Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-02-Speech-2-403"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080902.32.2-403"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
". −
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for allowing me to put my views on the Member’s speech and to put my views more generally on the case under discussion. The complaint relating to the Working Time Directive is connected with the judgments of the Court of Justice in the SIMAP and Jaeger cases concerning on-call working time, as has already been said. This is a matter which the Directive does not expressly address. Furthermore, according to many Member States, the interpretation made by the Court of Justice gave rise to fundamental problems and had a far-reaching impact on the financing and organisation of public health care and emergency services.
In an attempt to tackle the problems caused by these judgments, the Commission undertook extensive consultation in 2004. It came to the conclusion that an appropriate solution was to propose an amendment which would clarify the application of the Directive in the field of on-call working time and time off in lieu. This amendment was presented by the Commission in 2004. In view of the exceptional importance of these matters for public health care services, the Commission decided in 2004 that it would not institute proceedings for infringement of the law in cases where the law would be changed by the proposed amendment. The Commission acknowledges that, in this case, the time taken was unusually long, but I have given the reasons.
In view of the fact that the existing
remains in force until such time as the proposed amendment enters into force, the Commission left it open as to how to handle this actual complaint, and also other complaints relating to this matter. Furthermore, in justifiable cases, it instituted proceedings for the infringement of the law in connection with complaints relating to the Working Time Directive, but not falling under the jurisdiction of the amendment.
The Commission is also carefully monitoring and analysing resulting amendments to the national regulations in all Member States and the reactions of legislators, national courts and representatives of workers and employers to the decisions of the Court of Justice. This is very important, since the questions included in the actual complaint to which the report refers are in actual fact topical for more than one Member State.
The Commission will shortly submit to Parliament, in about two months time, a detailed report on the implementation of the Working Time Directive, providing complex and up-to-date information on compliance with the
including the SIMAP-Jaeger judgments, in all 27 Member States. The report will also include reactions to several proposals in the existing report.
As regards the conclusions relating to the handling of proceedings for infringement of the law in general, the Commission is of the opinion that, in view of the specific context of the complaint under the terms of the Working Time Directive, relating to changes to on-call working time, it is not appropriate to deduce general conclusions on the handling of proceedings for infringement of the law which the Commission normally conducts. The period of one year for decisions on complaints received by the Commission is usually appropriate, but is laid down expressly as a general principle which need not apply in all cases."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples