On Wednesday 29 August, the MEPs of the committee on employment and social affairs (EMPL) will get to work examining the amendments to the regulation establishing the European Labour Authority. The work is likely to be intense, as the MEPs, such as rapporteur Jeroen Lenaers (EPP, Netherlands) will have to examine nearly a thousand amendments (975 to be precise) and need to work on this dossier as quickly as possible, with the end of the legislative period drawing near.
The MEPs seem particularly divided over the role and the scope of the Authority's work – as already shown by preliminary debates in July (see EUROPE 12062) – around a left-right divide, but there is also a gulf between those in favour of reinforced European action in the field of employment and those calling for the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality to be strictly respected.
For instance, many MEPs are calling for the very name of the European Authority to be changed, to make it an agency, for various reasons. Some, like Danuta Jazłowiecka and Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz (EPP, Poland), consider that the expression "European Authority" refers to an entity that gives orders and takes precedence over the national authorities. This would not be compatible with the European treaties, they stress, as social matters come under national competence. Ádám Kósa (EPP, Hungary) points out that a common declaration between the EP, the Commission and the Council dated 19 July 2012 concerning the decentralised European agencies stressed the need to rename all agencies "European Union Agency for…".
Others, among them Terry Reintke (Greens/EFA, Germany), hope to increase the Authority's scope to include social security, in line with the coordination regulation of the social security systems currently being negotiated at the European Parliament (see EUROPE 12044).
Differing views on role and duties
These amendments reflect major differences of opinion over the very nature of the Authority and the scope of its activities. The Conservatives, such as Helga Stevens (ECR, Belgium), are out to prevent any “abusive use” of the Authority, stressing the need to comply with the European treaties (particularly article 5 of the Treaty of the EU), with emphasis on the fact that the European pillar of social rights is above all political in nature and confers no new competences upon the EU.
Many amendments limit the Authority's role on dispute mediation, information for employees and employers and the coordination of control actions between several member states. Some amendments stress the need to take account of micro-enterprises, calling for any excessive administrative burden to be avoided. Others hope to limit the use of interpreting and translation in the event of actions coordinated between member states.
Other MEPs, such as Evelyn Regner (S&D, Austria), on the other hand, have focused on the binding dimension of the Authority's decisions. Others, such as Rina Ronja Kari (GUE/NGL, Denmark), would like to clarify what the future European entity will do to tackle social dumping, letterbox companies, the phenomenon of false self-employment and shell companies that are exploited by human trafficking and forced labour networks.
Claude Rolin (EPP, Belgium), hopes to extend the scope of persons covered by the scope of the future Authority by removing the explicit reference to third-country nationals residing legally in the EU. Other MEPs wish to clarify the text to ensure that services sector workers are also covered.
The Greek MEP Kostadinka Kuneva (GUE/NGL) would like the Authority to set up a European register for all companies with cross-border activities. Some German EPP members (Sven Schulze, Thomas Mann, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch) suggest a salary comparison tool for posted workers.
Whistle-blowers
Still others are calling for mechanisms that do not currently exist to be included in the Commission's proposal. Reintke has suggested a complaints mechanism to report cross-border fraud, particularly social security fraud, with a new article to tighten up protection for whistle-blowers.
The work is likely to be intense, with the MEPs to be asked to vote on the report in committee on 18 October of this year. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)