector,
civil society, and international organizations.

54
V. Conclusion: The Need for an Integrated and Holistic Approach in the ASEAN Context

Additional challenges stem from illegal and informal practices such as IUU
Fishing and irregular working conditions, necessitating stronger cross-national
coordination and law enforcement. Adequate resources and capacity, including
funding, training, and technical support, are vital for implementing the ASEAN
Declaration on the Placement and Protection of Migrant Fishers. Education and
awareness-raising about migrant workers’ rights and promoting fair working
practices are also crucial for preventing exploitation and protecting workers.
Furthermore, the post-return phase highlights difficulties in repatriation and
reintegration, indicating the need for better support systems for migrant
workers upon return. Therefore, implementing the ASEAN Declaration requires
combined efforts and a strong commitment from all member states to create a
fair and sustainable working environment for migrant fishery workers.

Migrant fishery workers from Southeast Asian countries face a series of

challenges that require a comprehensive response. Misinformation and
deception in the early stages of the migration process, exploitative working
conditions, and lack of access to healthcare and insurance indicate an urgent
need for reform in recruitment and placement practices. Communication
barriers and skill gaps, along with a lack of legal protection and unionization,
add complexity to these challenges. The post-return phase is also marked by
repatriation challenges including unfair repatriation costs and administrative
manipulation.

To effectively address these challenges, preventive efforts involving various

stakeholders are required. This includes adjusting seafarer employment
agreements (SEAs) to ensure clear and fair rights and obligations for workers and
employers, stringent monitoring by private manning agencies, and transparent
and fair standards for wage payments. Ship seaworthiness standards must be
regulated to reduce risks to workers, and effective protection mechanisms
must be implemented to prevent exploitation and ensure fairness for workers
and the industry as a whole.

An effective preventive approach to addressing the issues of migrant fishery

workers from Southeast Asia requires collaboration and joint commitment
among nations, the private sector, and international institutions. This will create
a fairer and more humane working environment, benefiting all the parties
involved in the fishery industry. Thus, policies and practices oriented towards
protecting human rights, safety, and worker welfare are essential in addressing
these complex and diverse issues.

To enhance protection for migrant fishers it is crucial to acknowledge their

contributions to the sector and address their vulnerabilities. An enabling
environment must be established to combat and prevent exploitative practices
throughout the pre-departure and employment phases. Migrant fishers, as
key actors in this sector, should play a central role in the development of

55
Navigating the Currents:

multilateral and bilateral agreements that govern and protect their rights. These
agreements should cover labor and human rights standards, labor inspections,
grievance mechanisms, and law enforcement cooperation.

States, as duty bearers of human rights, must demonstrate political will in

developing regional and bilateral agreements, roadmaps, programs, and
services to promote and protect the rights of migrant fishers. They should
be treated non-discriminatorily, as workers and human beings with full rights
entitlements. States involved in the fishery sector must also ensure human
rights due diligence in business operations, including requiring ship owners
or business entities to establish grievance mechanisms, including on-board
complaint procedures and access to communication. These mechanisms
should be clearly communicated to workers prior to employment. Additionally,
working contracts, as legally binding documents, must be comprehensible to
migrant fishers.

Finally, regular coordination and monitoring of law enforcement and case

handling, with a focus on victim remedies, is essential. Solidarity among fishers,
including direct support for victims from all stakeholders is also crucial.

56
 References

References

Anwar, R. P. (2019). An Analysis of Formation of A Voluntary Indonesian

Migrant Fishermen Organization and Its Roles in Combatting Poor
Working Conditions in South Korea Fishery Industry. Contemporary
Society and Multiculture, 9(1), 71–106. https://doi.org/10.35281/
cms.2019.06.09.01.71
APIL & IOM. (2017). TIED AT SEA: Human Rights Violations against Migrant
Fishers on Korean Fishing Vessels. APIL & IIOM.
Asada-Miyakawa. (2023). Advancing Labour Rights for Migrant Fishing and
Seafood Processing Sector Workers in ASEAN. The Asean. https://
theaseanmagazine.asean.org/article/advancing-labour-rights-for-
migrant-fishing-and-seafood-processing-sector-workers-in-asean/
ASEAN. (2023, May 10). ASEAN Declaration on The Placement and Protection
of Migrant Fishers. ASEAN Main Portal. https://asean.org/asean-
declaration-on-the-placement-and-protection-of-migrant-fishers/
Auethavornpipat, R. (2022). Norm Contestation and the Weakening of Migrant
Fisher Protection in Thailand. Global Constitutionalism, 11(2), 249–273.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381721000277
Borgen Project. (2018, May 7). Progress Towards Ending Modern Day Slavery
in Thailand. Borgenproject.Org. https://borgenproject.org/modern-day-
slavery-in-thailand/
Casey, A. (2022, May 23). Promoting Fair Labor for Migrant Workers in
Thailand’s Seafood Supply Chain. Resonanceglobal.Com. https://
www.resonanceglobal.com/blog/fair-labor-for-migrant-workers-in-
thailands-seafood-supply-chain
Chantavanich, S., & Jitpong, W. (2023). Precarity and Social Protection of
Migrant Fishers in Thailand: Case Studies of Death and Disappearance
at Sea. Marine Policy, 155, 105743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2023.105743
Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic Masculinity:
Rethinking the Concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0891243205278639
Council of Agriculture. (2022). Action Plan for Fisheries and Human Rights
[Action Plan]. Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan.
Djohari, N., & White, C. (2022). How the socio-cultural practices of fishing
obscure micro-disciplinary, verbal, and psychological abuse of migrant
fishers in North East Scotland. Maritime Studies, 21(1), 19–34. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s40152-021-00251-0

57
Navigating the Currents:

EJF. (2023). High and Dry: A Policy Briefing on the Future of Thai Fisheries.
Environmental Justice Foundation. https://ejfoundation.org/resources/
downloads/High-and-Dry_2023.pdf
EJF & APIL. (2023). Korea’s Migrant Fishers Plan fails to end human rights abuses
at sea.
FairSquare Projects. (2021). Philippines to Taiwan: Fair Recruitment in review
(The Five Corridors Project - Corridor 4). FairSquare Projects.
FAO. (n.d.). Agreement on Port State Measures (PSMA). Fao.Org. Retrieved
December 25, 2023, from https://www.fao.org/port-state-measures/en/
Fishers’ Rights Network. (2023). THAILAND’S PORT-IN PORT-OUT (PIPO)
INSPECTIONS AND THE ILO: FAILING FISHERS, SEAFOOD SUPPLY CHAINS
AT RISK. Fishers’ Right Network.
FiskerForum. (2018, September 24). Taiwanese fishing vessels accept NZ’s high
seas boarding and inspection as standard practice. https://fiskerforum.
com/taiwanese-fishing-vessels-accept-nzs-high-seas-boarding-and-
inspection-as-standard-practice/
Fujii, Iwao, Okochi, Yumi, & Kawamura, Hajime. (2021). Promoting Cooperation
of Monitoring, Control, and Surveillance of IUU Fishing in the Asia-
Pacific. Sustainability, 13(18). https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810231
Gokkon, B. (2022, September 6). Indonesia pursues agreements to protect
its fishers on foreign vessels. https://news.mongabay.com/2022/09/
indonesia-pursues-agreements-to-protect-its-fishers-on-foreign-
vessels/
Greenpeace. (2023, May 12). Greenpeace on ASEAN’s historic declaration on
migrant fishers protection. https://www.greenpeace.org/southeastasia/
press/58883/greenpeace-on-aseans-historic-declaration-on-migrant-
fishers-protection/
Greenpeace Indonesia. (2023a, May 12). ASEAN Deklarasikan Pelindungan
Awak Kapal Migran. https://www.greenpeace.org/indonesia/siaran-
pers/56458/pertama-dalam-sejarah-asean-deklarasikan-pelindungan-
awak-kapal-migran/
Greenpeace Indonesia. (2023b, September 1). Greenpeace dan Tim 9 Temui
ASEAN untuk Dorong Perbaikan Pelindungan Awak Kapal Perikanan
Migran. Greenpeace Indonesia. https://www.greenpeace.org/indonesia/
siaran-pers/56995/greenpeace-dan-tim-9-temui-asean-untuk-dorong-
perbaikan-pelindungan-awak-kapal-perikanan-migran/
Greenpeace & SBMI. (2019). Seabound: The Journey to Modern Slavery on the High
Seas. https://www.greenpeace.org/southeastasia/publication/3428/
seabound-the-journey-to-modern-slavery-on-the-high-seas/

58
 References

Greenpeace & Serikat Buruh Migran Indonesia. (2021). FORCED LABOUR AT

SEA: The case of Indonesian Migrant Fishers.
Hidayah, A., Susilo, W., & Mulyadi. (2015). Selusur Kebijakan (Minus) Perlindungan
Buruh Migran Indonesia. Migrant Care.
Human Rights Watch. (2018, January 23). Hidden Chains: Rights Abuses and
Forced Labor in Thailand’s Fishing Industry. Hrw.Org. https://www.hrw.
org/report/2018/01/23/hidden-chains/rights-abuses-and-forced-
labor-thailands-fishing-industry
Hung, P.-C., Lee, H.-C., Lin, C.-C., & Liu, W.-H. (2022). Promoting human rights
for Taiwan’s fishermen: Collaboration with the primary source countries
of Taiwan’s DWF migrant fishermen. Frontiers in Marine Science, 9,
1097378. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.1097378
ILO. (n.d.). C188—Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188). International
Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORML
EXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C188
ILO. (2020). Study on the Recruitment and Placement of Migrant Fishers from
Indonesia (ILO Working Paper). https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/
public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-jakarta/documents/publication/
wcms_752111.pdf
ILO. (2022a). Pre-Employment Information Needs of Migrant Workers in the East
and Horn of Africa-Gulf Corridor.
ILO. (2022b). Rough seas: The impact of COVID-19 on fishing workers in South-
East Asia.
ILO. (2017). Ratifications of C188—Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188).
Ilo.Org. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=1000:11300:0::no:113
00:p11300_instrument_id:312333
ILO. (2023, March). Consultation workshops on ASEAN Declaration and ASEAN
Guidelines on Protection of Migrant Workers and Family Members in
Crisis Situations. https://www.ilo.org/asia/events/WCMS_877323/lang-
-en/index.htm
IMO. (n.d.). Ratification of Treaties / STCW-F 1995 [GISIS: Status of Treaties].
Gisis.Imo.Org. Retrieved December 25, 2023, from https://gisis.imo.org/
Public/ST/Ratification.aspx?tid=12
IMO. (1997). The New STWC Convention: The 1995 amendments to the
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW), 1978 (Focus on IMO). IMO. https://
wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/OurWork/Safety/Documents/
STCW97.pdf

59
Navigating the Currents:

IMO. (1995, July 7). International Convention on Standards of Training,

Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (STCW-F),
1995. Imo.Org. https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/humanelement/
pages/stcw-f-convention.aspx
IMO. (2012). 2012 Cape Town Agreement to Enhance Fishing Safety. Imo.
Org. https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/
CapeTownAgreementForFishing.aspx
IMO. (2019, November 27). Ratification Details / Indonesia [GISIS -
Status of Treaties:]. Gisis.Imo.Org. https://gisis.imo.org/Public/ST/
RatificationDetails.aspx?rid=15089
IMO. (2020). IMO Webinars Put Fishing Vessel Safety High on Agenda. Imo.
Org. https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/pages/37-
fishing-safety.aspx
Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative. (2022). Potret Kerawanan Kerja Pelaut
Perikanan di Kapal Asing: Tinjauan Hukum HAM dan Kelembagaan.
https://oceanjusticeinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/
Buku%20Laporan%20Potret%20Kerawanan%20Pelaut%20Perikanan.
pdf
Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative. (2023a, May 9). Strengthening the Protection
of Migrant Fishers through the Adoption of the ASEAN Declaration on
the Protection of Migrant Fishers. https://oceanjusticeinitiative.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/05/asean_migrant_fishers_en.pdf
Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative. (2023b, December 8). Joint Civil Society and
Union Initiative in Strengthening the Protection of Indonesian Migrant
Fishing Vessel Crews on a Taiwanese Fishing Boat. Oceanjustiveinitiative.
Org. https://oceanjusticeinitiative.org/2023/12/08/joint-civil-society-
and-union-initiative-in-strengthening-the-protection-of-indonesian-
migrant-fishing-vessel-crews-on-a-taiwanese-fishing-boat/
IOM. (2019). Reintegration Handbook. International Organization for Migration.
I-ting, C. (2023, April 11). Distance To The Truth – Reinvestigation Of Migrant
Fisherman’s Death In Indonesia, Critical Cross-Border Witness Testifies.
Taiwangazette.Org. https://www.taiwangazette.org/news/2023/4/11/
distance-to-the-truth-reinvestigation-of-migrant-fishermans-death-in-
indonesia-critical-cross-border-witness-testifies
Japan International Trainee & Skilled Worker Cooperation Organization. (n.d.).
What is the Technical Intern Training Program? Retrieved April 15, 2024,
from https://www.jitco.or.jp/en/regulation/
Kadfak, A., & Widengård, M. (2022). From Fish to Fishworker Traceability in Thai
Fisheries Reform. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 0(0),
25148486221104992. https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486221104992

60
 References

Kamalina, A. R. (2022, August 29). BP2MI Lepas 470 Pekerja Migran ke Korea
Selatan, Ini Sektor Penempatannya. Bisnis.com. https://ekonomi.bisnis.
com/read/20220829/12/1571816/bp2mi-lepas-470-pekerja-migran-
ke-korea-selatan-ini-sektor-penempatannya
Kao, A. (2021, February 22). Keelung Migrant Fishermen Form Union, Second of
its Kind in Taiwan. https://international.thenewslens.com/article/147564
Knott, Christine & Neis, Barbara. (2017). Privatization, financialization and ocean
grabbing in New Brunswick herring fisheries and salmon aquaculture.
Marine Policy, 80, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.10.022
Lee, J., Gill, S., Chen, S., & Chiang, M. (2023). Wi-Fi: Available at Sea—But Not
for Fishers (Briefing Paper No.2).
Lozano, A., Sparks, J., Durgana, D., Farthing, C., Fitzpatrick, J., Krough-Poulsen,
B., McDonald, G., McDonald, S., Ota, Y., Sarto, N., Cisneros-Montemayor,
A., Lout, G., Finkbeiner, E., & Kittinger, J. (2022). Decent Work in
Fisheries: Current Trends and Key Considerations for Future Research
and Policy. Marine Policy, 136, 104922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2021.104922
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. (n.d.). What is the SSW?. Retrieved April
15, 2024, from https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/ca/fna/ssw/us/overview/
Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare. (2023, January 27). Summary of
Notification of “Foreign Employment Status” (As of the end of October 2022).
News/Public Relations. https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/newpage_30367.
html
Monterey Bay Aquarium. (2022). Tropical tuna social risk profile Forced labor,
human trafficking, and hazardous child labor risks; Taiwan, Fishing, and
Processing [Seafood Social Risk Tool]. Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood
Watch.
Nur, M. (2021). SLAVERY OF INDONESIAN MIGRANT FISHERS: A REVIEW OF
REGULATION AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 10(2),
145. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v10i2.53715
Palmer, W., Ford, M., & Hasbiyalloh, B. (2023). Regulating Recruitment and
Contracting of Migrant Fishers from Indonesia. Asian and Pacific Migration
Journal, 32(3), 452–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/01171968231210760
Palmer, W., & Hasbiyalloh, B. (2022). The Government Now Has a Much-Needed
Regulation on the Recruitment of Migrant Fishers from Indonesia. What
Next? The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/the-government-
now-has-a-much-needed-regulation-on-the-recruitment-of-migrant-
fishers-from-indonesia-what-next-181946

