EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 4.3.2021 SWD(2021) 46 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan







{COM(2021) 102 final}



Contents 1. Introduction 2. Report on the consultation I. The consultation process Have your Say web page Dedicated events Inter-institutional process II. Main findings from the consultation On the European Pillar of Social Rights and its Action Plan in general A shared political commitment and responsibility Towards an Action Plan for a fair recovery and just transitions The need for a strategic approach Ensuring consistency with other policies Setting targets On policy priorities and concrete proposals Education, training and skills Equal opportunities Quality jobs, fair working conditions and social dialogue Social protection, health and long-term care

Poverty and social inclusion Fair labour mobility On instruments and cross-cutting engagement for implementation Type of instruments Implementation, enforcement and awareness of EU social/employment law The role of the European Semester, monitoring and indicators EU funding 3. Ongoing actions to implement the European Pillar of Social Rights I. Equal opportunities and access to the labour market Principle 1: Education, training and life-long learning Principle 2: Gender equality Principle 3: Equal opportunities Principle 4: Active support to employment II. Fair working conditions Principle 5: Secure and adaptable employment Principle 6: Wages Principle 7: Information about employment conditions and protection in case of dismissals Principle 8: Social dialogue and involvement of workers Principle 9: Work-life balance Principle 10: Healthy, safe and well-adapted work environment and data protection

III. Social protection and inclusion Principle 11: Childcare and support to children Principle 12: Social protection Principle 13: Unemployment benefits Principle 14: Minimum income Principle 15: Old age income and pensions Principle 16: Access to healthcare Principle 17: Inclusion of people with disabilities Principle 18: Long-term care Principle 19: Housing and assistance for the homeless Principle 20: Essential services 4. Monitoring the implementation of the Pillar I. Targets Employment rate Adult participation in learning in the last 12 months At-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion rate (AROPE) II. The Social Scoreboard III. Benchmarking





1.Introduction This staff working document complements the Communication on the Action Plan to implement the European Pillar of Social Rights by additional information. It provides a summary of the broad consultation process carried out from 14 January to 30 November 2020 (section 2). It then provides information on action taken to implement the Pillar since its proclamation by the European Parliament, Council and Commission in November 2017 at EU level, and with examples of national, regional and local action, including by social partners and relevant stakeholders (in section 3). Finally, it gives background information on actions proposed to monitor progress in implementing the Action Plan, notably the targets for 2030 and the revised Social Scoreboard as set out in the Action Plan, and ongoing benchmarking exercises run by the Commission with the Employment Committee and the Social Protection Committee. 2.Report on the consultation I. The consultation process In its Communication on a Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions of 14 January 2020 the Commission committed to come forward in early 2021 with an Action Plan to turn the rights and principles enshrined in the European Pillar of Social Rights into reality. Given the shared responsibility and competence for implementing the Pillar, the Commission invited all EU institutions and bodies, Member States, regions, municipalities, social partners, civil society organisations and think tanks at EU, national, regional and local level to present their views by November 2020 on further action needed and to pledge their own concrete commitments to implementing the Pillar. The Commission collected written input via a web page and organised dedicated consultation events in the Member States and with key stakeholders at EU level. The consultation was complemented by the strategic resolution of the European Parliament and the opinions of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the Committee of the Regions (CoR). In addition, the Commission ran a social media campaign and a Google ads campaign in October and November 2020 to drive submissions and pledges on the implementation of the Pillar and on its forthcoming Action Plan. The ads, covering all EU Member States, featured statistical data from Member States with a call to action entitled ‘You can change the statistic’. Overall, both campaigns generated over 202 million impressions and almost 1.8 million clicks on the campaign webpage. Have your Say web page Via a dedicated web page, stakeholders and citizens were invited to submit written contributions (without pre-set questions). The Commission received 1 041 unique written contributions. 67.5% of submissions came from individual citizens. Some concrete proposals of citizens are reflected in this report. Many citizens took the opportunity to describe their personal situation, notably persons with disabilities, people experiencing poverty and women with care responsibilities. 338 organisations (32.5% of total submissions) participated in the online consultation. Especially civil society groups (38.4% of organisations) and social partners (19% of organisations) took the opportunity to express their views. The majority of the participating organisations operate at EU level (41.7%) or national level (43.2%) and the rest at regional or local level. In addition, the Commission received several pledges to take concrete actions to implement the Pillar, including from individual citizens, cities associated with the Eurocities network, the European Workplace Innovation Network (EUWIN) and the European Lean Managers Society (and its Italian affiliate). Some of these are reflected in Chapter 3 of this Staff Working Document. Contributions: Country of Origin (N=1041)

Distribution of contributions from citizens and organisations (N=1041) Type of contributing Organisation (n=339) Policy Level of Contributing Organisations (n=339) Dedicated events Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the engagement process, which originally envisaged physical meetings at public events in various Member States, had to be adjusted. Virtual events became the standard practice. The Commission organised 23 high-level webinars in EU Member States, in cooperation with Commission Representations in these countries. The webinars were targeted at leading representatives of national, regional and local authorities, social partners, civil society organisations and think-tanks/academia. From the Commission side, these events involved Commissioner Schmit and senior staff from the Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. On 8 June 2020, the Commission organised a high-level hearing of EU social partners with Executive Vice-President Dombrovskis and Commissioner Schmit. Existing regular meetings with EU social partners allowed for further exchanges. This concerns notably the Tripartite Social Summit (TSS), the Social Dialogue Committee (with EU and national cross-industry social partners), the Liaison Forum (with EU cross-industry and sectoral social partners) and the Sectoral Social Dialogue Committees. On 21 October 2020, the Commission held a dedicated strategic dialogue meeting with representatives of EU civil society organisations. An exchange with relevant EU agencies took place on 15 October 2020. Inter-institutional process In its resolution of 17 December 2020, the European Parliament “[c]onsiders that the Porto agenda should take a double approach, i.e. it should focus on the social sustainability part of the EU’s Sustainable Development 2030 Agenda, while at the same time paving the way for the materialisation of the [Pillar] principles through adopting an Action Plan as well as serving as a follow-up to the Lisbon strategy, setting ambitious and mandatory targets and instruments defining the road to social progress and sustainability; believes that this agenda could contain the strategic framework for a sustainable, fair and inclusive social Europe for 2030”. In addition, on 22 October 2020, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on employment and social policies of the euro area 2020. In that document, it calls on the Commission to “develop a political strategy to replace Europe 2020 which aims to eradicate poverty, bringing together key instruments such as the European Green Deal, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the European Semester with a longer-term vision of an economy of well-being and the sustainability of our environment and social models, in line with the UN SDGs [Sustainable Development Goals]”. Parliament also stressed the importance of implementing the European Pillar of Social Rights and achieving the UN SDGs, including in the context of NextGenerationEU, in order to ensure social fairness, social cohesion and prosperity for all. The Commission raised the preparations for the Action Plan in several preparatory bodies of the Council in the social and employment field throughout 2020. The Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO) of 3 December 2020 discussed the main conclusions of the consultation. 21 Member States submitted written contributions to the consultation, while most governments were heard as part of the dedicated webinars in the Member States.

Moreover, the Council conclusions on the 2020 Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy and Joint Employment Report, adopted in April 2020, called on the Commission to “develop, as a matter of priority a post-2020 strategy that includes clear and ambitious employment and social targets, based on the European Pillar of Social Rights and on the results of the Europe 2020 strategy, taking into account the 2019 joint EMCO-SPC assessment, and to involve EMCO and SPC in its development”. The Council conclusions of 23 November 2020 on the “2021 European Semester: employment and social aspects of the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021” highlighted “that the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights should be implemented with due regard for respective competences and that Member States should make use of the significant EU funding available for the relevant reforms and investment, thereby mitigating the socio-economic impact of the crisis, accelerating the recovery and enhancing resilience”, while “taking note of the European Commission’s intention to propose an Action Plan on the European Pillar of Social Rights in early 2021.” At the request of the European Parliament, the EESC adopted an opinion on 2 December 2020. It states that “[t]he EESC welcomes the action plan announced to implement the [Pillar]. The relevant EU labour law acquis should be reinforced to better support a just transition for workers. The action plan should set a minimum floor of rights at EU level, including: the right to health and safety covering all workers and new types of work; information, consultation, co-determination and participation rights not limited to transition situations; skills development rights; minimum standards for unemployment insurance; minimum wage; and collective bargaining”. The CoR adopted an opinion on a Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions on 12 October 2020, stressing “the importance of a clear, coordinated and ambitious roadmap for implementing the European Pillar of Social Rights”. II. Main findings from the consultation On the European Pillar of Social Rights and its Action Plan in general A shared political commitment and responsibility There is a strong consensus among most contributors to the consultation on the importance of harnessing the EU’s social dimension. The values of the social market economy, embedded in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, are what sets Europe apart in the world. The European social model has shown its unique value in cushioning the harsh economic and social impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. This model is embodied by the 20 principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights. There is a broadly shared view that the joint political commitment to the Pillar, rooted in an interinstitutional proclamation, also entails a shared responsibility for its implementation. Many Member States and organisations recall the European Council’s Strategic Agenda 2019-2024, which calls for implementation of the Pillar “at EU and Member State level, with due regard for respective competences”. The topic is also one of the priorities of the Portuguese EU Council Presidency of the first half of 2021, which will organise in May 2021 a European Social Summit in Porto. The European Parliament recalls that “initiatives originating from the European Pillar of Social Rights are a shared responsibility between the EU and the Member States”. It also calls for Treaty reforms, in particular “the integration of the Pillar and a social progress protocol in the Treaties, protecting social rights at the same level as economic freedoms in the single market and the adoption of a Sustainable Development and Social Progress Pact making social and sustainable targets mandatory, in order to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals” and for an activation of the Treaty’s passerelle clause in social policy. While to a different extent across Member States, many powers relevant to the implementation of the Pillar are held by regional and local authorities. As spelled out by the CoR “a fair transition means recognising the key role of the local and regional level in delivering high-quality public services”. Eurocities has provided a substantial overview of key actions and pledges by its member cities to implement the Pillar and calls for a new pact between leaders of the EU and cities. Social partners and civil society organisations also hold important levers for the implementation of the principles of the Pillar. Both employers and trade unions stress the key role played by strong and autonomous social partners in designing employment and social policies, and hence in contributing to the implementation of the Pillar and of social rights, even if employer confederations insist on the non-binding nature of the Pillar. Multiple civil society organisations cite action taken by their members to implement the principles of the Pillar on the ground, notably by providing essential social support services to people. Towards an Action Plan for a fair recovery and just transitions Most contributors support the Commission’s intention to come forward with an Action Plan to implement the Pillar. Two key objectives for the Action Plan transpire from the consultation. First, it must anchor the Pillar at the heart of the EU’s recovery strategy, supported in particular by REACT-EU and the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). All over Europe, the pandemic has emphasised the vital importance of resilient social and health care systems and efficient public services. Secondly, the Action Plan must enable people and the workforce to successfully navigate the twin green and digital transformation of societies and labour markets. The COVID-19 pandemic has only accelerated existing trends. In this perspective, everyone must be able to seize the new opportunities and enjoy appropriate protection against new risks. Trade unions stress that the Action Plan must lead to an enforceable minimum floor of rights for all types of workers. Civil society organisations call for a rights-based approach, which empowers citizens, gives them access to adequate income and quality services and holds governments to account. In contrast, most employers express caution on the Commission’s intention to come forward with an EU-level Action Plan. They are mostly of the opinion that the EU-level coordination of national reforms must be strengthened to improve the functioning of labour markets and to make sure Member States deliver on the reforms they already promised to take.



