ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEE DES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM (75)501
Vol.1975/0191

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement (CEE,Euratom) n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernant l'ouverture aupublicdesarchiveshistoriques delaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement (CE,Euratom) n°1700/2003 du22septembre 2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003, p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance withCouncilRegulation (EEC,Euratom) No354/83of1February 1983
concerning theopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropean Economic
Community andtheEuropean AtomicEnergyCommunity (OJL43,15.2.1983, p.1),as
amended byRegulation (EC,Euratom) No1700/2003 of22September 2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003, p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary, classifieddocuments inthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformity withArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung (EWG,Euratom) Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar 1983überdieFreigabe derhistorischen Archive derEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung (EG,Euratom) Nr.1700/2003 vom22.September 2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003, S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit
erforderlich, wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenannten Verordnung freigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
" ,COM(75)501 final .
/ ->Erussels ,8October 1975
\Proposal for aCouncil Decision
\
onEuropean Social Fund measures
toaidvocational adaptation operations
,
(submitted totheCouncil bytheCommission )
f \) ■
CQM(75 )501finale
\

Qrig.:P
EuropeanSocialFondmeasurestoaidvocational adaptation operations con­
nectedwiththerecession (Article4oftheCouncilDecisionof1February
1971)
'EXPLANATORY MEMORANDtM
1«At.itsmeetingof17June,andinadoptingjointactionvto helpyoungpeople
throughtheSocialFund,theCouncildecidedtodiscussbefore30november
1975aproposal fromtheCommission toextendassistance fromtheFundto
"personswho"areorhavebeenemployedinthesectorsparticularly effected
"bytheimbalance inemployment linkedtothereoeBsion ,bearinginmindthe
1regionsmostaffected byemployment problems"#
'•*- •# +
■"
2.Informulating itspresentproposalthe.Commission takeasbasisdevelop­
mentsintheemployment situation...
Despiteaslightandintermittent seasonalrecoveryoftheemployment
marketinDenm?.rk fGermanyandFVance,therehas-beennosignofimprovement
inanyoftheMemberStatesinreoentmonths#Accordingtoforecasts ,
unemployment mustindeedbeexpectedtoworsenintheearlymonthsof1976#
...
ι
' *
1Doc.cai(75)126final»'

Ifthoincreases inunemployment canforthemostpartbeattributed to-the
developing economicsituation ,theyexpressatthesametimeastructural change
of"alonp-term natureithelargeeconomicrevivalprogrammes
governments areadopting willhaveto"beaccompanied byselective .
.measuresputtingintooperation themeansforrecycling thelabournecessary .
tocombatthegrowing .maladjustment ofmanpower supplytodemand*
3»Notonlybecauseoftheextentofthissituation
butalsobecauseofitslastingandstructural oharaoter ,
whichwillmakevocational adaptation onalargoqcaleinevitable ,itmeets
theconditions justifying recoursetoArtiole4oftheCouncilDecisionof
..1Februrxy 1971«ThoFundmustbe.allowedtoplayitspartwithinthe
frwnowork ofspecificjointactionbydirectingitsassiotanoe forrequalifi-
cationandretraining towardsthemosturgent .operations ,integrating itself
inpriorityobjectives recognized atCommunity levelandgivingthebest
guarantee forharmonization ofemployment policies *.*
4»?hefieldofapplication of-ajointactionwouldbedefinedwithreference
tocriteriaofeligibility orseltrtrioflatvariouslevels:sectors,regionand ■
theoualityof,thespecifioindividual programme ♦Itappoarslessdestirablo ,
atleastattheleveloftheCouncildecision ,toleydown'anexpressly
categorial criterion :firstly,.fromadesiretomaintainthespecifionature
oftheadhocdecisions whichextendedassistance fromtheFundtotwo (
largecategories ofworker–migraniaandyoungpeople(2);secondly,because
experience hasshownthatoperations selected onasectoralorregional -
basis I'10'*'nocessarily haveatthesametimeacategorial character :of
••*•t/•••
(2)CouncilDecisionsof27June1974(migrantworkers)
and22July1975(youngpeopleunder25years).
SeeOJLf8=5/74nfQJulv1Q7ADAW20andTlqq/7^

sufficient weighttojustifypreferential intervention treatment forthat
reason.Categorial priorities will,however,havetobetakenintoaccount
.atSocialPur.doperational management levelwherethespecificindividual
programme showsthattheyarebothfeasible andadvisable#
«
•AstothechoiceofBoctors,itdoesnotseemadvisable atthisstagethat
sectorsshouldbespecifically nominated forassistance •wouldbe
bettertodetermine thepointsofimpactofassistance fromtheFundbyreference
toobjective andclearcriteria ,applicable atCommunity leveltoall
•sectorswithoutdiscrimination . <
Followingthislineofthf/cifiit,theproposedDecision wouldapply .
toworkers whohadbeenmadeionemployed orwhowereundergoing
readrptation ,inanysoctororbranchwhich,asaresultoftherecession ,
hr\dundorgone aseriousdropinactivity endhadconsequently boonforcedto
dismisslargenumbersofpersonnel .Inthiscontextintermediate solu­
tionssuchassuspended ,part–timeorshort–timeworkingandcertainotherformulae
forjobmaintenance wouldbeconsidered asdismissal ,providedthatthose
measureshadbooninforceforarelatively longperiod,atloastthree
con3«5cutiv2j monthsforexample *
Thethreshold givingentitlement toassistance fromtheFundcouldbe
reachedwhenthenumberofunemployed personsinasector(whollyunemployed
* • <■»
orpersonsaffectedbysimilarmeasuresinth.issector)reachedalevelof
increasedistinctly higherthantheaveragefortheCommunity .

Theperiodofreference boingthebeginning of1974,thodatefromwhich
thefirstdropinemployment owingtorecession madoitselffelt•
Inaddition ,ifassistance fromtheFund,whilecontributing totho
roabsorption ofthoshort-term unemployed ,istoencourago further .
activity ,well-defined qualityguarantees must "borequired ,forexamplo
forthotypeofinitialtrainingorretraining envisaged andthe
.existingprospectforre-employment ** .
Since,however,personsundergoing readaptation mayteketipemployment
eitherinsideoroutsidethosector -towhichtheybelong,theseguarantees
will "beassessedpreferably inthelight'oftheindividual programme
submitted# .
4
6.TheCouncilintendsthatthoproposal putforwardbythoCommission
willalsoinclude ,asectiontakingintoaccountthe"regionsmostaf­
fectedbyemployment problems",thusgivingconcreteeffect*othe
concernexpressed explicitly attheConference ofHeadsofStateand
HeadsofGovernment inDecember 1974*'
Theaction envisaged onthisbasismustfirst"ofallanswertwo
cruestions :whatsortofrogionistobotakenasreferenoe andwhat
criteriaofurgencypreto"be"chosen?" . >.
Thedefinitionof urgencyvariesgreatlydepending onwhetherthogoo-
graphical referencebasisconsistsofadministrative units,region's,or
zonesdefinedmorecloselyinrelationtothelabourmarket*Theselast
are"employment basins"geographically determined bythedirection and■"
intensity ofmanpower flows'.Ifintervention concerning manpower and
consequently assistance fromtheSocialFundis- *

