Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-23-Speech-2-025"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011023.3.2-025"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the information, consultation and participation of employees assumed primary importance in the European debate as far back as 1974, when the first social action programme was adopted by the Council. Since then, the issue has featured in many of our debates in this Chamber and the Commission has launched a large number of initiatives, which have met with resistance. Almost all the Member States have a legislative or contractual legal framework in place intended to guarantee the information and consultation of employees. This directive proposes the introduction of minimum information and consultation standards which would be implemented throughout Union territory: after the European Company Statute, the European Works Council Directive and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the directive before us today completes the existing Community and national frameworks, thus contributing to the ultimate purpose of the law in question which is to ensure that adequate preparations are made for the change, that restructuring takes place under acceptable conditions and that due importance is given to the employment objective in the current situation.
The Commission presented its proposal – a sound proposal – in November 1998, and the European Parliament concluded its first reading in April 1999, adopting a series of amendments to improve it. Only in June 2001 did the Council adopt a common position. In general terms, the common position reflects the position adopted by the Commission following Parliament’s first reading but, if we compare the first reading of the European Parliament with the common position, we see that thirty or so of the amendments made by Parliament were not actually accepted.
As rapporteur, I called upon the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs not to repropose all the amendments adopted at first reading but concentrate on the most important points in order to improve the common position. My colleagues – whom I would like to thank for their cooperation – put forward 15 amendments to my proposal, almost all of which serve to reinforce it. After an in-depth debate, we came up with the text on which the House is to vote today. There are 16 amendments and they concern: the procedures for consulting employees, and these are in line with the common position but more specific in identifying problems; the definition of economic and financial information; the exact definition of ‘social partners’, in order to avoid ambiguities; the protection of employees’ representatives, which needs to be better defined in terms of protection against
; suspension of decisions which could result in substantial negative consequences for employees, so that the taking of a final decision can be deferred for a suitable period at the request of employees’ representatives in order to allow time for further negotiation and for a solution acceptable to all parties to be found.
Transitional periods: this is an extremely sensitive point. We do not feel that specific transitional periods are necessary. Precisely because this directive introduces minimum
rights, it must be enforced for all European employees simultaneously.
The question of penalties is the most sensitive point. It has provoked a deluge of lobbies from all sides of the House. We have decided not to include our initial suggestion of a European penalty with legal effect in our proposal, but we have reinforced the common position, stipulating that it should be the Member States that, whilst respecting the principle of subsidiarity, introduce more stringent penalties for serious violations which impact upon employees. This is an interpretation of the common position, which states that the Member States must lay down effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties.
It is my genuine hope that this House will confirm the wide majority reached in committee and will lose no time in providing the Union and the Member States with this major legislative instrument during the Belgian Presidency."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"disadvantage with regard to career, wage and training"1
"standard"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples