Opinion on the impact of the CAP on the employment and social situation of farmers and farmworkers in the European Union (15)

(96/C 18/14)

On 23 February 1995 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23(3) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an Opinion on the impact of the CAP on the employment and social situation of farmers and farm workers in the European Union (15).

The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for drawing up the Committee's Opinion on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 28 September 1995. The Rapporteur was Mr Wilms, and the Co-Rapporteurs Mrs Santiago and Mr Laur.

At its 329th Plenary Session (meeting of 25 October 1995), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Opinion nem. con. with two abstentions.

1. The Common Agricultural Policy and employment

1.1. Since the 1960s the European Union has endeavoured through the Common Agricultural Policy to guarantee the incomes of its farmers. In the 1980s agricultural production, and with it the market organization costs on the most important agricultural markets, rose considerably, without the income guarantee target being consistently reached. A reform was therefore unavoidable. The 1992 reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and the GATT Uruguay Round Agreements have had a significant impact on employment in the rural areas of the Union. The decision to cut farm prices in order to lessen the EU's structural surpluses and financial burdens, and the commitments to cut production have exacerbated employment problems on the land, albeit with regional variations. The drop in production will in the short and medium term primarily affect farm workers, but self-employed farmers whose farms become uneconomic will also be affected. Job losses will occur in those sectors which were hitherto heavily subsidized. There is thus a tendency for agricultural production potential to become concentrated in favourable areas. In the long term it is possible that the number of workers on farms which increase in size may rise in these areas. Any future revision of EU agricultural policy must also take account of the implications for employment of policy changes.

1.2. The considerable effects on employment can also be seen in the agri-food sector, the food processing industry, the foodstuffs industry and the agricultural supply sector. Depending on the scale of agricultural employment (in the wider sense) in each region, there is a threat of employment spiralling downwards and this could endanger the quality of life and the attractiveness of rural areas.

1.3. More than half of all Europeans live and work in rural areas. However, such areas are very important not only because they provide their inhabitants with a living and working environment, but also because they are areas where urban dwellers can seek recreation. The countryside has an intrinsic value because of its varied landscape. It provides a whole range of biological species with a vital habitat, and acts as an ecological balance to urban centres.

1.4. Some rural populations include a significantly higher than average number of people seeking jobs in vain. Commuting to jobs in the large conurbations means long, time-consuming and expensive journeys for many workers. The long journeys between home and work generate a high volume of additional traffic. However, in terms of the viability of rural areas this is not as bad as a complete exodus which intensifies the problems in conurbations. (...) Hence there are strong environmental arguments for maintaining viable rural areas in the European Union.

1.5. Since the 'first labour market' is underdeveloped in rural areas, in many cases a 'second labour market' has been formed, where a wide range of schemes, some with public support (e.g. the Leader Programme) seek to provide jobs particularly for more vulnerable groups. An example of this are the job promotion, employment and structural development companies (ABS) in the new federal Laender of Germany.

2. Women in agriculture

2.1. Women are among the most important players in any development process forming part of the structural transformation of agriculture and the countryside.

2.2. Many women work on the land (700 000 of the total of 2,5 million farmworkers are women). In general they take on the least skilled and lowest paid jobs in the agricultural sector. In some rural areas of the European Union, women are dependent on working at home or doing short-term seasonal work and enjoy only minimal, if any, social protection.

2.3. Family farms are a characteristic of western civilization: 90% of holdings in the EU are family holdings in which women play a leading part. Women have taken on more and more responsibility in family holdings, and in many cases their contribution is decisive for the holdings' survival. It is the woman who keeps the farm running when the man takes on an additional job outside agriculture to boost the family income.

2.4. It is difficult to analyze women's employment and work in the agricultural sector. Such an analysis must look at the close-knit family/farm unit, where most of the farm-related tasks are carried out by family members. Because of this complex situation many Member States of the Union recognize only the head of family as the true manager of the holding, and as an entrepreneur he has to bear the economic and financial responsibility for the holding.

2.5. The work of a woman, especially in her capacity as a family member lending a helping hand, often remains 'invisible'; it is not included in statistics or covered by legal provisions. Official recognition of this form of work and/or acknowledgment of an occupational status, e.g. as co-entrepreneur, is long overdue.

2.6. In the breakdown of tasks and responsibilities within the holding, women are given no clearly defined occupational status, and in social terms women are often subordinate to men, who normally occupy managerial roles.

2.7. 75,7% of all farm managers in the EU are men and only 24,3% are women. Yet 73,7% of all family helpers are women. In certain rural areas, especially in southern Spain, Portugal, northern France, Italy and Scotland, the female participation rate in the farm labour force is, however, on the increase. Here the official statistics for women farmers are close to reality.

2.8. The CAP reform gives women an important role in the future shaping of the countryside: the new accompanying and regional policy measures, through diversification of agricultural activity, systematically promote new sources of income (crafts, rural tourism, small-scale processing of farm products, environmental protection, nature conservation and new technologies).

2.9. Diversification of work aims to contribute to the survival of family holdings and thus to open up new job opportunities for the younger generation.

3. Social security and migration

3.1. Traditionally farmworkers have migrated, and still migrate from non-EU Mediterranean countries to the southern Member States of the European Union. The recent political upheavals in Central and Eastern Europe have significantly altered migratory patterns on the agricultural labour markets of the northern Member States. Because of the continuing deep structural crisis in the former COMECON countries, the migratory patterns have not yet stabilized, and they cannot therefore be fully defined.

3.2. It can be assumed that immigration pressure will continue. This has considerable effects on employment conditions. The number of long-term employed is falling while that of seasonal workers is rising. Standards of wages, housing and job security are under threat.

4. Agricultural insurance systems in the EU

4.1. Common legal provisions

4.1.1. The shaping of the social insurance systems remains the exclusive preserve of the Member States. Even the Treaty of Maastricht altered nothing in this respect. Who is insured, what benefits are provided, and how these are financed - all this is still decided at national level.

4.1.2. Nonetheless there are certain common legal provisions, such as Directives 86/613/EEC and 79/7/EEC on implementation of the principle of equal treatment of men and women (when self-employed, and in the field of social security), which should be borne in mind. Any direct or indirect gender discrimination is thereby prohibited.

4.1.3. The absence of any legal status as 'woman farmer' in a number of Member States has the effect that women farmers have no independent right to national social-insurance benefits.

4.1.4. Also of interest in this context is Regulation (EEC) 1408/71, which is based on Article 51 of the EEC Treaty. Under this regulation, insurance or residence periods spent in different Member States must be added together when calculating eligibility for certain benefits. This expressly applies also to specific agricultural old-age pension schemes, where these exist. This provision is intended to prevent those who move jobs from one Member State to another losing the benefit of their pension contributions, and thereby serves the free movement of workers and insured farmers in the Union.

4.2. Insurance systems

4.2.1. Most Member States do not have a specific agricultural old-age pension scheme, and farmworkers and farmers alike are insured under the general pension system.

4.2.2. Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Luxembourg and Portugal have no special agricultural old-age pension scheme: their farmers and farmworkers are members of the general social security system; nor do Denmark, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, where old-age pensions are paid to all citizens and are fully or mainly funded from taxation.

4.2.3. Special old-age pension systems for independent farmers exist in Germany (since 1995 also in the new federal Laender), France, Greece, Spain, Italy, Austria and Finland. Some of these pension schemes are however only administered separately (i.e. are otherwise part of the general social security system), and benefits are broadly the same as those of the general system (as in Spain and Finland).

4.2.4. Special pension systems for farmworkers exist only in Greece, Spain, Italy and France; however, some of these are only administered separately. In the other Member States they come under the rules of the general social security systems.

4.2.5. The often low level of old-age pensions for farmworkers in the Member States with social security systems is improved in some countries through contractual and/or statutory supplementary pension schemes.

5. Aims of the ESC Opinion

5.1. Promotion of employment

5.1.1. Job creation is the key to the viability of rural areas in the Union. Top priority must be given to combating unemployment. Safeguarding and creating jobs in rural areas requires a mix of agricultural, labour, economic, social, regional and environmental policy measures with a view to equal treatment of urban and rural areas or sectors of the economy. This requires a major rethink of partnership-based cooperation. Accordingly, policy instruments such as the Structural Funds should be constantly reviewed with a view to tapping the major employment potential of rural areas.

