In late August 2008, the European social partners submitted a joint advice on the European Works Council ‘recast’ directive to the French Minister for Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity. They accepted the Commission’s proposal as a basis for the revision of the directive and included an agreed list of possible changes to the proposal. Meanwhile, the social partners and the parliament’s rapporteur support a fast revision procedure based on this common position.
The first reaction of the European social partners to the Commission’s proposal for a recast of the European Works Council (EWC) directive (EU0807039I) resulted in them taking-up opposite positions. While the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) welcomed the long-overdue revision of the EWC directive, the Confederation of European Business (BusinessEurope) criticised the proposal as ‘over-prescriptive and ill-suited for individual companies’.
During the summer of 2008, however, both parties settled their disagreements and developed a common position. On 29 August 2008, the European social partners – namely ETUC, BusinessEurope, the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (Union Européenne de l’artisanat et des petites et moyennes enterprises, UEAPME) and the European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation and of Enterprises of General Economic Interest (CEEP) – addressed a letter (74Kb PDF) to the French Minister for Labour, Social Affairs and Solidarity, Xavier Bertrand, containing joint advice on the recast directive.
Content of joint advice
The most important part of the letter concerns the fact that the social partners accept the Commission’s proposal for a ‘recast’ directive as a ‘basis for the revision’ of the current EWC directive (94/45/EC). In addition, the joint advice proposes the following changes to the Commission’s proposal:
- clarifications to the wording of the following articles: 2 (f) (definition of ‘information’), 2 (g) (definition of ‘consultation’), 5.4 (role of trade union representatives in the special negotiation body), 10.1 (rights of the EWC), 10.4 (training) and 12.3 (fall-back clause regarding the link between EWCs and national bodies);
- revision of Article 13, introducing a new period for voluntary agreements following the adoption of the recast directive. Furthermore, the joint advice demands the deletion of the obligation to dissolve existing EWCs when a new EWC is set up following a major restructuring process.
Social partners explain their position
The joint advice was a surprise for most member organisations of the European social partners. BusinessEurope and most employer organisations were initially against a revision of the EWC directive. With the joint advice, BusinessEurope not only accepted the revision process but also the Commission’s proposal as a basis for the revision. In contrast, trade unions were dissatisfied with the Commission’s proposal, particularly because of the lack of sanctions.
The social partners explained their decision to sign the joint advice at two conferences held a few days after the publication of the letter to Minister Bertrand. On 8 September, the European Trade Union Institute for Research, Education and Health and Safety (ETUI-REHS) presented a Memorandum on European Works Councils (668Kb PDF). A day later, the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations (Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbände, BDA), in cooperation with BusinessEurope and the Movement of French Enterprises (Mouvement des Entreprises de France, MEDEF), organised a conference on EWCs in Brussels. Although both conferences were planned long before the joint advice letter, they became completely overshadowed by this recent development. This led the social partners to announce their shared intentions – namely to defend the joint advice against the critique of their respective members and to plead with the Commission for a fast revision process.
The Chair of BusinessEurope’s Social Affairs Committee, Jørgen Rønnest, explained that, after some reflection, the employer organisation could accept the Commission’s text as a ‘fair and balanced proposal’. The most important point for employers was to safeguard existing Article 13 agreements and to get a new ‘Article 13 window’ – in other words, a new time frame in which voluntary EWC agreements can be concluded, such that they are not restricted by the requirements of the directive.
According to ETUC’s Deputy General Secretary, Reiner Hoffmann, the most important issue for ETUC was to achieve a political agreement on the recast directive under the French EU Presidency before the end of 2008. As an agreement among the social partners would help to fast-track the revision process, the social partners decided to limit the debate to crucial issues where a joint understanding was possible.
Social partners issue second joint letter
On 2 October 2008, the General Secretary of ETUC, John Monks, and the General Secretary of BusinessEurope, Philippe de Buck, published a second joint letter clarifying the objective of their initial joint advice and arguing for a rapid adoption of the recast directive before the end of 2008. The clarifications related to two points:
- extending the definition of ‘information’ by an explicit statement that the in-depth information should not slow down decision-making in companies;
- regarding Article 13, the proposal of a new formulation to make clear that Article 13 agreements concluded before September 1996 can be renewed or revised if the parties agree to do so.
Commentary
The agreement reached by the European social partners is not only surprising considering their first contradictory reactions to the Commission’s proposal but also regarding BusinessEurope’s opposition over many years towards a legislative revision of the directive. With this agreement, the recast of the EWC Directive has become the least controversial part of the social package proposed in July 2008. Whether the proposal can be adopted before the end of the year will now depend on the political will of the institutions involved.
Stefan Lücking, Technical University Munich