TABLE OF CONTENTS

1........... Introduction.................................................................................................................... 4

2........... Overview of the activities of the EGF in 2012.................................................................. 4

3........... Follow-up to the 2011 Annual Report on the activities of the EGF................................... 5

4........... Analysis of the Activities of the EGF in 2012................................................................... 5

4.1........ Applications received...................................................................................................... 5

4.1.1..... Applications received by sector....................................................................................... 6

4.1.2..... Applications received by amount requested..................................................................... 6

4.1.3..... Applications received by number of workers targeted for assistance................................. 6

4.1.4..... Applications received by amount requested per worker................................................... 7

4.1.5..... Applications received by intervention criterion................................................................. 7

4.2........ Contributions granted...................................................................................................... 7

4.2.1..... Actions funded with EGF assistance.............................................................................. 10

4.2.2..... Complementarity with actions funded by the Structural Funds, notably the European Social Fund (ESF) 10

4.3........ Cases not meeting the conditions for a financial contribution from the EGF..................... 11

4.4........ Results achieved by the EGF......................................................................................... 11

4.4.1..... Summary of the results and good practices reported in 2012.......................................... 11

4.4.2..... Details of the measures implemented, as communicated in the Final Reports received in 2012 12

4.5........ Programming period 2014-2020 – Commission proposal for a new EGF Regulation...... 17

4.6........ Financial report............................................................................................................. 17

4.6.1..... Funds contributed by the EGF...................................................................................... 17

4.6.2..... Technical assistance expenditure................................................................................... 17

4.6.3..... Irregularities reported or closed..................................................................................... 18

4.6.4..... Winding-up of financial contributions from the EGF....................................................... 18

4.6.5..... Other reimbursements................................................................................................... 21

4.7........ Technical assistance activities undertaken by the Commission......................................... 21

4.7.1..... Information and publicity............................................................................................... 21

4.7.2..... Meetings with the national authorities and EGF stakeholders.......................................... 21

4.7.3..... Creation of a knowledge base – EGF database and standardised procedures for EGF applications 21

4.7.4..... Second EGF Statistical Portrait 2007-2011.................................................................. 22

4.7.5..... Mid-term evaluation of the EGF.................................................................................... 22

4.7.6..... Ex-post evaluation of the EGF – First phase.................................................................. 22

5........... Trends.......................................................................................................................... 23

6........... Conclusion................................................................................................................... 28

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

on the activities of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in 2012

1. Introduction

The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) was set up by Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006[1] to show solidarity with, and provide support to, workers made redundant as a consequence of major structural changes in world trade patterns. It was designed as a means of reconciling the overall long-term benefits of open trade in terms of growth and employment with the short-term adverse effects which globalisation may have, particularly on the employment of the most vulnerable and lowest-skilled workers. The EGF co-finances active labour market policy measures organised by the Member States to help the redundant workers re-position themselves on the labour market and find new jobs.

The rules were amended by Regulation (EC) No 546/2009 of 18 June 2009[2] to respond more effectively to the global financial and economic crisis.

Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 requires the Commission to send to the European Parliament and to the Council each year a quantitative and qualitative report on the activities of the EGF in the previous year. The report should focus mainly on the results achieved by the EGF and should, in particular, contain information relating to applications submitted, decisions adopted and actions funded, including their complementarity with actions funded by the Structural Funds, in particular the European Social Fund (ESF), and the winding-up of financial contributions made. It should also document requests that were refused owing to a lack of sufficient appropriations or to non-eligibility.

2. Overview of the activities of the EGF in 2012

In 2012, the Commission received 11 applications for contributions, requesting EUR 58.5 million from the EGF. Details of the applications are given in section 4.1 and in Table 1.

The Budgetary Authority took 19 decisions to mobilise the EGF in 2012, amounting to a total of EUR 73.5 million from the EGF's 2012 budget. Details of the contributions granted are set out in section 4.2 and in Tables 2 and 3.

The Commission received 41 final reports in 2012 on the implementation of EGF contributions. Details of the results are given in section 4.4 and in Table 4.

Eleven EGF contributions granted in previous years were wound up (details in section 4.6.4 and Table 6). Details of technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission (Article 8(1) of the EGF Regulation) are given in section 4.6.2 and in Table 5.

The Commission set up the first phase of the ex-post evaluation, signing a contract with an external service provider (more details are given in section 4.7.6).

The Commission proposal for a future EGF Regulation for 2014-2020, which was submitted to the European Parliament and the Council in 2011[3], was discussed in both institutions (more details are given in section 4.5).

3. Follow-up to the 2011 Annual Report on the activities of the EGF

Regulation (EC) No 546/2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 establishing the EGF

Regulation (EC) No 546/2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 establishing the EGF was applicable to EGF applications submitted from 1 May 2009 onwards. It laid down temporary and permanent modifications to the original EGF Regulation[4].

The amending Regulation brought about significant improvements to the EGF, providing better conditions for Member States to apply for EGF co-funding, particularly in support of their responses to the negative impact on employment of the global financial and economic crisis.

Since no political agreement on the extension of the temporary ‘crisis derogation’ was reached in the Council in 2011, it lapsed from 31 December 2011. For the remaining period of the EGF Regulation, i.e. up to 31 December 2013, applications for EGF support can no longer be justified on the grounds of the financial and economic crisis, but only on grounds of structural changes in world trade patterns, and the co-funding rate has been reduced to the original 50 % of total eligible costs. The permanent modifications, i.e. the reduction of the threshold from 1 000 to 500 redundancies and the extension of the implementation period from 12 to 24 months from the date of application, continue to apply up to 31 December 2013.

Facilitating decision-making on EGF applications: procedure for submitting proposals to the Council and the European Parliament

The efforts that had begun in 2010 to speed up decision-making within the rules of the present Regulation were pursued in 2012. A specific seminar for Member State representatives took place in March 2012 in order to address various issues related to the efficient implementation of the Fund.

4. Analysis of the Activities of the EGF in 2012

4.1. Applications received

The 11 applications[5] received by the Commission in 2012 (see Table 1) were submitted by nine Member States (Ireland, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Italy, Belgium and Romania), targeted 10 403 workers made redundant as a result of structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation and requested a total of EUR 58 499 659 from the EGF. Amounts not yet approved are indicative as they may still change during the assessment phase. All nine Member States had previously applied for EGF funding.

Regulation (EC) No 546/2009, adopted on 18 June 2009, applies to all these applications (i.e. 50 % co-funding rate, 24-month implementation period from the date of application, etc.).

Table 1 — Applications received in 2012

4.1.1. Applications received by sector

The 11 applications related to six sectors[6]. For two sectors (activities of call centres and consumer electronics), an EGF application was presented for the first time in 2012.

4.1.2. Applications received by amount requested

Every Member State applying for EGF support must design a coordinated package of measures that best fits the targeted workers’ profiles, and decide on the amount of assistance to request. The EGF Regulation does not recommend or limit the total amount requested, but the Commission’s assessment of an application may raise issues prompting the Member State to revise the proposed package of personalised services, thereby affecting the amount requested.

The EGF contributions requested in 2012 ranged from EUR 2 620 982 to EUR 12 536 454 (average EUR 5 318 151).

4.1.3. Applications received by number of workers targeted for assistance

The total number of workers targeted by the measures proposed for co-financing by the EGF was 10 403, which is around 74 % of the total number of workers made redundant (around 14 000 redundancies were declared by the nine Member States in the eleven applications submitted).

The numbers ranged from 295 to 2 103 targeted workers, with five applications targeting more than 1 000 and two applications targeting fewer than 500 workers. The number of workers affected by a redundancy event and the number targeted for EGF support can differ, because the applicant Member State may decide to focus the EGF assistance only on specific groups of workers, such as those facing exceptional difficulties in staying in the labour market and/or those most in need of assistance. Some of the affected workers may receive assistance outside the EGF, while others may find new jobs on their own or may decide to take early retirement, which means that they would not be targeted for EGF measures.

4.1.4. Applications received by amount requested per worker

The package of individualised services that Member States may propose for the redundant workers concerned is at their discretion, within the terms of the Regulation. The amount requested per worker affected can therefore vary according to the severity of the redundancy event, the situation of the labour market affected, the individual circumstances of the workers targeted, the measures already provided by the Member State, and the cost of providing the services in the Member State or region concerned. This explains why the amounts proposed per worker in 2012 varied from about EUR 2 500 to slightly above EUR 42 000, with an average of EUR 8 668 per worker.

4.1.5. Applications received by intervention criterion

All eleven applications submitted were intended to support workers made redundant on grounds of major structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation.

Ten applications were based on Article 2(a) of the EGF Regulation, and one application was based on Article 2(ce) (exceptional circumstances).

4.2. Contributions granted

In 2012, the Budgetary Authority took 19 decisions to draw down EGF funding for active labour market policy measures in response to Member State applications (see Tables 2 and 3 for an overview and a breakdown of the workers’ profiles). Five of these concerned applications made in 2012, while 13 concerned applications received in 2011 and one was in response to an application received in 2010. Regulation (EC) No 546/2009, adopted on 18 June 2009, applies to 14 of the 19 contributions granted (i.e. 65 % co-funding rate, 24-month implementation period from the date of application, etc.). For the five applications submitted in 2012, the co-funding rate is 50 %, while the implementation period remains at 24 months (permanent change of amending Regulation (EC) No 546/2009).

The 19 contributions granted targeted 15 700 redundant workers in eleven Member States with a total of EUR 73 536 222 paid from the EGF (14.7 % of the annual maximum amount available to the EGF). Seven out of the 19 EGF contributions were approved in December 2012 and paid out in the first quarter of 2013 (from the 2012 budget).

The decrease in terms of EGF funding compared to 2011 (in 2011, EUR 128 167 758 were granted for 22 contributions) is to some extent explained by the reduced EGF co-financing rate (50 % instead of the previous 65%) and by the reduction in new applications after the 'crisis derogation' lapsed at the end of 2011.

Table 2 — Details of contributions granted in 2012

Table 3 — EGF contributions granted in 2012: Profile of workers

4.2.1. Actions funded with EGF assistance

Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 provides that the EGF can co-finance only active labour market measures aiming to help redundant workers back into employment. In addition, it states that the EGF may finance a Member State’s preparatory, management, information, publicity and control activities for use of the funding (‘implementing activities’).

The measures approved for the 19 EGF contributions granted in 2012 aimed to reintegrate 15 700 redundant workers into the labour market. They consisted mainly of intensive, personalised job search assistance and case management, a variety of vocational training, upskilling and retraining measures, various temporary financial incentives / allowances for the duration of the active support measures up to the period of actual work reintegration, some mentoring during the initial phase in the new job and other types of activities such as entrepreneurship promotion/business creation, and one-off employment / hiring incentives.

When designing their support packages, Member States took into account the backgrounds, experiences and educational levels of the workers, their ability to be mobile and current or expected job opportunities in the regions concerned.

4.2.2. Complementarity with actions funded by the Structural Funds, notably the European Social Fund (ESF)

The EGF is designed to increase employability and ensure the rapid reintegration of redundant workers into employment through active labour market measures, thus complementing the ESF, which is the major EU instrument for promoting employment. Generally, the complementarity of the two Funds lies in their ability to address these issues from two different time perspectives: while the EGF provides tailor-made assistance to redundant workers in response to a specific, large-scale mass redundancy event, the ESF supports strategic, long-term goals (e.g. increasing human capital, managing change) through pre-programmed multi-annual programmes, the resources of which cannot normally be reallocated to deal with crisis situations caused by mass redundancies. EGF and ESF measures are sometimes used to complement each other to provide both short-term and longer-term solutions. The decisive criterion is the potential of the available instruments to effectively help workers, and it is up to Member States to select — and to programme — the instruments and actions best suited to achieving the objectives pursued.

The content of the ‘coordinated package of personalised services’ to be co-funded by the EGF should be balanced with other actions and complement them. The measures co-funded by the EGF can go well beyond standard courses and actions, and practice has shown that the EGF allows Member States to offer redundant workers better tailor-made and more in-depth assistance than would be possible without the EGF, including measures to which they would not normally have access (e.g. second or third-level education). The EGF allows Member States to focus more particularly on vulnerable people, such as the lower-skilled or those with a migrant background, and to provide support with a better counsellor-worker ratio and/or over a longer period of time than would be possible without the EGF. All this increases the workers’ prospects of improving their situation.

All Member States must put in place the necessary mechanisms to avoid any risk of double funding from EU financial instruments, as required by Article 6(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006.

4.3. Cases not meeting the conditions for a financial contribution from the EGF

Neither the Commission nor the Budgetary Authority rejected any application submitted by the Member States for funding from the EGF.

4.4. Results achieved by the EGF

The main sources of information on the results achieved by the EGF are the final reports presented by the Member States under Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006. These are supplemented by information shared by Member States in direct contacts with the Commission and during meetings and conferences during the year.

In 2012, the Commission had received final reports for 41 EGF co-funded cases, implemented by twelve Member State up to the middle of 2012. All 41 cases had an extended 24-month implementation period from the date of application (after the increase from 12 to 24 months resulting from the 2009 amendment of the EGF Regulation), and all benefited from 65 % co-financing from the EGF (after the temporary increase from the previous 50 %).

