Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-09-Speech-1-076"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040209.5.1-076"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Commission has prepared a draft amendment of a directive relating to the EU labour market.
The purpose of the original directive was, out of health and safety considerations, to safeguard employees against unduly long working days by setting a maximum working time of 48 hours per week. The directive nonetheless makes it possible for the employee, by means of his signature, to permit this maximum of 48 hours per week to be worked only as an average over a whole year. Employers are accorded flexibility at the expense of employees’ welfare. This has, for example, led to millions of Britons increasing their working time to more than 48 hours per week since the directive was introduced. It is a sick way in which to organise labour market legislation. The directive supports the principle of individual agreements that is contrary to the collective agreement model that exists in Denmark. Among Danes, there is considerable backing for the national model in which, for example, working time and wage conditions are established through free negotiations between independent trade unions and employer associations. Employees use ballots to agree upon the conditions under which they wish to work.
The directive on working time is an example of the EU’s needing to keep clear of labour market policy and leave this to the Member States. The proximity principle must be taken seriously. Unfortunately, we are now in a situation in which the EU has already legislated in this area. The report on revising the directive proposes closing those gaps in it that employers have misused to exploit the unfair individual agreements. In practice, employers have, upon employing people, in many cases put pressure on them to accept longer working hours. This individualisation is unacceptable as a basis for labour market agreements.
To conclude, therefore, we are voting in favour of the rapporteur’s report and against the majority of the many amendments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples