When asked on Wednesday 19 March how to move forward with the reform of Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security schemes, which started in 2016, the vast majority of Member States indicated their willingness to finalise the work, with the exception of two countries, according to several sources, namely Austria and Denmark. In particular, Copenhagen has asked for the proposal to be withdrawn and for a new impact study to be carried out.
Austria is said to have rejected the proposals on unemployment for cross-border workers and those on derogations for the construction sector, with regard to the requirements for prior notification of postings.
The Polish Presidency of the Council of the EU had submitted five questions for this meeting and “most showed flexibility” on “most issues” (see EUROPE 13600/15).
In particular, these concerned pluriactivity (“Can you accept that the definition of ‘registered office or place of business’ be divided into a normative part and a recital, as well as the current non-exhaustive list of indicative factors for its assessment, as proposed by the Spanish Presidency?), the rule on unemployment benefits for cross-border workers, derogations from posting notification requirements for the construction sector, and ways of modernising the regulation and whether or not it is necessary to limit the scope of the revision.
While the European Commission said that the discussions had enabled progress to be made and “clearly ruled out the possibility of splitting up” the regulation, reports one source, another said that the Member States had shown flexibility on this last point.
As far as pluriactivity is concerned, almost all the Member States are said to have accepted this proposal or indicated the possibility of accepting it. There also seems to be a tendency to support the 25-week period of affiliation required to trigger the responsibility of the State of activity for paying unemployment benefits to cross-border workers. Only one Member State has rejected the proposed six-month period for exporting unemployment benefits.
With regard to the construction sector, the Member States are also said to have shown openness to the proposals or flexibility, when the Polish Presidency proposed that they should also abolish prior notification for the construction sector for postings of less than three days.
However, six to eight countries reportedly backed away from this possibility. Paradoxically, the Member States also stressed that the construction sector is at high risk of fraud.
According to one diplomat, the discussion revealed a clearer position on the part of the Council of the EU, and there is reason to believe that a “positive outcome can be found”.
On Tuesday, a source also indicated that a qualified majority was potentially in the process of being formed as France had the support of 11 Member States, including Spain and Italy, in favour of a rapid resolution.
The Polish Presidency also noted a “positive” discussion, but did not yet specify the next steps.
On the European Parliament side, a meeting of the shadow rapporteurs was due to be held late on Wednesday.
At the European Parliament, impatience reigns over this project, which it has been wanting to complete for years. It says it is ready to engage with the Polish Presidency, but will only consider trilogues depending on the EU Council’s ability to find a landing zone.
The European Parliament also says that it is open to discussions, but points out that it shares the concerns expressed by trade unions and employers, particularly regarding the significant risks of fraud and social dumping in the construction industry. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)