|
| |
IR Notes 95 – 11 April 2018
www.irshare.eu
|
|
|
| |
| |
Who we are?
IR Share is a
provider that shares information, documentation and expertise for HR
managers and employee representatives. The IR Share agency operates by
way of online publications, working groups, training devoted to relevant
topics and a network of experts.
The team This issue
was produced by Sylvain Nadalet and Frédéric Turlan. Find out more
about the IR Share
team on our website
Subscribe to IR Notes
Via the IR
Share website or by calling us on: +33 (0)6 81 41 53 95
or E-mail: frederic.t@irshare.eu
|
|
|
 |
| |
Interview
Claude Rolin, MEP (EPP), Vice-President of the European Parliament’s
Committee on Employment and Social Affairs
You were involved as rapporteur in
the two latest revisions of the directive on the protection of
workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens or
mutagens. What do you think of the new proposal for a revision
presented by the European Commission (see Lead
story)? I
haven’t yet gone through this new proposal in detail, but I’m sure
it will be taking things in the right direction. In the report
adopted by the European Parliament’s Committee on Employment and
Social Affairs (see Lead story) we requested an ongoing revision
process for this directive. The fact that the Commission has
embarked on this third revision, and its announcement that it will
shortly be embarking on a fourth revision, clearly shows that this
is what is happening. It’s ten years now since this law was revised,
even though, in the intervening period, companies have started to
use various new substances and further progress has been made in
terms of scientific knowledge. We have thousands of substances to
deal with. Will the next Commission keep moving in this direction?
It absolutely needs to do so. The thing I am most proud of during my
time as a MEP is the fact that I have helped to save tens of
thousands of human lives by working on these revisions. Europe does
not necessarily enjoy a good press among European employees.
However, protecting them from harmful substances is a concrete step
towards improving people’s lives, and will create a Europe that
protects them.
During the course of your work as
rapporteur on the second revision of the directive, did you come
under any pressure from manufacturers not to include diesel
engine emissions? I didn’t feel any pressure as such.
Nevertheless, I felt that a number of the sectors concerned were on
alert. The way I work is to listen to the reality described by the
sectors affected by future legislation. So, when I receive a visit
from an employers’ organisation representing the sectors concerned,
I make sure I also receive one from an organisation representing
employees working in the same sector. If sectors themselves can
construct the responses needed to protect workers, as was the case
with crystalline silica, that’s a very positive thing. However,
while it’s clear that voluntary sector-wide agreements are to be
encouraged, we cannot accept them as a substitute for legislation
and its application.
What was the most difficult aspect
of the discussions surrounding the report on the second
revision?
The main difficulty concerned diesel engine exhaust gases. In large
measure, this was due to a lack of understanding. In point of fact,
many people thought that the text referred to car diesel engines in
particular. However, the proposed revision applies primarily to
diesel engines used in industry. That’s why we used German
legislation, which is the outcome of a negotiation between the
social partners, to set an exposure limit value.
Will this also be a difficult topic
during the forthcoming negotiations with the Council, held with
a view to adopting the directive? Yes, this will certainly be a problematic
aspect of the trialogue. I imagine that a number of specific points
will be raised by sectors that will find it difficult to comply with
the proposed limit values. Some examples are coal mines and
tunnelling, i.e. activities taking place within confined
atmospheres, where workers are exposed to carbon and the use of
explosives. Maybe it will be necessary to adapt the calculation
formulas used or to grant these sectors more time to adapt. But the
fact is that all workers, including those employed by SME, must
enjoy identical protection. It’s difficult to find the right balance
between economic sustainability and workers’ health, but equally,
it’s clear that rules that are too difficult to follow will not be
properly applied, and instead will be circumvented.
|
|
|
 |
| |
IR Notes loved…
…an application that measures well-being at work
Over the past year, the French start-up
OurCompany has been developing an application that will measure the
level of employees’ well-being at work. Employees can use a
free application
on a daily basis to communicate their
stress, energy and happiness levels. The data is then aggregated to
construct a well-being index that functions at both community level
and company level, and can be consulted by everyone. OurCompany
guarantees employees’ anonymity. For their part, in return for
payment of a subscription charge, companies can access information
on some or all of their employees, with a view to speeding up the
detection of any problems and solving them. At the moment the
application, which is supported by IR Share, is only available in
French, but a multilingual version is due out at the end of the
year. Companies’ management and/or European Works Councils could use
the tool to measure the well-being of European employees, and to
detect any deteriorations or improvements, on a flexible and ongoing
basis, without having to use cumbersome and expensive Europe-wide
surveys. A number of French trade-union federations (CGT Syntec,
CFDT Fonction publique territoriale du Morbihan, Unsa Ferroviaire
Lyon and HP’s CFTC branch) are currently testing the
tool. >
Contact: Stéphane
Bourbier / stephane@ourcompanyapp.com
|
|
|
 |
| |
Agenda
17 and 18
April Sofia Informal
Employment and Social Affairs Council
18 April
Brussels
Symposium organised by the Atelier de droit social [‘Employment
law work group’] of the Université Catholique de Louvain, entitled “Quel
droit social pour les travailleurs de plateformes ? Premiers
diagnostics et actualités législatives“ [‘Employment law and
online platform workers: Initial findings and current legislative
issues’].