The main results and data reported by these Member States in 2012 are summarised in this section and in Table 4. These 41 cases will also be analysed in the ex-post evaluation of the EGF, the objective of which is to measure the EGF’s added value and its impact on dismissed workers and labour markets (29 cases are being analysed in the first phase of the evaluation, and the remaining 12 will be covered in the final phase - see section 4.7.6).

In total, the Commission had received final reports for 60 EGF cases up to 31 December 2012, representing 57 % of the total number of applications received up to 31 December 2012 (105)[7].

Based on the information contained in the Member States' final reports, it can be concluded that the EGF adds value to what the Member States could otherwise do in order to help redundant workers find new jobs and to reposition themselves on the labour market. It allows them to provide measures to a larger number of redundant workers, for a longer duration and of better quality than would be possible without EGF funding.

4.4.1. Summary of the results and good practices reported in 2012

The final reports presented by the twelve Member States showed that at the end of the EGF implementation period, 14 333 workers (50 % of the 28 662 workers who benefited from the EGF assistance) had found new jobs or were self-employed. This is a good result, particularly as the workers supported by EGF co-funded measures are usually among those with the greater difficulties in the labour market. Approximately 3.7 % were still in education or training and 44.7 % were unemployed or inactive for personal reasons[8] . Table 4 shows the details.

Similarly to 2011 and 2010, the results in terms of reintegration into work were influenced by the reduced absorption capacities of local and regional labour markets as a direct consequence of the global crisis. It should also be noted that the reintegration rate recorded at the end of the respective implementation periods merely provides a snapshot of the workers’ employment situation at the moment the data are collected. It does not give any information on the type of employment and the quality of the work that has been found, and can change significantly in a short space of time. According to information received from several Member States, the reintegration rates tend to rise even just a few months after submission of the final reports and increase further in the medium term, especially in cases where workers continue to receive the tailor-made assistance beyond the EGF period, at the Member States’ own expense or with the help of the ESF. This shows that the EGF co-funded support can have an additional positive impact in the longer run.

4.4.2. Details of the measures implemented, as communicated in the Final Reports received in 2012

The support packages which the twelve Member States provided to the dismissed workers included a wide range of personalised job search, outplacement and (re)qualification measures. The highest amounts were spent on two categories of measures: training and retraining (about EUR 56.5 million, or 32% of the total personalised services for all 41 cases) and financial allowances paid to the workers while they were pursuing the active labour market policy measures (about EUR 68.5 million, or 38.8% of the total personalised services for all 41 cases).

The qualification and training programmes were tailor-made to the needs and wishes of the workers while taking into account the requirements of the local or regional labour markets and the potential of promising sectors in the future. In some Member States and cases (e.g. in Austria and Ireland), the focus on higher (tertiary) qualifications was important, while the cases from other Member States were concerned with upskilling the workers' technical profiles. Sometimes (e.g. in Denmark) the EGF was used as a testing ground for innovative measures not yet available to all redundant workers, which after the EGF experience could be more generally used in the future. In most cases, workers could obtain the certification of existing skills or experiences, thus increasing their value for future employers.

The measures also included actions to promote entrepreneurship and business start-ups (included in most of the support packages), as well as financial allowances to cover transport costs, expenses related to the training, and subsistence costs while the workers participated in the active labour market measures organised for them.

The twelve Member States reported a series of interesting facts and encouraging information indicating that the personal situation, self-confidence and employability of the workers concerned had visibly improved thanks to the EGF assistance and services, even though not all of them had found new work quickly.

The EGF enabled the Member States to act more intensively in the areas affected by redundancies, in terms of the number of people assisted and the scope, duration and quality of support than would have been possible without EGF funding. The EU funds enabled them to respond more flexibly and to include in their packages highly personalised, sometimes innovative, actions of a high quality and thus to devote more care to specific population groups, such as the lower-skilled and harder-to-help jobseekers (people aged 50+, people with migrant backgrounds, people with handicaps, people with only basic education and skills, etc. Particularly efficient were job fairs involving the redundant workers and also actions where the implementing agencies contacted local businesses in order to identify with them vacancies not yet published so that the supported workers could be trained to match their skills with the needs of the vacant posts. The organisation of internships was another activity potentially leading to job offers for the EGF workers.

In some Member States, the EGF assistance had an impact on entire industrial sectors, for instance the printing/graphics sector in the Netherlands became more conscious of the needs of older workers when these were made redundant. In Spain, the contacts with the local enterprises resulted in a better understanding of the labour market as regards workers' profiles sought after and the types and conditions of current work contracts. The twelve Member States also carried out information and awareness-raising activities, targeted at the workers concerned as well as potential employers, other stakeholders and the informed general public. These included articles in the local and social media, promotional leaflets and videos, internet websites, and final conferences to mark the end of the EGF co-funded projects.

The EGF was felt by the Member States authorities to be a useful instrument to help them tackle the current labour market challenges, at a time of budget constraints. EGF co-funded assistance therefore represents an enhanced investment in skills, which can have a positive impact also in the medium and longer term when markets gradually recover from the crisis.

The twelve Member States also drew a number of lessons which should prove useful for the preparation and implementation of future EGF cases. The EGF allows Member States to make an early start in helping the redundant workers: as soon as the announcement of the forthcoming dismissals has been made, measures may begin. The Netherlands, Austria, Germany, and the Czech Republic reported about their positive experiences with an early start. Reviewing and rebudgeting the measures in the course of implementation helps achieve a better composition of measures for the workers and a better budget consumption. Denmark recommends using the advice of a lawyer on procurement procedures as the time available for these is limited and legal certainty very important. The Netherlands recommended early communication with the affected workers about the proposed measures as a key element for keeping them motivated and interested in job and career opportunities.

Table 4 — Final reports received in 2012 — overview of results

4.5. Programming period 2014-2020 – Commission proposal for a new EGF Regulation

In accordance with Article 20 of the EGF Regulation, the Regulation must be reviewed by 31 December 2013, which coincides with the end of the Multi-Annual Financial Framework for 2007 to 2013. Based on the proposal from the Commission, the European Council supported on 7/8 February 2013 the continuation of the EGF during the next Multi-Annual Financial Framework, from 2014 to 2020, as a way to provide specific, one-off support to workers made redundant as a result of major structural changes due to globalisation. The details of the future Regulation will be known once the Council and the European Parliament have approved it.

4.6. Financial report

4.6.1. Funds contributed by the EGF

During 2012, the Budgetary Authority granted 19 contributions from the EGF, for a total of EUR 73 536 222, representing 14.7 % of the annual maximum amount available (see Table 2). All 19 payments came from the 2012 budget, the final seven being paid out at the beginning of 2013.

Under Article 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006[9], which lays down the budgetary framework of the EGF, the EGF may not exceed an annual maximum amount of EUR 500 million, which can be drawn from any margin existing under the global expenditure ceiling of the previous year, and/or from cancelled commitment appropriations from the previous two years, excluding those under heading 1B of the financial framework. In addition, Article 12 of the EGF Regulation states that at least 25 % of the annual maximum amount must remain available on 1 September of each year in order to cover any needs arising by the end of the year.

The commitment appropriations for the funds granted in 2012 were transferred from the EGF reserve to the EGF budget line. An amount of EUR 50 000 000 was credited to the EGF budget line at the start of the year. A further amount of EUR 17 657 535 was added by means of an amending budget. During the global transfer, EUR 5 878 687 was identified and transferred to the EGF.

4.6.2. Technical assistance expenditure

Under Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, up to 0.35 % of the financial resources available for the year (EUR 1.75 million) can be used in the form of technical assistance on the initiative of the Commission for activities such as preparation, monitoring, information and creation of a knowledge base, administrative and technical support, and audit, control and evaluation activities necessary to implement the EGF Regulation. On 4 July 2012, an amount of EUR 730 000 was approved by the Budgetary Authority for technical assistance[10] regarding the activities listed in Table 5. The remaining EUR 1 020 000 potentially available for technical assistance during the year were not called upon.

The Commission's initial proposal[11] for EUR 1 120 000 was cut back to EUR 730 000 by the Budgetary Authority, with almost all items affected by the reduction. When implementing the technical assistance, the Commission decided to give priority to the meetings with the Member State representatives, so as to ensure the effective implementation of the Fund, and to start the ex-post evaluation of the Fund as planned.

Table 5 — Technical assistance expenditure 2012

Description || Budgeted amount EUR *) || Actual amount EUR

Information (e.g. updating the EGF website in all EU languages, publications, audio-visual activities) || 130 000 || No expenditure (website updated by Commission services)

Administrative and technical support : - Meetings of the Expert Group of Contact Persons of the EGF - Seminar on the implementation of the EGF || 35 000 125 000 || 70 000 181 900

Monitoring data collection and EGF Statistical Portrait) || 20 000 || No expenditure (work carried out by Commission services)

Creation of a knowledge base (standardised procedures for EGF applications) and their processing; creation and rationalisation of EGF database containing the facts and figures of EGF cases) || 70 000 || No expenditure (database work carried out by Commission services) (standardised procedures postponed to 2013 budget)

Evaluation || 350 000 || 476 203 **)

Total || 730 000 || 728 103

*) Amounts following the Decision by the Budgetary Authority of 4.7.2012

**) EUR 344 810 for the 1st phase of the ex-post evaluation (Article 17(1)(b) of the EGF Regulation) & EUR 131 393 for the final payment of the mid-term evaluation (Article 17(1)(a) of the EGF Regulation).

