Employment and Social Affairs Committee (EMPL) MEPs significantly strengthened the Directive's provisions on transparent and predictable working conditions, in particular by extending its scope to cover on-demand and ‘zero hours’ contract workers, platform workers and the self-employed, and by strengthening worker protection in general, in a vote by a comfortable majority (30 votes in favour, 7 against, 11 abstentions) on Thursday 18 October.
There was no shortage of dividing points, starting with the definition of the notion of ‘worker’ - one of the significant new elements introduced by the Commission. Knowing that a majority would be difficult to build around a European definition, Mr Calvet Chambon preferred to remove it from the article establishing the definitions and concepts of the Directive and incorporate it into the article on the subject matter of the Directive by referring to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
Thus, the Directive applies to any physical person who provides services for a certain period of time on behalf of and under the direction of another person in exchange for remuneration and where there is a minimum degree of dependence or subordination.
This approach makes it possible to cover a large number of cases, according to several sources, including ‘freelancers’- but not ‘self-employed workers’. In addition, the proposal to exempt microenterprises was not adopted, as was the exemption introduced by the Commission for contracts of less than eight hours per month.
It should be noted that the wording adopted remains, on the whole, very close to that proposed by the European Commission (see EUROPE 11931). On the Council's side, the proposal to define the notion of ‘worker’ was rejected in order to avoid generating an imbroglio with national laws.
Information
Another notable point is that the deadlines for transmitting worker-related information are divided into two stages, along the lines of what was developed at the Council last June (see EUROPE 12044). Thus, the essential information will be transmitted in writing no later than the first day worked, and the ‘secondary’ information must be transmitted at the latest seven days later. The Commission wanted all the information to be provided from the first working day, while the Council developed a system also in two stages, but with different deadlines.
In Article 9, MEPs introduced arrangements to cover workers on request when Member States do not have provisions in their national law. Above all, in a complex written article they have set a limit of six months. "It's a miracle that it happened and I think that some didn't understand what they were voting for", says one source. In addition, MEPs amended a series of articles (14, 15, 16) strengthening workers' rights and reversing the ‘burden of proof’.
In addition, the probationary period has been set at a maximum of six months, or nine months in the case of a managerial position, to ensure that any contract renewal is not followed by a new probationary period.
A left-winged majority
The vote was tight until the last minute, with the EPP and the GUE/NGL maintaining a certain vagueness about their voting disciplines, according to our information. Finally, the rapporteur, Enrique Calvet Chambon (ALDE, Spain), was able to secure many of his amendments by relying on the left flank of the committee and the French-speaking EPP delegations, the latter being isolated within the group from the other delegations (Germany, Poland, Hungary) who voted against, including the shadow rapporteur, Dennis Radtke (Germany).
The EPP, particularly dissatisfied with the compromises reached, initially tried to delay the vote in committee. But a postponement could have potentially damaged the negotiations with the Council.
Difficult negotiations in sight
In addition, several members of the delegation of the EPP, the ERC, but also of ALDE (Czech Republic's Martina Dlabajová) tried to torpedo the rapporteur's negotiating mandate. However, this was confirmed (32 votes in favour, 15 against and 1 abstention), thanks in particular to the support of some Spanish, Luxembourg and French EPP members.
Good news, according to a parliamentary source, because Mr Calvet should thus have more latitude for negotiations with the Council, which promises to be more difficult - particularly on the definition of ‘worker’, deadlines and the integration of the self-employed - than if he had had to obtain his mandate in plenary, we are told.
The dates for the inter-institutional meetings were not yet known. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)