Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-15-Speech-4-072"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010215.4.4-072"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The European institutions themselves are starting to be ashamed of the minimum standards enshrined in Community legislation on social matters, drawn up any old how, yet while taking good care not to touch employers’ prerogatives in any country whatsoever.
The very fact that, with every passing year, additional steps to harmonise the rights of employees moving within the European Union are not taken indicates that, thirty years after the initial directives, there is no more harmonisation than there are Community rights to bring employers to book.
Harmonising the situation of EU workers ought to mean that employers and Member States are obliged to bring wages throughout the European Union in line with those of countries where they are highest and to stipulate the same social rights for the whole of the Union in line with the social provision for illness, unemployment and retirement that is most advantageous to the workers.
The only form of harmonisation which the European Union is interested in, however, is harmonisation of the rules governing competition between industrial and financial groups. The movement of workers is considered only insofar as it affects the movement of goods and of capital.
The reason that we did not vote against this report is only because we did not wish to stand in the way of a few scant benefits that specific categories of workers may gain from it. Since, however, we are completely opposed to the motivation of this approach, we did not vote in favour of it either."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples