According to the rapporteur, Guillaume Balas (S&D, France), on Tuesday 27 February at the employment and social affairs committee, more than 600 amendments had been submitted to the draft report on the coordination of social security systems.
The debates are expected to focus on three points: exporting unemployment benefits abroad; posted workers and the indexation of family allowances. The divisions are more geographically based than they are political.
Balas wants to extend the period for exporting unemployment benefits when the jobseeker goes to another member state to include the terms of open unemployment benefit entitlements (see EUROPE 11909). He has traced a redline on not going below the Commission proposal, namely extending the export from 3 to 6 months, with the option for the member states to even extinguish these rights. Scandinavian, Austrian and German MEPs are opposed to it.
In this regard, the situation of cross-border workers is expected to be a subject of very heated debate. The EPP shadow rapporteur, Sven Schulze, from Germany has questions regarding the responsibility of the member state, particularly with regard to cross-border workers. The German MEP would like the country of residency to remain the country in charge of allocations and providing assistance that relates to the reintegration of the labour market (language courses and training). In this respect, the Commission is looking to shift this, after 12 months of responsibilities, to the member state where the worker has been working.
According to Schulze it is this that is creating the problem and he is concerned about the logistic and language difficulties that this kind of provision would create. Another problem in his eyes is the lack of clarity regarding the definition of cross-border workers, particularly with regard to the maritime sector, where many nationals are working on boats that fly the flag of a different member state, which means that they are also cross-border workers even though they are working in a single and same territory.
Another subject creating disagreement involves the indexing of family allowances to where the children are living. Balas does not want to discuss it, given the extent of the phenomenon (fewer than 1% family allowances would be affected) and the administrative complications this proposal would create. Schulze considers, however, that the question should be tackled and points out that MEPs from Austria, Denmark and some from the Benelux countries (in a reference to the Netherlands) were on the same wave length. The project for introducing an indexation would receive backing form around a third of MEPs, according to another source. This proposal could produce a “political blockage" by provoking a defensive response from MEPs from Eastern Europe. This provision would mean higher allocations for nationals whose children are in Western European states.
Last but not least is the question of posted workers. Balas, with the backing of certain MEPs from the EPP, including the rapporteur on the posted workers directive currently being negotiated (see EUROPE 11964, 11957), would like the A1 form which attests to the social security legislation applicable to be issued prior to a posting. Schulz thinks that this appears a good idea but it is not because such a provision would prevent swift postings from going ahead. The digitalisation of the service would be more efficient, in his point of view.
The first meeting of rapporteurs is planned for 6 March. MEPs are hoping for a vote in the committee next June, with the aim to reach an inter-institutional agreement under the Austrian Presidency of the Council. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)