24 April
Brussels The
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, jointly with the European
Commission and the Bulgarian presidency of the EU, is launching the
2018-2019 edition of its campaign for healthy workplaces, entitled “manage
dangerous substances ”.
26 and 27
April Brussels
Symposium “European
social dialogue 2018: Social Europe strengthening workers’
voice”, organised by the European Trade Union Institute (ETUI)
and the Hans-Böckler-Foundation.
29 April to
4 May Dublin 32nd
International Congress on Occupational Health: the roadmap on
carcinogens – European and national initiatives
5 to 8
June Bordeaux
11th International Conference on Workplace Bullying and
Harassment: Bullying2018 – Mieux
comprendre le harcèlement au travail dans un monde en mutation
[‘Better Understanding of Workplace Bullying and Harassment in a
Changing World’], organised by Comptrasec and IAWBH.
18 and 19
June Paris “Revisiting
solidarities in Europe” symposium, organised by Professor Alain
Supiot of the Collège de France, Chair in The Welfare State and
Globalisation: A Legal Analysis of Forms of Solidarity.”
27 and 29
June Brussels Annual
conference of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and the
European Trade Union Institute (ETUI), entitled “The
World(s) of Work in Transition“, seeking to analyse the impact
on employment of various current global transitions (environmental,
energy-related, demographic, etc.), with a view to presenting a more
global vision of the changes taking place.
2
July Bordeaux Multidisciplinary
international summer school on the theme of: Employment
and Technological Innovation.
|
|
|
 |
IR Notes is a
fortnightly newsletter produced by IR Share and
its network of experts, and is available in several European languages. It
offers Europe-wide monitoring of employment law, labour relations and
employment policy. It is available by subscription for 15 euros per month
(excluding tax), via the IR
Share website. IR Share is a privately-
owned, independent, apolitical company whose aim is to inform and assist all
players involved in social dialogue within and outside Europe. It has been
the correspondent organisation for France of the Dublin Foundation since
2009.
|
|
|
Lead
story
Further
progress made in protecting employees against carcinogens
On 5 April, the European Commission presented a proposal
for a directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure
to carcinogens or mutagens which would include new exposure limit values for
five chemical agents. These values define a new maximum airborne concentration level
for a given carcinogenic chemical agent in the workplace. Five carcinogens have been
selected: cadmium and its inorganic compounds; beryllium and inorganic beryllium
compounds; arsenic acid and its salts, as well as inorganic arsenic compounds;
formaldehyde and 4,4’-methylene-bis (2-chloroaniline) (see Commission’s press release
and factsheet).
This new proposal follows two previous legislative amendments, proposed by the
Commission in May 2016 and January 2017, which fixed the limit values for 21
carcinogenic agents. The first amendment was adopted in late 2017 (directive
2017/2398 of 12 December 2017; see IR
Notes no. 89). The second proposal for a legislative amendment is currently
being discussed by legislators. It went before the European Parliament’s Committee
on Employment and Social Affairs on 27 March. The committee voted almost unanimously
(41 for, 0 against and 7 abstentions) to adopt the report on the second phase of the
revision of the directive on the prevention of cancer presented by the Belgian MEP
Claude Rolin (EPP) (see press release
from Claude Rolin, and interview opposite). One of the contributions made by MEPs is
the addition of diesel engine exhaust emissions – to which more than 3 million
workers are exposed – to the agents included in the Commission’s text. Under
pressure from manufacturers, the Commission decided in the end not to include diesel
engine exhaust emissions in its proposed directive, even though they are classed by
the International Agency for Research on Cancer (an agency of the World Health
Organization) as proven carcinogens. The Employment and Social Affairs Committee
therefore expressed its support for an occupational exposure limit value of 50 µg/m³
calculated on the basis of elemental carbon – one of the components of diesel engine
emissions. “This value is identical to that recently adopted in Germany”, explains
Laurent Vogel of the European Trade Union Institute, adding that “given that most
European countries have no limit value for exposure to diesel emissions in the
workplace, adopting such a value at European level would represent significant
progress.” Negotiations between the Parliament and EU ministers can now begin, as
the Member States adopted their negotiating position on 15 June 2017. As a result,
the revision of the directive could be finally adopted this year.
