*** * * • • 
-It * 11•* COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 15.07. J 997 
COM(97) 334 final 
WHITE PAPER ON SECTORS AND ACTIVITIES 
EXCLUDED FROM THE 
WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE 

White Paper on Sectors and Activities 
excluded from the Working Time Directive 
Table of contents 
INTRODUCTION 
PART ONE: BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS 
The Community Charter of the Fundamental Social 
Rights of Workers 
The Working Time Directive 
Public Safety 
The Problem 
The nature and extent of the exclusion 
Self employed 
Employment in the excluded sectors 
Legal and Contractual Situation in the Member States 
Action at Community Level 
Joint Committees and Studies 
Sector-by-sector analysis and assessment 
Road Transport 
Rail Transport 
Urban Transport 
Inland Waterways 
Air Transport 
Sea Transport 
Sea Fishing 
Other Work at Sea 
Doctors in Training 
PART TWO : OPTIONS 
Criteria for action 
Policy Options 
Option 1 : Non binding approach 
Option 2: Purely sectoral approach 
Option 3 : Differentiated approach 
Option 4: Purely horizontal approach 
PART THREE : THE WAY FORWARD 
Proposed Course of Action 
CONCLUSION 
ANNEX 2 
2 
2 
2 
3 
3 
3 
4 
4 
5 
5 
6 
6 
6 
7 
8 
8 
9 
10 
10 
11 
12 
14 
14 
14 
14 
14 
15 
15 
16 
16 
18 
White Paper on Sectors and Activities 
excluded from the Working Time 
Directive 
INTRODUCTION 
1. The aim of this White Paper is to 
find the best ways of ensuring the 
protection of the health and safety, with 
regard to working time, of workers 
currently excluded from the Working 
Time Directive (93/l 04/EC). 
2. The White Paper is in three parts. 
The first part sets out the background and 
an analysis of the current situation. The 
second part sets out the options. In the 
third part the Commission sets out its 
views on the way forward in this matter, 
subject to comments received on this 
White Paper. 
3. The White Paper has been 
prepared folJowing informal consultation 
with the social partners on the basis of a 
Working Document of the Commission 
Services. 
2 PART ONE BACKGROUND AND 
ANALYSIS 
The Community Charter of the 
Fundamental Social Rights of Workers 
4. The Community Charter of the 
Fundamental Social Rights of Workers 
contains provisions in relation to working 
time and holidays. Thus point 7 refers to 
the approximation of conditions as regards 
the duration and organisation of work. 
Point 8 refers to the right of every worker 
to a weekly rest period and to annual paid 
leave, while point 19 states that every 
worker must enjoy satisfactory health and 
safety conditions in his working 
environment. 
The Working Time Directive 
5. The Council of Ministers 
adopted Directive 93/104/EC on certain 
aspects of the organisation of working 
time on 23 November 1993. It was based 
on Article I l 8A of the EC Treaty. This 
requires Member States to ''pay particular 
attention to encouraginK improvements, 
especially in the working environment, as 
regards the health and sqfety of workers 
" 
6. The essential aims are to ensure 
that workers are protected against adverse 
effects on their health and safety caused 
by working excessively long hours, 
inadequate rest or disruptive working 
patterns. The Directive provides in 
particular (Articles 3 to 8) for : 
• a minimum daily rest period of 11 
consecutive hours a day; 
• a rest brea< where the working day is 
longer than 6 hours; 
• a minimu."11 rest period of 1 day a 
week; 
• a maximum working week of 48 hours 
on average including overtime; 
• 4 weeks1 annual paid holiday; and that 
• ni2ht workers must not worlc n" ..... .a.ore 
th;L-i S homs in 24 on average. 
7. The rnrective contains a numb-er 
of fi.ctber provisions relating to the 
protection of the health and safety of :night 
workers and shift workers. It also requires 
measures to be taken sc that the 
organisation of work according to a certain 
pattern takes account of the general 
pr!nciple of adapting work to the worker. 
8. The Di:ective makes extensive 
provisions for flexibility in the application 
of the principles of the directive to specific 
situations. In particular, the Directive 
provides for derogations from all the main 
provisions except the annual leave 
prov1s1on, in a wide range of 
circumstances. These include "in the case 
of .:lctivities where the worker's place of 
work and his place of residence are distant 
from one another or where the worker's 
different places of work are distant from 
one anofaer"; "in the case of activities 
involving the need for continuity of 
service or production"; "where there is a 
foreseeable surge of activity"; and "in the 
case of accident or imminent risk of 
:iccident". In addition derogations :from the 
same provisions are allowed in respect of 
any activity, by means of collective 
agreement or agreements between the two 
3 sides of 1ndustry. These tlcrogutions arc 
allowed normaliy ""provided that the 
workers concerned are afforded equivalent 
periods of compensatory rest". In the ~ase 
of the provision for a maximum working 
week of 48 ho1lrs on av·erage, the 
derogations allow the "reference perio~s" 
over which the average can be cab:ilated 
to be extended t:p 1o 6 montbs in E.11 cr.ses 
where derogations are allowed aTI6. up to 
12 months by ~eans o~ .collective 
agreement or agree::nents between ·t:1e ·~No 
sides of inckstry. 
9. Member S:.ates were required to 
impiement the Dirn~·tive by 23 November 
1996. 
Public Safety 
10. \VhHe it is workers' specific hea1tb 
and safoty whicil is quite properly ~.ae 
subject matter of this Wbite Paper, the 
Commission wis~ies to underscore the 
benefits that the general public may derive 
from adequate working time arrangements 
in all sectors. This is particularly the case 
w}th regard to transport ac'tivities and 
doctors in training, where fatigue brought 
by excessive hours of work may constitute 
a direct risk to the welfare and safety of 
others. The EC Treaty foresees specific 
Community action in areas where 
required for ensuring a high level of 
transport safety. Where such action 
relates to working (driving) times 
consistency with measures protecting the 
workers' health and safety must be 
ensured. 
Th~ Problem 
The. nature and extent qftbe exdusion 
11. The Commission's original 
proposal for a Directive on working time 
covered all economic sectors and 
activities. The Council decided, however, 
to exclude certain sectors and activities 
from the scope of the Directive. The 
precise wording regarding the scope of the 
Directive is: "This Directive shall apply to 
all sectors of activity ... with the exception 
of air, rail, road, sea, inland waterway 
and lake transport, sea fishing, other work 
at sea and the activities of doctors in 
training" (Article 1 paragraph 3 ). 
12. The sixteenth recital to the 
Directive states : "whereas, given the 
.\pecific nature of the work concerned, it 
may be necessary to adopt separate 
measures with regard io the organization 
of working time in certain sectors or 
activities which are excluded from the 
scope of this Directive 11
• 
13. Thus the exclusions were 
considered by the Council to be directly 
related to the type of work involved, and 
not because of any suggestion that health 
and safety as regards working time was 
sufficiently protected in those sectors and 
activities. A common feature of all these 
sectors, apart from doctors in training, is 
that key workers typically are required to 
spend time away from home as an integral 
part of their duties. 
14. TI1e way in which the exclusions 
are drafted has been interpreted as 
implying that all workers in the transport 
and sea fishing sectors are excluded from 
the scope of the Directive, even those who 
perform sedentary tasks. The Commission 
considers that this should be clarified, as 
there is no objective reason why "non­
mobile" employees should be treated 
differently in comparison to employees 
carrying out similar tasks in other 
industries. The test should relate to the 
nature of the activity, not to a definition of 
the "sector" in which the employee works. 
15. In the case of "other work at sea" 
and "doctors in training", the reference, 
either implicitly or explicitly, is to 
4 "activities", so the problem of defining the 
work involved does not arise. 
Self emoioved 
:6. Self-emplo:1cd \.vcrkers are not 
coverec b:1 Directive 93/l (J4/3C. V,111ile 
self-employmeat £s cormr;.011 ir1 certain 
excluded sectors, fo:-exai1~)le ie the read 
and inland '"atenvays sectors~ it is alsc 
prevalent in many other sectors~ already 
covered by the Directive, for e};ampie :he, 
construction indw1try. The argum\::m th(:_t 
special treatment should contir . .ue to se 
applied in certain sectors1 sirr ... ply because 
of the high proportion of self-eniploye(; 
workers canno~· therefore be sustai.ned. 
This does not mean 10 sa.y that self­
employed workers <,.re excluc1ed fi·mi'l BU 
Community ieg:s1 aticr... 1.::;or ;:x8n-.. ple: :x. 
the economically most impcrt2nt exducied 
sector, road transport, Sf.;] f-en:pJ o~/ed 
workers are covered by the existing 
regulations on driving time. 
17 However, while the objective is to 
protect health and safety, the Conm.1 ! ss ior: 
is sensitive to the effect cf possible 
distortions of competition and the 
imperatives of enswi.ng trans1::crt safety, 
and this is why an integrated approach to 
the implementation of the Community, s 
transport and social policies is favoured in 
this White Paper. 
Employment in the excluded sectors 
18. The total employment, including 
self-employment, in all the se<;tors and 
activities excluded from the Directive, is 
about 5.6 million (about 4% of total 
employment in the EU1). Of these 3.5 
million are in the Road Transport industry. 
In addition there are some 3 million 
Source: Employment in Europe 1996 
workers in "own account"2 road trcuisport, 
which is not excluded from the Directive. 
Estimates of total employment in the 
different sectors and activities are set out 
in the Annex. More detailed information is 
to be found in the sector-by sector analysis 
(see paragraphs 29 to 66 below). 
Legal and Contractual Situation in the 
Member States 
19. There have been significant changes 
in national legislation since the Directive 
was adopted in 1993. These reflect in part 
the measures taken by Member States to 
implement the Directive and partly moves 
towards greater flexibility in working time 
arrangements, often combined with 
reductions in working time. A study of legal 
and contractual limitations to Working Time 
in the European Union has recently been 
prepared by the European Foundation for 
Living and Working Conditions3. 
20. The extent to which employees are 
already covered by general or sector specific 
working time legislation varies enormously 
both between Member States and between 
sectors. All Member States have some 
legislation which provides some protection 
in respect of working time in respect of some 
categories of workers. But there is no 
apparent uniformity or consistency. In some 
cases general working time laws apply to 
some (or all) of the sectors and activities 
excluded, in other cases there are specific 
legal rules applying to the sector. In most 
countries, legislation is complemented by 
collective agreements. There is, however, 
2 Mostly in chemicals, oil products, agri-food, 
construction and the gross/retail trade 
3 Legal and Contractual Limitations to Working 
Time in the European Union, published by the 
Office for Official Publications of the 
European Communities and Peeters 
Publications 
5 legislation in most Member States providing 
minimum periods of annual leave, in ·respect 
of most sectors. 
Action at Community Level 
21. In negotiations with the European 
Parliament during the Second Reading, the 
Commission undertook to take initiatives in 
respect of the sectors and activities excluded 
from the Directive. For example, the 
Commission's Communication to the 
European Parliament.4 stated the 
Commission's intention "to take appropriate 
initiatives as soon as possible in respect of 
the different sectors excluded from the scope 
of the Directive. The preparatory work for 
the implementation of these initiatives is 
being undertaken in the context of the Joint 
Sectoral Committees for the sectors 
concerned (where they exist)." 
22. In the Medium Term Social Action 
Programme 1995-97, the Commission stated 
that "discussions with the social partners 
and/or studies will continue on how best to 
ensure that the activities and sectors 
excluded from the directive on the 
organisation of working time are 
appropriately covered . . . . If necessary, the 
Commission will consider bringing forward 
proposals to complete the Directive in 1996-
1997". 
23. In its Resolution on the Mediwn­
Term Social Action Programme 1995-1997, 
the European Parliament expressed "the wish 
that the Commission in its forthcoming Work 
Programme for 1996, will put forward 
detailed legislative proposals on . . . working 
time directives for those sectors excluded 
from the Working Time Directive, as well as 
social dialogue actions". In its Resolution on 
a reduction and adaptation of working time, 
the Parliament also called on the 
4 SEC(93) 1054 of7 July 1993 
Commission ... to encourage the two sides of 
industry to consult ... at European level with 
a view to concluding flexible agreements on 
reducing and adapting working time 
particularly in sectors currently excluded 
from the directive on working hours. 
24. In its Common Transport Policy 
Action Programme 1995-2000 the 
Commission indicated its intention to launch 
sector-specific initiatives on working time in 
various transport modes once the outcome of 
discussions between the social partners has 
become sufficiently clears. In its Resolution 
on this Action Programme the European 
Parliament endorsed the need to submit 
legislative proposals on working time in 
transport, in particular in areas where social 
partners did not reach agreement. 
Joint Committees and Studies 
25. In the five transport sectors and the 
sea fishing sector discussions between the 
social partners are organised in the form of 
Joint Committees at Community level. 
26. The Commission requested the 
Joint Committees to provide JOmt 
descriptions of the existing situation with 
regard to working time arrangements in 
these sectors and to give their 
recommendations on how to adapt the 
principles of the Directive with regard to 
their area of work. 
27. On 16 June 1995 Commissioners 
Flynn and Kinnock met all five Joint 
Committees in the transport sectors. At this 
meeting there was widespread agreement 
that there was no justification for excluding 
"non-mobile" workers from the scope of EC 
legislation on working time and that this 
needed to be put right. 
28. The Commission arranged for 
factual studies to be undertaken of the 
5 See COM(95)302 final. 
.6 working time arrangements in respect or 
"other work at sea" and "doctors in training" 
to provide the basis for the analysis which 
follows, in respect of these activities. 
Sector-by-sector analysis and assessment 
29. The following paragraphs analyse 
the specific features and issues relating to the 
regulation of working time in each sector 
and activity, including, in particular, the level 
of employment, and the discussions in the 
relevant Joint Committee or the views of the 
social partners. This analysis is followed in 
each case by an assessment of the 
possibilities for legislation on working time 
in the sector, including any obstacles which 
might arise from the simple extension of the 
Working Time Directive to cover workers in 
the sector concerned. 
Road Transport 
30. Road transport is by far the largest 
sector not covered by the Directive. Precise 
figures are difficult to establish. However, it 
has been estimated6 that road transport 
activities provide a total of 6.5 million jobs 
in the EU. A significant number of these are 
self-employed. There are about 1.2 million 
jobs in passenger transport, some 2.1 million 
in road haulage for hire or reward and 3 -3 .5 
million in own account transport (mostly in 
chemicals, oil products, agri-food, 
construction and the gross/retail trade). It 
should be noted, however, that own account 
transport workers are already covered by the 
Directive. 
31. This is the only industry where 
there is relevant Community legislation. In 
particular, Regulation 3820/85 provides for 
maximum daily driving periods of nine 
6 Road Transport in the European 
Union: Aspects of the Organization 
and Enforcement of Working and 
Driving Time Regulations 
hours which may be extended twice in any 
one week to 10 hours, breaks of at least 45 
minutes for each period of four-and-a-half 
hours driving, and daily rest periods of 
eleven hours which may be reduced to a 
minimum of nine consecutive hours not 
more than three times in any one week (on 
condition that compensatory rest be given in 
the following week). But there are important 
differences between this Regulation and the 
\Vorking Time Directive. The provisions of 
Regulation 3820/85 have as their objective 
not only the protection of the health and 
safety of workers, but they also primarily 
ain1 to hannonise the conditions of 
competition bet\veen all types of road 
trans:port operators as well as to improve 
road safety and working conditions in 
general. Given its direct link with road 
safety, the Regulation applies not only to 
employees but also to se1f-employed drivers. 
32. Nevertheless, Regulation 3820/85 
does not stipulate maximum hours for 
activities other than driving, such as loading 
and unloading which can form an important 
pait of the daily working time of drivers but 
which are not covered by the Regulation. 
1bis may in certain circumstances lead to 
extremely long overall working times. 
Furthermore there are many exclusions and 
possibilities for further exceptions from the 
Regulation. As a result, a variety of rules is 
currently applicable in the Community 
leading to significant distortions of 
competition. This means that the road 
haulage sector can be subject to industrial 
relations problems which have already led to 
serious disruptions in the provision of 
transport services, affecting considerably the 
free movement of goods, services and 
p-ersons. These shortcomings need to be 
phased out by appropriate Community 
action. 
33. Employers have argued that a 
better application of existing mles would be 
preferable to new rules, whereas trade unions 
stress the need to cover all working time. 
Discussions in the Joint Committee were 
7 resmned towards the end of 1996, but there 
appears to be little common ground between 
the two sides. 
34. The provision.for consecutive daily 
rest in the Working Time Directive might be 
con.r;idered to be the most difficult rule to 
apply to mobile workers involved in long­
distance road transport. However, there are 
already similar provisions in Regulation 
3820185, and this is the most appropriate 
instrument to deal with the issue of daily and 
weekly rest for mobile workers. Moreover, 
there does not appear to be any sector-
5pecific argument why the provisions on 
paid leave and health assessment for night 
workers in the Working Time Directive, as 
well as guarantees of adequate rest and ll 
maximum number C?l hours worked per year 
should not apply to all mobile workers in the 
sector. The full provisions af the Working 
Time Directive should ap_ply to all non­
mobile workers. As a complement to any 
general action taken with regard to the 
protection of the health and sqfety of 
workers in respect of worJing time, the 
Commission intends to propose in early 
1998 important amendments to Regulation 
3820185. These amendments would, inter 
alia, integrate new provisions on the 
ma:x:imum daily, weekly and fortnightly limits 
to be placed on driving and 
loading/unloading activities into the 
Community's legislative system on driving 
time in road transport. They will also seek to 
achieve uniformity as far as checking rules 
andprocedures are concerned 
Rail Transport 
35. Almost one million people were 
employed in rail transport in the 15 Member 
States of the EU in 1995. A study 
, undertaken for the European Commission by 
the Committee (now Federation) for 
Transport Workers' Unions in the European 
Community? shows that in 1992, 19% of 
7 Social Aspects of the Common Transport 
Policy: Study of the Working and Social 
employees worked as drivers and other train 
crew, 31 % as traffic/maintenance staff 
(goods porters, semi-skjlJed workers, 
shunters for train coupling in stations and/or 
private sidings, tenninal installations, 
containers etc.) and 50% were operational 
and station staff. 
36. A specific feature of the industry is 
the intermittent nature of some of the 
work, particularly in rural areas. Thus the 
intensity of activity is detennined by the 
frequency of the trains. This can give rise 
to problems of calculation of "working 
time" in some cases._ There are also 
problems in applying the Directive to 
long-distance train drivers and 
accompanying staff. While these 
activities, and working conditions in 
general, are covered by a series of 
collective agreements at national level, 
the absence of any Community level 
framework will present growing 
problems as liberalisation and 
competition with new entrants gathers 
momentum. 
3 7. The Joint Committee on Railways 
reached agreement on 18 September 1996 
that the provisions of the Working Time 
Directive should be applied to all workers in 
the industry, including mobile workers, with 
appropriate adjustments to the derogations. 
A condition of the agreement is that similar 
provisions should be applied to other 
transport sectors at the same time. A further 
condition is that existmg conditions 
concerning working time should be applied 
through legislation to all new entrants to the 
industry. This arises from fears that health 
and safety standards with regard to working 
time might otherwise fall as the industry is 
opened up to competition. 
Conditions of European Railway Workers 
by Hugues de Villele and Brenda O'Brien 
(CTWU) 
8 38. Rail seems w be a !:ector where 
existing agreements between social partners 
work satfafactoriiy. In the light of the 
agreement within the Joint Commitiee, there 
are no objective reasons for continuing 1he 
exclusion in respect of this sector. In 
addition the Comn;ission will monitor 
developments closely in this indi1.stry with a 
view to assessing the need.fhr .mpplementwy 
.\pecjfic action. 
Urhan Tranworl 
39. While not mentioned specifically in 
Directive 93/104, this "sector!(, which cover~ 
aspects of rail and road transport is ex duded 
from the Working Time Directive. It is also 
excluded to a large extent from RegulatilJ~1 
3820/85 (regular passenger services \\iith ?JJ 
operating radius of 50km or less), which 
may affect the safoty of passengers. T~1e 
Commission services have recei\,eJ 
!:epresentations from the UJTP (1._Jruon 
Internationale des Transports Publiques) 
representing the interests of urban passenge.1· 
transprni, which arc difforcnt from those of 
road or rail sectors as such. In formulating 
any proposals, the Commission will take 
account of their concerns. 
Inland Waterways 
40. Approximately 45,000 people 
work in the inland waterway transport 
sector; 35,000 of them are employees and 
the rest are small operators, owners of 
between one to three vessels. Nowadays 
there is a perceptible general upward trend 
in the number of small operators due to the 
sale by the big companies of their vessels 
to their employees. In the case of the sn:all 
operators with only one vessel, who make 
up the great majority of the small 
operators, their vessel is both their means 
of making a Jiving as well as their 
permanent home. However, those 
operating on the Rhine are currently 
subject to provisions on crew's rest 
periods, its composition and vessel 
navigation time. The link between these 
measures and working time is that the 
small operator, in as much as he is a 
member of the crew, is subject to 
regulations on an ohl igatory rest pcrio<l 
an<l vessel navigation times. 
41. The two sides in the Joint 
Committee for inland waterways decided to 
enter into negotiations with a view to 
reaching a Community-level agreement on 
working time within the industry. The draft 
agreement, submitted by the workers' side, 
generally followed fairly closely the 
provisions of the Working Time Directive. It 
did, however, contain different provisions 
relating to daily rest, providing for 10 hours 
consecutive rest, as compared with 11 in the 
Directive. These negotiations broke down in 
early 1995, because the employers did not 
accept that the principle of working time 
should apply to the category of the small 
operator. 
42. The extension of the provisions ~l 
the Directive to employees in this sector 
ought not to pose insuperable problems. 
For, although the basic provision on daily 
rest periods provided for in the Working 
Time Directive could pose problems, the 
Directive does allow derogations from the 
relevant Article, both by collective 
agreement and where the worker works 
away from home. The Commission intends 
to submit a proposal to the Council in 
1998, containing provisions, inspired by 
the Rhine Convention, which would apply 
to all Member States. 
Air Transport 
4 3. It is estimated that there are 
approximately 375,000 employees working 
for air transport companies in the 15 
Member States of the EU. About 20% of 
these are flight crews and the remainder 
ground staff, including maintenance and 
ticketing staff. 
44. Flight time limitations are 
necessary, because it has long been 
recognised that serious performance 
degradation could occur as a result of flight 
9 crew fatigue. Aviation 
combinations of factors that presents 
influence 
fatigw: not encountered in other profossions. 
Personnel arc required to evaluate situations, 
take decisions an<l perform well under stress 
during long work periods, sometimes at 
night and after crossing many time zones. It 
is therefore necessary to protect such 
personnel not only against short-term fatigue 
but also from the possible effects of fatigue 
built up over the course of time. 
45. Agreement has been reached in the 
Joint Committee on Air Transport that the 
provisions of the Working Time Directive 
should apply to ground staff (some 80% of 
all employees). Further discussions in the 
Joint Committee have concentrated on the 
application of the principles of the Working 
Time Directive to flight crews. These have 
been hampered by disagreements over the 
inter-relationship between these discussions 
and parallel discussions within the Joint 
Aviation Authorities (JAA) on the limitation 
of flying duty periods for flight and cabin 
crews. 
46. The agreement that the provisions 
of the general Directive should be extended 
to ground staff constitutes a considerable 
step forward With regard to flight 
personnel, the only substantive problem with 
extension of the Directive might concern the 
provisions with regard to daily rest and rest 
hreah, though with the possibilities for 
derogations provided by the Directive these 
should not prove insuperable. As a 
complement to any general action taken with 
regard to the protection of the health and 
safety of workers in respect of working time, 
the Commission is also considering specific 
proposals, for reasons of operational safety, 
for a uniform Flight Time Limitation 
scheme. 
Sea Transport 
47. The number or seafarers employed 
in the EU flagged fleet is cstimatcd8 to total 
about 162,000. Of these, about 129,000 
(80%) are nationals of the Member State 
concerned and 33,000 are non-nationals, 
mostly from third countries. 
48. Long working hours at sea are 
common. However, a systematic approach to 
limitation of these hours has hitherto been 
difficult because of competition from ships 
flying the flags of third countries. Indeed the 
decline in employment in the EU-registered 
fleet -by over 30% between 1985 and 1995 -
has been a major preoccupation of both ship­
owners and seafarers over recent years. For 
this reason, and because this is a global 
industry, there has been concern, within the 
Joint Committee, to reach agreement in the 
international organisations, before tackling 
intra-Community issues. 
49. Agreement was reached in the 
International Maritime Organisation in 1995 
on the adoption of the revised Standards of 
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping 
(STCW) Convention in relation to minimum 
rest periods for watchkeepers. This provides 
for minimum daily rest periods of I 0 hours 
per 24, which can be divided into no more 
than 2 periods, including one period of at 
least 6 consecutive hours; and for weekly 
rest periods of not less than 70 hours. The 
Commission has submitted a formal 
proposal to the Council amending Directive 
94/58/EC on the minimum level of training 
of seafarers. This proposal reflects the 
provisions of the 1995 STCW Convention in 
respect of minimum rest periods for 
watchkeepers in the deck and engine 
departments. This amended Directive is 
currently being discussed in the legislative 
bodies of the European Community and on 
8 TecnEcon: Study on the maritime 
professions in the European Union 
10 18 June 1997, the Council of Ministers 
reached a common position on it. 
50. In October 1996, the International 
Labour Organisation (ILO) adopted a new 
Convention (N° 180) on hours of work in 
shipping. The strategy followed, in the lead­
up to the adoption of Convention 180, was 
developed by the social partners. The 
Convention provides, in respect of seafarers 
on board ship, either maximum working 
hours ( 14 hours a day and 72 hours a week) 
or minimum rest periods (I 0 hours a day anci 
77 hours a week). TI1e Conference decided 
on a mechanism which would allow for the 
provisions of Convention N° 180 to be 
enforced upon non-EU registered ships 
operating in EU waters by means of Port 
State Control. Since then, the social partners 
have emphasised that it is very important for 
the strategy that Member States should ratify 
this Convention. They have also agreed in 
principle that there is a need for a specific 
Community instrument on working time in 
the maritime sector. On that basis, the 
Commission will, as it has previously 
indicated, rapidly make a proposal for a 
Directive. This will take account of the 
provisions of ILO Convention N° J 80 and, 
subject to further discussion of the details, 
elements of the Working Time Directive. 
51. Much progress has been made. 
The Commission welcomes the agreement in 
the Joint Committee and looks forward to 
receiving its detailed recommendations. The 
Commission also hopes that Member States 
will ratify /LO Convention 180, so that 
minimum standards with regard to 
maximum working time or minimum rest can 
be eriforced internationally. 
Sea FishinL! 
52. There are about 270,000 sea-going 
fishermen in the EU Member States9. In 
Number of fishermen (full and part-time) (all 
EU Member States). Figures are for 199:::1 
addition there arc relatively small numbers 
of non-mobile land-based workers in the sea 
fishing sector, whose activities are directly 
related to the landing of catches and who are 
not covered by the Directive. There are also 
substantial numbers of other land-based 
workers who are closely related to sea 
fishing, e.g. port workers and workers in the 
fish processing industry, but these are 
already subject to the provisions of the 
Working Time Directive. 
53. Both sides in the Joint Committee 
for this sector provided the Commission 
with their separate opinions. These were 
very different from one another. The 
employers expressed their opposition to any 
Directive on working time in the sector, 
given the specific nature of the industry and 
the principle of subsidiarity. Particular 
problems cited included the large number of 
self-employed workers, the financial 
consequences for share fishermen and the 
diverse nature of the industry in Europe. ·me 
trade unions, on the other hand, argued that 
action is necessary to protect fishermen from 
long working hours; that the exclusion from 
Directive 93/104/EC was unnecessary; and 
that suitable derogations could have been 
provided. They submitted detailed textual 
proposals. Discussions resumed earlier this 
year, with a view to reaching a common 
position. 
54. The Commission hopes that the 
social partners will reach a common 
position. However, in the a~sence of 
agreement, sector-specific provisions could 
be proposed for sea-going personnel, 
covering daily and weekly rest periods. Jn 
addition, the provisions on paid leave and 
health assessment for night workers in the 
Working Time Directive, as well as 
guarantees of adequate rest and a maximum 
number of hours worked per year, could be 
applied to all sea-going personnel in the 
except Greece (1990) and Ireland (1991). 
Source: OECD, Member States 
11 sector. The full provisiom <f the WorkinK 
Time Directive should apply lo all non­
mobile workers, with suitable farther 
provision.for derogatiom, flnecessary. 
Other Work at Sea 
55. The number of employees 
working offshore fluctuates seasonally. The 
best estimate available is that the overall 
population of workers engaged in "other 
work at sea" in the EU is approximately 
45,000. Of these, most are employed on 
offshore operations, but some 10,000 are 
employed in marine contracting work 
(including saturation diving) and at the high 
season there are some 3000 personnel 
engaged in seismic surveying work in 
European waters. The main EU countries 
involved are the UK (with well over halfthe 
EU employment in the sector), Denmark, 
Netherlands and Italy. 
56. According to the study undertaken 
fix the Commission 10 virtually all offshore 
work in the North Sea is based around a 12-
hour working shift. Some managerial 
personnel and specialists may work 
according to the daily requirements of the 
job, rather than to fixed hours. The duration 
of the period offshore is typically two weeks, 
but varies somewhat according to the 
country and employer. In the field of marine 
contracting in the UK, the arrangements 
regarding the period offshore are made 
according to the anticipated duration of the 
task. If a task is anticipated to take up to 
about five weeks it is probable that the same 
crew will remain working for the duration of 
the job. 
57. There is legislation, often 
supplemented by collective agreements, 
containing at least basic prov1s1ons 
concerning hours of work or minimum 
to Coshape Ltd: The Working Hours in 'Other 
Work at Sea' in the Context of Directive 
93/104/EC, 1995 
rest periods offshore in Denmark, Italy 
and the Netherlands. In the UK there is no 
specific legislation on hours of work, but 
each operator is required to prepare a 
safety case in respect of each installation 
and an assessment of the risks to the health 
and sa{ety of their employees. Working 
time should be included in both the safety 
case and the risk assessment. 
58. According to the Coshape report 
(prepared in 1995), overtime of 6 to 16 
hours per week (over and above the 12 
hour daily shift) was not unusual in 
Denmark. In the Netherlands, where 
overtime was worked offshore there had to 
be compensatory rest during the time 
offshore. In the UK the amount of 
overtime actually worked varied according 
to company and activity. In most cases 
significant overtime work was unusual 
during routine operations and was limited 
to about 4 hours a week, though in some 
instances it was over double this figure. 
For managerial personnel, overtime of 2 to 
3 hours a day was commonplace; in Italy 
shift patterns and ove11ime working were 
very varied. The Coshape study concluded 
that the existing shift patterns appear to be 
the most appropriate way of organising 
working time offshore and that the scope 
for change is significantly limited. 
59. There is no EC level social 
dialogue in this sector. Trade unions wish for 
negotiations at EC level, or, failing that, a 
specific Directive. The employers' 
organisations, on the other hand, have been 
reluctant to take part in any EC social 
dialogue and indeed the main organisations 
state that they are not mandated to do so. 
They consider that the industry is well 
regulated and that there is no justification for 
EC legislation in this sector. A particular 
concern is to maintain the 2 x 12 hour x 14 
day shift pattern and an annualised 
calculation of working hours. 
60. Any proposal needs to allow shift 
systems based on 2 shifts x 12 hours x 14 
days to continue and to give adequate 
12 recognition to the international and seasonal 
nature <?f the indm·try 's working patterns by 
allowing an annualised calculation <!l 
working hours. Indeed the working patterm 
<!f these workers are in many ways 
analogous to those of ''mobile " trampLJrt 
workers, in that they work away from home. 
They should there.fore he treated similarly to 
such workers. In particular, some of the 
activities could he covered by similar 
arrangements to those proposed for 
maritime tramport. 
Doctors in IraininL: 
61. The exclusion refers to "doctors 
in training". In general, in Member States, 
the concept of "doctor in training" 
contains two important features: the 
persons concerned have completed their 
basic (undergraduate) medical training; 
and they arc preparing for a recognised 
higher medical qualification. The length of 
the training period varies from country to 
country and it is not clear in some 
Member States when this period of 
training comes to an end. Employed 
doctors "not in training" are, by definition, 
covered by the Working Time Directive, 
subject to the flexibility provided by the 
Directive, as described in paragraph 8 
above. 
62. It is estimated that there are over 
270,000 junior hospital doctors 
(corresponding roughly to the concept of 
"doctors in training") throughout the EU. 
However, almost half of these are m 
Germany, where national legislation on 
working time already applies. 
63. There was an apparent problem 
relating to the employment status of 
doctors in training. In some countries, they 
have a special status, which is neither self­
employed, employee, nor trainee. 
However, on further investigation, it 
would appear that in the vast majority of 
countries, they are considered to be 
"employees" for the purpose of 
employment law. 
64. A specific feature of the 
employment of doctors in training relates to 
"on-call" duty. The study undertaken for the 
Commission in 199411 showed that the 
treatment of "on-call" duty varies 
considerably in individual Member States. A 
high nwnber of weekly hours and 
excessively long periods of continuous 
duties are expected of doctors in training in 
several counL;es, and generally arise through 
the imposition of night or weekend cover on 
to a typical weekly working pattern. "Unless 
there are specific provisions for proper 
breaks, or other restrictions on the hours that 
are worked, many rostering systems mean 
that a doctor in training is working without 
proper rest for 32 hours routinely, and in 
excess of 70 hours in the more extreme 
cases." The report concluded that although 
the weekly hours worked by doctors in 
training were highly variable, they routinely 
exceeded 55 hours a week in many 
countries. 
65. There is a clear risk therefore to 
the health and safety of a considerable 
number of trainee doctors. To the extent 
that these doctors are directly involved in 
medical procedures and medical 
decisions affecting patients, the safety of 
such patients could also be put at risk. 
66. The "on-call" issue for doctors in 
training should be dealt with at national 
level. However, the current wording of the 
Directive does, in fact, allow Member States 
to de.fine working time in a restrictive way, 
while allowing a wider definition. There 
would, therefore, appear to be no practical 
legal problem in extending the provisions of 
the Directive to doctors in training, jm·t m· 
they already apply to other employed 
doctors, while a4ju\·ting the existing 
derogations to allow the Member States to 
deal with the treatment of" on call duty". In 
11. Coshape Ltd: The Working Hours of 
Doctors in Training in the context of 
Directive 93/104/EC 
13 comidering how to extend the Directive, the 
Commission will take into account the 
potential impact on the provision and quality 
<?f health care. 
PART TWO : OPTIONS 
Criteria for action 
67. Before making proposals, it is 
necessary to establish the criteria against 
which the preferred policy option needs to be 
judged. In the case of action in respect of 
workers not covered by the Working Time 
Directive, the following criteria would 
appear to be appropriate. 
68. The action proposed would need : 
a) to ensure adequate protection for 
the health and safety of workers 
with regard to working time; 
b) to allow adequate operating 
flexibility to firms; 
c) to take account of any impact on 
employment; 
d) not to place unreasonable burdens 
on firms, in particular small firms, 
and to take account of specific 
characteristics of sectors such as 
share fishing and the heterogeneous 
nature of sea fishing; 
e) to respect the principle of 
subsidiarity; 
f) to respect the principle of 
proportionality. 
69. In addition it is also necessary to 
ensure as far as possible that action taken, or 
indeed failure to take action, takes account of 
European competitiveness and public safety 
requirements and does not lead to distortions 
of competition within the internal market 
and between competing modes of transport. 
Policy Options 
70. The analysis in Part One has 
shown that there is a problem to be solved, 
i.e. that in all sectors and activities excluded 
14 there are some workers who have no 
protection against working long hours or no 
guarantee of adequate rest. I laving identified 
the policy options to resolve this problem, 
the Commission must ensure that the chosen 
solution meets the criteria set out in 
paragraph 68. 
71. Four broad policy approaches to 
the problem can be considered : 
-a non-binding approach; 
-a purely sectoral approach; 
-a differentiated approach; 
a purely horizontal approach. 
Option 1: Non-bindin1i: Approach 
72. Under this approach, the 
Commission would either issue one or more 
Recommendations or propose Council 
Recommendations. 1bis would mean 
keeping the current exclusions from the 
Directive, if this is justified in a particular 
sector. l11e essential message would be to 
urge Member States and the social partners 
to take the necessary measures to ensure that 
all workers, whatever their status, have 
adequate rest and do not work excessively 
long hours. Most employers' organisations 
who commented during the informal 
consultation process on this White Paper 
favoured this approach, including some, 
particularly those representing the off-shore 
industry, who argued that the exclusion in 
respect of their sector should continue. The 
trade unions were strongly opposed to the 
non-binding approach. 
Option 2: Purely sectoral cwproacb 
73. Hitherto, the main approach has 
been, both within the Joint Committees and 
in the studies, to seek to find working time 
arrangements, inspired by the Working Time 
Directive, which would strike the right 
balance, on a sector-by-sector basis, between 
the protection of the health and safety of 
workers, public safoty requirements and 
operating flexibility needs. This approach 
appeared until relatively recently, to be 
unlikely to produce results in the Joint 
Committees. B-..1t there is now some progress 
in at least two sectors: sea and rail transport. 
This js the approach advocated by the 
E:.rro_pean Tratle Union Confederation 
{ETUC). 
Qption 3: Diffe-rentiated ap;>roach 
74. T:1e foird option is to differentiate 
h:etwee11 those activities which can he 
ac~ommodated under the Wor}dng Time 
Diredve and those which require S:;')ecific 
measur~s. This would entail: 
• extending the full provisions of the 
W mking Time Directive to all non­
o:::ibile workers. Appropriate 
adjustment of the existing derngations 
wou1d be made to take account, notably 
of the rieed for co~tinuity of service and 
ofaer operationa~ requirementsl2; 
• extending to all mobile wor:(ers and 
fuose engeged in "other work at seP." the 
provisions of the Wor:<lng Ti:ne 
Directive on 4 weeks' paid anmk'li }eave 
and health assessments for night workers; 
and p:oviding a guarantee of adequate 
rest and for a maximum number of hours 
to be wor~(ed rumually; 
• introducing or mod1f1ing .specific 
legisiafa:m for each sector or a~tivity 
concerning the working time and rest 
periods of mobile workers and foose 
engaged in "other work at sea". 
QQt1on 4: Purely horizontal approach 
7 5. The fourth option would be to 
propose a purely horizontal measure, which 
did not address the sector-specific aspects of 
the working time question. Such a proposal 
might contain the following features: 
i2 bcluding, for example, the 'on-cal; duty' of 
trainee doctors, and quayside activities in 
the sea fishing sector directly related to the 
J3nding of catc!les. 
15 a) clarification of Directive 93/104/EC to 
ensure that a11 tne provisions of that 
Directive app1y to non-mooile wor:(ers; 
b) to provide for basic minimum protection 
in respect of wo~.:cing time, such f:S a 
g'..mw..ntee o:f adeq:.:ate rest anci 4 wee:(S' 
paid enra.ml Jeave, for a11 other workers 
not covered by Di:·ective 93/104/EC. 
---·-·----------
PART THREE THE WAY 
FORWARD 
Proposed Course of Action 
76. The assessment in Part One leads to 
three conclusions. 
77. The first is that there is a health and 
safety problem which must be rectified given 
that there are workers in all the excluded 
sectors who have no protection against risks 
to their health and safety through having to 
work excessively long hours. Furthermore it 
is not justifiable on objective grounds to 
exclude any sector totally. 
78. TI1e second conclusion is that there 
is no reason to treat "non-mobile" workers 
differently from other workers already 
covered by the Directive. 
79. l11e third conclusion is that in order 
to ensure minimum health and safety 
protection, the basic principles of the 
Working Time Directive should apply to all 
workers, and that there is no justification for 
complete exclusion of any of the sectors 
provided that public safety and operating 
flexibility requirements can be met in an 
appropriate way. 
80. The Commission continues to 
believe that agreements between the social 
partners would be the best solution. Such 
agreements could be implemented either in 
accordance with the procedures and practices 
specific to management and labour or 
through legislation at EC level. The 
Commission notes, however, that in the 
sectors where agreement has already been 
reached (rail and sea transport), the social 
partners are advocating a legislative solution. 
81. In the light of these considerations, 
the Commission's preliminary view is that 
the most practical approach wo~ld be to 
initiate the legislative process in accordance 
with Option 3. This approach guarantees the 
protection of health and safety while 
allowing for sufficient flexibility to take 
16 account of the operational considerations 
which were at the root of the exclusion in the 
first place. 
82. On the other hand, the 
Commission believes -in the light of the 
analysis of the sectors -that the non-binding 
approach (Option 1) would not be 
approp1iate, as it gives no guarantee that the 
health and safety requirements will be 
addressed in regard to all workers. The 
purely sectoral approach (Option 2) would 
make it very difficult to achieve a coherent 
or equitable treatment of non-mobile 
workers, while the purely horizontal 
approach (Option 4) would fail to provide 
the health and safety protection required by 
mobile workers. Furthermore, Options 1 and 
2 could in themselves lead to distmtions of 
competition. 
83. How does this proposed course of 
action (Op~ion 3) measure up against the 
criteria established in Part Two above ? 
84. The first test is to ensure adequate 
protection for the health and safety of 
workers with regard to working time. 111e 
options envisaged are based on the Working 
Time Directive, which itself seeks to 
establish minimum standards. 
85. The Working Time Directive 
allows considerable flexibility to finns (see 
paragraph 8 above). Similar flexibility 
should be allowed in any new proposal. 
Careful consideration will also be given to 
the views of employers to ensure adequate 
additional flexibility under any new 
proposals. 
86. With regard to employment, it is 
most important that action at European level 
should either help to create or preserve jobs 
or at least should not harm the employment 
situation and the competitiveness of 
European firms. Widely different views are 
held on the effect of reducing working time 
on employment. These are discussed in the 
Green Paper "Partnership for a new 
organisation of work"13. However, the 
Working Time Directive already permits 
longer working hours than are commonly 
worked in practice in most Member States. 
Furthermore, the Commission firmly 
believes that minimum standards with regard 
to the protection of the health and safety of 
workers are important for the good 
functioning of the internal market. 
87. Similar arguments apply in relation 
to the issue of placing burdens on firms, 
particularly small and medium sized firms. It 
is necessary to avoid excessive regulation 
and adding unnecessary burdens. But, while 
the Working Time Directive is complex, the 
basic provisions, as set out in paragraph 6 
above, are very simple. Indeed, most of the 
complexity arises from the flexibility the 
Directive allows to Member States to cater 
for particular cases and national traditions. 
88. With regard to respect of the 
principle of subsidiarity, the Commission 
now has the benefit of the Judgment of the 
European Court of Justice in the application 
by the United Kingdom for annulment of the 
Working Time Directive. In this Judgment t 4, 
the Court notes that "once the Council has 
found that it is necessary to improve the 
existing level of protection as regards the 
health and safety of workers and to 
harmonise the conditions in this area while 
maintaining the improvements made, 
achievement of that objective through the 
imposition of minimum requirements 
necessarily presupposes Community-wide 
action". There is, in fact, no objective 
difference, in terms of subsidiarity, between 
the sectors excluded from the Working Time 
Directive and those included. It has to be 
concluded therefore that there can be no 
13 Com (97) 128 
14. Judgment of the Court, 12 November 
1996 in Case C-84/94: United Kingdom 
v Council of the European Union. 
17 objection to legislative action with regard to 
subsidiarity. 
89. Turning to the principle of 
proportionality, the Court has consistently 
held that, in order to establish whether a 
provision of Community law complies with 
the principle of proportionality, it must be 
a'iccrtained whether the means which it 
employs arc suitahle .fhr the o~jective 
pursued and whether they do not go beyond 
what is necessary to achieve it. It is 
necessary, therefore, to determine whether 
the intensity of the Community action taken 
by means of the Directive goes beyond what 
is necessary to achieve the objective of 
protecting the health and safety of workers. 
Again, the ECJ concludes in the case of the 
Working Time Directive that they do not. As 
any proposals for directives in the excluded 
sectors will not go beyond the provisions of 
the Working Time Directive, it seems to the 
Commission that the principle of 
proportionality would also be satisfied. 
CONCLUSION 
90. In the light of the foregoing 
considerations, the Commission considers 
that a pragmatic approach should he taken in 
order to ensure at EC level the protection or 
the health and safety, with regard to working 
time, of workers in the sectors and activities 
currently excluded from the Working Time 
Directive. 
91. Subject to consideration of the views 
expressed on this White Paper, the 
Commission proposes to proceed on the 
basis of Option 3 (see paragraph 74). 
Under this option a distinction would be 
made between those activities which can 
be accommodated under the Working 
Time Directive and those which require 
specific measures. This would entail: 
• extending the full provisions of the 
Working Time Directive to all non­
mobile workers. Appropriate 
adjustment of the existing derogations 
would be made to take account notably 
of the need for continuity of service and 
other operational requirements; 
• extending to all mobile workers and 
those engaged in "other work at sea" the 
prov1s10ns of the Working Time 
Directive on 4 weeks' paid annual leave 
and health assessments for night workers; 
and providing a guarantee of adequate 
rest and for a maximum number of hours 
to be worked annually; 
• introducing or modifying specific 
legislation for each sector or activity 
concerning the working time and rest 
periods of mobile workers and those 
engaged in "other work at sea". 
92. With regard to such sectoral 
measures, the Commission hopes that it will 
be possible to proceed on the basis of 
agreement between the social partners. With 
regard to possible specific measures in 
respect of sea fishing (if the discussions on a 
common policy do not succeed) and other 
18 work at sea, the Commission would 
welcome views from employers and trade 
unions in the sea-fishing and off-shore 
sectors as to whether they would wish 
arrangcmcnll;) similar to those for sea 
transport (sec paragraphs 4 7 -51 ahovc) to 
apply in their industry. 
93. In its Communication concerning 
the application of the Agreement on social 
policy,t5 the Commission stated that it 
would follow the consultation procedures set 
out in that Communication on all measures 
with major social implications, irrespective 
of the legal base of the proposal. Therefore 
the Commission is sending this White Paper 
to the social partners for consultation. The 
Commission will, of course, subsequently 
consult management and labour on the 
content of any proposal envisaged. 
94. The Commission would also 
welcome views from other recipients of this 
White Paper on the course of action 
proposed. Any comments should be sent 
(rcforence V /02 -WP) by 31 October 1997 
to: 
European Commission 
DGV/02 
rue de la Loi I Wetstraat 200 
I 049 Brussels 
95. Comments can also be sent by 
e-mail to: 
dg5-workingtime@bxl.dg5.cec.be 
96. After that date, the Commission 
will adopt its final position with due regard 
to all the views of the social partners and 
other recipients of the White Paper. 
·niis document is accessible at the following address: 
internet http://europa.eu. inti 
The DGV homepage is accessible through the 
following path: 
Welcome, Policies, Employment and Social Policies, 
on which page there is a link to DGV. 
15 Com(93) 600 
N.B. 
la 
17. 
18 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
2J. 
24. 
25. ANNEX 
TOTAL EMPL0"4\fENTl.4 
Road Transport ) 500 00017 IK 
Rail Transport 965 00019 
Inland Waterways 45 00020 
Air Transport 375 00021 
Sea Transport 1so00022 
Sea Fishing 270 00()23 
Other work at sea 45 00024 
Doctors in training 27Q QQQ25 
Total 5 630 000 
These are "ball-park" figures, for further explanations see sector-by sector aiJ.a1ysis in paragraphs 
All EU Member States 
Ext:Judes workers in "own account transport" which is not excluded from the Working Time 
Directive. 
Source: Road Tmnsport !n -~he European Union: Aspects of the Organ!zation and Enforcement of 
Work1ng and Driving Time Regulations, 1995 
Source: M:iin statistical results for UlC Member Railways, 1995 
Source : DGVII estimates, 1996 
Source :Flight 1nternational World Airline Directory, figures for 1995 
Source: TecilEcon: Study on the maritime profess1ons in the European Union, l 996 
NumJer of fis}1ermen (full ar.d part-time) (all EU Memher States). Figures are for J.993, except 
Greece ( l 990) and Jrcland { J 99 J ). Source: OECD, ,Vi cm her Stales 
S0:.:::-ce: Coshape Ltd: The Working Hours in 'Other Work at Sea' in 1he Context of Directive 
931) C4/EC, 1995 
Sou::ce: Permanent Working Group of European Junior Hospital Doctors, 1996 
ISSN0254-1475 
COM(97) 334 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 04 OS 06 
Catalogue number CB-C0-97-401-EN-C 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg ISBN 92-78-23326-9