No C 41/34 Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 2. 91 
2.3.5. The Committee, in any case, regrets the 
rather alarmist tone in Point III. 11. of the explanatory 
memorandum and in Point II.6. of the draft notice, 
in which allusion is made to 'mass' influxes of certain 
population groups and to 'precipitate repatriation to a Member State' of such persons, all this posing a 
'challenge' to the equilibrium and to the economic 
and social fabric of the host State. A slight toning 
down of these sections in the proposal might be 
advisable. 
Done at Brussels, 20 November 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 
1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed 
persons and to members of their families moving within the Community and Regulation 
(EEC) No 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) 
No 1408/71 
(91/C 41/10) 
On 6 September 1990 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 15 November 1990. 
The Rapporteur was Mr Pearson. 
At its 281st plenary session (meeting of 20 November 1990), the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
1. Introduction ARTICLES 
1.1. The Committee recognises that it is desirable 
and timely that the Commission produce a text which 
updates the Regulations (EEC) No 1408/71 and No 
574/72. 2. Periods of insurance 
1.2. The proposal aims to incorporate certain 
changes in national legislations into Community Regu­
lations in order to safeguard the rights of 'migrant' 
workers. It will eliminate certain gaps in the existing 
provisions for workers moving within the Community, 
including transfrontier workers: these gaps have 
become evident due to operating experience and current 
need, and must be removed mainly due to the judge­
ments of the Court of Justice in the Ten Holder and 
Rebmann cases. 
1.3. The proposals also cater for other amendments 
which are of an administrative nature or which derive 
from the changes necessary at 1.2 above. 2.1. It is desirable to protect workers moving within 
the Community, including transfrontier workers so that 
'periods of insurance' following child bearing and 
devoted to child rearing up to 12 months are counted 
as pension contributions in Germany, even though the 
worker and child may be resident in another Member 
State. Other Member States must find a similar solution 
to this problem. 
2.2. Article 12.4. in connection with Article 57 of 
Regulation No 2332/89 (EEC) protects benefits for an 
occupational disease where the person concerned has 
been exposed to the same risk in several Member States. 
18. 2. 91 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 41/35 
This principle of shared responsibility has hitherto been 
endorsed by the Committee. 
3. New Article 13 (2) (f) — Non-active workers' rights 
protected 
3.1. The new sub-paragraph gives protection to non-
active workers where no such protection previously 
existed under Community legislation. Persons who have 
ceased to engage in occupational activity under the 
legislation of one Member State and who reside in the 
territory of another Member State and who are now 
non-active are subject to the national legislation of the 
territory in which they reside only. 
3.2. New Article 17(a) 
Pensioners of one Member State who reside in the 
territory of another Member State and who are already 
entitled to sickness and family benefits may not be 
obliged to pay unnecessary insurance twice. 
3.3. New Article 45(8) 
Pension rights for transfrontier workers will be protect­
ed for periods of unemployment in the State of resi­
dence. 
3.4. New Article 72(a) 
Family benefits will be protected for the family of the 
unemployed transfrontier worker by the Member State 
in which he resides with his family and at the expense 
of that State, irrespective of in which Member State he 
(she) last worked. 
3.5. New Article 94(10) 
The previous amendment to Article 94(9) was incom­
plete. That amendment omitted the derogation which 
France enjoyed regarding family benefits for a period 
of 17 years. The current amendment would restore the 
previous arrangement resulting from bilateral conven­
tions made between France and Spain and France and 
Portugal. 
Done at Brussels, 20 November 1990. 4. Annex amendments 
4.1. These amendments deal with changes of title or 
administration procedures of the competent authority 
within the various Member States. It likewise deals with 
internal changes of form and substance in the insurance 
schemes of some Member States. In all cases the per­
son's rights are protected, the principle of equal treat­
ment is upheld and greater approximation and coordi­
nations of the various social security systems estab­
lished. This is to be welcomed. 
4.2. Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 is the implement­
ing instrument for the procedures of Regulation (EEC) 
No 1408/71. The proposed amendments have been 
checked against the 'Compendium of Community pro­
visions on social security 1988' and subsequent modifi­
cations. They appear to be in order. 
5. Concluding remarks 
5.1. Since each Member State continues to operate 
its own social security system, the Committee endorses 
the proposed changes as they attempt to clarify and 
improve the rights of employed persons, self-employed 
persons an J members of their families moving within 
the Community. 
5.2. The Committee has, for many years and in many 
of its Opinions, stated that the term 'migrant workers' 
is inappropriate as a definition of a citizen of one 
Member State working in another Member State: it is 
very disappointed that the Commission continues to 
use this terminology. 
5.3. In an earlier Opinion (*) the Committee pointed 
to the detailed and complex nature of the Community 
social security scheme Regulations: it drew attention 
to the need for 'a document, setting out in simple terms, 
the obligations and benefits incurred by citizens of 
Member States moving and working within the Com­
munity'. The need for such a document, which it was 
suggested should be made available through the social 
security offices in each Member State, is even more 
urgent today than it was in 1986. The Committee is 
pleased to know that such a document is now available. 
(!) OJ No C 207, 18. 8. 1986. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois STAEDELIN