|
1. European
Union
Social
update
- Caterpillar: On 23 March,
the European Commission announced a proposal to provide Belgium with 4.6 million
euros from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. This money is intended to
help nearly 2,300 workers who were made redundant by Caterpillar Solar at
Gosselies and by several of its suppliers, to find new jobs (see press
release).
|
Case law
Free movement still subject to restrictions for
the unemployed: the mobility of unemployed persons from
regions suffering from a high level of unemployment to those desperately in need of
labour continues to be hampered by strict application of regulation
883/2004 of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems.
This regulation (Article 64) provides that “entitlement to benefits shall be
retained for a period of three months from the date when the unemployed person
ceased to be available to the employment services of the Member State which he left,
provided that the total duration for which the benefits are provided does not exceed
the total duration of the period of his entitlement to benefits under the
legislation of that Member State”. This article adds: “the competent services or
institutions may extend the period of three months up to a maximum of six months”.
The Court of Justice delivered its interpretation of this provision in a judgment on
21 March (case
C-551/16, Klein Schiphorst). The case concerned a Dutch national who was
receiving unemployment benefits from the Employee Insurance Institute in the
Netherlands (Uwv), and decided to look for a job in another State covered by
Regulation 883/2004. Relying on this text, he requested the Uwv to “export” his
unemployment benefits for a three-month period, which they agreed to do. However,
the Uwv then refused to extend this period of exporting his unemployment benefits.
The Uwv explained that it did not exercise its option to extend the period of
exporting benefits for a maximum of six months. The Court of Justice confirms that
this is indeed an option, and the Member State’s institution in question is under no
obligation to extend payment of benefits from three to six months. The State
concerned is merely required to adopt national measures regulating the competent
institution’s discretion. These institutions are entitled in principle to refuse any
requests for an extension beyond a period of three months, “provided the institution
does not consider that refusing that request would lead to an unreasonable
result”. > Further information:
the European Commission has proposed a revision
of the regulation providing for an export period of six months, which is
currently being scrutinised by the Council and the Parliament.
- Non-inclusion of parental leave for the
purpose of calculating holiday pay entitlement: so far
we only have the opinion of the Advocate-General at the Court of Justice (on the
basis of which the Court will deliver its ruling), but the subject is sensitive
enough to warrant discussion already at this stage. The issue in question is
that of deciding whether EU law requires the period spent by a worker on
parental leave to be included in the calculation of their entitlement to paid
annual leave. The Court already recognises that “any worker, whether he be on
sick leave during the reference period as a result of an accident at his place
of work or elsewhere, or as the result of sickness of whatever nature or origin,
cannot have his entitlement to at least four weeks’ paid annual leave affected”
(CJEU,
24 January 2012, case C-282/10, Dominguez). However, the
Advocate-General’s view is that ’”given the fundamental difference between the
situation of a worker who is on sick leave and that of a worker on parental
leave, notably the fact that the second case does not involve proven unfitness
for work that is independent of the will of the worker concerned, this solution
cannot be extended to the scenario of a worker who is on parental leave” (CJEU,
opinion, 20 March 2018, case. C-12/17, Maria Dicu, not available in
Engish).
|
2. Member
States
Belgium
- Reducing the notice period required for
making employees redundant: the law of 26 March 2018
relating to boosting economic growth and social cohesion reduced the
notice period that an employer is required to give when making an employee
redundant during the first six months of the working relationship. In cases
where the contract of employment is terminated before the end of month three,
the notice period is reduced to one week instead of two. The aim is to cut the
cost involved for the employer in making employees redundant, with a view to
making it easier to take on new workers (see press
release issued by the Ministry of Employment).
- The right to switch off from
work: the law of 26 March 2018
relating to boosting economic growth and social cohesion stipulates that
in order to “ensure compliance with rest breaks, annual holidays and other types
of leave to which workers are entitled, and to preserve the balance between work
and private life”, the employer must arrange “consultation” with employee
representatives from the Committee for Prevention and Protection at Work. Such
consultation must take place “at regular intervals and whenever it is requested
by workers’ representatives (…), on the subject of switching off from work, and
of using digital communication means”. The Minister of Employment believes that
reaching agreements on this subject should reduce exposure to stress (see press
release issued by the Minister of Employment).