New employment opportunities and sources of income could be created by

- improving the infrastructure of rural areas (which is also one of the most important prerequisites for the other proposed measures);

- rewarding special environmental achievements in farming over and above the normal obligations;

- supporting agriculture based on sustainability and ecological considerations (e.g. organic farming);

- developing the regional marketing and processing of agricultural produce into high-quality foodstuffs;

- promoting the cultivation of agricultural and forestry products to provide renewable raw materials for use in technology and energy production (e.g. by means of tax incentives);

- large-scale reforestation programmes in regions where agriculture is no longer viable; programmes to combat forest fires;

- improving the condition and management of woodland;

- making use of the opportunities afforded by biotechnology;

- developing rural tourism;

- developing service-sector jobs in rural areas (ranging from nature conservation and upkeep of roads to the use of information technologies) (e.g. teleworking);

- large-scale promotion of skills-acquisition measures (see 5.6).

5.1.2. Particular attention should be paid to creating possibilities for combining different sources of income. There should be a review of incentive policies and tax, business and social regulations which militate against this, as well as the sometimes large amount of red tape they entail. However, the possible repercussions for existing rural trades should be borne in mind in order to preserve equality of opportunity.

5.1.3. EU resources should continue to be concentrated on particularly disadvantaged rural areas. It is important to coordinate regional and local development plans so as to avoid conflicts between projects and land-use requirements.

5.1.4. The Member States must also work together to control new patterns of migration and cross-border employment bearing in mind the commonly agreed rules on freedom of movement and the internal market. The ESC is in favour of European regulations enabling the establishment of minimum standards by statutory instruments or collective bargaining.

5.2. Health and safety at work

5.2.1. There is an urgent need for an initiative from the Committee to encourage the transposition into national law of directives, such as those on health and safety, which have not yet been implemented in many Member States. It would seem that the minimum worker-protection requirements set out in the directives have probably not yet been fully implemented in numerous Member States, so transposing such directives can be expected to bring an improvement in health and safety protection.

5.2.2. The proposed standardization by the CEN should be speeded up to provide a package of norms which complement basic safety requirements. This will create a verifiable common safety level.

5.2.3. Health and safety provision must also be stepped up for family farms. Standards must be harmonized to prevent distortions of competition within the EU.

5.3. Equal opportunities for women

5.3.1. The European Parliament has called upon the Commission to recognize the occupational status of women farmers by modifying Directive 86/613/EEC. It is recommended that Member States accord independent rights to the spouses of farmers. Unfortunately, not all Member States have heeded this recommendation. The Commission should therefore take effective action against those Member States which do not apply the legal rules. A comprehensive obligation for women working in agriculture to have insurance cover must be introduced to combat specific 'female' poverty in old age.

5.3.2. In order to enable women to take on new tasks in the preservation and development of rural areas, support should be given to the establishment of social services in the following sectors:

- care for children and the elderly,

- transport,

- health,

- relief services,

- centres to promote the employment of women and provide them with business advice.

5.4. Social security for the elderly ()

5.4.1. The Information Report by the Section for Agriculture and Fisheries dated 11 December 1985 () stated that agricultural workers were a low-income group who receive less in absolute terms from social security schemes based on income than the average worker in industry. This is still true today. The level of old-age pensions for farmworkers and farmers must therefore be improved where adverse discrimination exists, especially in the case of social security systems based on income.

5.4.2. In order to bring about the necessary structural changes, the possibility of moving between different social security systems, which is sufficiently well regulated in the case of people moving to jobs in other Member States, must also be guaranteed within Member States where there are special agricultural old-age pension schemes.

5.4.3. The decline in the number of people insured under existing agricultural pension schemes because of structural changes poses a threat to the funding of such schemes which is greater than the 'ordinary' demographic risks of social security in general. There is an increasing need for funding transfers from general tax revenue or from social security contributions. However, such transfers between a country's general and specific social security schemes presuppose a comprehensive harmonization of the rules governing contributions and payments in each scheme.

5.5. Early retirement

5.5.1. As part of the measures accompanying the CAP reform farm workers must at last be granted their own rights to early retirement. The existing derived rules (early retirement in the case of a business closing down or downsizing) are inadequate. Agriculture continues to undergo far-reaching structural change; the ruling allowing most EU farmers to take early retirement in return for stopping production must be extended to farmworkers as a separate right.

