Will the directive on high-quality traineeships become a reality for the millions of trainees across Europe? While the Cyprus Presidency of the Council of the EU has postponed the third negotiation meeting (‘trilogue’) with the European Parliament, initially scheduled for 24 March, to 5 May, mainly due to the availability of time, some are concerned about the slow pace of work and the very little progress made so far.
This is particularly the case for the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), which is calling on the co-legislators and the Commission to react, and fears in particular that the directive, without any concrete commitment from the Council of the EU, will be forgotten. All the more so as European employers, represented in particular by BusinessEurope, are campaigning for the withdrawal of this draft directive presented in March 2024 as part of their calls for legislative simplification.
The second trilogue, held on 24 February, still failed to tackle the most sensitive points, such as the scope and type of courses covered (see EUROPE 13791/23).
The European Parliament and the Council of the EU have completely opposing mandates on these issues (see EUROPE 13726/15, 13663/2), but the meeting did outline progress on non-discrimination of trainees or written traineeship agreements/conventions, describing remuneration, tasks, learning objectives, rights and obligations as well as the duration of the traineeship, which must not exceed six months unless duly justified.
However, according to European Parliament sources, no confirmation of this progress has yet been received. With regard to non-discrimination, the European Parliament wants to ensure that equal treatment is the rule, and the current definitions are too vague.
In addition, Chapter 4 on implementation and compliance has reportedly been completed, but here again no discussions have taken place to finalise it, even though the original philosophy was to begin work on the least controversial points and to prepare to negotiate on the most controversial points at the end. In fact, the scope of the directive is likely to be an issue at the next trilogue, as well as at that on 18 June, another discussion date set by the Presidency.
The two parties are accusing each other of refusing to move forward. But the finger is also being pointed at the role of the Commission, which is not sufficiently involved, and the Cyprus Presidency, which is content to accept the deadlock in the EU Council.
The Presidency has to contend with a very fragile qualified majority in the Council of the EU, which was only achieved thanks to the removal from the scope of the directive of traineeships linked to activation policies on the labour market.
The European Parliament, for its part, proposed a much broader scope, encompassing all types of internship, with the exception of compulsory internships, which are part of studies to obtain credits, and apprenticeships.
The Commission’s argument that the legal basis for moving towards a broader scope covering more trainees is insufficient is also misunderstood and not necessarily supported.
For the ETUC, it would in any case be incomprehensible not to move forward on this tool, a flagship text linked to social Europe. The unions are calling on all parties to make concessions, as ETUC Confederal Secretary Téa Jarc explains: “This agreement must have a clear objective: to protect young people from abuse and guarantee equal rights on the labour market, so that they are not exploited”.
The Member States’ ambassadors are expected to discuss the matter in Coreper on 6 May, the day after the trilogue. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)