|
Finland
Banking sector’s collective agreement renewed:
On 25 March, the social partners in Finland’s financial services
sector finalised a new collective agreement, on the eve of a strike that was
scheduled to last three days, thereby avoiding a stoppage of work (see press
release issued by the Pro trade union). The agreement marks the end of a
negotiation that began in October 2017 but became mired in the issue of weekend
working. The Pro union, which represents employees in the banking sector, wanted
weekend working to be organised within the framework of local agreements at company
level, operating on a voluntary basis. The employers, however, wanted to organise
these working arrangements unilaterally. The parties accepted the agreement
submitted by the National
Conciliator, which provides for recourse to local negotiations. If agreement
cannot be reached, the introduction of weekend working has to be referred to the
union representative nine weeks in advance. In principle, the agreement is based on
voluntary working arrangements, but if not enough people come forward, the employer
can instruct employees to work, on certain conditions. An employee can still turn
this request down if they have pressing reasons for doing so. Saturday working will
be paid at a rate 50% higher than a week day and Sunday working will be paid double.
|
Italy
Redefining industrial relations :
On 9 March, Italy’s main social partners (the employers’
organisation Confindustria and the three trade union confederations CGIL, CISL and
UIL) signed a historic agreement, known as the “Patto
della Fabbrica” (‘Factory Pact’), which is intended to redefine the
country’s industrial relations model. What is new about this agreement is that it
establishes the conditions governing the representative status of employers’
associations. One of the aims is to tackle the phenomenon of “rogue” sectoral
agreements, i.e. those signed by organisations that do not really represent their
industries, with a view to competing with companies operating in a particular
industrial sector by driving down wages and working conditions. The agreement is
also innovative in terms of worker participation and confirms the central role
played by sectoral agreements in determining wages and working conditions, while at
the same time encouraging company agreements that introduce additional remuneration
linked to achieving genuine improvements in a company’s productivity.
|
3.
Companies
European
Works Councils
Johnson & Johnson: the
American pharmaceuticals company (which has a workforce of 134,000) has renewed its
European Works Council agreement signed on 1 April 1998, with a team of negotiators
appointed by committee members. The new
agreement, signed on 1 January 2018, provides for one representative per
country with at least 100 employees, plus a second representative from countries
with 1,001 or more employees, and a third representative for those countries with
more than 2,500 employees. A select committee comprised of 5 members is being
appointed. It is “strongly recommended” that its members are able to communicate in
English and already have some experience as an employee representative. The
agreement establishes a framework for the information and consultation procedure.
This procedure must unfold over an eight-week period, which in exceptional
circumstances can be extended by mutual agreement. The procedure is triggered when a
project affects “more than 150 employees in two or more countries covered under the
agreement” or the “majority of the employees in a country”. The document includes
flow charts in appendix to illustrate how the procedure works. The plan is to adapt
this process to encompass projects that involve changes taking place over a period
of several years.
- Gebrüder Weiss: on
4 October 2017, the management of the Austrian famiy-owned transport and
logistics group Gebrüder Weiss signed a European Works Council
agreement covering its 6,500 or so workers in the EU, who are employed
mainly in Central and Eastern Europe. The agreement provides for the creation of
a select committee comprising between three and five members, plus working
parties if necessary.
|
Restructuring
Bombardier: on 28 March, the
train manufacturing subsidiary of the Canadian Bombardier group concluded an
agreement with the metalworkers’ trade union IG Metall, to preserve all of the
group’s production sites in Germany, some of which were threatened with closure as
part of a global reorganisation announced in 2016, affecting 5,000 employees
worldwide (see IG
Metall press release). Nevertheless, the agreement provides for the gradual
loss of 2,200 jobs over a three-year period (one third of whom are held by temporary
workers) out of a total workforce of 8,500. Most of the job losses (a maximum of
1,513 employees) will take the form of voluntary redundancies.
|
4. Studies
and reports
A wage convergence is taking place but it is
too slow: the data published by
Eurostat reveals significant disparities between hourly labour costs among the
various Member States in 2017. These range from 4.9 euros per hour in Bulgaria to
42.5 euros in Denmark. The data shows labour costs gathering pace in the countries
of Central and Eastern Europe, with rises over a one-year period that are above the
EU average, but hourly costs in these countries still remain far below the EU
average (26.8 euros, compared to 4.9 euros in Bulgaria and 6.3 euros in Romania, for
example). The country in this region with the highest hourly cost, Slovenia (11.1
euros) is still less than half of the EU average (26.8 euros). The fall in hourly
labour costs recorded in Finland (down 1.5% to 32.7 euros) is probably linked to the
2016 tripartite agreement seeking to cut labour costs, with a view to boosting the
competitiveness of the economy.
|
|
|