On Wednesday 18 November, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union once again discussed the revision of the Regulation on the coordination of social security systems, without reaching an agreement on both the conditions for exporting unemployment to frontier workers and on prior notification.
On the issue of the export of unemployment benefits, several proposals would be on the table. The Commission would have submitted a proposal at several levels: - an uninterrupted contribution of six-month would give rights for a minimum of six months, with the possibility of extension according to national legislation; - an uninterrupted contribution of 24 months would allow 10 months, or more if the state allows it (except for some countries, such as the Czech Republic, where unemployment benefits are shorter).
On Friday 20 November, Parliament would have sent a new proposal to the German Presidency of the EU Council suggesting a 6-month contribution interrupted over a 24-month period to trigger the right to export unemployment benefits.
The question of an interrupted or uninterrupted period would currently be “the new battleground” between the two co-legislating institutions, we are told.
Prior notification. As regards the notification prior to the dispatch of an employee to the competent authorities of the Member State, the co-legislators would not have found common ground and would still oppose each other on the question of the conditions of the exemption from notification.
Parliament remains very reticent about a temporal exemption, which would, in its view, open the way to abusive situations. However, Parliament’s very restrictive proposals (by sector and activity) would pose difficulties for the EU Council, for whom Parliament’s solution would constitute an obstacle to the free movement of workers and the freedom to provide services.
The Commission would have made a last-minute proposal, which would not have satisfied MEPs. In their view, this proposal would be too close to a proposal of the Finnish Presidency of the EU Council in 2019, as it would introduce an exemption from notification for emergency situations as well.
On the EU Council side, a majority of national delegations would remain unconvinced by this prior notification system, which is intended to supplement the system already provided for in the Posted Workers Directive. Introducing prior notification - a request from Parliament - would only be an acceptable concession to the EU Council if accompanied by a temporary exemption.
Given that the majority in the EU Council is very narrowly divided between those Member States that are opposed to the export of longer benefits for frontier workers and those that are opposed to prior notification.
The German EU Council Presidency wants to avoid the same fate as the previous Romanian and Finnish Presidencies, which failed to bring together a qualified majority of Member States around a compromise.
The next trilogue is scheduled for 7 December (see EUROPE 12605/38). (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)