European Parliament and EU Council negotiators are due to meet on 6 June for a political trilogue on the minimum wages Directive, which the French Presidency of the EU Council intends to formally approve on 16 June at the Employment and Social Affairs Council in Luxembourg.
A meeting at technical level was also scheduled for Tuesday 31 May to try to test solutions on the remaining points of divergence, such as on Article 6 and its provisions on the possibilities of reduction and variation of minimum wages in the Member States, the promotion of collective bargaining to set wages or the decent level of these minimum wages.
The French Presidency of the Council of the EU will propose, from this 6 June perspective, avenues for compromise to the national ambassadors of the Member States meeting on 1 June, as indicated in a document on the preparation of the trilogue dated 25 May. The most sensitive points still open concern Articles 4, 5 and 6 of the Directive.
Article 6 is particularly sensitive for Parliament, which does not accept that a worker can be excluded from minimum wage agreements and had decided to delete this Article, while creating obligations for Member States to report to the Commission on the “justifications” for such arrangements.
The document shows that the Presidency proposes two alternative options here: - delete Article 6 while retaining a proportionate reporting obligation and mentioning variations and deductions in the non-regression clause in Article 16; - maintain Article 6 as drafted in the EU Council’s general approach, expanding the notion of “legitimate objective” in the recital and retaining a reporting obligation in Article 10, and mentioning variations and deductions in the non-regression clause in Article 16.
In its approach, the EU Council had decided to keep Article 6 and to require the respect of the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality by the Member States. It had clarified that this is a matter for Member States, while recognising that variations and deductions can have negative effects on the adequacy of statutory minimum wages.
Regarding Article 4(1) on the promotion of collective bargaining for wage fixing, the Commission had proposed, in order to increase the coverage of collective bargaining, at least two types of measures to be taken by the Member States, the document recalls, namely: - promoting and strengthening the capacity of social partners to engage in collective bargaining on wages; - encouraging constructive negotiations on wages.
The EU Council had added the phrase “in accordance with national laws and practices” in order to take account of “the extreme sensitivity of national models of employment relations, which are generally subject to constitutional guarantees in the Member States”, the document explains.
Parliament, on the other hand, has greatly increased the level of requirement on this paragraph and added several new requirements. “Parliament had indicated that strengthening the requirements for the promotion of collective bargaining and trade union protection as part of this promotion was a political priority”, the EU Council recalls.
“Given the importance that the Parliament gives to this paragraph, possible compromises will require flexibility to take into account some of the Parliament’s amendments”, the text says without saying more.
On the setting of statutory minimum wages (Article 5(1) and (2)), Parliament emphasised the concept of the “decency threshold” and the additional objective of preventing and combating poverty, in particular in-work poverty, promoting social cohesion, reducing wage inequalities, and eradicating the gender pay gap.
The institution proposed to add that Member States shall ensure that statutory minimum wages are adequate and equitable and guarantee a decent standard of living. It also inserted a reference to a “national basket of goods and services at real prices” as an instrument to assess the cost of living.
The following compromises could be envisaged, the Presidency explains: - emphasise the procedural nature of the obligations that Member States will have to implement and obtain the deletion of the notion of a “decency threshold” from the Article; - to set aside the principle of an obligation of result in favour of an obligation of means on the part of the Member States to set the level of statutory minimum wages.
Adjustments between the different lines of this Article 5 will also be proposed on the place in the text of the notion of ‘poverty rate’ and on the reduction of the gender pay gap.
Finally, on the assessment of statutory minimum wages, Parliament had included indicative reference values of 50%-60% of gross pay in the Article and made the use of reference values voluntary. It had retained as an obligation only the obligation of Member States to assess statutory minimum wages.
The following compromise could be identified. “Member States could be required to use indicative reference values to assess the adequacy of statutory minimum wages. For this purpose, they will have the choice between indicative reference values commonly used at international level such as 50%-60% of gross salary, and/or indicative reference values used at national level”.
In addition to the explicit choice left by the text to Member States in the Article, “the text of recital (21) would retain the list of examples of indicative reference values that Member States may use, as present in the general approach”.
Link to the document (in French): https://aeur.eu/f/1vm (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)