61
Navigating the Currents:

Parhusip, J. (2018). Racialized Migration: Indonesian Fishers on Taiwanese

Fishing Vessels. Conflict, Justice, and Decolonization: Critical Studies of
Inter-Asian Societies, 2709–5479.
Parhusip, J. (2023). Emerging Port Infrastructure and Advocacy Networks for
Migrant Fishers in Taiwan. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 32(2),
371–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/01171968231191468
Pew. (2018, October 5). The Cape Town Agreement Explained [Ending Illegal
Fishing]. Pewtrust.Org. https://pew.org/2DXmQFN
Ratnawulan, D., Lindgren, D., & Ravisopitying, B. (2021). Effects of Forced Labor
and Trafficking in Persons on Female Relatives of Male Fishers. Plan
International. https://plan-international.org/philippines/publications/
effects-of-forced-labour-and-trafficking-in-persons-on-female-
relatives-of-male-fishers/
Resi, A. P. (2023, September 2). Protection of Migrant Fishers in ASEAN and East
Asia. Asean People’s Forum, Jakarta.
Rogovin, K. (2020). Time for A Sea Change: Why Union Rights for Migrant
Workers are Needed to Prevent Forced Labor in the Thai Seafood Industry.
International Labor Rights Forum. https://laborrights.org/sites/default/
files/publications/ILRF_TimeforaSeaChange.pdf
Rosida, H., Nadiyya, A., & Indah, W. S. (2022). Urgensi Ratifikasi Konvensi ILO 188
Tahun 2007 sebagai Pemenuhan dan Perlindungan HAM ABK Indonesia
di Kapal Asing. Humani (Hukum Dan Masyarakat Madani), 12(1), Article
1. https://doi.org/10.26623/humani.v12i1.4738
SAFETY4SEA. (2020, October 26). Cape Town Agreement on fishing vessel safety:
A technical briefing. Safety4sea.Com. https://safety4sea.com/cape-
town-agreement-on-fishing-vessel-safety-a-technical-briefing/
Sasaki, T. (2021). The Marine Products Industry’s Reliance on Foreign Workers
and the Issue of Continuity. Ocean Newsletter No.497, 10-15. https://
www.spf.org/opri/en/global-data/opri/ssp27.pdf
Sawengi, I. H., & Rijal, N. K. (2022). International Cooperation in the Protection
of the Indonesian Migrant Fishing Vessels Crew on Taiwan-Flagged
Ships. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Ilmu Politik Malikussaleh, 3(1), 66–78.
Siggs, M., Global Seafood Alliance, Purton, L., Key Traceability, Tindall, C., Platt,
M., & MP Seafood Consulting. (2023). What is the Expectation of Worker
Voice and Grievance Mechanism on Certified Fishing Vessels? Global
Seafood Alliance & Key Traceability.
Stella Maris Kaohsiung. (2023). Distant water fishers in Taiwan: Challenges and
Responses.

