On Wednesday 11 July, MEPs at the European Parliament’s employment and social affairs committee (EMPL) adopted the draft report by David Casa (EPP, Malta) by a comfortable majority (34 votes for, 14 against, 4 abstentions) and thereby set out the level of paternity leave remuneration at 80% of the gross salary and 78% for parental and carer’s leave.
The rapporteur stated that “the position adopted today on the directive on the work/life balance directive is strong and balanced”. He added, “I am convinced that this provides a solid basis for beginning negotiations with the Council in September”.
The negotiations with the Council look like they are going to be hard going given that Parliament's position is different to that of the member states.
As we previously anticipated (see EUROPE 12057), the inter-institutional negotiations are expected to focus on a number of divisive issues such as the question of remuneration. On this point, the member states have opted for greater flexibility (see EUROPE 12046). The MEPs have set out the period of non-transferability suggested for parental leave to four months, as opposed to the two months advocated at the Council (including one and a half months paid). The maximum age of the child for benefiting from parental leave and changes at work have been set at 10 years when the member states have removed any reference to a specific age.
MEPs also amended the definitions put forward by the Commission to cover homosexual couples and for paternity leave to be maintained in the event of stillbirths.
MEPs also expanded the scope to cases where someone can request carer’s leave to provide assistance to a member of the family up to a 2nd degree through blood ties or ties of affinity, including foster children, the children cared for by this person or their partner and recognised as such under national law (e.g. in the context of a civil partnership).
It should also be pointed out that for parental leave, MEPs introduced a certain flexibility for SMEs and micro-enterprises.
Concerns expressed by SMEs and craft associations. Despite these modifications, the UEAPME, which represents SMEs and craft associations, repeated its opposition to the Commission’s initial proposal due to the bureaucracy that this would generate (see EUROPE 11775).
The UEAPME acknowledges the attempts by MEPs to cut down on the red tape for SMEs but it is concerned at the level of compensation and remuneration proposed by the European Parliament. Other UEAPME concerns involve: the introduction of changes at work, the requirement imposed on employers to respond to workers in writing and the non-transfer ability period maintained four months. The organisation therefore calls on the co-legislators to carry out “realistic trilogue negotiations” in an effort to establish “a reasonable approach”. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)