conceived inrelation tothecharacteristics ofthezones
definedabove,itsspecificorientation wouldappearto"betetter
guaranteed thanitwouldbebysimplereference tothecriteria adopted
forthedelimitation ,forexample,ofpriority zonesofregional expan­
sionofageneralcharacter ,whichcouldnotguarantee this*Thatis
«
whyitisthisdefinition whichshouldberetained inthepresentcase*
Asfarasthecriteria ofurgencyareconcerned priority shouldcer­
tainlybegiventothoseregionswiththelargestreserves ofmanpower
ι
asaresultoftherecession .Thesereserves willbemeasured bythe
increaseinunsatisfied jobdemands (regardless ofseotor); »
wherenecessary ,the«development ofmigration sincethebeginning of
therecession maybetakenintoconsideration .Consequently ,eligibility for
aidfromtheSocialFundwouldbeaccorded tooperations inregard
tomanp.ower inthesectorscovered,carried -outinregionshavingex­
perienced anincrease inunemployment orunsatisfied jobdemandsdis­
tinctlyabovethenational levelsincethebeginning of197^«
Asanalternative to-theforegoing ,andtostrengthen theregional
andsectoral character ofaids,thelatterwouldbereserved tothose
regionsinwhichthesectorsseriously affected bytherecession pre­
dominate.Suchpredominance couldbemeasured bytherela­
tionofthetotalworkforce inthesesectorstotheactivepopulation
intheregion.
Inthisconnection ,'toensurethatthereisnoneglectofthosestructurally
weakregionswheretheimpactoftherecessionislessobvious,accountmust
betakenoftheabsolutelevelofunemployment intheregion.

Inthis system ,assistance from theSocial Fund would begranted in
descending order ofpriority ,depending ontheavailable resources ,
i.e.applications which substantially satisfied theestablished
«
qualitative andquantitative criteria would automatically take pre-.
cedence over .those which satisfied .only afeworsatisfied them to
alesser degree . '■ ••
f
Beside thecriteria already mantioned ,operations carried out inthe
framework ofactions thesubject ofco-operation between thesocial
partners (preferably onaEuropean level but atleast onnational
level ,)could benefit (atleast inthose sectors "where such co­
operation exists )from apriority intheframe ofthemanagement of
the fund . > , -
Each operation forwhich theFund 'sassistance isrequested must form
part ofagroup ofmeasures included in .anindividual programme at
thelevel ofthesector ,theMember State ,theregion ,oreven ofthe
undertaking ,stfowing theeconomic context ,therange oftheadaptation
and development schemes ,theopinion ofthe twosides ofindustry and
thelevel atwhich itwasobtained .TheCommission hopes toensure
bythis that schemes receiving assistance from theFund present ade­
quate guarantees ofdesirability andeffectiveness atnational level
andpermit gradual harmonization with theCommunity 'seconomic and
social guidelines . . .-
TheCouncil must also state thetypes ofaidqualifying forassistance
from the Fund inaccordance with its decision under Article *+•
< , ,
1. x •
It .isproposed torestrict itself tothetypes ofaidprovided forin
i i i*, • t
theRegulation containing thelist ofaids .

ProposalforaCouncildecision
onintervention "bytheSocialFundinfavourofvocational adjustement
measures
THECOUNCIL OPTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
HavingregardtotheTreaty .establishing theEuropean Economic Community ;.
HavingregardtoCouncilDecision No.7i/66/t£ECof1February1971onthe
reformoftheEuropean -SocialFund,andinparticular Article4thereof ;
Havingregardtotheproposal fromtheCommission ;
HavingregardtotheOpinionoftheEuropean Parliament ;
HavingregardtotheOpinionoftheEconomic andSocialCommittee ;
• ·'ψ* Φ ,..WhereastheHeadsofGovernment ,meetinginParison9and10December 1974
tooktheviewthatvigorous andcoordinated actionhadtobetakenatCom­
munityleveltodealwiththeproblemofemployment ;whereastheyalsodrew
attention tothefactthatwhenthetimewasripe,theCouncilwouldconsi­
der,inthelightofexperience ,andwithdueregardtotheproblemofthe
regionsandcategories ofworkersmostaffected byemployment difficulties ,
whetherandtowhat,extentitwouldbenecessarytoincrease?£he resources
oftheSocialFund;
WhereastheCouncil,initsdecision No75/459/^SECof22July1975oninter­
ventionbytheEuropeanSocialFundinfavourofpersonsaffected byemploy *
mentdifficulties (2)undertook todecidebefore30November 1975onaCom­
missionproposalsubmittedpursuanttoArticle4ofDecision No.7l/66/EEQ
facilitating thegeographical andvocational mobilityofpersonsworking
V. I,
' , 4 •/•••I '
(1)OJ.No.L28,4.2.1971 ,pl.15 "
(2)OJ.No.L199,30.7.75,p.36

