The European Parliament and the EU Council got to the heart of the matter on Thursday 10 January at the fourth interinstitutional meeting (trilogue) on the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive, addressing the issue of scope, including the issue of the term 'worker', the working time threshold under which the legislative text is not applied and has various exemptions.
The meeting was not as successful as the one before the winter break, when agreement in principle was reached on the length of the probationary period (see EUROPE 12165). This time, it was a matter of "feeling the ground", we were told.
For example, regarding the definition of the term 'worker' at a European level, discussions are particularly difficult, as the positions of the Council and the Parliament are distant from each other. The Parliament has greatly clarified - not without debate - the definition put forward by the Commission by characterising in detail labour relations between the worker and the employer (see EUROPE 12120). On the contrary, Member States preferred that the term be defined according to national laws and practices. This is a difficult position for the European Commission and the Parliament, which fears a major weakening of the scope of the directive.
These are fears that the Council - through the Romanian Presidency of the Council of the EU - would try to calm by emphasising that the Directive recalled in its recitals (recital 7) that the status of a worker was determined by a series of criteria established by the case-law of the European Union’s Court of Justice. The talks will therefore continue and are expected to be intense.
Another bone of contention is the threshold below which the Directive does not apply. The Commission proposes to give Member States the possibility not to apply the provisions of the Directive to an employment relationship of a total duration of up to 8 hours during a one-month reference period.
Member States have proposed, for their part, not to apply the provisions of the Directive to an employment relationship of a total duration of 5 hours or less on average over a four-week reference period (i.e. 20 hours per month). On the contrary, the Parliament has crossed out any threshold, which would have been criticised by the Commission, for whom this removal would undermine a multitude of “babysitting jobs”. The Parliament, through the rapporteur, Enrique Calvet Chambon (ALDE, Spain), said it would be ready to review its positions on the threshold, but not without major compensation.
The co-legislators also discussed exemptions for seafarers and sea fishermen, domestic workers and civil servants. Often, the Council asks for a simple non-application of the directive, whereas the Parliament asks for "adaptations" in conjunction with the social partners. On civil servants, both the Parliament and the Council have added exemptions for certain public service bodies with nuances on the scope of the exemptions.
The next trilogue is scheduled for Thursday 17 January in Strasbourg on the margins of the plenary session. According to our information, there are still between 3 and 5 meetings left to finalize the trilogue meetings. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)