Nicolas Schmit is the European Commissioner for Employment and Social Rights. A few days before the EU ‘Employment and Social Affairs’ Council in Luxembourg on 12 June, he gives EUROPE an update on the Commission’s main projects. (Interview by Solenn Paulic)

Agence Europe - The Porto Social Forum recently reiterated the major objectives on employment (78% of 20-64 year-olds in employment), poverty (lifting 15 million people out of poverty) and training of adults every year (60%) set two years ago at the Porto Social Summit. Can Member States meet these targets by 2030? 

Nicolas Schmit - These are very serious objectives that must be achieved. With the current employment rate (69.9% in 2022, editor’s note), this seems possible; we still need to make efforts to integrate certain categories such as women, the long-term unemployed or older workers, but, given the sectors in short supply that need labour, it is absolutely feasible.

We’ve made a lot of effort on training. Today, the Pact for Skills brings together 1,500 participants and the initiatives we have launched reach almost two million people. Today we are probably around 40% and I think that our efforts will bring us up to 60%.

Reducing poverty is indeed the biggest challenge, but I don’t want to be pessimistic. The more people there are in work, the more decent wages there are, especially decent minimum wages, the more likely we are to reduce the number of people in poverty. Many people at risk of poverty are, for example, single women, sometimes with children.

If we offer them the prospect of a job, more work, better pay, this is a category that we can get out of this risk.

There has been an improvement in recent years, but Covid-19 put a halt to this. And then there’s inflation. Circumstances are not extremely favourable at the moment, but we need to see how changes in income, for example, can mitigate this impact. 

The European Parliament believes that a directive on minimum income would be more credible in terms of poverty. Has this trail been definitively abandoned? 

We opted for a recommendation, because what could have been done with a directive would not have been very substantial. The Treaty being what it is, we cannot exceed the powers it gives us. It’s not very realistic to believe that a directive will miraculously lift millions of people out of poverty.

From now on, we must concentrate above all on work, wages, minimum wages, but also on collective agreements, the upgrading of certain professions, the integration into the workforce of certain excluded categories with compensation measures where necessary. There is a whole range of measures available. There is also training to get a job or a better job.

But there is no miracle solution.

Of course, the minimum income is important for all those who cannot work or who are in a transitional situation. It needs to be at a decent level, but it needs to be accompanied by a range of other measures. 

On Wednesday, the Swedish Presidency of the Council of the EU will once again attempt to convince the Member States on the issue of workers on digital platforms. Are you satisfied with the latest text? 

The Commission still prefers its own text, but the Swedish Presidency is making great efforts. The question we need to ask ourselves is this: is Europe capable of sending out the message that it is not going to let platform workers down and that it will be able to enshrine their rights in a text with an equally important social value for the future?

To fail this week or next in Luxembourg would be a step backwards. Especially as we are not yet deciding on the outcome of the directive, but on a general position of the EU Council. We will then move on to negotiations with the European Parliament, which has a text that is presented as more ambitious.

So we need to give negotiations a chance. We certainly must not go below a certain level of ambition, but given the time factor, it is important to arrive at a general position in the EU Council. Delaying the process any longer would jeopardise the whole project. 

What do you say to those countries that feel the directive could harm the truly self-employed? 

Nobody wants to reclassify or reclassify a genuine self-employed person who wants to remain self-employed, but if I am a genuine self-employed person, then the terms and conditions of my status must correspond to those of a self-employed person.

But there is a more general question: how should self-employed people be protected? This is not covered by the directive, but it may be a subject that needs to be addressed one day. 

This week, the Commission is presenting an initiative on mental health. Will psychosocial risks in the workplace be the subject of specific action? 

There will be a communication on mental health and a chapter on mental health in the workplace.

A study has just been published in France which shows that absenteeism due to psychological illness has risen from 97 to 111 days in just a few years. These are long periods, with a considerable human cost and a growing economic cost for companies, local authorities and social security systems.

Many European workers say they suffer from stress. This requires more action, first and foremost at company level. We want to push ahead with support for businesses and, above all, prevention. There is not enough investment in prevention. This is an important role for the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, but also for national agencies and company managers.

Preventing ill-being in the workplace is all the more important as we embark on major transitions in our economy. 

You recently expressed your interest in a 4-day week in companies. Isn’t this just one way of improving mental health in the workplace? 

I am indeed in favour of the four-day week where it is decided by the social partners, but we should not expect any initiative from the Commission on this point.

Furthermore, the Working Time Directive is perfectly compatible with this four-day arrangement, and I can only say that I am in favour of company and sector negotiations on this arrangement.

It is up to the social partners to negotiate this. But there are some interesting studies which show that productivity does indeed increase, absenteeism decreases and people are happier... even if this formula is not equally applicable to all sectors.

Looking back, has the Commission delivered on its promises? And what do you think will be the next Commission’s priorities?

We have achieved most of the points in the Porto Action Plan and we have even gone further with an agreement on the right to disconnect, which is being negotiated by the social partners, and the reform of the European Works Councils, where the consultation procedure has been launched.

Of course, there are always new areas that need to be addressed. Now it’s all about artificial intelligence in the workplace, which will surely be the big topic for the next Commission.

We need to start work on this now, by studying the consequences of the introduction of artificial intelligence, new methods of monitoring work, workers’ rights, and also all aspects relating to mental health, because there could be a clear impact.