On Thursday 16 February, the first debate of MEPs on the revision of the 1996 directive on posted workers, experienced a few moments of tension. This was particularly apparent on the East-West division but the two co-rapporteurs appear, however, to have come out strengthened in their approach and choice for supporting the European Commission proposal.
The draft report from the two co-rapporteurs, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (EPP, France) and Agnes Jongerius (S&D, Netherlands) has been out since the end of November 2016 (see EUROPE 11679). It is primarily based on the Commission proposal of March that year (see EUROPE 11507) and includes the most important ideas for amending the 1996 directive (introduction of the notion of remuneration and a maximum 24-month duration). The text goes further, however, mainly on two other points: providing member states with the possibility of applying their collective regional and sectoral agreements for posted workers and extending the legal base of the directive to social policy.
Such an approach was welcomed by the majority of shadow rapporteurs and representatives from the other political groups. Speaking on behalf of the ALDE group, Martina Dlabajová (Czech Republic) stated that the draft report was a good compromise. She said that she was convinced of the need for a revision, despite her initial skepticism about the Commission proposal. Her amendments will have to be submitted by 28 February and will focus on the exclusion of certain sectors from the scope of the directive, such as transport, the introduction of a clearer definition of the concept of remuneration and the 24-month duration period, which she believes could create some problems.
Speaking on behalf of the GUE/NGL, Rina Ronja Kari (Denmark) also welcomed this compromise but called for the duration of the posting to be set at six months, as originally sought by Ms Jongerius. She then highlighted the importance of including collective regional and sectoral agreements. Terry Reintke (Germany), speaking for the Greens, also highlighted this last point. The contribution made by Dominique Martin (France), shadow rapporteur for the ENF, simply consisted of criticising the absence of a genuine debate, while Czesław Hoc spoke on behalf of the ECR and was very general in his appreciation but did not provide any concrete proposal.
This debate ultimately demonstrated that this proposal is provoking an East West division at the European parliament, as it is at the Council of the EU, apart from a few exceptions (Ms Dlabajová). German, Dutch and Belgian MEPs, irrespective of whether they are from the S&D or EPP, are more often than not in favour of the revision, while their colleagues from Central and Eastern Europe have expressed the opposite opinions. Emilian Pavel (S&D, Czech Republic), Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz (EPP, Poland) and Michaela Šojdrová (EPP, Czech Republic) were particularly critical of what they described as an attempt to erect barriers in the internal market to the benefit of companies in Western Europe. (Original version in French by Jan Kordys)