4.6.3. Irregularities reported or closed

There were no irregularities reported to the Commission under the EGF Regulation in 2012.

There were no irregularities closed in 2012 under the EGF Regulation.

4.6.4. Winding-up of financial contributions from the EGF

Article 15(2) of the EGF Regulation lays down the procedures for winding up EGF financial contributions. In 2012, eleven cases (shown in table 6) were wound up; these had been implemented in the years up to 2012 (24-month implementation period from the date of application; 65 % co-financing from the EGF).

The budget implementation rate varied between 1.9 % and over 100 %. The total amount of unspent funds reimbursed to the Commission for these eleven cases was about EUR 18.1 million (37.8 % of the EGF contributions to these cases).

There are various reasons why Member States did not use the full amounts granted. While Member States are encouraged to make realistic budget estimates for the coordinated package of personalised services, there can be a lack of accurate and informed planning. A too high safety margin may have been included in the initial calculations which at the end turned out to be unnecessary. The number of workers wishing to participate in the proposed measures may have been overestimated in the planning phase, some workers may have opted for cheaper measures rather than more expensive ones or for short-term measures rather than long-term ones, or they may have found new jobs sooner than initially estimated. Other reasons for the low spending may have been delays in starting up the measures and failure to use the flexibility of re-allocating amounts of funding between different budget items while implementing the package of personalised services.

The Commission has been helping the Member States by means of regular information and specific seminars to encourage optimal fund management. This has meant that the initially high recovery rate of over 60 % for the first cases has been reduced significantly (37.8 %) but still needs to be improved.

The budgeting of the measures and the forecasting of worker participation over the extended 24-month period are expected to improve with experience. The timing of the arrival of the EGF funding in the locality, the capacities of the various coordination and implementation structures and the quality of communication between the national and the regional/local levels are also being improved. Member States are making better use of the possibility to review their budgets and reallocate expenditure between the various measures and/or implementing expenditure. Finally, the EU institutions also are making major efforts to speed up the procedures for decision-making and the payment of EGF funds, so that the time and funds provided can be used optimally. A specific seminar was organised by the Commission for Member States’ representatives in March 2012 to address various issues related to the timing and efficiency of Fund implementation.

Table 6 — Cases wound up in 2012

4.6.5. Other reimbursements

There were no other reimbursements made in 2012.

4.7. Technical assistance activities undertaken by the Commission

4.7.1. Information and publicity

Internet site

Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 provides that the Commission must ‘set up an internet site, available in all Community languages, to provide information on the EGF, guidance on the submission of applications, as well as updated information on accepted and refused applications, highlighting the role of the Budgetary Authority’.

In line with the requirements of Article 9, the Commission's EGF internet site[12] was updated with relevant information in 2012. The website recorded 253 462 page views, consulted by 32 030 unique visitors (total number of visits: 44 630) in 2012.

4.7.2. Meetings with the national authorities and EGF stakeholders

The ninth and tenth meetings of the Expert Group of Contact Persons of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, who are the EGF representatives in the Member States, were held on 21 March 2012 and 16 October 2012 respectively, in Brussels. Part of each meeting was devoted to discussing the review of the current EGF Regulation, the Commission’s proposal for its continuation during the 2014 to 2020 period, and the matters arising for future implementation, together with informing members about the preparations for the ex-post evaluation of the EGF 2007-2013 and a range of other agenda items.

On 22 March 2012, a Networking Seminar was held in Brussels to discuss the timelines in the implementation of the EGF and to share best practices aimed at speeding up the implementation of measures for maximum effectiveness and optimal expenditure.

On 17 October 2012, a Networking Seminar was held in Brussels to discuss several issues related to the implementation of the EGF, including the effects of the crisis by sector and the success of business creation measures in EGF implementation.

4.7.3. Creation of a knowledge base – EGF database and standardised procedures for EGF applications

In order to record the quantitative data of EGF cases for statistical purposes, the Commission services in 2012 improved the EGF database and produced several forms to facilitate the input of case data into the database. The development of a new electronic application form is scheduled for 2013/2014, taking into account the preparatory work carried out by external experts in 2011 (financed from the 2011 Technical Assistance budget; final report submitted in April 2012).

The new application form will standardise application and assessment procedures and should therefore reduce the time it takes from the moment an application is prepared by a Member State until adoption of the Proposal submitted by the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. In combination with the database, it will also facilitate the work of the Commission to analyse, aggregate and compare facts and figures of EGF cases.

Other information activities planned for 2012

In its proposal for 2012 technical assistance, the Commission had planned to produce a video and some information folders on the activities of the EGF. Because of the budget cuts made by the Budgetary Authority in July 2012, these actions could not be carried out.

4.7.4. Second EGF Statistical Portrait 2007-2011

In the first half of 2012, the Commission published the EGF’s second Statistical Portrait (2007-2011), which had been produced by external experts under the 2011 technical assistance budget.

4.7.5. Mid-term evaluation of the EGF

The results of the mid-term evaluation of the EGF, which was carried out in 2011 in accordance with Article 17(1)(a) of the EGF Regulation, were presented to the EGF stakeholders in Brussels on 2 February 2012[13]. This was an opportunity to discuss the main outcomes of the initial phase of the EGF (2007-2009) and the evaluators' recommendations which had meanwhile either been implemented, or were included in the proposal for a new EGF Regulation (2014 - 2020).

4.7.6. Ex-post evaluation of the EGF – First phase

The 33 cases to be evaluated in the first phase of the ex-post Evaluation (Article 17(1)(b) of the EGF Regulation) are those listed below. These cases were selected on the grounds that the final implementation reports had been received by the Commission by 20 September 2012. A further batch of EGF cases will be analysed during the final phase of the ex-post Evaluation (cases for which final reports will have been received by the end of December 2013[14]).

5. Trends

With the increasing number of EGF cases, more data are available to identify trends in applications and to gain an overview of the direction of the Fund’s activities. The data contained in the graphs below and in the Annexes relate to the 110 applications submitted by Member States from January 2007 up to 12 August 2013[15]. Some EUR 471.2 million were requested (and some EUR 416.3 million have already been paid) in order to help 100 022 workers (number of targeted workers estimated by the Member States).

Graph 1: Number of applications received, 2007-2013 (up to 12 August 2013)

The 2009 amendment of the EGF Regulation, with its temporary and permanent modifications, has had a considerable impact on the number of applications received by the European Commission, showing a significant increase in applications from May 2009 (when the amended EGF Regulation became applicable) to the end of 2011. Over the whole period of January 2007 to August 2013, there have been 65 crisis-related applications and 45 trade-related applications (not taking into account cases withdrawn by Member States). 82 % of the applications received between May 2009 and the end of 2011 were related to the global financial and economic crisis.

As shown in Annex 2, Spain is the Member State which has submitted the highest number of applications for EGF funding (18 applications), followed by the Netherlands (16 applications), Italy (12 applications) and Denmark (10 applications). Eight Member States had not yet applied for EGF support by 12 August 2013: Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, Slovakia, the United Kingdom, and Croatia (which only joined the EU on 1 July 2013).

Graph 2: EGF amounts requested per Member State, 2007-2013 (up to 12 August 2013)

EUR million

Over the whole period of January 2007 to August 2013, a total amount of EUR 471.2 million was requested from the EGF by 20 Member States (see also overview table in Annex 2). Denmark requested the highest amount of co-funding from the EGF (EUR 63.7 million/10 applications) followed by Ireland (EUR 63.3 million/7 applications), Italy (EUR 60.6 million/12 applications) and Spain (EUR 57.1/18 applications). Amounts not yet approved are indicative, as they may still change during the assessment phase.

Graph 3: Number of targeted workers per Member State, 2007-2013 (up to 12 August 2013)

Spain is the Member State that has requested EGF assistance for the greatest number of redundant workers (13 396 for 18 applications), followed by Italy (12 759 for 12 applications), Germany (11 349 for 7 applications) and Ireland (10 267 for 7 applications). In 12 other countries, the numbers range from just over 8 000 in the Netherlands to just under 1 800 in Poland. In each of the remaining four Member States which submitted applications, the number of workers involved was less than 1 000.

Graph 4: Number of applications by sector (NACE Rev. 2), 2007-2013 (up to 12 August 2013)

Over the whole period of January 2007 to August 2013, the EGF received applications concerned workers made redundant in a total of 35 sectors of activity (see also overview in Annex 1). The majority of these involved manufacturing industries, but also included construction and services. Four manufacturing sectors were responsible for the largest number of applications: the automotive industry (19 applications or 17 % of the total), followed by the machinery and equipment sector (12 applications or 11 % of the total), textiles (10 applications or 9 % of the total) and the printing industry (9 applications or 8 % of the total).

