On Friday 17 November, a majority of Member States (around 15) indicated that they were unable to support the Spanish Presidency’s new proposals for revising the regulation on the coordination of social security schemes (see EUROPE 13294/20).
Even though these countries expressed concerns to varying degrees and for different reasons, with some expressing real red lines or rejecting all the avenues suggested and others pointing out difficulties with one or other aspect of the proposals, the message sent by the EU27 to the Presidency was not the most positive, even though Madrid plans to meet the European Parliament on Tuesday 21 November for a new ‘exploratory’ trilogue aimed at relaunching a dossier that has been at a standstill since the end of 2021.
Although the Spanish Presidency did not wish to describe these new avenues as a new revised mandate, and although no formal vote was taken, it was nevertheless able to conclude that it still does not have a new basis for discussion with the European Parliament.
According to several sources, Ireland, Greece, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, Hungary, Bulgaria, Finland, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Latvia and Malta have expressed dissatisfaction; Austria, Belgium and Lithuania are also among the countries that have expressed reservations.
For countries such as the Netherlands and Luxembourg, the issue of compulsory prior notification and, in the case of Luxembourg, the responsibility of Member States for the latter activity are particularly important points.
With regard to unemployment benefits, the Presidency had proposed in particular to slightly reduce the period of continuous activity required in a country of employment for that country to become responsible for paying unemployment benefits and the job seeking process.
Despite this, the Spanish Presidency intends to lead this discussion with the European Parliament to see where the margins for compromise lie. A method that some also consider unusual.
Concerns in the construction sector
Ahead of the meeting of the Member States, the European Federation of Building and Woodworkers (EFBWW) and the European Construction Industry Federation (FIEC) wanted to sound the alarm and point out that the construction sector must benefit from prior notification.
“The European sectoral social partners for the construction industry jointly oppose the possibility that prior notification would not apply to postings in the construction industry, including for short-term postings”.
They call on the EU Council to reconsider its position and to insist on the need to make postings in the construction sector subject to prior notification, which is essential to ensure the protection of workers and respect for social standards in the sector, to guarantee fair competition and to prevent the exploitation of workers, they state in a press release.
According to EFBWW General Secretary Tom Deleu, this lack of prior notification requirement is “an open door to an explosion of fraud in the construction sector and a frightening reduction in social security protection for workers”.
For FIEC Director General Domenico Campogrande, such an exemption could provide fertile ground for fraudulent behaviour: “Fraudulent employers could split the posting periods “eternally” to avoid prior notification. Workers will be vulnerable, as countries – the sending and receiving member states - can say they do not have competence to deal with a possible work-related accident. Labour inspectorates’ work will be harder due to the short-term posting periods”.
And “in the construction sector, many postings are of short duration, so most of them would not even be notified”. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)