On Wednesday 30 April, Member State experts once again discussed the draft directive on quality traineeships, through a new compromise drawn up by the Polish Presidency of the EU Council, but the discussions do not yet appear to have enabled progress towards an agreement (see EUROPE 13626/23).
The delegations mainly reiterated their demands and, according to observers, this meeting confirmed the divergent positions, with the delegations remaining very attached to their national positions and not having opened up any new common ground.
Thus, according to some, the exchanges were “going round in circles”. The discussion once again divided the Member States that, like Spain, wanted a more ambitious directive, and those that wanted to obtain further flexibility in the scope of application.
On this specific point of scope, several delegations are said to have welcomed the deletion of the reference to open market traineeships as well as the added reference to identifying false traineeships, rather than detecting them as stipulated in the previous language.
However, some delegations, such as Germany, again raised the issue of the treatment of traineeships carried out as part of active employment policies, wishing to ensure that they are excluded from the directive in its entirety. A clearer definition of false traineeships was also requested by several delegations.
Austria, for its part, reportedly asked why the directive does not cover traineeships during training when they are considered to be traineeships.
With regard to equal treatment and the role of the social partners, delegations and the Commission are said to have welcomed the addition of a new recital (22a) to avoid possible derogations from the directive through collective agreements. But the Nordic delegations, on the other hand, reportedly said they were not satisfied with the new wording, believing that it misinterprets the role and autonomy of the social partners. The Polish Presidency is expected to rework the language.
As for the list of criteria for differentiating traineeships from jobs, some delegations, such as France, reaffirmed their preference for an indicative list.
Clarifications were also requested on probationary periods and the addition by the Presidency that “persons on probation should not be considered as trainees within the meaning of this Directive, unless the probationary period is part of a traineeship”.
According to one source, the Presidency no longer really wants to change the text, believing that it has reached the Council’s centre of gravity, and has cancelled a working party meeting scheduled for 19 May. A new meeting of the ‘Social Questions’ working party is due to take place on 2 June. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)