-2-
orhaving worked insectors particularly aff.ected bytheimbalance
inemployment connected with therecession ,taking account ofthe
' .-it!
regions nost affected byemployment difficulties ;
%
Whereas theemployment ,situation inthesectors and regions most .
affected bytherecession calls forspecific common action tob.etter
/' • ,
ensure adjustment ofsupply and demand inthelabour market-' inthe
Community ;
HAS DECIDED ASFOLLOWS : ' "
Article 1
Pursuant toArticle 4oftheCouncil Decision of1February 1971 »the
Social Fund can take action infavour ofoperations designed to
facilitate the employment andgeographical andvocational mobility
of ^persons working orhaving worked inboth :
-sectors inwhich ,since thebeginning of1974 ,unemploy -^
ment has risen considerably compared totheaverage Community increase
inall sectors orinwhich asemilar trend occurs atthe level ofthe
number ofworkers -";
-andregions inwhich ^since thebeginning of197^,unemploy –__
ment hasrisen considerably compared totheaverage national increase .
orinwhich theemployment in'one'ormoreoftheabovementioned aaotors
represents asubstantial part oftheaotivepopulation ,due _
account being taken ortheabsolute level ofunemployment intheregion \
oonoerned# •.
> ■r * i
' , •/•••

Article 2
Theoperations referred tounderArtiole 1shall "becombined withtheimple­
mentingofAdjustment ordevelopment programmes consistent withtheeconomic
»ndsocialobjectives oftheCommunity# Suchprogrammes shall,moreespecial­
ly,showtheeconomic contextoftheactionstheycomprise anddefinethe
objectives andmethods. ''
Theyshalltakeaccountoftheopinionwhich "bothsidesofindustrywill
haveexpressed endthelevelatwhichthelatterwereconsulted#
1
Article 3
PursuanttothisDecision ,theSocialFundmaygrantassistance toaids
listedinCouncilRegulation (EEC)No»2397/71onaidwhichmayqualify
forassistance fromtheEuropean SocialFund*
.Article 4
ThisDecisionshallenterintoforceonthefifthdayfollowing thatofits
publication intheOfficial JournaloftheEuropean Communities#

FIÎTANCISL DATA SIIEET
annexed totheproposal foraCouncil decision onassitance from the
European Social Fund forvocational retraining operations inconnection
with the recession
1.The last three years experience ofintervention bytheSocial Fund in
textiles has shown that ,inasector indifficulties ,theaverage cost
ofassistance canbestimated at67Ou.a .perperson andthat the
average number ofrecipients inrelation tothe total number ofpeople
whose jobs arethereby threatened maybeputat38$.Byapplying these
averages toother sectors indifficulty ,inparticular those sectors
that aremost affected bytherecession ,itispossible tocalculate ,
ofcourse only very provisionally ,afigure that might correspond to
the cost oftheassitance specified inthepresent proposal for a
decision .
2.According toanestimate based onstatistics from four countries in
the Community ,about 320000people areunemployed inthose sectors
where unemployment hasincreased over a12month period ,considerably
more than the Community average .Toprovide anindication ofthe
numbers covered bytheproposal foradecision ,this figure must be
reduced byone-third ,oreven 40$ ,totake account ofthelimitations
imposed bycriteria ofregional admissibility .The initial figure is
thus reduced tobetween 190000and 215000 .
3.Byapplying tothis total theaverage percentage ofrecipients ,the
population which will receive assistance from theFund inthechosen
sectors canbeestimated atbetween 72500and80500people .Based
ontheaverage cost of67Ou.a .perperson ,theoverall annual budget
necessary toimplement thepresent proposal foradecision will amount
tosome 49to53million u.a .

Itmayberecalled that thepreliminary budget estimates ofthe
Commission for1976 provided for60million u.a .under theheading
of'anti-orisis "assistance from theSocial Fund (doc.COM(75 )330
p.57)*This amount wasalso partly tocover expenditure onaassitance
for thetextile and clothing industry .