White smoke, which will be seen by many as unexpected, is emanating from the roofs of the European institutions on Tuesday, 19 March. The Romanian Presidency of the Council of the EU and the European Parliament succeeded, at the cost of a long and heated negotiation meeting, in reaching an ambitious provisional political agreement on the regulation on the coordination of social security systems.
Things were not going well, however, after the last interinstitutional meeting, with some diplomatic and parliamentary observers increasingly considering it likely that no agreement could be reached under this current mandate (see EUROPE 12213/22). “Honestly, this morning, I started the negotiations by telling myself that we were going to have a new trilogue next week", said a source close to the issue.
But after almost reaching an impasse several times, the co-legislators were able to find a compromise, in particular to increase the maximum export of unemployment benefits for frontier workers to 15 months (a person who returns at least once a week to their State of residence).
A victory for the European Parliament, with the Council of the EU proposing three months (then nine months during the negotiations). The European Parliament initially wanted this export of benefits to run until social benefits were exhausted, a position that many people find impracticable, given that unemployment benefits are unlimited in some Member States.
Also for frontier workers, the period of transition of responsibility between the State of residence and the Member State of activity has been extended to six months of activity. A switchover period that will exclude a large proportion of seasonal frontier workers, explains another source.
As for the question of the export of social benefits for non-frontier workers, the duration was set at six months. The duration for triggering aggregation, i.e. taking into account previous periods worked in another Member State, was set at one month. The European Parliament wanted ‘from the first day’.
Social dumping
“In addition to exporting unemployment benefits, I am very proud of what we have achieved on the applicable legislation", the rapporteur, Guillaume Balas (S&D, France), proudly told EUROPE. The co-legislators agreed on the following point: if, after 35 working days, a national authority in the worker's sending State has still not sent form A1 (which proves membership of a social security organisation) to the national authority in the host State, the latter may consider that "the document was never been issued", which ultimately means that the worker must be affiliated to the social security fund in the host State with retroactive effect, explains one source.
During the negotiations, the Romanian Presidency reportedly proposed 60 working days, but this seemed far too long to European Parliament negotiators, who recalled that the average duration of workers' posting was three months.
Other main sources of satisfaction for the rapporteur: the prior affiliation to a national security before the worker is sent has been set at three months and the waiting period between two postings has been set at two months. The Parliament also ensured that the host national authority be notified of the sending of a worker before his departure.
The thorny issue of pluriactive workers
As regards the question of the criteria to be used to define the State responsible for benefits for a pluriactive worker - i.e. a person who simultaneously, or alternately, carries out one or more different activities for one or more employers in two or more Member States - the criteria of the place of residence of the main directors, the main place where financial and banking transactions take place and the place where administrative and accounting documents are stored have been dropped. The Parliament did not win its case on the integration of an individualised criterion on working time.
On the other hand, the Parliament had requested that a review of the situation of the pluriactive person be included every 24 months (at present, there is no limit set). In addition, the co-legislators agreed to introduce a clause to review the criteria after five years, with an impact study carried out by the European Commission.
The co-legislators also agreed to provide important clarifications related to family benefits, in particular in the case of parents residing in different Member States, by allowing "individualised" benefits. It should be noted that no mechanism for indexing family benefits according to the children's place of residence has been included.
As for long-term care, the situation has also been clarified. The Parliament’s position, which wanted to integrate benefits also in the ”workplace”, was not followed up on. According to a diplomatic source, this clarification was not useful, as the text also covers the workplace. This proposal could also have presented the risk of adding elements that are not covered by the scope of social security, but by labour law.
The game is not over
The agreement has been sealed, but the game is not over yet. The Romanian Presidency will have to take the agreement to the ambassadors at the Committee of Permanent Representatives I (Coreper I) on Wednesday, 27 March. The document is expected to be distributed to delegations on Monday, March 25.
Here, a united front of six Member States (the "like-minded") is expected - the Netherlands, Austria, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg - which are very attentive to the export of unemployment benefits (see EUROPE 12215/2, 12201/19). Another tension could come from some states - particularly the Nordic ones, as well as Slovakia and the Czech Republic - on long-term care benefits, fearing a widening of the scope of application.
On the Parliament side, the hemicycle is in danger of being split: on the one hand, a left-wing block built around the S&D, Greens/EFA and GUE/NGL, and on the other, the ALDE, the EPP, and the ECR. However, the ALDE and the EPP could end up in scattered rows during the vote depending on the delegations, as was the case during the vote on Mr Balas' mandate last December (see EUROPE 12157/19). (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)