62
 References

Strong, M. (2022, October 21). Taiwan To Launch Fishing Trawler Built According
to Human Rights Regulations. Taiwannews.Com.Tw. https://www.
taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4694034
Taiwan Fisheries Agency. (2022, December 31). 農業部漁業署 (Number of
foreign crew members employed by fishing vessels in Taiwan). www.
fa.gov.tw. https://www.fa.gov.tw/view.php?theme=Rights_for_Foreign_
Crews&subtheme=&id=34
Thai Union. (2020). Guidance to the Thai Union Fishing Vessel Improvement
Program and Code of Conduct (1.1). Thai Union.
The Maritime Executive. (2021, June 25). Report: Continued Rise in Sea Slavery
for Indonesian Fishermen (Report Continued Rise in Sea Slavery for
Indonesian Fishermen, Pos. 1). https://maritime-executive.com/article/
report-continued-rise-in-sea-slavery-for-indonesian-fishermen
Tseng, H.-S., Tsai, H.-H., & Tseng, P.-H. (2023). The Labour Rights Protection of
Migrant Fishing Workers in Taiwan: Case Study of Nan-Fang-Ao Fishing
Harbor. Mdpi, 8(73), 2–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8020073
Ulya, F. N., & Saptohutomo, A. P. (2023, May 11). ASEAN Deklarasi Janji untuk
Melindungi Pekerja Migran di Kawasan. Kompas.Com. https://nasional.
kompas.com/read/2023/05/11/17212111/asean-deklarasi-janji-untuk-
melindungi-pekerja-migran-di-kawasan
Vandergeest, P., & Marschke, M. (2021). Beyond slavery scandals: Explaining
working conditions among fish workers in Taiwan and Thailand. Marine
Policy, 132, 104685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104685
Vandergeest, P., Marschke, M., & MacDonnell, M. (2021). Seafarers In Fishing:
A year into the Covid-19 Pandemic. Marine Policy, 134, 104796. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104796
Verité. (2021). Recruitment and Employment Experiences of Filipino Migrant
Fishers in Taiwan’s Tuna Fishing Sector: An Exploratory Study. Verité.
WCPFC. (2021, May 31). High Seas Boarding & Inspection. MCS and Compliance.
https://www.wcpfc.int/high-seas-boarding-inspection
Wong, L. Y.-D. (2023, September 2). Brief introduction on the working condition
of the migrant fishermen in Taiwan.
Yea, S. (2020). Prefiguring Stigma in Post-Trafficking Lives: Relational
Geographies of Return and Reintegration. Area, 52(3), 558–565. https://
doi.org/10.1111/area.12620

63
Navigating the Currents:

Yea, S., & Stringer, C. (2022). Valuing Victims Voices a Participatory Action
Research Project with Victims of ‘Seafood Slavery’ for Effective Counter-
Trafficking Communication. Winrock International. https://winrock.org/
document/valuing-victims-voices-a-participatory-action-research-
project-with-victims-of-seafood-slavery-for-effective-counter-
trafficking-communication/
Yea, S., Stringer, C., & Palmer, W. (2023). Funnels of Unfreedom: Time-Spaces
of Recruitment and (Im)Mobility in the Trajectories of Trafficked Migrant
Fishers. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 113(1), 291–
306. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2022.2084016
Yen, K.-W., & Liuhuang, L.-C. (2021). A review of migrant labour rights protection
in distant water fishing in Taiwan: From laissez-faire to regulation and
challenges behind. Marine Policy, 134, 104805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpol.2021.104805
Yusriza, B., Sudiarto, T., Muchtar, C., Mangapul, J., Muhammad, A., & Maukar,
P. (2023). Lokalisasi Norma dan Wacana Ratifikasi Konvensi Pekerjaan
dalam Penangkapan Ikan, 2007: Studi Kasus Indonesia. In F. Triantama
(Ed.), Refleksi Politik Internasional Kontemporer: Gatot Subroto Kav. 97
(pp. 127–153). Litnus.
Zoolfakar, M. R., & Rahman, M. T. A. (2013). A Review of Standard of Training,
Certificate, and Watchkeeping for Fisherman 1995. MARINE FRONTIER,
4(2), 60–64.

64
 @2024 BEBESEA

View publication stats