NoC223/60 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 31.8.92
3.3.TheEuropean-level exchangesmentionedin
Point4shouldnotonlycoverpaypractices,butalso
thosegoverningindustrialrelationsandworkerpartici­
pationinsofarastheseareinterlinkedwithpay.3.4.AlsoinPoint4,theCommissioncouldunder­
taketopromotegreater'socialdialogue'betweenall
therelevantsocialpartnersatCommunitylevel,in
ordertodecidethebasiccriteriatobeusedforsetting
anequitablewageasdescribedinPoint2.10above.
DoneatBrussels,26May1992.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
MichaelGEUENICH
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilDirectiveamendingDirective89/392/EEConthe
Approximation oftheLawsoftheMemberStatesrelatingtoMachinery
(92/C223/18)
On4February1992theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle100AoftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity ,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheSectionforIndustry,Commerce,CraftsandServices,whichwasresponsibleforpreparing
theCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon6May1992.TheRapporteur
wasMrPerrin-Pelletier .
Atits297thPlenarySession(meetingof26May1992),theEconomicandSocialCommittee
adoptedthefollowingOpinionunanimously .
1.GeneralComments MemberStates'technicallegislationatahighlevelof
safety,withaviewtocompletingtheSingleMarket.
TheCommission'sDirectorate-General forSocial
Affairsiscurrentlypreparingadraftamendmentto
Directive89/655/EEC(3)of30November1989onthe
useofworkequipment (basedonArticle118Aofthe
Treaty).Thisamendmentwillsupplementtheoriginal
textconcerningrulesfortheuseofmobileandlifting
apparatus,includingliftingofpersons.1.1.ThedraftDirectiveisthesecondamendmentto
Directive89/392/EEC(!)onmachinery.Thepurposeof
thefirstamendment,dated20June1991(2),wasto
includerisksduetomobilityandliftingwithinthe
scopeofthe1989Directive.Thislatestamendmentlays
downessentialsafetyrequirementsspecifictomachin­
eryforliftingpersons.Thistime,theCommissionhas
revisedanumberofArticlesintheoriginalDirective
inordertotakeaccountofexperienceacquiredsince
itspublicationin1989.
1.1.1.ThedraftDirectivehasbeendraftedonthe
basisofahighlevelofsafetyandinsuchawayasnot
tolowerexistingsafetylevelsintheMemberStates,as
requiredbyArticle100A(3)oftheTreaty.1.2.1.Itwouldhavebeenpreferablefortheforth­
comingamendmentofDirective89/655/EECbasedon
Article118Atohavebeenpresentedatthesametime
astheproposalunderconsideration here,soasto
establishaclearerlinkbetweentextsrelatingtodesign
anduse.ThefutureDirectivetobedrawnupbythe
1.2.This'newapproach'draftDirectiveisbasedon
Article100AoftheTreaty.Itspurposeistoharmonize
(1)OJNoL183,29.6.1989.
(2)OJNoL198,22.7.1991. (3)OJNoL393,30.12.1989.

31.8.92 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC223/61
2.1.3.1.1.Responsibility forthecompulsorypro­
visionofinstructionsinthelanguageofthecountryof
usemayfalltothedistributor—themanufacturerof
theapparatusisnotinfactnecessarilyawareofthe
finaldestinationofhisproduct.
2.1.3.1.2.Whereemployeesoperatingtheapparatus
donotunderstandthelanguageofthecountryinwhich
theyareworking,theymusthaveattheirdisposal
instructionstranslatedintotheirlanguage.
2.1.3.1.3.Itwouldbeadvisableforthemaintenance
instructionstospecifythatmaintenanceconditionsare
determinedbythemanufacturer .Hemayforbidthe
userfromcarryingoutcertainmaintenancetasksifhe
considerstheuserunqualifiedtodoso.
2.1.3.2.Moreover,themanufacturer isnotobliged
toprovidetechnicalinformationnotspecificallycon­
nectedwithsafety,andwhichwouldenablepartstobe
counterfeited (orthemachinetobecopiedcontraryto
industrialpropertylaw).Sparepartsmustmeetthe
samesafetyandqualityrequirementsastheoriginal
parts,whoeverthesuppliermaybe.Themanufacturer
mustbeabletospecifyintheinstructionsthatheisnot
liableforsparepartspurchasedelsewherebytheuser.CommissionDGforSocialAffairs(DGV)mustspecify
theperiodicalcheckstobecarriedoutbyusersof
apparatusforliftingpersons.
2.SpecificComments
2.1.Commentsonamendments totheDirectivenot
concerningtheliftingofpersons
2.1.1.Theprohibition onMemberStates
fromprohibiting theplacingon
themarketofmachinery which
complieswiththeprovisions
[Article 1(2)]
2.1.1.1.Article4oftheDirectiveonmachinerypla­
cedablanketprohibitiononMemberStates,preventing
themfromimpedingtheplacingonthemarketof
equipmentcomplyingwiththeprovisionsoftheDirec­
tive.
2.1.1.2.Theamendmentestablishesthatthefree
movementgrantedbythemachineryDirectiveshould
notprecludecompliancewithotherregulations .Mem­
berStatesmaythereforeprohibitmachineryforreasons
basedon,forexample,environmental ortownplanning
regulations .
2.1.1.3.Itisunderstandable thatotherdirectives
shoulddealwithaspectsnotcoveredbythemachinery
Directive,butitisdangerousforothertexts,atthe
sametime,togovernaspectsalreadycoveredbythe
Directive.Asingletechnicalfactor,suchasnoise,
shouldonlybesubjecttooneregulatoryrequirement ,
takingaccountofallaspects:worksafetyand
consumer/environmental protection .Forexample,itis
toberegrettedthatDGXIshouldcurrentlybedrawing
upaproposaltoamendthe1986Directiveonthenoise
emissionofconstructionplantandequipment,tobring
itintolinewithtechnicalprogress,whileanessential
safetyrequirementhasinthemeantimebeendevised
underthemachineryDirective.
2.1.2.Amendment ofthetechnicalpart
oftheDirectiveonmachinery
[Article 1(3)(a),1(3)(b),1(3)
(d)and1(3)(e)]
2.1.2.1.TheCommissionrightlyamendsandcom­
pletesthemachineryDirectiveontwoimportant
points:operationoftheemergencystopcontrol,and
preventionoftheriskofbeingtrapped.Machinery
operatedbyotherthanhumaneffortandmachinery
forworkundergroundaresubjecttotwotechnical
specifications .
2.1.3.Instructions anddeclaration of
conformity [Article 1(3)(c)and2.2.Commentsonequipmentforliftingpersons
2.2.1.Scope
2.2.1.1.Liftsandcable-powered formsoftransport
(cablewaysetc.)aretobecoveredbyseparateDirec­
tives,inviewofthescaleandspecificnatureofthe
risksinvolved.TheCommitteenotesthatthepresent
proposalwillnotapplytoliftingapparatususedby
wayofexceptionfortheliftingofpersons.
2.2.2.Essentialsafetyrequirements
(AnnexI)
2.2.2.1.AnnexImakesnodistinctionbetweenequip­
mentwherethecontrolpositionmayberaised,equip­
mentwheretheworkpositionmayberaised,and
equipmentprovidingaccesstotheworkposition.
2.2.2.2.Consequently anumberofdifficultiesof
interpretation—evensomecasesoftechnicalimpossi­
bility,dependingonthetypeofequipmentinvolved—
arise.
2.2.3.Proceduresfortheplacingonthe
marketofequipmentforlifting
persons (AnnexII)
2.2.3.1.AnnexIIestablishesthatmachineryforlift­
ingpersonsinvolvingariskoffallingmorethan14
2.1.3.1.Manufacturers sellingapparatusdirectlyto
usersmustalwaysprovideinstructionsinthelanguage
ofthecountryofuse.Provisionofinstructionsinany
otherlanguageisamatterofcontractualagreement
betweenthesupplierandtheuser.

NoC223/62 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 31.8.92
5metresshallbesubjecttotype-examination before
beingplacedonthemarket.
2.2.3.2.Insofarastheprincipalsafetycomponents
—speed-limiting andfall-prevention devices—aresub­
jecttotype-examination atthedesignstage,type-exam­
inationfortheentireliftingapparatusbecomesredun­
dant.Itshouldberememberedthatthedraftamend­
menttotheDirectiveontheuseofworkequipment
requirestheusertocarryouttechnicaltestsbefore
usingtheequipment .
2.2.3.3.Type-examination ofequipmentforthelift­
ingofpersonsshouldapplyonlytothosepartsinvolved
inthisfunction.Otherpartsshouldbecertifiedby
themanufacturerhimselfor,whereappropriate ,under
specificprocedureslaiddowninotherdirectives (eg.
pressurevessels).2.2.3.4.TheCommitteeconsidersthatonsafety
groundstheheightof5mspecifiedinAnnexIIis
unacceptablyhigh.Inmanyoperatingareasreliable
accidentinvestigationandpreventionshowsthat1,5m
canbeasuitableheight.Thatheightof1,5mhowever
cannotapplyinallsectorscoveredbythisDirective,
especiallyinrelationtotype-examination ,andthe
Committeerecommends furtherconsideration ofthe
drafting.
2.2.3.5.Moreover,certainhigh-levelliftingequip­
ment(warehouseoverheadcarriers)aredeliveredin
partsandassembledonsite.Type-examination ofsuch
apparatus,oftenmanufactured onaone-offbasis,is
difficult.
2.3.Inordertoavoidthemanyreferencestoother
legislationinthedraftDirective,theCommission
shouldissueaconsolidatedDirectiveencompassing all
subsequentamendments .
DoneatBrussels,26May1992.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
MichaelGEUENICH
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)amendingRegulation (EEC)No
594/91of4March1991inordertospeedupthephasing-outofsubstancesthatdepletethe
ozonelayer
(92/C223/19)
On7April1992,theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle130SoftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity ,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheEconomicandSocialCommitteedecidedtoappointMrProumensasRapporteur-
GeneralforitsOpinion.
Atits297thPlenarySession(meetingof27May1992),theEconomicandSocialCommittee
adoptedthefollowingOpinionunanimously .
TheCommitteeendorsesthedraftRegulation,subject
tocertaincomments,andcongratulates theCom­
missionontheinclusionofthenewprovisionspriorto
theUNmeetinginCopenhagenattheendof1992
whichistorevisethe1989MontrealProtocol(UN
EnvironmentProgramme).1.Introduction
1.1.ThedraftRegulationamendsRegulation (EEC)
No594/91of4March1991whichitselfderivesfromthe
MontrealProtocolonSubstancesthatdepletetheOzone
Layer.
1.2.Thesubstancescoveredarechlorofluorocarbons
(CFC)11,12,113,114and115,otherfullyhalogenated