Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-04-25-Speech-3-443"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070425.41.3-443"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, Airbus, Alcatel, Lucent and Delphi Systems are just the latest in a never-ending stream of instances of major restructuring that have led delegations of workers to come to us complaining of breaches of EU information and consultation laws, not just the Works Council Directive, but others too: directives on collective redundancies and transfers dating from the 1970s, and the Directive establishing a General Framework for Information and Consultation of Workers.
We have quite a body of information on consultation laws, but the inconsistencies and contradictions between them and the loopholes in them mean that they are often avoided altogether. There is often no attempt at meaningful information or consultation in good time in avoiding or mitigating job losses.
We urgently need a clear definition of the concepts of information and consultation in EU law. We have different definitions in several different directives. The Works Council Directive does not define either notion clearly, while the later directives on a company statute and the general framework have different definitions. This is an open door to abuse and avoidance. The need for a revision to the Works Council Directive is now glaringly obvious: it was due for revision eight years ago.
The deficiencies and loopholes are well known: failure to provide timely information and consultation, to fully recognise the role of trade unions, to provide expert support, the inadequacy of sanctions, the misuse of confidentiality rules to withhold information and so on. These deficiencies must now be addressed to give workers the effective tools they need.
I know there is a view that a revision should not be launched because we might end up with a weaker, not a stronger, instrument. The view of my group is that the avoidance and abuse of this legislation is now of such scale and breadth that we have nothing to lose in insisting on a revision. I urge the Commissioner to bring that provision forward as a matter of urgency."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples