CESI in Belgrade: Strengthening gender equality in Serbia and the healthcare sector

The report calls on the Commission to push, in the TiSA negotiations:
• to exclude current and future services of general interest and services of general economic interest from the scope of application of TiSA, which “include, but are not limited to” water, health, social services, social security systems and education, waste management and public transport;
• to ensure that EU, national and local authorities retain the full right to “introduce, adopt, maintain or repeal any measures with regard to the commissioning, organisation, funding and provision of public services”; and
• to recognise the great importance attached by European citizens to high-quality public services.

MEPs call to exclude public services from TiSA

The report also calls for “an unequivocal ‘gold standard’ clause” which could be included in all trade agreements and would ensure that a public utilities clause applies to all services considered to be public services by European, national or regional authorities.

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger: The Commission should follow the European Parliament’s views

CESI Secretary General Klau Heeger said: “I am particularly pleased that the report makes reference to an unequivocal gold standard clause on the protection of public services which is to be not only valid for TiSA but for all future trade agreements, too. This is something very close to CESI’s heart.” As a trade union confederation representing numerous trade unions from the public sector, CESI believes that a liberalisation of public services (such as through free trade agreements) would go at the expense of their quality.

CESI has called for such a gold standard clause in the past already. Last year, CESI adopted and published an extensive position paper on EU trade and investment agreements, laying out its visions for a gold standard clause for the protection of public services. The report adopted by the European Parliament yesterday is to a great extent in line CESI’s position.

Klaus Heeger added: “As the EU’s negotiator, the Commission should now follow the European Parliament’s view and push for an encompassing protection of public services in TiSA.”

This package, with features both legislative and non-legislative components, contains:

• an Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive with six legally-binding anti-abuse measures;
• a revision of the Administrative cooperation directive which includes country-by-country reporting (CBCR) between Member States’ tax authorities on tax-related information on multinationals operating in the EU;
• non-binding recommendations to the EU Member States on how to reinforce their tax treaties against abuses by aggressive tax planners. They refer to the introduction of general anti-abuse rules in tax treaties and a revision of the definition of permanent establishment;
• a communication on an External strategy for effective taxation, which sets out a process to create a common EU list of third countries for tax purposes; and
• a study on aggressive tax planning.

Good to act

CESI welcomes this new package, which is already the third initiative of the Commission within less than a year (after the Tax Transparency Package in March 2015 and its Action Plan on Corporate Taxation in June 2015). This certainly demonstrates its continued commitment to fight against tax fraud and tax evasion.

CESI President Romain Wolff said: “Tax avoidance costs the European society more than €200 billion year after year. Businesses continue to not pay their fair share of tax – but this would be so essential in order to finance public services. Because of austerity measures, tax administration workers also lack the necessary means to effectively perform their role and actually collect what is due. Political and legal measures are now more than ever needed to support them and to provide for fair and effective taxation in all 28 EU Member States.” In this context, CESI welcomes the Commission’s action. CESI welcomes in particular the proposed introduction of a general anti-abuse rules in tax treaties and an envisaged new common list of tax havens outside the EU.

More must be done, more must follow

At a second glance, though, the package is disappointing in several respects. For example, CESI had hoped that the Commission would go further than the BEPS recommendations as laid out in the package. Some of the proposed measures are in fact weaker than those of the OECD. Examples are those concerning the interest limitation and controlled foreign company rules (CFC), which are insufficient because they are to exempt all Member States in which they are entirely artificial. Moreover, the strategy on tax havens is unfortunately not proposed to be binding and is to be not accompanied by sanctions. This will remain at the discretion of the states.

In terms of transparency, CESI welcomes the proposed inclusion of CBCR in the Administration cooperative directive but regrets that the proposed level of required information remains relatively low and is only to be made available to tax administrations. As stated in its answer to the recent consultation by the Commission on corporate tax transparency, public disclosure is an integral part of a necessary democratic control. It would also significantly ease the work of tax administration staff members who are already suffering from a lack of resources. Public CBCR has already proven worthwhile, namely in the banking sector where it helped revealing tax scandals. CESI therefore hopes that the Commission will come up with a public CBCR proposal in early spring after the release of its undertaken impact assessment. Currently, more loopholes are at risk of being created and more must be done than focus on lowest common denominators.

CESI hopes that today’s package will not be the end of the Commission’s activities on fair corporate taxation, especially as regards the re-launch of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) proposal. Commissioner Moscovici announced 2016 to be the “year of corporate tax reform and fiscal transparency”. If he wants to remain credible, he and his services need to go beyond what has been proposed today.

CESI is confident that the new Dutch Council Presidency – which will lead the negotiations on the package within the Council and with the European Parliament – will take today’s package as an opportunity to send a strong political signal, especially after the recent Starbucks case led to the Dutch fiscal integrity being questioned!

To access the package released today, visit the European Commission’s website.

The event is formally themed ‘Labour mobility: Opportunities and risks.Which role for trade unions and NGOs?‘.

MEPs from different political groups will speak:
• MEP Jean Lambert (Greens/EFA, UK) – host
• MEP Verónica Lope Fontagné (EPP) – tbc
• MEP Agnes Jongerius (S&D, NL)
• MEP Ulla Tornaes (ALDE) – tbc
• MEP Dennis de Jong (GUE/NGL) – tbc
• MEP Laura Agea (EFDD)

Interventions will also be given by:
• Jordi Currell Gotor, Director ‘Labour mobility’ at the European Commission, and
• Alice Hamilton, researcher at the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA).

The opening and closing words will be delivered by the Secretary Generals of CESI and Eurodiaconia, Klaus Heeger and Heather Roy.

Please follow this link to register and find out in more detail about the event.

The main aim of this contract is to provide social partners with two products as follows:
• a background European comparative study relating to psychosocial risks in central government administrations;
• a user-friendly step-by-step guide based on the study and inputs from the members of the SDC CGA;
• a contribution to the preparation of the content of two theme-based seminars in 2016 in Vilnius and Madrid and of the final project conference in March 2017 in Berlin; and
• assistance in the preparation of a script of a short video to illustrate the guide.

The research is part of a health and safety project seeking support from the European Commission under budget line 04.03.03.01. The project aims at better tackling and preventing psychosocial risks (stress, burn-out, etc.) in the sector of central government, against a background of restructuring, work intensification and ageing workforce. More specifically, it will examine the use and efficiency of risk assessment procedures and the chain of responsibility of the different stakeholders (management, health and safety representatives, trade unions and labour inspectors, occupational doctors etc.) involved at the workplace.

The duration of the project is 18 months (November 2015-May 2017). The deadline to participate in the tender procedure is February 4 2016.

Detailed tender specifications and terms and conditions can be accessed in the tender document. Further questions can be addressed to:

Agathe Smyth,
CESI Policy Advisor for Social Dialogue
[email protected]
+32-(0)2 282 18 65

The tender concerns the production of a research and study paper on “Responsible players in the implementation of the occupational safety and health policy in the public sector in Europe: managers, trade unions, safety reps”. The paper is to be presented at a Europe Academy seminar in Madrid on October 13-14 2016.

The following description of tasks applies:

• Research and analyse the implementation of the OSH policy in the public sector of five Member States (probably DE, FR, ES, IT, BE) and determine whether there are “safety reps”/OSH managers in the said administrations.
• Identify five best practices from public administrations in the field of OSH policies (namely in the field of prevention of psychosocial risks and new emerging risks).
• Production of a mid-term report in English or French by April 17 2016.
• Issue the final study of approximately 20 pages in English or French by the beginning of October 2016.

The successful applicant will receive 17,500€ to produce the study. The deadline for participation in the tender procedure is February 5 2016.

Further information about this tender procedure can be accessed here.

The initiative on work-life balance by the Commission follows its recent withdrawal of the 2008 proposal to revise the Maternity Leave Directive. According to the Commission, the objective of the initiative is “to address the low participation of women in the labour market by modernising and adapting the current EU legal and policy framework to today’s labour market to allow for parents with children or those with dependent relatives to better balance caring and professional responsibilities.”

It its statement, CESI highlightes the challenges on the way to better work-life balance solutions for workers and illustrates possible ways out.

Regulating the flexibilisation of working time and the location of work

Increasing work flexibilisation as a tool for better work-life balance in exchange of a mere increase in work intensification or the shifting of work to other employees is not a solution that can allow adequate occupational health and safety of workers in the long run.
Accordingly, CESI favours preventive safeguards like the recruitment of additional staff to avoid such harmful developments whenever new schemes for a better work-life balance are being created. CESI believes that increased work flexibilisation for better work-life balance can be particularly well achieved by means of life work time accounts and tightly regulated alternating telework.

Putting in place more effective part time work schemes

In many Member States, effective schemes to help bring employees working part time back to full-time work are missing or deficient. This means that voluntary part time work, started for instance due to family-related reasons, often ends up being forced part time work in the long run. This can lead to in-work poverty in the present and old age poverty in the future (since part time workers do not collect as many pension entitlements as full-time workers). Experience has shown that women are disproportionally affected.
In this context, CESI supports concepts for an easier switch between part time work and full-time work. More instruments for vocational education and training in part time should also be envisaged and working parents and carers in leadership and management positions should be given more possibilities to work part time too – naturally without part time work having negative implications on professional development opportunities.

Achieving more and better childcare options

A suitable work-life balance for parents is only possible if childcare is available. Therefore, CESI favours an EU-wide legal right to childcare.
To make this right work in practice, investments in the quantity of childcare workers, services and facilities need to be stimulated to the extent that childcare becomes effectively available on a continuous basis and affordable for all families and single parents – including the less well-off. CESI underscores the importance of social investments in childcare, which will yield substantial positive returns especially in the long-run.

Realising more affordable options for care

While the need to provide professional and stationary care for family members is often key for workers to combine job requirements with care responsibilities, only few can currently afford it. Therefore, CESI believes that stationary and professional care services must be made more affordable and that investments must be made to further raise the quality and quantity of available care services.

Furthermore, CESI notes that where personal home based care is necessary, part time work as a result of family-related care responsibilities must be subsidised by the state so that caring workers continue to receive full salaries and will not lose out on pension and social security entitlements.

CESI’s full consultation statement can be accessed here. More information about the Commission’s initiative on work-life balance is available here.

The European Confederation of Independent Trade Unions (CESI) is glad to invite to its next “CESI@noon” on

‘Public sector workers in Europe facing the new challenges of migration’

Monday 19th of October 2015, 1.30-3.30 p.m., CESI premises

English/German interpretation will be provided
Cocktail lunch from 12.30 a.m.

Register for the event here

In the context of ongoing migrants’ arrivals at the borders of Europe, CESI wants to highlight the fundamental importance of public authorities and organizations that provide assistance throughout the EU in dealing with this unprecedented situation.

CESI, which itself represents public administration workers at EU level, is convening experts to look closer at the difficulties encountered by public authorities and supporting organizations in terms of new tasks, resources and needs, as well as to propose concrete solutions to deal with this dramatic situation.

CESI has repeatedly underlined the importance of the role played by public authorities in receiving and integrating migrants. Once regularized, the integration of migrants (above all related to housing, employment, social protection, education and health) depends decisively from the efficiency of public authorities and their capacities. Yet, in particular as a result of budgetary cuts and personnel reductions, the efficiency of public authorities has been decisively undermined in the past decades.

Organizations that provide support are also facing reductions in resources and are equally challenged by differing legal interpretations of rights to social protection and other assistance. Ultimately, public authorities and not for profit organizations need to better work together if migrants are to be effectively supported and integrated.

An event moderated by

Yves PASCOUAU
Director of Migration and Mobility Policies and Head of the program
“European Migration and Diversity” of the EPC

With the participation of

Ulrich SILBERBACH
President of the German union of municipal workers (dbb/Komba)

Laura CORRADO
Head of Unit ‘Legal Migration and Integration’ of the European Commission’s DG Home

Anna PLATONOVA
Labour Migration and Human Development Specialist – International Organisation for Migration

Heather ROY
Secretary General of Eurodiaconia

Conny REUTER
Secretary General of Solidar

Guest speaker: The Presidency’s policy on the refugee crisis

Jean ASSELBORN
Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, Minister of Immigration and Asylum of Luxembourg,
Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the European Union

Conclusions

Klaus HEEGER
Secretary General of CESI

The working document, officially titled ‘Recommendations to the European Commission on the negotiations for the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA)’, starts an own-initiative report procedure in the European Parliament Committee on International Trade (INTA). The aim is to provide constructive input to the TiSA negotiations towards the European Commission, which negotiates the agreement on behalf of the EU. The rapporteur is the former European Commissioner for Justice, Viviane Reding, who became an MEP after the last European elections.

For CESI, it is encouraging to see that Ms Reding’s working document calls to comprehensively exclude public services from TiSA. It states: “Public services … are not for sale. They are jewels rooted in Europe’s DNA … While the negotiating text demonstrates the EU’s political will to widely exclude public services, it could be said more clearly, more simply and less equivocally by means of a gold standard clause.”

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger welcomes in particular the reference to a gold standard clause: “The idea of a gold standard clause for the protection of public services was coined by an initiative by CESI and the Social Platform during a joint campaign months ago already. We believe that including public services in the scope of TiSA would lead to detrimental privatisation and liberalisation pressures in the sector. Therefore, we are glad that the term of a gold standard clause for the protection of public services has been included in the working document.”

Indeed, already back in February this year CESI held one of its CESI@noon lunchtime events on a safeguard clause in TiSA for public services – with Ms Reding as keynote speaker.

More information about a gold standard clause for the protection of public services in TiSA can be accessed here. For more details about why CESI believes that public services should be fully excluded from the agreement, please see also this article by CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger, published in EurActiv earlier this year.

At the 2016 EYE, the European Parliament will host hundreds of engaging activities – from idea checks, debates, and hearings to ideas labs, workshops, and digital games, giving 7,000 young people the opportunity to meet and discuss with European decision-makers and come up with innovative ideas on how ‘Together, we can make a change’.

EYE 2016: Five themes that move the youth

The five themes of the EYE 2016 are:

• War and peace: Perspectives for a peaceful planet;
• Apathy or participation: Agenda for a vibrant democracy;
• Exclusion or access: Crackdown on youth unemployment;
• Stagnation or innovation: Tomorrow’s world of work; and
• Collapse or success: New ways for a sustainable Europe.

The European Youth Forum’s YO!Fest is a central feature of the EYE. Mixing political debates and workshops with live music and artistic performances, YO!Fest aims at mobilising young people and youth organisations across Europe.

CESI Youth Representative Matthäus Fandrejewski: “One of our most important opportunities to raise awareness”

Matthäus Fandrejewski, representative of the CESI Youth, is looking forward to contribute to the YO!Fest at the 2016 EYE: “We were already a Yo!Fest partner before. Raising our voice at the EYE 2016 is one of our main priorities of the year. We want to help the European Youth Forum bring the youth’s priorities to the fore in a fun way and exchange with EU-level politicians. “

More information about the EYE is available here. If you are interested in more information about the YEF’s YO!Fest, follow this link.

The most important provisions of the letter to Jean-Claude Juncker can be found below. The full letter, including its annex, can be accessed here.

“As the European Semester Alliance, a broad coalition bringing together 18 major EU civil society organisations (CSOs) and trade unions, representing thousands of member organisations at EU, national, regional and local level, we are writing to you to express our concern about the direction your Commission has taken when it adopted the Country Specific Recommendations for 2015. We urge you to address this and turn the 2016 AGS into a first step towards a European Semester that is democratic, social, sustainable and inclusive

Using the European Semester purely as an instrument to ensure macro-economic and monetary stability will not help you bring the EU closer to its citizens. Only by using the Semester to support a reform agenda that helps the EU become more democratic, social, sustainable and inclusive and make progress towards the related Europe 2020 targets will you have a chance to close the gap with EU citizens. An explicit commitment to effective stakeholder engagement for both the Commission and Member States will also reinforce ownership and accountability.

In the current climate, in which women and men across Europe are becoming increasingly sceptical of Europe’s leadership in solving Europe’s many crises and challenges in a responsible manner that restores the balance between economic, social and environmental policies, the time has come to give hope. This means to draw lessons from the recent past, to renew the founding values of the EU in accordance with Article 3 of the Treaties and to meet your promise for a democratic, social and sustainable Europe. This is particularly the case regarding your priority to develop a deeper and fairer Economic and Monetary Union by making governance in this area more democratically legitimate and apply social impact assessments to reform programmes.

Five years have passed since the ‘fiscal consolidation’ approach was first introduced through the European Semester. As CSOs and Trade Unions, confronted by the social and environmental realities faced daily by various age and population groups and service providers we represent, we assert that austerity is not working. Rather it is transferring costs to society as a whole which will have disastrous human, social and environmental/climate mitigation impacts that will take decades to reverse, as well as preventing a sustainable and inclusive economic recovery that can benefit all.

We believe a prosperous European Union has the means at its disposal to change its direction and to invest in the well-being of all. […] We would like to ask you the following specific questions:

1. As the Semester should be democratic, is the European Commission willing to introduce Guidelines for stakeholder dialogue in order to homogenise and improve the quality of civil society participation across Member States?

2. As regards the social dimension of the Semester is the European Commission willing to promote social impact assessments as a key tool to ensure that budgetary consolidation and economic growth strategies do not undermine social priorities?

3. As regards the inclusive dimension of the Semester is the European Commission willing to reinforce the Poverty Target by urging member states to ambitiously commit to targets and actions that result in the target of lifting at least 20 million persons out of poverty? What initiatives will the Commission take that will concretely result in less people experiencing or at risk of poverty by 2020?

4. As regards the environmental dimension of the European Semester, how will you ensure that all Member States will be asked to shift taxation from labour to environmental pollution and resource consumption and align macro-economic reform with measures to address Europe’s over consumption of resources such as raw materials or freshwater, whilst guarding against negative social impact?

A specific commitment from the European Commission to support the active participation of civil society organisations in the Semester process is essential. […] We trust that you will give your utmost attention to our concerns.”

*The EU Alliance for a democratic, social and sustainable European Semester or (European Semester Alliance) is a broad coalition bringing together 14 major European civil-society organisations and trade unions, representing thousands of member organisations on the ground at European, national and local levels in the European Union. The Semester Alliance aims to support progress towards a more democratic, social and sustainable Europe 2020 Strategy, through strengthening civil dialogue engagement in the European Semester at national and EU levels. In the Alliance, CESI works to stress the role that strong public services (and hence the numerous public sector workers it represents) play in providing services that are crucial for the state to function and for the societies to proper.
The Alliance members include: Age Platform Europe, Caritas Europa, Housing Europe, Eurochild, Eurodiaconia, European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN), European Association of Service Providers for Persons with Disabilities (EASPD), European Confederation of Independent Trade Unions (CESI), European Environmental Bureau (EEB), European Federation of Food Banks (FEBA), European Federation of National Organisations working with the Homeless (FEANTSA), European Public Service Union (EPSU), European Women’s Lobby (EWL), Green Budget Europe, Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM). It is supported by the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and the Social Platform.
Follow this link to read more about the European Semester Alliance.

On the positive side, the report found (modest) wage increases in the central public administrations of 13 EU Member States in 2014. In many of these countries, a mature system of social partner wage setting or involvement in wage setting contributed to this development. This concerns, most notably, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden.

Countries such as the UK, Latvia and Bulgaria also saw increases in wages in their central administrations – but by government decision and outside a social partner wage determination procedure.

Unfortunately, there is also a large number of countries where wages for central administration workers were not raised: Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain are examples of countries belonging to this group. In several cases, wage freezes prohibited any wage increases, be it through social partner negotiations or government decision.

The full report by Eurofound can be accessed here.

In particular, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) ruled in case C-266/14 that where workers do not have a fixed or habitual place of work, the time spent by those workers travelling each day between their homes and the premises of the first and last customers designated by their employer constitutes working time within the meaning of the directive.* The CJEU based its judgment on three justifications:

1. Workers in such a situation to be carrying out their activity or duties over the whole duration of those journeys: The journeys of the workers to the customers their employer designates is a necessary means of providing their services at the premises of those customers. Not taking those journeys into account would enable the employer to claim that only the time spent carrying out a service at the customer falls within the concept of working time, which would distort that concept and jeopardise the objective of protecting the safety and health of workers;

2. Workers are at the employer’s disposal for the time of the journeys: The workers act on the instructions of the employer, who may change the order of the customers or cancel or add an appointment. During the necessary travelling time the workers are therefore not able to use their time freely and pursue their own interests;

3. Workers are working during the journeys: If a worker who no longer has a fixed place of work is carrying out his/her duties during his/her journey to or from a customer, that worker must also be regarded as working during that journey. Given that travelling is an integral part of being such a worker, the place of work of that worker cannot be reduced to the physical areas of his work on the premises of the employer’s customers.

Commenting on the judgment, CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger said: “This judgment is a very important ruling for mobile workers. It will bring concrete improvements for instance for workers in the care sector – many of which CESI represents as a trade union confederation in Brussels.”

Follow this link to access more information about the case. An official executive summary is available here.

* The EU working time directive defines working time as any period during which the worker is working, at the employer’s disposal and carrying out his activity or duties, in accordance with national laws and/or practice. Any period which is not working time is regarded as a rest period. The full text of the directive is available here.

The consultation, together with ongoing impact assessment work by the Commission on the same topic, will help to shape future policy decisions. In this context, it was an important opportunity for CESI to recall that taxes are being collected in the general interest and that tax avoidance and tax evasion by large enterprises affect all members of society, depriving tight public finances from much needed resources.

The current CBCR requirements are insufficient

The following background applies: With a view to regain trust in the financial sector, a CBCR obligation already exists for financial institutions established in the EU. This will soon be extended to large extractive and logging industries. By the end of 2015 the OECD and the G20, which have taken the lead on the subject matter, will finalise a 15-point action plan on this as part of a base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) project. Once agreed, point 13 of the action plan, which is on country-by-country reporting, would oblige very large multinational enterprises (with turnovers above €750 million) to provide a country-by-country report to the relevant tax authority from 2017 onwards. Tax authorities could then share the CBCR documents submitted to them to perform a more substantial risk assessment in the area of transfer pricing. However, it is important to highlight that:

1. not all EU Member States are OECD members;
2. the recommendations of the BEPS project are not binding; and that
3. the information provided would be only available to tax authorities and not to the public.

An extended CBCR, disclosure of tax rulings and whistle-blower protection are key

As a trade union confederation representing numerous tax administration employees, CESI believes that it is crucial to go beyond the above and, through a legally binding instrument, to extend the CBCR obligation to all sectors and to all major companies (e.g. by lowering the existing threshold for large companies of €750 million). CESI President Romain Wolff, himself a member at the European Commission’s expert advisory Platform for Tax Good Governance, says: “Extended CBCR obligations would help create greater transparency and allow tax administrations to effectively understand and control where economic activities are located and avoid illegitimate transfer pricings.”

Moreover, as the recent tax scandals have revealed, CESI notes that the mobilisation of the public and especially the protection of whistle-blowers is crucial in the fight against tax fraud. As part of a legitimate democratic control and in order to restore public trust CESI also calls for a disclosure of tax-related information (including tax rulings) not only to tax authorities but also to the public.

From a trade union perspective, an automatic public CBCR mechanism would also save time and resources for tax administrations which, due to budget cuts, in many places already lack the necessary resources to carry out their duties effectively. In this context, a CBCR tool would greatly support tax administration workers with their investigation work and make them more independent from cooperation with other national tax administrations. Furthermore, CESI believes that using a dedicated online register with important information would allow data to be more easily accessible to a variety of stakeholders. This would not only enhance cooperation at EU-level in a number of respects but also have an important deterrent effect.

Finally, CESI is convinced that while mandatory and public CBCR is necessary, it is only a first step in the fight against tax avoidance and tax evasion. It must necessarily be coupled with further measures. Romain Wolff adds: “I welcome the proposals of the European Commission in its recent tax transparency package and action plan for fairer and more efficient corporate taxation in the EU. This is particularly true for the proposed re-launch of discussions on a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB). More than ever, the European Commission must now show political determination at the highest level to coordinate the fight against harmful tax practices with the EU Member States.”

For more information on CESI’s position, please see its consultation contribution and consult its recent opinion paper ‘Collecting what is due: For fair and effective tax systems in Europe’.

Many employees of the public sector and local and regional administrations are on a daily or at least occasional basis working with incoming migrants, and it becomes increasingly obvious that large numbers of them have become overwhelmed. Not least as a result of cuts in public finance, many public sector bodies and local and regional administrations lack staff and equipment to cope with the dramatic situation. They are also overburdened with complex asylum provisions and procedures.

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger: “Administration staff is overwhelmed.”

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger underlined the urgency of the subject matter: “Regional and local administrations in several European countries are facing tremendous challenges when it comes to ensuring a timely processing of the refugee asylum procedures and their further needs. Despite a permanent, common and ‘automatic’ European refugee distribution mechanism, as proposed by Mr Juncker today, the uninterrupted arrival of new refugees means that the challenges which public sector workers and local administrations and their staff members are confronted with is becoming greater by the day.”

EU support for public sector staff vital

In this context, CESI welcomes that additional support has already been pledged under the EU Asylum and Migration Fund (AMIF) for countries such as Austria and Hungary in order to raise their administrative capacity. Furthermore, the proposed simplification of public procurement procedures in connection with the current asylum crisis is a step in the right direction.

However, Klaus Heeger also warned of too much audacity: “We cannot be naïve: A decent and humane migration policy does not only relate to an efficient processing of asylum requests and a fair distribution of migrants in adequate shelters, but also the provision of long term perspectives. These can only be provided if migrants receive a real chance to be integrated in our societies.”

Beyond migration, Mr Juncker also made comments on the future of EU social and employment affairs, announcing proposals to establish a common social socket for the EU in 2016. CESI is curious about this, noting that interesting proposals have been made in the past to centre a common social socket around an EU unemployment benefit scheme or minimum wages. CESI hopes that plans will eventually substantiate.

To access more information about Mr Juncker’s speech and the proposals made, visit the Commission’s webpage.

To provide further discussion impetus on the migrant crisis, CESI will hold a CESI@noon lunchtime expert debate on ‘Public administrations in Europe facing the new challenges of migration’ on October 19. Please consult CESI’s events website section for further information and registration.

The fight against youth unemployment and radicalisation of youngsters is embedded in six proposed adjusted future priorities for ET2020:

1. Relevant and high-quality skills and competences for employability, innovation, active citizenship;
2. Inclusive education, equality, non-discrimination, civic competences;
3. Open and innovative education and training, including by fully embracing the digital era;
4. Strong support for educators;
5. Transparency and recognition of skills and qualifications; and
6. Sustainable investment, performance and efficiency of education and training systems.

For the CESI Youth, the Commission’s continued commitment to combat youth unemployment with all possible means is highly encouraging. However, in the end, for the CESI Youth the preparedness of the Member States to really deepen cooperation under a re-tailored ET2020 will be decisive – this is especially true for one of the CESI Youth’s key fields of work: the proposed priority on the development of competences for active citizenship and employability. A successful adoption of the report by the Council by the end of this year would be a step forward in the successful fight against youth unemployment.

The priorities ‘Support for educators’ and ‘Inclusive education, equality and non-discrimination’ are of great importance also for CESI’s Trade Council ‘Education, Training and Research’*. This is, most notably, because both priorities can lead to positive measures in the fight against radicalisation and serve as a ‘preventive’ contribution from the education sector to this fight: As the European Commissioner for education and culture Tibor Navracsics said on the occasion of the publication of the (draft) report, the threat of radicalisation shows how urgently education prospects need to be improved across all European communities. Having recently held an event on the role of public sector workers in helping prevent and tackle radicalisation, a debate on how the education sector can contribute to preventing radicalisation and how teachers can be further trained to give their contribution in the fight against this ‘new threat’ will rank high on the agenda of the trade council’s next meeting on November 10.

To read the Commission report, follow this link. An accompanying Commission staff working document can be accessed here. For more information on ET 2020, click here.

* CESI’s Trade Council ‘Education, Training and Research’ gathers CESI’s member organisations from the education sector to deliberate and act on the improvement of working conditions of educators and trainers.

Indeed, considered by some as the worst humane exodus since World War II and the biggest humanitarian crisis of the 21^st century, the record number of 340,000 persons has crossed Europeans borders since the beginning of the year. Only during the last week-end around 7,000 migrants entered Serbia from Macedonia and another 4,400 migrants were rescued in the Mediterranean by Italian coastguards.

Overwhelmed by the incoming flow of refugees and migrants through the Mediterranean Sea, Italy and Greece have for months now sound the alarm and called for help from the other EU member states. Angela Merkel, whose country expects the record figure of 800,000 refugees this year (four times higher than last year), is now warning about a crisis potentially more serious than the Greek one.

As stated by CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger: “It is our moral duty to save people at risk of being killed and of drowning in the Mediterranean Sea, but we must face the inevitable too: How can we guarantee shelter and decent life conditions? How to ensure that our authorities are able to cope with the incredible large number of migrants? Not only solidarity and willingness to help is needed, but also the capacity to do so.”

Angela Merkel and François Hollande, who met Yesterday in Berlin to discuss these problems, called for a unified response. They also urged for the creation of new registration centres in Greece and Italy to be run and staffed by the EU by the end of the year and of a new system of mandatory quotas for refugees across the EU despite the proposal of the European Commission being rejected by EU leaders in June.

Local and regional administrations are clearly overcharged and unable to cope with the situation, not least due to a lack the necessary capacities – noteworthy a result of countless one-sided “administration-reduction-measures” of the past years in the name of austerity and cost reduction.

A European solution is now more than ever needed. In a spirit of solidarity, which lied at the heart of the creation of the EU, all member states must support the states directly concerned and admit their shares of refugees within their countries. CESI challenges the member states to implement existing agreements on the matter and has also expressed its strong support for the proposal of the Commission to introduce a system of mandatory quotas.

This important topic will be on the agenda of CESI’s next Trade council Local and Regional Administrations on 16 October.

For more information on CESI’s opinion on the integration of migrants by public services in Europe, please follow this link.

Referring to a list of Greek privatisation measures, compiled by the Hellenic Republic Asset Development Fund and published yesterday by German Green MEP Sven Giegold, CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger reiterated his general concerns regarding one-sided austerity measures, especially as to ruthless privatisation measures.

CESI, which represents several million public sector workers, is very sceptical about such measures supposed to help Greece recover from its deep recession. “Of course, if a government needs more revenues, it is always the easiest to reduce public spending by getting rid of public services and downsizing public administrations. Yet we should not forget: the delivery of public services lies in the general interest and requires the public hand to be able to act free from the mere logic of economic benefit” said Klaus Heeger.

As the Greek privatisation lists includes very sensitive areas such as, water supply, sewage and energy firms, Klaus Heeger reminded that the delivery of public services is a basic principle of a democratic, fair and just society. Indeed, public services lie at the heart of the European social model and therefore must be protected in every economic situation.

According to Ms Lühmann, the roadmap correctly outlines the challenges faced by working families and working women in particular: “Employment rates among women continue to be significantly lower than employment rates among men. Many young mothers do not make it back to full employment after having given birth to a child, and young parents continue to often face difficulties in finding an appropriate balance between work and family. But this is nothing new”.

Indeed, the European Commission writes in its roadmap that the situation of young mothers and families will not improve in the foreseeable future unless the EU takes effective action. Ms Lühmann adds: “After the discussions of the last months on the maternity leave file, a call for action by the European Commission is the right signal. There is lots to do and giving up is not an option.”

European Commission: Three options to move ahead

The Commission roadmap outlines three options to move forward:

First, via legislation to enforce, amend or introduce binding policies. This would touch on areas such as:
• a generalisation of the existing rights to flexible working arrangements to both parents and women and men with caring responsibilities;
• updates of the social partner agreements on parental leave, fixed-term work and part-time work (if desired by the social partners);
• a better enforcement of and new incentives for take-up of parental leave by fathers;
• improvements to the existing maternity leave directive (here, however, the Commission indirectly rules out a substantial increase in the maternity leave floor currently in place);
• the introduction of a special carers’ leave; and
• a strengthening of the implementation and where needed the enforcement of Directive 2006/54 on equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation and of Directive 2010/41 on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity;

Second, through non-legislative instruments. These would address, for instance:
• the development of EU level benchmarks in the format of proposals for Council recommendations on conditions for women participation in the labour market, on child and other dependent persons care infrastructure availability, accessibility and equality and on incentives and disincentives in tax and benefit systems;
• a regular monitoring of and public reporting on these benchmarks through the European semester and thematic reports;
• a facilitation of a structured dialogue with the Member States, the social partners and other actors of the labour market to identify, exchange and promote best practices supporting women’s participation on the labour market; and
• the initiation of awareness-raising campaigns to foster an understanding of work-life reconciliation policies benefits.

Third, by combining (parts of) the legislative and non-legislative options referred to above.

Lühmann: Binding, legislative measures must be included in the package

Kirsten Lühmann encourages the Commission to include the first option in its forthcoming proposals: “Non-binding suggestions and recommendations alone do not lead anywhere. During the discussions on the 2008 maternity leave directive proposal, the Member States proved that they do not see any need for action. The Commission, as the EU’s negotiation facilitator, must bring forward clear proposals and steer the European Parliament and the Council towards a credible compromise.” Ms Lühmann added that a quick and decisive agreement on an encompassing package of measures is important: “We cannot afford another impasse of more than half a decade!”

To access the Commission’s roadmap, follow this link.

Mr Mann, occupational pension systems in Europe have been built over many decades by the social partners. In early 2014, the European Commission caused a stir when it proposed to revise the Directive 2003/41 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement (the IORP II proposal). The file is now being worked on in the European Parliament. What is your view on the dossier?

During the last years, the European Commission has repeatedly tried to tighten the rules for occupational pension systems. In 2008 already, the German Bundesrat indicated that costs for the employers would rise by 20% if harmonisation plans for occupational pension schemes in the Commission became reality. As an MEP my group I have always spoken up against such plans – most recently as rapporteur in the ECON Committee in 2012 and 2013. Instead of “one-size-fits-all approaches” we need tailor-made rules for IORPs in those Member States where action is in fact necessary – for instance in Eastern Europe, where safeguards for occupational pensions are low. Social partners have repeatedly written joint letters to the European Commission, asking to not jeopardize the successful occupational pension systems that have been cautiously put in place over many years in countries such as Germany, Austria and Luxembourg. One such letter, sent in December 2014, noted: “The IORP proposal requires fundamental corrections. The Commission should – other than foreseen in its proposal – abstain from a full harmonisation of prudential supervision rules since this would not be suitable for the different framework conditions of occupational pension schemes in the Member States”.

What could a further European harmonisation in IORP rules mean for countries with cautiously balanced occupational pension systems such as Germany?

The occupational pension systems in European countries are as varied as the social systems. European regulations aiming at uniformity can therefore bring no added value for countries such as Germany, where safeguards for occupational pensions via the ‘Pensionssicherungsverein’ (Pension guarantee fund) are one of the best worldwide and have proven a strong resilience to crises to the test: Since 1975, there has not been a single case of insolvency. Here, harmonisation experiments from Brussels must be out of question. For this, too much is at stake: More than 20 million German citizens are entitled to this important form of pensions; the cover volume of their claims is more than 520 billion euros. More bureaucracy from Brussels would only mean higher costs. The payouts to the pensioners would suffer. Therefore, I believe: instead of full harmonisation, full subsidiarity must apply!

The EMPL Committee adopted its opinion just some weeks ago. How do you assess the outcome of the vote? What are the next steps?

On 28 May 2015 the EMPL Committee voted with 38 votes in favour, with 10 votes against and 2 abstentions against stricter occupational pension rules for countries like Germany. This was an important signal for the further direction of the negotiations on the file. Together with the Dutch EMPL rapporteur Jeroen Lenaers I convinced my colleagues in the EMPL Committee to vote to defuse several harmonisation provisions contained in the Commission’s proposal.

My last pensions report, which was adopted on 21 May 2013 in plenary with 502 votes in favour, 138 votes against and 49 abstentions already made clear that we do not accept the application of Solvency II rules to occupational pension schemes. Indeed, the Commission left Solvency II out of the IORP II proposal. However, at the same time it incorporated a number of Trojan horses that aim to Solvency II through the back door: the Holistic Balance Sheet (HBS), the authorisation clauses, the revision clause and the definition of occupational pension schemes as a financial service. Fortunately, the EMPL opinion advocates improvements in all these points. Now it is important to repeat this success in the ECON Committee report in November and in the plenary vote in December. What worries me though is that discussions in the ECON Committee could be affected by Dutch internal political debates. In the Netherlands there have recently been national-level disputes about tightening rules for occupational pensions and I fear that this debate may be unduly carried to the EU-level. After all, three of the four shadow rapporteurs in the ECON Committee are Dutch.

In November 2014 European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker presented a 315-billion-euro package to promote the financing of sustainable investments in Europe. The European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) is at the heart of this package. How will the EFSI help bring about investments?

The EFSI Regulation, which is to boost the EU’s economy and implement the 315-billion-euro package, was adopted by the European Parliament on 24 June 2015 with 464 votes in favour, 131 votes against and 19 abstentions. One day later, on 25 June 2015, the Council accepted the EFSI Regulation. The EFSI is intended to provide incentives for the participation of private investors in a range of new investment projects. By taking a part of the risk, the fund is expected to achieve a multiplier effect of 1:15. This leverage effect means that in a period of three years investments worth more than 300 billion euros could be mobilised in the EU.

In the negotiations with the Council and the European Commission, MEPs were able to change the financing structure of the EFSI. What was achieved?

We achieved a lot: We successfully pushed for an involvement in the appointment of the EFSI management’s senior staff. Moreover, the appointment of the managing director and the deputy managing director of the EFSI’s Investment Committee is now subject to approval by the European Parliament. And the list of funded projects will be made available to the public.

It is important that the regulation will now be implemented swiftly. The EFSI must be fully operational as quickly as possible. Funds should flow as of September 2015. After all, the investment activity in the EU has declined by more than 430 billion euros since its peak in 2007. This investment deficit works against Europe’s economic recovery and hurts the EU’s long-term growth. I want to ensure that a major part of the EFSI resources will be directed at SMEs. They are the backbone of the economy and account for two thirds of jobs and 99% of businesses in Europe.

No interview these days without a question on TTIP: More than 15 EP Committees, including the EMPL and ECON Committees, worked out elaborate opinions on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership which is currently under negotiation. These opinions were merged into a plenary report on TTIP that was adopted earlier this month. The report makes reference to many TTIP-related doubts expressed citizens, the social partners and the organised civil society. Which role does the EP play in TTIP?

TTIP can only enter into force if the EP approves. Therefore our view on TTIP has weight in the ongoing negotiations between the European Commission and the delegation from the USA.
We wanted to discuss and adopt a plenary report on TTIP already in the beginning of June. I had my speech prepared, too. But at 9pm on the evening before the debate, we learned that it had been decided to postpone the debate and vote on TTIP. The compromise text that we had previously reached with other political groups was suddenly on the rocks. What had happened? The TTIP rapporteur Bernd Lange from the S&D group had had trouble securing support for the compromise in his group. It was only in early July that we were finally able to vote in plenary on TTIP. I could then hold my speech, too.

Investor protection, the so-called Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) procedure, was one of the most controversial topics discussed in the context of the TTIP report. What is your attitude to ISDS?

During last few months I received up to 200 emails per day from TTIP opponents who criticised proposed measures for investor protection. They believe that an ISDS mechanism is a threat to democracy because, in their view, US-companies could use it as an instrument for waves of lawsuits to turn established EU environmental, consumer protection as well as social and labour standards upside down. Unfortunately, many of these mails contained sweeping judgments, even insults. I advocate a differentiated approach.

I am opposed to private arbitration tribunals and in favour of a European Court of Arbitration which operates in a constitutionally conform manner. We need a system of public arbitration which offers legal certainty to both of the two disputants and which gives both parties the possibility to revise a judgment. Of course, all parties have to respect the law and the legislation of the EU and its Member States.

Many critics of TTIP raise concerns that an EU-US agreement may be linked to social cuts in Europe. Are these fears justified?

TTIP must not lead to social cutbacks! The core norms established by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) such as the freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining must not be put in question. So far, the USA have only committed themselves to these norms but not yet legally ratified the relevant ILO conventions.
In this context, I am glad that in the EMPL Committee opinion and also in the plenary report my amendments calling for European standards in fields such as workers’ rights, social security, vocational training and social dialogue not to be weakened or abolished were taken on board.

CESI thanks Mr Mann for the interview. For previous editions of the ‘CESI speaks to …’-series, please see CESI’s press section.

The consultation focuses in particular on the functioning of the current coordination rules in a number of cross-border situations, including rules on family benefits, unemployment benefits and social security rules for posting when workers move across borders within the EU.

The contributions submitted to the Commission will feed into a revision of Regulation 883/2004 and 987/2009 on the coordination of social security systems. The consultation follows the public consultation on a revision of the EU provisions on coordination of long-term care benefits and unemployment benefits (Regulation 883/2004) of 2012.

Interested individuals or organisations can submit their contributions by October 7 directly through the Commission’s webpage, where further information about the nature and context of the consultation is available, too.

The consultation takes place in the context of discussions on a renewed EU gender equality – The current 2010-2015 edition expires at the end of this year. However, while numerous social partners and civil society organisation have in the past consistently highlighted lacking progress in gender equality in almost all dimensions of work and private life, it is still not entirely clear whether the European Commission actually intends to commit to a renewed EU gender equality strategy. After the Commission withdrew its maternity leave directive proposal just some weeks ago, abolishing the idea of a new EU gender equality strategy would be another blow for women’s rights in the EU.

Both as a recognised EU social partner and through its work with the European Women’s Lobby (EWL), CESI has in the recent months tried to convince the European Commission of the necessity to launch a new gender equality strategy by the end of this year. CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger said: “The Commission must acknowledge that women in particular still suffer from various kinds of disadvantages and discrimination especially in employment and on the labour markets and that a new, integrated and forceful strategy is required to change the status quo.”

Answers to the Commission’s consultation can still be submitted today by organisations or any individual directly on the Commission’s webpage. To view CESI’s contribution, click here.

In an opinion article, CESI Secretary-General Klaus Heeger recently explained, once again, why excessive austerity measures in Greece without long-term vision must be stopped. Now, the joint statement adopted at the euro summit reveals that Greece will have to continue to go down the same path of austerity as before if it wishes to remain in the euro area. Instruments provided by the euro zone for some assistance for investments is counteracted by a wave of intended measures that will likely compromise on the provision of public services and have negative implications on workers.

Collective bargaining, industrial action and collective dismissal rules are to be “modernised”. CESI fears that this will equal a further decrease in worker rights.

Moreover, Greek assets worth a total of 50 billion EUR must be privatised. CESI believes that the privatisation of public services is in many cases likely to decrease the quality of services, which in the long-term runs counter to the interest of the Greek people.

Finally, the costs of the Greek administration are to be “further reduced” in order to “modernise” it. CESI fears that this will entail many simple cuts in staff or staff salaries in the absence of a proper employee consultation process which might yield alternative, innovative and economically equally appealing solutions.

Given the political majority in Athens to stay in the eurozone, it is likely that Greece will succumb to the pressures from the creditors and adopt the reforms as required.

Mr Zourek stressed that overcoming transnational taxation challenges such as tax avoidance by large multinationals should happen in the context of a common EU approach and relevant European harmonisation options and respect the provisions of the EU treaties. In particular, he reiterated the Commission’s intention to move forward with its ambitious agenda and go beyond the long expected Base erosion and profit sharing (BEPS) plan of the OECD, which will is planned to be published after the summer break.

During the meeting some business organisations expressed fears and pessimism with regards to certain Commission-proposed measures in the field of tax transparency and tax justice. The most sensitive subject matter discussed related to the newly published pan-EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions: a list which unfortunately represents a mere compilation of national lists and is done in parallel to the lists established by the OECD’s Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes and its Forum on Harmful Tax Practices. Some member states expressed concerns regarding this list, arguing that it contains several mistakes and may moreover lead to significant diplomatic problems with the countries exposed as non-cooperative on the list. In this context, regrettably, the majority of member states remains opposed to a common blacklist with common criteria. They are now invited to send accurate and updated information to the Commission. They are also called upon to take part in a special meeting with 42 identified non-cooperation jurisdictions and the Commission on 24 July for a further discussion.

During the meeting, stakeholders also had the occasion to express their opinion on the work priorities of the platform: an increase in tax transparency, the creation of a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) and a better arbitration and coordination of tax audits in Europe. A number of members, including CESI, expressed the wish to keep taxation problems in developing countries on the agenda, add taxation challenges for small businesses and dedicate more attention to the estimation of tax avoidance, its consequences for tax administrations and the use of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) at national level.

Regarding the working methods of the platform, the Commission declared that there will be meetings of different working sub-groups as well as further plenary-style meetings bringing together all member states and stakeholders.

Two more meetings of the platform are scheduled for this year, with the next one being scheduled for 24 September. Information about the work and functioning of the platform will be updated regularly on the Commission’s webpage. CESI’s overall priorities with regards to tax justice and tax transparency and the role of public administrations in it can be accessed in its latest resolution on the topic.

For all further information, contact:

Agathe Smyth
Policy Advisor EU sectoral social dialogue
Tel.: +32 2 282 18 65
Email: [email protected]

The adopted text unambiguously calls on the Commission – which is mandated by the EU to negotiate the TTIP with the USA – to build on the joint statement of March 20 2015 by Commissioner Malmström and US Trade Representative Froman regarding the exclusion of public services in EU-US trade agreements. The joint statement confirmed that TTIP will not prevent governments from providing services in areas such as water, education, health and social services. Furthermore, it will not require them to privatise any service.

Following an adopted amendment by MEP Trüpel and fellow Greens/EFA MEPs, the plenary report now also calls to “ensure with a general clause the right of EU Member States to adopt or maintain any measure with regard to the provision of all educational and cultural services which work on a non-profit basis and/or receive public funding to any degree or state support in any form, and to ensure that privately funded foreign providers meet the same quality and accreditation requirements as domestic providers.”

During the last months, CESI together with the Social Platform pursued a joint initiative to insert a “gold standard clause” in trade and investment agreements such as TTIP to fully protect public services from any liberalisation pressures. In this context, CESI’s Secretary-General Klaus Heeger welcomed the plenary vote with regards to public services: “Our gold standard clause initiative has yielded first concrete results. The two clauses on public services in the plenary report reflect much of what such a gold standard clause could look like. Now, the Commission needs to listen to what parliament has said. After all, the treaties foresee that it is the European Parliament that in the end approves or rejects negotiated trade deals such as TTIP. I believe parliament will reject any deal that fails to incorporate its recommendations.”

CESI will work to remind the Commission of this.

President Gauck had invited Mr Fandrejewski along with other young citizens with impressive volunteer work track records for a formal honourary ceremony to his official residence in Berlin, Bellevue Palace.

During the ceremony, Mr Gauck paid tribute to the laureates, noting the particular value that their volunteering brings to society. Without citizens engaging in voluntary work next to their job, many organisations, clubs and initiatives could not function and the civil society would be weaker, Mr Gauck added.

Having met Mr Gauck in person, Mr Fandrejewski holds the German President in high esteem. “He was genuinely interested in the voluntary work I do. You can tell he really appreciates the involvement and participation of young people in civil society.”

Mr Fandrejewski works as an immigration officer at the Lippe district administration in North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) and has held different voluntary positions in several organisations and institutions for many years. Through his membership at CESI’s member organisation dbb (the German Civil Service Federation) he was elected lead representative of CESI‘s own, then newly-established youth organisation, the CESI Youth, in 2013.

Since then, Mr Fandrejewski has been instrumental in the organisation of the CESI Youth. CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger notes: “The initial consolidation and later expansion of the CESI Youth may not have been possible without Mr. Fandrejewski’s tireless dedication and motivation. We are extremely grateful for his efforts. The way he manages to reconcile his voluntary work for CESI with his job truly deserves a recognition.”

It is deeply concerning to see that, especially regarding Greece, no major change away from a regime of structural debts and austerity measures has taken place yet.

We have in the past consistently warned that there is hardly any worse impact than austerity measures on economies already hit by economic slowdown. With economic activities downsized, neither employment nor state income is generated and public spending cuts prove completely ineffective (since the parameter used to measure public deficit, the GDP, continues to fall). It is a vicious circle and that is what has happened in Greece.

Criticism has also repeatedly been voiced about what I call the “austerity blame game” and it has been warned that one-sided austerity measures do not only prevent struggling economies from getting back on track but ultimately endanger the existence of entire states and indeed the EU itself.

Given the outcome of Sunday’s referendum in Greece, a scenario which is everything but far-fetched.

Even though it may have been legitimate, yesterday’s referendum and the rejection of the latest or even last creditors’ bailout offer leads (again) to a negotiation stalemate. The blame game is at its peak and I wonder who will assume responsibility for a possible failure to save Greece.

Even more frustrating for both sides – for the creditors who believe they have shown tremendous solidarity and for Greece which feels like having been ‘reformed to death’ by ruthless foreign powers – is that the many years of negotiation have not lead to anything but a practically bankrupt Greece and a broken Greek-EU relationship.

What happens next?

It is hard to imagine that after the Greek referendum, the EU member states, the IMF and the ECB will endorse further payments from the ESM. There is simply no willingness among the political majorities to push for this.

Hence, only a debt relief or an ‘organised’ sovereign default can be the consequence in the long run. Whether this would entail a Grexit may be debatable. Yet, it is unquestionable that Greece would need an extensive recovery programme to get back on its feet. A programme for once not accompanied by one-sided austerity measures, that much must be clear.

In the future the Greek government would need to pursue a predictable, consistent and well-communicated approach in its politics, and it goes without saying that Greece would have to continue fighting corruption and nepotism, properly equip public services, combat tax evasion and fraud more persistently and stop sparing the rich from contributing to the country’s welfare.

It is also clear that further structural reforms to attract investments and to strengthen local production in the country would also have to be implemented, yet once again: not hand in hand with austerity measures.

What does it mean for Europe?

The main lessons to be learned:

There can no longer be an EU monetary union without economic and social components. The aim must be to achieve a “triple-A on social issues, just as much as a triple A in the financial and economic sense”, as Europe´s political leaders have stated again.

In addition to that, the macroeconomic imbalances procedure must be strengthened because in the end many of the challenges that Greece and Europe are facing are similar: Preventing societal disintegration and returning to a strengthened role of social partners to defend and further worker rights.

In this context the crisis in Greece, which is also present in other parts of Europe, is in fact in an opportunity to change things for the better.

We just have to get the direction right. In the end, it is, as noted previously, a small price to pay for social peace and democracy.

The file has a long history which dates back to 2008 when a proposal was released “as a priority initiative” by the European Commission. However, despite pressure from the European Parliament, social partners and civil society organisations – including CESI* – progress on the dossier was continuously blocked by the Council of Ministers.

This is why the Commission decided to withdraw its proposal and replace it with a new “fresh” initiative in 2016 “to meet the policy objectives of improving the protection of mothers, better reconciling professional and family life and facilitating female participation in the labour market.” CESI very much welcomes that maternity leave is still on the Commission’s agenda and stands ready to consult and provide constructive input.

Nevertheless, for CESI today’s withdrawal is hardly good news. It is a huge missed opportunity for improved gender equality and a better reconciliation of work and family life for women. Kirsten Lühmann, President of CESI’s internal Women’s Rights and Gender Equality Commission (FEMM), said: “The mills of the EU grind slowly. The launch of a new initiative means that real and necessary improvements in working conditions for women are highly improbable in the foreseeable future. Moreover, given the history of the file, a new initiative will unlikely be sufficiently ambitious.”CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger added: “The withdrawal is also tragic for the EU’s reputation as a partner for progressive social change. When entering his term of office, Commission President Juncker said that he will work for a triple social A rating of the EU. Now, a file that promised a better protection for prospective and young mothers is one of the first dossiers to be abandoned by the new Commission. The people are expecting more from the EU than being an advocate of austerity and competitiveness. Today’s withdrawal is a blow to all those who had hoped that the EU would be able to use the file to bring real improvements to working women. I hope the Commission’s plans for a new initiative will substantiate quickly.”

* CESI channeled its activities through the European Women’s Lobby (EWL), of which it is a member, and also sent own open letters to key Member State ministries to save the file.

This is because there are currently no EU-wide rules in place that give public administrations workers the right to information and consultation. On the contrary: They are explicitly or implicitly excluded from the existing directives.* For the last year CESI has been working to change this. It has done so through the EU Social Dialogue Committee ‘Central government administrations’ (SDC CGA) -of which CESI is a member- and also by means of a special Europe Academy project, which dedicated one of its annual symposiums to this subject last week.**

In this context, the European Commission’s consultation is a welcome opportunity for CESI to express once again its view on this topic and justify the importance of granting the fundamental right to information and consultation to all workers, including to public administration workers:

• Given the specific circumstances in the sector, the ideal solution to give central administration workers a full right to information and consultation is a binding social partner agreement as currently negotiated on in the SDC CGA.*** An extension of the personal scope of application of the three directives to public administration staff should however be pursued in case such an agreement cannot be reached.

• A recast or consolidation of the three directives is not considered to be the ideal solution for a more accessible and transparent legislative framework. Indeed, while the three directives all concern the right to information and consultation, they address different situations. A recast of the directives may affect these specificities and lead to an over-simplification of the directives which would lose in weight. A separate revision is therefore the preferred option.

• In the case of a revision, adopting a common and more extensive definition of the terms ‘information’ and ‘consultation’ would provide a higher degree of clarity, consistency and legal security in the application of information and consultation provisions than is the case under the current legislative framework. Moreover, the importance of time and appropriateness of information and consultation should be underscored in the definition: Information and consultation should happen in such a way as to enable workers or their representatives to effectively undertake in-depth assessments a exchanges of views. Information and consultation loses its value if made a formality which is completed just before a decision is taken or a measure undertaken by an employer.

For more information about CESI’s response to the consultation please follow this link.

*See directives 98/59/EC on collective redundancies, 2001/23/EC on transfers of undertakings and 2002/14/EC on a general framework relating to information and consultation of workers.

** The CESI Europe Academy is CESI’s training centre. Each year, it engages in usually two projects with the financial support of the European Commission. These projects provide CESI’s members with the possibility of delving deeper into current social and political issues in Europe and engaging them in debates with policy-makers and international experts through the seminars at the heart of each project. The topic of the project for 2015, discussed at a major symposium in Dublin on June 25-26, has been ‘Better anticipate change and restructuring in public administrations in Europe: The role of information and consultation of workers’. Please follow this link for further information about the Dublin conference.

*** This reflects the position expressed by the committee in its response to the consultation, which can be accessed here (follow this link for the French version). CESI supports the committee’s opinion but chose to also issue an own position, thus going beyond the committee’s text.

For further information please contact:

Agathe Smyth
Policy Advisor EU sectoral social dialogue
Tel.: +32 2 282 18 65
Email: [email protected]

The symposium was formally opened by Emilio Fatovic, President of the CESI Europe Academy* and by John Clinton, Secretary General of CESI’s member organisation POA (the Irish Prison Officers’ Association).

Europe Academy President Fatovic: Discussing information & consultation of public administration staff is highly topical

In their speeches, Mr Fatovic and Mr Clinton highlighted the topicality of the conference’s theme: In the context of tight public budgets, public administration workers across Europe are increasingly confronted with restructuring processes in the public administrations. However, while these often compromise on their working conditions, they are not covered by EU legislative framework on information and consultation (I&C) of workers – which covers the private sector only. As a consequence, they often cannot provide constructive alternative solutions to restructuring activities or at least suggest how potential negative implications on them may be minimised. For CESI, which represents several million central, regional and local-level public sector workers, this must be a field of concern and action.

CESI Secterary General Heeger: Lack of information & consultation of workers in the public administrations is harmful in multiple ways

CESSecretary General Klaus Heeger followed up on this during his intervention: “Especially during the recent time of crisis, people are in particular need of the services provided by the public sector. Despite this increase in needs austerity-induced restructurings have hit the public sector even more severely than the private sector. Staff has been laid off, pensions have been cut and salaries frozen. As a consequence, workloads have increased while working conditions have worsened, leaving many public administration workers with seriously increased stress- and psychosocial health-related problems.” Klaus Heeger highlighted that adequate working conditions for public administration employees need to be ensured and that staff members must have the possibility to provide input in how their work is being organised. Otherwise, he stressed, staff members will not be able to identify with their job, feel responsible and deliver quality services. Leaving their input away would also preclude valuable practical suggestions from employees relating to more favourable alternatives to restructuring or ways to limit negative impacts on working conditions, Klaus Heeger added.

Expert speakers make a case for a better involvement of public administration workers in restructuring

A plethora of expert speakers presented evidence about the negative implications that restructuring often has on public sector workers, exchanged best (and worst) practices of how public administration restructuring is being managed in the Member States and discussed how to achieve a full right to information and consultation of public administration workers in the management of restructuring:

• Eurofound research manager John Hurley presented research evidence on the extent to which public sector restructuring tends to increase the work intensity and the exposure to psychosocial risks among the sector’s employees. Birgit Köper from the German Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA) complemented this with a research-based presentation on why not only workers but also employers can benefit from employee involvement in restructuring activities; and finally

• European Parliament official Marion Schmid-Drüner explained why the European Parliament in its 2014 Resolution on the European Semester for economic policy coordination: implementation of 2014 priorities and in its 2013 Resolution on information and consultation of workers, anticipation and management of restructuring called for a legal act on the provision of I&C of workers and the anticipation and management of restructuring “in order to ensure economic and socially responsible adaptation to change by EU industry in such a way as to maintain workers’ rights”

Moreover, five case studies were presented on how public administration restructuring should (and should not) be carried out. These covered restructuring in the:
• City Council of Spanish city Huelva – by the First Deputy Mayor of Huelva, Saúl Fernández Bevía;
• City of Oxford’s recycling services – by Peter Sloman, Chief Executive at Oxford City Council;
• Belgian Federal Public Service of Finance – by François Goris, President of the Belgian National Union of Public Services (UNSP-NUOD);
• French veterinary services – by Laurent Lasne, President of the French national union of veterinary public health inspectors (SNISPV); and
• Spanish hospital sector – by Juan Carlos Mejias Roman, Secretary of the Spanish Nursing Union (SATSE).

The way forward: Full I&C rights for public administration staff first, then for local and regional administration employees too

This expertly input paved the way for a discussion on how to proceed to ensure a better involvement of public administration workers in restructuring processes.

Picking up on the European Commission’s work on a possible revision of the EU’s I&C legislation** and CESI’s current negotiations in the EU’s sectoral social dialogue committee ‘Central government administrations‘ to secure full I&C rights for central administration staff, Stefano Martinelli from the European Commission gave an update about the European Commission’s plans concerning the future of social dialogue at EU-level.

CESI’s Policy Advisor for EU sectoral social dialogue, Agathe Smyth, laid out CESI’s position on the future of I&C of public administration workers: Aiming at a successful conclusion of an EU social partner agreement that grants central administration workers a full right to I&C in restructuring processes, to be transformed in a second stage into a binding EU directive as foreseen in TFEU article 153. Should this not be possible, however, the EU’s existing I&C legislation should be revised so as to extend its scope of application to central administration workers, Ms Smyth said. In his subsequent concluding remarks, Mr Heeger added that a successful realisation of full I&C rights for central administration workers may then, hopefully, lead to a snowball effect to give this right to local and regional administration employees too.

Presentations, speeches and further conference material can be accessed here. A synthesis report will be made available, too. The conference’s Twitter feed can be found under #CESIweb.

* The CESI Europe Academy is CESI’s training centre. Each year, the CESI Europe Academy engages in usually two projects with the financial support of the European Commission. These projects provide CESI’s members with the possibility of delving deeper into current social and political issues in Europe and engaging them in debates with policy-makers and international experts through the seminars at the heart of each project.
** A social partner consultation is running at the moment. Please find CESI’s contribution here.

For further information please contact:

Marcella Migliori
Project Officer CESI Europe Academy
Tel.: +32 2 282 18 74
Email: [email protected]

Aurélie Quintin
Policy Advisor CESI Europe Academy
Tel.: +32 2 282 18 61
Email: [email protected]

Agathe Smyth
Policy Advisor EU sectoral social dialogue
Tel.: +32 2 282 18 65
Email: [email protected]

The excessive austerity and cuts in public service providers that many policy-makers have imposed in many European countries during the last years should be stopped immediately if Europe wants to keep a quality public healthcare system, provide excellent state-run education systems or maintain defence and police forces that can keep Europe a safe place.

“We see a rising military escalation at Europe’s eastern borders, we face increasing rates of radicalisation and terrorist threats in Europe, Europe’s ageing societies have special needs and our societies have to compete with rising knowledge economies around the world. But political leaders do not equip the military forces to operate effectively, they dismiss police officers where more staff is needed to detect radicalising terrorists on time, they ax public heath and social care provisions for the elderly in need, and they do not spend sufficient money to educate the youngsters adequately”, CESI Secretary-General Klaus Heeger said.

Indeed, it is time to recognise the vital role that public servants play in making societies function and in ensuring social justice. Without them, Europe’s post-industrial societies will be deprived of important services that they need to keep their standard of living. Mr. Heeger concludes: “In principle, privatising public services is certainly not an option: Privately provided services will always be profit-driven and stand by the rich and the wealthy – but leave behind those in real need.”

The Alliance* particularly urges EU leaders to embrace a comprehensive approach to promote economic growth that contributes to social justice and sustainable development. Combating poverty, creating quality jobs, ensuring adequate and sustainable social protection, including quality social support services, investing in early childhood education and care, enhancing equality for women and men at every stage of life, as well as ensuring environmental sustainability are all as important as boosting economic recovery.

The letter by the European Semester Alliance to the June 2015 European Council can be accessed here.

Further information is available on the website of the European Semester Alliance.

* The EU Alliance for a democratic, social and sustainable European Semester or (Semester Alliance) is a broad coalition bringing together 17 major European civil-society organisations and trade unions, representing thousands of member organisations on the ground at European, national and local levels in the European Union. CESI has been a member since 2014. The Semester Alliance aims to support progress towards a more democratic, social and sustainable Europe 2020 Strategy, through strengthening civil dialogue engagement in the European Semester at national and EU levels. As a European trade union federation representing several million public sector employees, CESI’s work in the European Semester Alliance focuses above all on aspects of decent employment and adequate public investments through the European Semester and in Europe 2020 for the benefit of the societies at large.

The blog post, entitled ‘Fighting tax evasion by firms to achieve sustainable corporate and societal environments: An issue not only for the EU internally but for development cooperation too’, is available on the website of the EMI.

As a European trade union confederation representing national trade unions of tax administration officials from several European countries and as a member of the European Commission’s advisory Platform for Tax Good Governance, fair taxation for development is a matter very close to CESI’s heart. CESI has stressed for a long time that if dubious tax practices by transnational companies are to be eliminated for the benefit of sustainable business and societal environments, national tax administrations in Europe and beyond need to be strengthened and better equipped to efficiently and effectively perform their function: Collecting due taxes.

The time to move to a system of fair and effective taxation for multinational companies has probably never been better than now. Following the LuxLeaks-revelations towards the end of last year, problems related to unethical tax practices by many multinational companies in Europe have been exceptionally high on the political agenda. During the last months, the public outcries have increased with each additional dubious tax practice involving a multinational being revealed.

In this context, the European Commission in its corporate taxation action plan from today correctly analysed many of the challenges that lie ahead in the EU. These pertain especially to the fast introduction of an encompassing and mandatory CCCTB and an effective system of country-by-country reporting.

A full and timely CCCTB would restore tax justice for the tax-paying citizens

A CCCTB would ensure that multinationals are limited in transfer pricing in cross-border sales and ensure that they do effectively pay taxes where profits are made – and that these taxes are determined with the help of a mandatory minimum tax rate. Tax justice would be restored for the tax-paying citizens. However, for reasons yet to be established, the Commission decided to postpone concrete CCCTB proposals by 18 months, arguing that a fully-fledged CCCTB would currently not get a majority in the Council of Ministers. CESI wonders why Member States should be more willing to agree to an encompassing CCCTB in 1,5 years when there will be perhaps even less pressure from the public than is the case today. The Commission should be more willing to push for a full CCCTB now, taking advantage of the current momentum of public outrage.

CESI President Romain Wolff: Without encompassing country-by-country reporting, tax collectors grope in the dark

An encompassing country-by-country reporting system -full transparency concerning multinationals’ tax payments and tax rulings of the various EU Member States- would enable the national tax administrations to effectively go after corporate tax evaders and collect all due taxes. “What tax inspectors need to operate is a system of encompassing country-by-country reporting. Without more transparency, they continue to grope in the dark. However, the Commission does not propose immediate action in this regard.” Instead, it opened another consultation on the topic, which will be followed by another impact assessment. Even after that consultation and the impact assessment, the Commission refuses to promise to come forward with concrete policy proposals. As a European trade union confederation representing several national tax administration trade unions, CESI lacks any understanding for such delays and backdoor shelving options.

N.B.: The official documents related to the Commission’s action plan can be accessed here. Further information about CESI’s position advocated in this statement is available in a resolution it recently adopted on fair and effective tax systems in Europe.

CNV-Connectief, formally called Christelijk Nationaal Vakverbond-Connectief, formed at the end of last year following a merger of CNV-Onderwijs -a Dutch 56,000 member-strong teachers’ union- and CNV-Publieke Zaak, a trade union representing 84,000 Dutch civil servants and healthcare workers.

SPELC is the French teachers’ trade union ‘Federation Nationale des Syndicats Professionnels de l’ Enseignement Libre Catholique’ and brings together about 15,000 French teachers.

CESI’s profile as a trade union confederation strengthened in the field of education, healthcare and public service more generally

Following the positive vote by the Board, which was witnessed by both SPELC Secretary General Luc Viehé and CNV-Connectief President Helen Adriani, CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger said: “We already represent numerous public sector trade unions in the EU arena. Now, the accession of CNV-Connectief and SPELC further strengthens CESI’s profile and role as an EU-level trade union confederation in the field of education, healthcare and public services more generally. We will make sure to bring added value to SPELC and CNV-Connectief through the successful work we perform in Brussels already today.”

Successful membership applications complement successful Board meeting overall

The successful membership applications by CNV-Connectief and SPELC complemented a Board meeting that was very successful overall. Following presentations by Mr Heeger on the successful work, evolution and achievements of CESI’s General Secretariat and its Europe Academy*, Commissions and Trade Councils** and youth organisation ‘CESI Youth’ during the past six months, the Board adopted important decisions in relation to CESI’s budget, structure and future work priorities. The next meeting of CESI’s Board will take place on December 1 2015.

More information about SPELC is available here. Follow this link to access further information about CNV-Connectief.

* The CESI Europe Academy is CESI’s internal capacity-building body. Working within the context of the General Secretariat, it implements usually two subject-specific projects per year that culminate in a large-scale conference open to all CESI member organisations. The next Europe Academy conference will take place in Dublin next week (June 24-26) and address the topic ‘Better anticipate changes and restructuring in public administrations in Europe: the role played by the information and consultation of employees’.

**CESI’s Commissions and Trade Councils are its sector-specific principal forums for debate and action, composed of representatives of its member organisations active in the respective sectors. They usually meet twice per year.

The report, drafted by MEP Maria Noichl of the European Parliament’s Women’s Rights and Gender Equality Committee, was adopted by the plenary in Strasbourg with 341 votes in favour and 281 against.

Unambiguous call on the Commission to commit to a new EU gender equality strategy

It unambiguously calls on the European Commission “to draw up and adopt a new separate strategy for women’s rights and gender equality in Europe aimed at creating equal opportunities and based on the priority areas of the previous strategy with a view to ending all forms of discrimination suffered by women in the labour market, with respect to wages, pensions, decision-making, access to goods and services, reconciliation of family and working life and all forms of violence against women and to removing discriminatory structures and practices related to gender.”

So far, there have been rumours that the European Commission’s services responsible for gender equality, headed by Commissioner Věra Jourová, will not table a new gender equality strategy at all, apparently judging it undesirable or unnecessary. Indeed, the topic is not addressed in the Commission’s 2015 annual work programme.

Keep the momentum

Currently, the European Commission is still running public consultation in order to establish if a new strategy is useful at all. Just like the European Parliament and numerous social stakeholders, CESI thinks it clearly is. CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger noted: “The momentum gained through the report of the European Parliament must be kept. First, the EPSCO Council in its next meeting on June 18 should speak in favour of a new strategy. Secondly, it is important that responses to the Commission’s public consultation in favour of a new, strong gender equality strategy are numerous. Then, hopefully, the Commission will realise that women still suffer from disadvantages and discrimination especially in employment and on the labour markets and that a new, integrated and forceful strategy is required to change the status quo.” The Commission’s consultation is still open until July 21. Answers can be submitted by organisations or any individual directly on the Commission’s webpage.

According to the Commissioner for social dialogue Valdis Dombrovskis, the orientation debate was to review “the way economic policy [can be better] coordinated across the EU to better take into account social concerns”. His colleague, the Commissioner for employment Marianne Thyssen, added: “Creating jobs, restoring fairness, providing protection and reducing inequalities therefore remain our priorities […] Our aim is to achieve upward social convergence and to bring concrete results to the European citizens.”

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger: “Make sure that the debate does not remain a mere symbol.”

CESI welcomes such statements very much. It also values high the European Commission’s commitment to hold a college orientation debate on how to bring about more and better jobs. In fact, CESI believes that such a debate has been long overdue. After all, the crisis has left deep marks in Europe’s societies for years already, having put thousands of people out of work and having led austerity-inspired politicians across Europe to cut social and worker rights for the sake of what they have called “restoring the competitiveness of the EU’s economy”.

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger notes: “Time has come for a real social agenda that puts quality jobs and social equality back to the centre of the political debates in the EU and its Member States. In this context, the Commission’s orientation debate has certainly been a vital political sign. However, the Commissioners Thyssen and Dombrovskis must make sure that the debate does not remain a mere symbol.”

Big gap between the Commission’s stated objectives and the reality of social conditions

Indeed, an analysis of the orientation debate’s conclusions reveals just how far reality is (still) away from the Commission’s stated objectives in the field of employment and social affairs.

• In the orientation debate it was concluded that “EU economic governance has been strengthened since the crisis and improvements are still being made, including by taking better account of employment and social objectives [through] this year’s country-specific recommendations” (CSRs). Here, substantial progress still needs to be made. An analysis by the European Semester Alliance -a broad coalition of social stakeholders and trade unions, including CESI- strongly criticised the predominance in the 2015 CSRs on austerity and the lack of emphasis on the need to invest again in public services to achieve social objectives. Following the orientation debate, CESI eagerly awaits for more socially ambitious CSRs in 2016.

• The orientation debate also established that the involvement of the EU social partners in political deliberations should be enhanced. Again, CESI sees a lot of room to make this aim a reality. Despite repeated political statements to strengthen social dialogue, the Commission recently cut its support for EU sectoral social dialogue drastically. The recent past saw a weakening of social dialogue in Europe, not a strengthening of the involvement of social partners.

• Moreover, the orientation debate led to the conclusion that EU employment and social legislation should be “modernised” in order to adapt it to “technological change, a more diversified workforce and new business models”. Certainly, there is nothing wrong with this in principle. CESI would welcome any EU action with regards to, for instance, the adequate protection of workers engaging in what Eurofound identified in a recent report as unregulated and partially exploitative “new forms of employment” like “casual work”. However, “modernisation” must not remain an euphemism to continue cutting worker rights for the sake of business interests under the Commission’s Refit and “Better” Regulation agendas. It is important that a possible withdrawal of the Maternity leave proposal this summer will not set a precedent in this direction.

“If the reform of maternity leave has not finally advanced by this summer, the project will be off the table for years. The Member States’ strategy of playing the waiting game in the Council of Ministers would have been successful,” warns Kirsten Lühmann. At the end of May, the European Parliament had reiterated its clear support for a reform of maternity leave, which has been discussed in the EU for years. “The blockade comes from the Council. However, the national governments must not let this opportunity to reform pass; they have to move and play with open cards at last,” says Lühmann.

The FEMM President asks to support an online petition of the European Women’s Lobby (EWL) to save the reform. “The European Commission will withdraw the draft directive if there is no agreement by this summer. This cannot be allowed. The better protection of mothers should not fall victim to purely economic considerations.” In particular, the governments of Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom have been slowing down reform efforts.

“CESI does not step back from its demands: an increase in the minimum length of maternity leave from 14 to at least 18 weeks as well as a harmonisation of existing national rules, which will improve working conditions,” Luehmann explains with regards to CESI’s position paper on maternity leave that was adopted by the FEMM Commission in spring earlier this year. “The European Union will also be judged according to whether it can bring about real improvements for mothers. A failure would be a devastating blow.”

Opening the meeting, the ACF Trade Council members discussed the state of play concerning the social dialogue in their home countries, which was in many cases weakened during the recent economic and financial crisis. With regards to social dialogue at the EU-level, CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger reported that CESI’s work in the sectoral social dialogue committee ‘Central government administrations’ is evolving continually. In this context, he noted above all CESI’s efforts to have central administration staff covered by the EU legislation on information and consultation of workers – which to the day only covers private sector workers – and specifically referred to the recent adoption of a joint committee response to a current social partner consultation by the European Commission on a consolidation of the three existing EU directives on information and consultation of workers and to the current parallel social dialogue committee negotiations on a legally binding agreement which extends the EU legislation on information and consultation of workers to central administration employees.

Investments in tax administrations at the heart of the debate

The meeting’s keynote presentation was given by Reinhard Biebel from the European Commission’s DG TAXUD on the European Commission’s recently published Tax Transparency Package. The presentation set the stage for a controversial discussion on current challenges relating to tax transparency and tax avoidance and evasion in Europe and led to a resolution being worked out which lays out a set of practical recommendations on how to improve the transparency of Europe’s current tax systems and effectively fight tax fraud and tax evasion in the EU Member States. Among others, the resolution calls for a boosted and revamped cooperation among the EU Member States in tax-related matters such as:

• automatic exchanges of information;
• an extension of country-by-country reporting obligations;
• more effective controlling;
• the creation and enforcement of uniform sanctions for illegal practices; and
• an increase in the investment in tax administrations, which have during the last years often suffered from drastic cuts in staff and budgetary support.

Commenting on the resolution, which still needs to be rubber-stamped by CESI’s Presidium, CESI General Secretary Klaus Heeger said: “Investing in the human resources of the national tax administrations is maybe the most important point mentioned in the resolution. The recent economic and financial crisis has led to budgetary cuts many national tax authorities. Employees were laid off and working conditions deteriorated. This is unacceptable, given the fact that tax administrators and inspectors actually help to improve the state’s revenues by making sure that all due taxes are being collected.”

During the ACF Trade Council meeting, it was also discussed how to deal with emerging levels of violence in public services and how to assess new trends, dangers and consequences of productivity bonuses for employees in central administrations. It was concluded that work on these topics needs to be continued.

The panel which discussed ‘How to strengthen the involvement of social partners in the EU transport policy’ featured six chairs/co-chairs and representatives from different EU sectoral social dialogue committees of the transport sector. The chair of the rail sectoral social dialogue committee Greifelding was among the speakers that stressed very clearly that better financial and resource-oriented support by the European Commission is urgently needed if EU sectoral social dialogue is to be reinforced, further strengthened, and made more effective and operational. Only in this way can social progress be realised, he concluded.

The representative of the ports sectoral social dialogue committee Kerdjoudj-Belkaid added that more respect and support for sectoral social dialogue is also desirable from the side of the EU Member States in the Council of Ministers.

As a recognised social partner actively involved in four different sectoral social dialogues, CESI also demands that the EU institutions should all give sectoral social partners a more systematic role in the European political discourse than is currently the case. However, as CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger made it very clear: “The actors have to open their doors to a broader representation. Otherwise, the legitimacy of the sectoral social dialogues will always be put in question.”

Apart from the workshop on social dialogue, the conference also dedicated separate sessions to topics such as “How to prepare the transport workforce for the future?”, “How to promote transport professions for young people and women?”, and “How to combat persistent problems of illicit employment practices and disloyal social regimes competition?”

Further information about the conference can be accessed on the European Commission’s webpage.

According to the FRA, its study, entitled ‘Sever labour exploitation: workers moving within or into the European Union’, is the first of its kind to comprehensively explore all criminal forms of labour exploitation in the EU affecting workers moving within or into the EU. The findings show that criminal labour exploitation is (still) extensive in many sectors across the EU Member States and also that perpetrators are often only at little risk of prosecution or of having to compensate victims.

As one key finding, the report underscores the importance of trade unions “to reach out and provide information to workers moving within or into the EU.” Specifically, it reads: “Many respondents [in interviews carried out in the research phase of the study] considered it essential for workers to know about working conditions and their rights before their arrival in their country of destination, or to be given such information on their arrival. In this respect, the important functions performed by trade unions and NGOs that come into contact with workers moving within or into the EU – for example in Austria, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands – should be acknowledged as a promising development.”

Reading this, CESI feels strongly encouraged to continue its work on the promotion of fair labour mobility which it started already a while ago when it identified the same problem that the new FRA report also highlights. In March this year, CESI facilitated the adoption of an agreement between its member organisation dbb (the German Civil Service Federation) and SATSE (the Spanish nursing union), a member of CESI’s member organisation Eurofedop, which establishes a bilateral framework for the mutual supporting, counseling, and informing of incoming Spanish migrant nurses of their rights in Germany (and vice versa).

CESI Secretary-General Klaus Heeger notes: “We have worked hard to fill the dbb-SATSE agreement with life and I see it as a blueprint for further similar bilateral agreements between trade unions to counter the risk of exploitation of labour migrants in Europe. The FRA is absolutely right in saying that trade unions can do a lot when it comes to supporting policy-makers and public authorities in achieving effective fair labour mobility on the ground.”

The full FRA report can be accessed here.

ABOUT THE SYMPOSIUM

• Dublin, 25-26 June 2015
• Synthesis: EN / FR / DE / ES / IT
• Brochure: EN / FR / DE

During the two-day symposium in Dublin, expert speakers of various backgrounds discussed why and how restructuring processes in public administrations need to take better account of the employees’ perspectives. The conference took place timely against the backdrop of work by CESI at EU social partner level to create an EU-wide right to information & consultation of central administration workers, especially in restructuring processes, which was concluded soon after the symposium in December 2015, when CESI (together with EPSU) signed a social partner agreement with the employers’ side. More information about the symposium is available here.

PRESENTATIONS/SPEECHES:

• FATOVIC Emilio, 25.6: FR / IT
• SCHMID-DRÜNER Marion, 25.6.: EN
• HURLEY John, 25.6. (2 presentations): EN / EN
• SLOMAN Peter, 25.6.: EN
• GORIS François, 25.6.: FR / NL
• LASNE Laurent, 25.6.: FR
• MEJIAS ROMAN, Juan Carlos, 25.6.: EN / ES
• KÖPER Birgit, 26.6.: 26.6.: EN
• SMYTH Agathe, 26.6.: EN
• HEEGER Klaus, 26.6.: FR

‍

In June 2015, the European Council meeting will be dedicated to security and defence. EU Heads of State or Government will assess the progress made in this field since the December 2013 summit.

Even more than before, the security environment of the EU is under threat and calls for a strong European response. These threats are coming from several directions. The bipolar world changed into a multipolar and to some extent unpredictable world environment. At the eastern borders of Europe, the actions of Russia in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea pose a threat to its security. In the South, conflicts in some Mediterranean, African as well as Middle-Eastern countries and regions including Iraq, Libya, Mali, the Sahel and Syria are also putting pressure on its security environment. Furthermore, Europe was recently confronted with terrorist attacks in Paris and Copenhagen as well as with cyberattacks going hand in hand with the rise of extremism in society including on the European continent.

Simultaneously, European countries have been faced with an economic crisis in the last years and consequently decrease their defence budgets. In Fact, several European countries had already started decreasing their spending on the military and reducing their Armed Forces in numbers since almost 20 years. However, faced to current challenges, it became clear that EU Member States must increase their individual and especially collective efforts. A majority of the public is in favour of a broad European project in the field of security and defence.

The recent declaration of the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, who expressed himself in favour of a European army, broadened the defence debate in the European political and military arena. Even if not everybody is yet convinced that there will be, one day and not in the short term, a European army, it is undeniable that there is a strong need for closer defence cooperation and not only for budgetary reasons. If Europe wants to be taken seriously it should maintain its military capabilities, strengthen its global position and ensure its security in a more coordinated way, comprising to what concerns its defence spending.

The establishment of a European army would lead to further transfer of sovereignty to the EU level. Its development and deployment would therefore necessarily require a legitimation by the European Parliament.

EUROMIL and CESI support a comprehensive and indivisible approach to security, which includes, among others, a human dimension. Armed Forces personnel, whether civilian or military, put their live at risk for the preservation of some European values and must be treated as “Citizens in Uniform”. They deserve the best living and working conditions as any other EU citizens. This implies the need for soldiers serving in EU missions to receive proper training equipment and have access to medical facilities as well as social protection. Indeed, we call for deeper cooperation and harmonisation among EU Armed Forces, not only to what concerns Pooling and Sharing of capabilities, but also for the development of common standards for the living and working conditions of Armed Forces personnel. Civilian and military personnel, as any other European workers, should enjoy all the rights and benefits inherent in that condition.

Already today, similar standards in terms of working conditions for all employees in the armed forces should be respected, for instance: working conditions in accordance with the EU safety and health framework directives and the related Working Time Directive, healthcare benefits, , the possibility to access (civilian) vocational training and further training for temporary employees during and after their employment in the armed forces.

Therefore, EUROMIL and CESI are of the opinion that a closer collaboration between European Armed Forces has to go hand in hand with the development of certain standards. At that point we recall the SAFE project which stands for “Synchronised Armed Forces Europe”, voted by the European Parliament in 2009 as a first step towards a true European military force. The SAFE project should be brought back on the agenda for further discussion and development.

EUROMIL and CESI also call on all EU Member States to abide by international legislation and respect the fundamental rights and freedoms -including the freedom of association, as stipulated among others in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights- of Armed Forces personnel. The establishment of a European Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces would be a sign of political will towards these principles.

* CESI’s Trade Council ‘Defence’ gathers its member organisations from the defence sector to deliberate and act on the improvement of working and living conditions of military and security sector staff.
** The European Organisation of Military Associations (EUROMIL) is an umbrella organisation composed of 41 military associations and trade unions from 26 countries. It is the main Europe-wide forum for cooperation among professional military associations on issues of common concern. EUROMIL strives to secure and advance the human rights, fundamental freedoms and socio-professional interests of military personnel of all ranks in Europe and promotes the concept of “Citizen in Uniform”. As such, a soldier is entitled to the same rights and obligations as any other citizen. EUROMIL particularly calls for recognition of the right of servicemen and -women to form and join trade unions and independent associations and for their inclusion in a regular social dialogue by the authorities.

For further information, please contact:

CESI
Avenue de la Joyeuse Entrée 1-5
B – 1040 Brussels
Tel: +32/(0)2.282.18.70
E-mail: [email protected]
URL : cesi.netvis.nl

EUROMIL
Rue John Waterloo Wilson 78
B – 1000 Brussels
Tel: +32/(0)2.626.06.80
E-mail: [email protected]
URL: www.euromil.org

Press release as PDF: CESI-EUROMIL position on June European Council on security and defence challenges

The adopted compromise amendment on public services unambiguously calls on the European Commission – charged with negotiating TTIP with the United States (US) – to build on the recent joint statement by European Commissioner Cecilia Malmström and US Trade Representative Michael Froman regarding the exclusion of public services in European Union (EU) and US trade agreements. The joint statement confirmed that TTIP will not prevent governments from providing services in areas such as water, education, health and social services. Furthermore, it will not require them to privatise any service.

In recent months, Social Platform and CESI have pursued a joint initiative to insert a “gold standard clause” in trade and investment agreements such as TTIP to fully protect public services from any liberalisation pressures. In this context, CESI’s Secretary-General Klaus Heeger welcomed the INTA vote with regards to public services: “I am glad that the efforts we put into the gold standard clause initiative yielded results. The clause on public services in the INTA committee report reflects much of what such a gold standard clause could look like. I am confident that the European Parliament plenary will follow the INTA vote on this.”