Around 8 % (9 applications) came for workers in the construction industry broadly defined, covering the construction of buildings, specialised construction activities and architectural and engineering activities (this would rise to 13 applications or around 12 % if ancillary sectors such as building materials, carpentry/joinery and ceramics were also included). For more than half of the sectors (20 out of 35 sectors), the EGF received one single application.

Graph 5: Number of targeted workers per sector (NACE Rev. 2), 2007-2013 (up to 12 August 2013)

The 20 Member States in their 110 applications targeted a total of 100 022 workers made redundant. The sectors concerned are first and foremost the automotive sector, with almost 24 000 workers targeted (23.8 % of the total in the submitted applications), followed by textiles (more than 11 000 targeted workers or 11.2 % of the total in the submitted applications), mobile phones (slightly above 10 000 targeted workers or 10 % of the total in the submitted applications) and the machinery & equipment sector (more than 9 000 targeted workers or 9.1 % of the total in the submitted applications).

Graph 6: Average EGF amount requested per targeted worker by Member State, 2007-2013 (up to 12 August 2013)

EUR Average

Graph 6 illustrates the average EGF support per targeted worker (EUR 4 711 for the total of 100 022 workers targeted by 20 Member states). EGF support per targeted worker was largest in Austria and Denmark at around EUR 14 000 and EUR 10 000, respectively. By contrast, in Lithuania, Slovenia and the Czech Republic, the support requested was less than EUR 1 000 per worker.

6. Conclusion

The trends evident so far show that EGF applications have been presented for workers in a growing number of sectors. Member States have gained experience in selecting the most suitable measures, programming their assistance to redundant workers in an efficient manner, and making use of the EGF to test new approaches. They are also increasingly using the possibility to re-allocate funds between measures during project implementation in order to make best use of the available contribution.

The fact that the EGF’s temporary ‘crisis derogation’ could not be extended beyond the end of 2011 (failure to achieve a qualified majority in Council) has limited the possibilities for EU assistance to workers, even though many are still seriously affected by the crisis.

From 2012 until the end of the current EGF Regulation (end of 2013), the permanent changes in the amended Regulation (threshold reduced to 500 redundancies, implementation period increased to 24 months from the date of application) will continue to apply, and Member States can continue to support workers made redundant as a consequence of major structural changes in world trade patterns. If the full potential of the EGF is utilised, in complementarity with other available instruments and in consultation with the major stakeholders, workers who are eligible for EGF support can be helped in a tailor-made and personalised manner, thereby improving their opportunities in the labour market in the medium and longer term as markets gradually recover from the crisis.

[1] Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of 20 December 2006 on establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1, as corrected by OJ L 48, 22.2.2008, p. 82, for all languages and OJ L 202, 31.7.2008, p. 74, for the English language only.

[2] Regulation (EC) No 546/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 on establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (OJ L 167, 29.6.2009).

[3] COM(2011) 608 final, 6.10.2011.

[4] The temporary derogation of the EGF Regulation allowing applications on the grounds of the global financial and economic crisis and increasing the EGF co-financing rate from 50 % to 65% was applicable from 1 May 2009 to 30 December 2011.

[5] One case, EGF/2012/009 BE/Carsid, was subsequently withdrawn and reintroduced on 2 April 2013.

[6] Automotive (3), machinery and equipment (3), basic metals (2), mobile phones (1), consumer electronics (1), activities of call centres (1).

[7] Not counting the final report for one case which was subsequently withdrawn by the applicant Member State: EGF 2007/002 FR Renault.

[8] NEET: not in education, employment, or training.

[9] OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

[10] OJ L 192, 20.7.2012, p. 11.

[11] COM(2012) 160 of 4.4.2012.

[12] http://ec.europa.eu/egf - available in all 23 EU languages, including Irish

[13] The report of the mid-term evaluation is available on the EGF website (http://ec.europa.eu/egf).

See also chapter 4.7.5 of the 2011 EGF Annual Report.

[14] The report on the first phase of the ex-post Evaluation is due by 31 December 2013, and that on the final phase by 31 December 2014 (Article 17(1b) of the EGF Regulation).

[15] When taking into account the 10 cases withdrawn by the applicant Member States, this figure rises to 120. Withdrawn cases are not considered in the statistics.

Annex 1 — EGF applications by classification of economic activities up to 12 August 2013

Annex 2 — Overview of EGF applications up to 12 August 2013 by Member State and Application Type (Article 1 criteria)