5.6. Training for employees and the self-employed

5.6.1. Training for employees and the self-employed in rural areas falls into three categories:

- promoting innovation in agriculture and forestry; responsible use of new biotechnologies; compatibility of technical and ecological progress and diversification of farming activities;

- promoting private-sector schemes (e.g. start-up and business courses) and non-governmental (cultural, ...) initiatives and implementing governmental (administrative) action;

- promoting counselling activities.

5.6.2. There is a crucial need for regional dovetailing of relevant further training and skills' acquisition. These measures must be coordinated by employment offices, private investors, trade and employers' associations, unions and training bodies. For employees to benefit from training in real terms, agreements must be laid down in collective agreements and by law on job release and study leave. The self-employed should be eligible for grants.

5.7. Establishment of young farmers

5.7.1. In addition to arrangements for early retirement and skills acquisition, there should be an increase in start-up assistance for young farmers and premium and quota arrangements should be made more flexible. The entry into the sector of highly qualified young farmers, able to provide a flexible and dynamic response to the challenges of tomorrow's agriculture, improves the structure of agricultural production.

6. Social dialogue in agriculture

6.1. Social dialogue in agriculture is institutionalized at European level and is complemented by nationwide social dialogues.

7. Institutional social dialogue

7.1. Social dialogue takes place through the European Federation of Agricultural Workers' Trade Unions (EFA), with employers' representatives on the Committee of Agricultural Organizations in the European Community (COPA-COGECA/GEOPA), which has been based in Brussels since 1960, under the auspices of the Joint Committee on Social Problems of Agricultural Workers (a committee with a right of initiative) and through participation in agricultural advisory committees.

8. Joint Committee

8.1. Article 2 of the Committee's statute states that the Committee is to assist the Commission in the drafting and implementation of social policy intended to improve and harmonize the living and working conditions of agricultural workers.

8.2. The Joint Committee has the right to issue opinions and to take up initiatives itself.

8.3. Following its excellent track record until the mid eighties, the Joint Committee's performance must now be seen in a more critical light. Nowadays a Joint Committee Opinion rarely has any actual direct effect on the social circumstances of agricultural workers. It is worth noting in particular that agreements reached in the working group on harmonization led over the period from 1978 to 1981 to a gradual reduction of the working week in agriculture by collective agreement to 40 hours.

8.4. The Joint Committee's working groups are currently hard at work 'to exhaust all possibilities'. The present working groups are particularly involved with the following areas:

a) Employment (improving the attractiveness of jobs, improving social protection);

b) Harmonization (lively debate on the draft European recommendation on

- development of a plan for a gradual transition to a 38-hour week,

- introduction of a five-week minimum holiday,

- agreement on study leave,

- working conditions of seasonal workers,

- agreement on annual working time);

c) Vocational training (study on initial, continuing and further training);

d) Health and Safety (reduction of the problems arising from the use of pesticides);

e) Statistics (survey on part-time working in agriculture, report on conditions laid down in current collective) agreements and laws for agricultural workers in the EU) and

f) Forestry policy (investigation into the effects of piece-working on job security).

8.5. In recent years the work of these groups has become more effective thanks to improved coordination. It has proved particularly useful that both EFA and COPA-COGECA/GEOPA have an advisor in the working groups.

8.6. It would seem to be necessary to set up a further working group on the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe to tackle the problems caused in the EU by political developments in those countries.

9. Advisory Committees

9.1. The most important Advisory Committee in terms of social dialogue is the Advisory Committee on Questions of Agricultural Structure Policy.

9.2. The Advisory Committee meets on average twice a year. It is primarily concerned with information. Since the Advisory Committee is not sufficiently geared to regional issues and the future of rural areas, its potential cannot be adequately exploited.

9.3. The Advisory Committee may be given a key role in formulating a European employment policy within the framework of the European social dialogue.

10. The ESC asks the Commission in future to provide it with an annual résumé of the agricultural employment proposed by the Joint Committee, the Commission's Advisory Committees and the ESC.

Done at Brussels, 25 October 1995.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Carlos FERRER

() Section 5.4 does not apply to Member States where there is no income-related social security scheme.

() CES 728/85 fin.