Pierre Baussand, Director of Social Platform, added: “We also welcome that this exclusion will apply irrespective of how the services are provided and funded. The INTA committee’s vote reflecting our initiative on the golden clause demonstrates the important role civil society has to play in trade negotiations.”

However, Social Platform and CESI are sceptical about the compromise found on the ISDS mechanism. What is proposed is a reformed mechanism that is both unnecessary and potentially destabilising. Pierre Baussand noted: “Protection against misuse or abuse of governmental powers is a standard feature of domestic law – or certainly in advanced legal systems, the standard would generally not fall below what is offered in international investment law. Both the EU and the US have advanced legal systems with sufficiently strong legal mechanisms to reassure foreign investors.”

Social Platform and CESI joint statement on INTA TTIP vote

The EU-Swiss agreement* foresees automatic exchanges of information on the financial accounts of each others residents. It also provides for measures intended to restrict the opportunities for taxpayers to avoid being reported to tax authorities by shifting assets or investing in products that are outside the scope of the agreement. In particular, three central objectives of the taxation agreement are to enable the national tax administrators:

• to more effectively identify correctly and unequivocally the taxpayers concerned;
• to more easily administer and enforce their tax laws in cross-border situations; and
• to better assess the likelihood of tax evasion being perpetrated.

Agathe Smyth, policy adviser for tax policies at CESI, comments: “The EU-Swiss taxation agreement that was agreed today can be a very powerful tool to help the national tax administrators do their work – collecting due taxes. Now, an unrestricted implementation and enforcement of the agreement by all actors and at all levels is key.”

CESI represents several major national trade unions of tax administration officers. Especially through its membership in the European Commission’s advisory Platform for Tax Good Governance, CESI has for long called on the EU to take measures that will enable the tax administrators to do their work in an efficient and effective manner.

In this context, CESI also welcomes broader recent developments in the field of tax transparency such as the continuing progress in the Commission towards an Action plan for fairer tax systems in Europe** and Amazon Germany’s recent carving in to political pressure when it comes to paying taxes on profits where they are made. There is still a long way to go on the road to effective fair tax systems, but a good start has been made.

*All information concerning the EU-Swiss taxation agreement can be accessed here.
**More information about the European Commission’s upcoming Action plan for fairer tax systems is available here.

The resolution ’20 years after the privatisation of the postal market’ concludes that the privatisation of the postal markets in Europe 20 years ago has neither led to improved services for the consumers nor to adequate working conditions for the workers employed in the sector. Specifically, it notes that privatisations have led to competition between postal service providers being staged on the back of the employees in the sector, who nowadays face higher workloads, decreased wages, and increased pressures towards forced part-time work or so-called ‘mini jobs’ than was the case prior the privatisation in the sector.

The position statement ‘Adjusting the P&T sector labour market to demographic ageing’ points to the necessity to adjust working conditions in the P&T sector to the continuing and progressing demographic ageing of its workforce. In this context, it lists a number of fields of action that policy-makers need to engage in if they want to promote active healthy ageing and counter ever increasing levels of old-age unemployment in the P&T sector. These refer, most notably, to the introduction of:

• more effective work-life balance and work organisation solutions;
• better lifelong learning schemes;
• adequate voluntary part-time work frameworks;
• more flexible retirement conditions; and
• appropriate guaranteed pension levels.

The next P&T Trade Council is scheduled to take place on December 11 in Luxembourg. A main point to be discussed will be the likely impacts of the EU Digital Single Market initiative in working conditions in the P&T sector.

* CESI’s Trade Councils are its sector-specific principal forums for debate and action, composed of representatives of its member organisations active in the respective sectors. They usually meet twice per year.

Issuing a resolution at the end of their meeting, the Trade Council ‘Post & Telecoms’ voiced its disagreement with the new law, which rules that within one firm there may only be one collective agreement (Tarifvertrag) for each group of employees.

CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger strongly criticised the new legislation: “This law means that the entire bargaining power for a particular group of employees in a company is given to the trade union that unites the largest share of these employees. All smaller trade unions can no longer negotiate freely with the company and try to put their own collective agreement in place. This law clearly discriminates against and puts at risk the entire functioning of small trade unions.”

Indeed, these new rules are highly questionable from a legal point of view because they threaten to abuse the principle of autonomy of collective bargaining and are likely infringe on the right to strike. The German Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) already ruled in 2010 that the wage unity which the new law now tries to impose cannot apply in Germany. In this context, concerned smaller trade unions such as CESI’s member organisation GDL (the German Train Drivers’ Union) will challenge the law in front of the German courts.

Under the Better regulation package’s future social partner consultation regime (based on TFEU articles 154-155), several procedural steps put the much needed and well-established autonomy for the EU social dialogue in question:

• An “analytical document” by the Commission is necessary between the first and second stage of a social partner consultation under TFEU article 154 in order to “explore the value added of EU action” on the topic at stake. In case the Commission officials do not see sufficient “value added” of EU action, the entire consultation procedure can be stopped. But how to objectively assess sufficient value added?

• When EU social partners have agreed on a social partner’s agreement on a particular topic in line with TFEU article 155, said article foresees that this agreement “shall be implemented … at the joint request of the signatory parties … by a Council decision on a proposal from the Commission”. Under the Better regulation package, the European Commission reserves the right to carry out an impact assessment on whether or not to accept a social partners’ agreement before taking any further steps. The same applies to agreed social partner agreements concluded in line with TFEU article 154(4). What is more, the wording in the of the package leaves some ambiguity about how the Commission will assess social partner agreements in its impact assessments.

• Oddly, even when social partners have NOT agreed on an agreement on a topic at stake, the Commission still reserves the right to go ahead with a proposal for a Council decision (of course after having carried out another impact assessment).

“Indeed, there will be many steps in the adoption of agreements under TFEU articles 154 and 155 which enable the Commission officials to obstruct at their convenience the well-proven autonomy for the EU social dialogue”, CESI Secretary General Klaus Heeger commented.

Please follow this link to access all documents related to the new ‘Better regulation package’.

The EU is failing to deliver an inclusive recovery strategy, which is urgently needed to bring the Europe 2020 Strategy back on track – in particular to combat poverty, create quality jobs, invest in early child development, equality for all, including gender equality and ensure environmental sustainability. This is the critical assessment of the Semester Alliance*, a broad European coalition bringing together environmental, social and equality NGOs and trade unions, responding to the European Commission’s Country-Specific Recommendations (CSRs) published on 13 May 2015.

As Europe enters its 6^th year of economic and social crisis, the EU’s image is overwhelmingly identified with austerity. Steps are urgently needed to restore the balance between social and environmental objectives and economic governance, if the EU is to revive trust in its Europe 2020 promises of a smart, sustainable and inclusive recovery based on democratic accountability and engagement. The Semester Alliance reiterates the urgency of a more transparent and participatory engagement of civil society in the European Semester, and regrets that the CSRs continue to be focused on economic governance to the detriment of a more social and equal Europe.

Although welcoming the statement by Commissioner Thyssen on the need ‘to focus on those that have been left behind in the crisis’, the Semester Alliance fails to see how this is being translated in the CSRs. The focus on fewer, key priorities has meant that this year only six countries have received CSRs related to poverty and social exclusion compared to 12 last year. Even the so-called ‘poverty recommendations’ predominantly focus on activation and education, and fail to directly address poverty as a priority, investing in integrated approaches which promote access to accessible, affordable and quality services, as well as adequate social protection and quality jobs.

CSRs that refer to reforming pension systems fail to acknowledge the gender pension gap which currently stands at 39% in the EU. Neither do they address the obstacles workers with broken careers face to build their pension rights – as nowadays the vast majority of workers cannot achieve a full career and will not be able to claim a full pension when they will retire. The overwhelming focus continues to be on reducing deficits by cutting public finances in key areas like pensions, healthcare and social benefits. This approach will continue to have huge negative impacts on the lives of women and men across Europe. Such measures along with a de-regulatory approach to labour markets are contrary to the creation of quality jobs which will severely impact on in-work poverty, bringing Europe further off-track to meet its 2020 Strategy objectives.
Furthermore, recommendations aimed at tackling climate change through greener taxation and increased investment in energy efficiency and renewables have almost entirely disappeared from the CSRs, to be ‘taken up via other policy processes‘ whose objectives and governance are yet to be defined. This marks a step backwards, one that is particularly disappointing in the year of crunch climate change talks in Paris.

Whilst the new CSRs claim to focus more on investment, Europe must be clear where the investment is most needed: in people, and not just markets. Although the 2015 Annual Growth Survey recognised the collapse in public investment since the crisis but, with the exception of carefully-worded recommendation for Germany, there is nothing in this year’s CSRs that will begin to restore the billions of euros of lost public investment. The austerity led focus with an overemphasis on structural reform has resulted in decreasing public investments and services and in increasing inequalities all of which damage social cohesion. The Semester Alliance refutes terms such as social fairness which undermines a rights based approach towards a more equal Europe.

The Semester Alliance demands answers as to whether the Mid-Term Review, now postponed to 2016, will put the Europe 2020 Strategy back on track and emphasises that the CSRs should be consistent with these objectives.

The involvement of civil-society and trade union stakeholders, as well as the European and national parliaments, in the process is urgently needed to safeguard democracy and ensure progress towards a social, sustainable and equal European Union.

*The EU Alliance for a democratic, social and sustainable European Semester or (European Semester Alliance) is a broad coalition bringing together 14 major European civil-society organisations and trade unions, representing thousands of member organisations on the ground at European, national and local levels in the European Union. The Semester Alliance aims to support progress towards a more democratic, social and sustainable Europe 2020 Strategy, through strengthening civil dialogue engagement in the European Semester at national and EU levels. In the Alliance, CESI works to stress the role that strong public services (and hence the numerous public sector workers it represents) play in providing services that are crucial for the state to function and for the societies to proper. The EU Alliance members include:

The objective of the ‘Pro Juvenes’ project is to strengthen policies and practices on employment and network development at the EU-level and to boost the labour market actors’ capacity to get actively involved in promoting employment and social inclusion of young people. CESI’s member Romanian National Trade Union Confederation (NTUC) ‘Meridian’ is partner of the ‘Pro Juvenes’ project.

Led by Dumitru Fornea, NTUC ‘Meridian’ coordinator for international relations and member of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), the 20-head strong delegation was in particular interested in the recent launch of CESI’s own youth organisation, the ‘CESI Youth’. According to George Bogdan, senior adviser at the Romanian labour ministry, CESI’s successful efforts to set up and consolidate its own youth organisation shows that CESI correctly identified the urgent need to give special attention to the challenges that young people today face in finding their place in the employment market and the society as a whole.

The ‘CESI Youth’ was created in 2013 and strives to promote trade unionism among young Europeans, maintain and improve living and working conditions of young workers and unemployed young people and participate in problem-solving in the field of transition from education to work and EU youth policies and legislation such as the EU youth guarantee scheme.

The crucial part of Ms Malmström’s speech is the following:

“Finally, people are worried about TTIP and public services like healthcare or education. We’ve heard the concern here too. And again we’ve reacted. I’ve tried to make it perfectly clear that our right to organise, for example, our health system is not up for debate or negotiation. And that goes for how we set the prices of medicine as well as for whether our hospitals are public or private. But you don’t have to take it from me. My US counterpart Ambassador Froman agrees fully. We have released a joint statement in March this year that makes very clear:

• That nothing in a trade deal will prevent Member States like Belgium from organising public services the way they want to…
• Nothing will oblige them to privatise anything…
• And nothing will stop them from taking healthcare services into public ownership if that’s what they want. And there is no room for doubt about this. Because we’ve done it in the past. The legal mechanisms we use to protect public services have been tested by time in many previous trade agreements. We will approach TTIP in the same way.”

As a European trade union federation representing several million public sector workers in many European countries, CESI has for long worked for a full exclusion of public services from forthcoming trade agreements such as TTIP. Together with the Social Platform, it has launched an initiative to insert a ‘Gold standard clause’ in these agreements to fully and unrestrictedly protect public services. Therefore, when the European Parliament’s INTA Committee will vote on its TTIP recommendations own-initiative report on May 28, CESI calls for an adoption of amendment 397 which reflects much of what such a gold standard clause would look like.

Follow this link to access the full speech by Ms Malmström.