Workers in the global fishing industry have described exhausting shifts, withheld wages, unsafe vessels and restricted access to basic necessities during a European Parliament discussion on sustainable fisheries. The testimony has renewed calls for stronger enforcement of labour protections across seafood supply chains serving the European market.
The debate, held on 30 September by the European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries, focused on the social dimension of sustainable fisheries and the need to tackle forced labour. Representatives of fishing organisations, trade unions, international bodies and labour-rights groups took part.
Testimony highlights severe conditions at sea
Among the speakers was Fredi Seprizal, an Indonesian seafarer who described spending 16 months aboard a Chinese vessel. He said he regularly worked between 16 and 20 hours a day, with some periods lasting 24 hours, while rest could be limited to between three and six hours.
Seprizal also reported inadequate safety equipment, poor food and a lack of clean drinking water. He said his identity documents were withheld and that he had to pay to recover them. His account was presented as an example of the risks faced by workers who may have little practical ability to leave an abusive situation while at sea.
He characterised his experience as modern slavery and told participants that he had feared for his life. The testimony underlined how isolation, recruitment practices and dependence on vessel operators can make labour exploitation difficult to detect.
Calls for effective protection, not paperwork alone
The meeting’s organisers argued that sustainable fishing must include decent working conditions as well as environmental safeguards. Carmen Crespo, chair of the Fisheries Committee, said the European fleet should compete through sustainability, safety and labour rights rather than lower standards.
A study discussed at the meeting examined interviews with 121 fishers and 32 family members from the Philippines, Indonesia, Cambodia and Fiji. According to the findings presented, 94% of those interviewed had experienced non-payment of wages at some point, while all had seen their contracts changed to less favourable terms.
The research also recorded serious safety concerns. One in four interviewees said they had witnessed the death of a fellow crew member, and deaths were reported on one in four vessels examined in the study.
Sallie Yea, a researcher at Charles Sturt University, said protections should move beyond formal compliance. The measures discussed included:
- Checks on employment contracts and wage payments;
- Accessible arbitration and complaint mechanisms;
- Protection for workers who report abuse or exploitation;
- Greater accountability for recruitment agencies; and
- Responsibility extending beyond vessel operators to seafood companies and supply-chain businesses.
EU rules and international standards
Participants included representatives of the International Labour Organization, the European Transport Workers’ Federation, the Environmental Justice Foundation and Oxfam. They called for more effective implementation of labour standards in fisheries.
The International Labour Organization’s Work in Fishing Convention establishes minimum conditions for people working on fishing vessels. However, participants noted that it had been ratified by 27 EU member states, meaning that coverage and implementation remain important areas of scrutiny.
The European Union is also introducing rules addressing products linked to forced labour. Those rules are due to be phased in through December 2027. Their practical effect will depend on enforcement, supply-chain checks and the ability of authorities to identify products connected to exploitation.
What could this mean for seafood sold in Europe?
Industry representatives said access to the European market should be linked to labour standards comparable to those expected of the EU fleet. The objective is to prevent seafood caught through forced labour from entering European supply chains and to reduce unfair competition for operators that comply with social and environmental requirements.
For consumers, the issue is not limited to product labelling. Seafood can pass through complex international chains involving recruitment agencies, vessel owners, processors, importers and retailers. Effective due diligence would require companies and authorities to examine how workers are recruited, paid and treated, not simply whether paperwork is present.
For European fishers and businesses, stronger enforcement could create additional compliance responsibilities. Supporters argue that consistent standards would also help prevent operators using exploitative labour from gaining a cost advantage.
What happens next?
The discussion was not a vote and did not itself create new legislation. It was a parliamentary policy debate intended to examine working conditions and the enforcement of labour rights in fisheries.
The next stage will depend on how EU institutions apply the existing forced-labour framework, how member states enforce international labour standards and whether further policy proposals emerge from the European Parliament, the European Commission or national authorities.
Ireland, as an EU coastal member state with fishing communities and seafood businesses, may be affected by any changes to import controls, supply-chain checks and labour standards. However, the debate described in the source material did not announce a separate measure specific to Ireland.
Conclusion
The European Parliament debate showed why sustainable fisheries cannot be measured only by stock management and environmental performance. Protecting workers from forced labour, wage abuses and unsafe conditions is also central to responsible seafood production. The key test for EU policy will be whether existing rules deliver effective protection in practice and prevent exploited labour from being hidden within international supply chains.