The need for a strategic approach EU institutions and bodies, several Member States, trade unions and civil society organisations call for a strategic orientation of the Action Plan. It should provide a successor to the Europe 2020 Strategy and set out the road towards the social sustainability objectives of the 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs). In particular, the European Parliament calls for a Porto Agenda, arguing that the “EU Social Summit planned for May 2021 in Porto would be the perfect opportunity for adoption of this agenda at the highest political level by the leaders of the 27 Member States and of the European Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission.” The Action Plan should be consistent with the objectives of the European Green Deal and the Commission’s Communication on Shaping Europe’s digital future, as key components of the Commission’s growth strategy. With regard to cushioning the social impact of the shift to climate-neutrality, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) recalls that delaying action on climate change would hit people in situations of vulnerability hardest. The EESC calls for a new social contract while the ACT 4 SOCIAL EU coalition and the German Trade Union Confederation (DGB) propose a ‘Social Deal’ based on EU-wide social minimum standards, with the Pillar as a compass for economic policy coordination. The European Parliament, anti-poverty organisations and some trade unions call for the Action Plan to contain an overarching strategy to eradicate poverty by 2030. To remedy the COVID-19 pandemic’s already observed and foreseeable continued negative impact on inequalities, some Member States and stakeholders cite the increased urgency of living up to the basic premises of the Pillar, notably promoting social cohesion and convergence and responding to the new opportunities and challenges of our quickly developing societies and labour markets. Several contributions illustrate the acceleration of pre-existing trends, for instance on the digitalisation of work, and warn about the risk of new divides and of widening inequalities between groups of citizens within Member States and between different Member States and regions. Employer organisations stress the importance of economic competitiveness as a basis for social progress. In their view, the Action Plan should stimulate structural reforms and not hamper the ability of companies, in particular SMEs, to create jobs and hire people. Some wish to see a structural competitiveness check before the Commission adopts any proposal for EU legislation. Some Member States recall that social convergence is essential to combat social dumping. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the European Network of Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI) and Amnesty International highlight Member States’ obligations under international human rights law and recommend linking the Action Plan with the revised European Social Charter, the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Commission’s New Strategy for the Implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. The French organisations French General Confederation of Labour – Workers’ Force (FO) and ATD Fourth World (ATD) call on the EU to ratify the revised European Social Charter. Ensuring consistency with other policies Most contributions focus on the role of employment and social policies in implementing the Pillar. Many also argue that such policies can only be successful if there is consistency with wider economic, budgetary and fiscal policies. Eurocities calls on the Commission to perform a social impact assessment of all planned EU policies, especially in relation to its recovery strategy. They also stress the need to reinforce the social dimension of the Green Deal, including through action for affordable housing and against energy poverty under the Renovation Wave. The ENNHRI, Amnesty International and EuroMed Rights call for systematic human rights impact assessments on all proposals by the EU and its Member States. For the ENNHRI, national human rights institutions should have a consultative role in EU policy-making. With regard to the planned update of the new Industrial Strategy, the EESC calls on the Commission to strengthen its social dimension, while the Federation of German Employers' Associations in the Metal and Electrical Engineering Industries (M+E) calls for the introduction of a European moratorium on further burdens on employers. Several citizens echo the demand of the EESC and of trade unions to ensure fair corporate taxation, in particular of large multinational tech corporations. This demand encompasses a financial transaction tax, which would ensure that stock market investors pay their fair share to finance social protection systems. The Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour calls for progress on establishing an EU-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base. The EESC welcomes the creation of the Platform on Sustainable Finance and anticipates an acceleration in social taxonomy development. Some contributors call for the revision of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP). Trade unions propose to develop benchmarks for government expenditure within the SGP to ensure necessary funding for universal, affordable and high-quality public services. The DGB suggests to add an investment protocol to the Treaty or at least to further develop the existing investment clause. The Social Platform argues that there are at least four areas of public social expenditure which are productive and should be considered for exemption from the corrective and preventive arm of the SGP: 1) early childhood education and care, 2) primary and secondary education, 3) lifelong learning, training and active labour market policies, and 4) services that support autonomy, independence ands affordable quality social housing. The Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (GI-ESCR) advocates for keeping essential services, including health care, education, food, water, sanitation, transportation and energy outside of any market-based competition framework, including by stopping the use of public-private partnerships. A few contributions point to the need to mainstream the Pillar in the EU’s external action, enlargement negotiations and the European Neighbourhood Policy. The Austrian Federal State of Vienna notably calls for action against human trafficking. The Euclid Network mentions the potential of promoting the social enterprise model as a global standard. The CoR is convinced of the EU’s capacity to positively affect working conditions in non-EU countries, by concluding ambitious trade agreements. In that context, it supports tasking the new Chief Trade Enforcement Officer (CTEO) with enforcing labour and environmental standards in trade agreements, in consultation with social partners. Swedish trade unions demand that the ratification and compliance with the core Conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO) should be a precondition for negotiations on trade agreements with the EU. Dispute settlement mechanisms must not restrict the right of states to take decisions, the autonomy of the social partners or trade union rights. The German Federal Association of Non-statutory Welfare (BAGFW) cautions that future EU free trade agreements should exclude social and health services, in order to warrant access to essential services. Autism-Europe asks the Commission to promote the ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Setting targets The European Parliament, the Council (in particular its Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs configuration), social partners and civil society organisations advocate setting a number of employment and social targets as part of a strategic post-2020 framework to strengthen cohesion and convergence and to meet the UN SDGs. The European Parliament highlights that “an ambitious political agenda with identifiable, feasible, sustainable, clear and mandatory targets and indicators of social sustainability must be designed.” These targets and objectives, both qualitative and quantitative, and with a 2030 time horizon, should be reinforced through dedicated monitoring and mandatory enforceability and include the following: ·collective bargaining coverage of 90%;

·reduce long-term and youth unemployment by at least 50%; ·eliminate involuntary temporary and part-time employment; ·eliminate the practices of zero-hour contracts and bogus self-employment; ·80% of jobs created being middle or high paying and concentrated in sustainable sectors; ·eliminate work-related deaths and reducing work-related illnesses; ·at least 80% of corporations covered by sustainable corporate governance agreements; ·a ratio of at least one labour inspector per 10 000 employed persons; ·every child in the EU must have full access to quality and free healthcare, education and childcare, is living in a decent house and receives an adequate nutrition; ·eliminate the gender pay gap - and pension gap - with a 0% target; ·eeach at least 40% representation of women in senior management positions; ·at least 30% of all newly built houses must constitute affordable housing for low and middle income groups; ·eradicate homelessness; ·eliminate energy poverty. According to the Social Platform “the Action Plan must define ambitious and concrete targets and timelines for the realisation of each of the 20 principles”. Together with civil society organisations active in the fight against poverty, it calls for a 50% poverty-reduction target (including child poverty) and a commitment to ending extreme poverty and homelessness by 2030. Social partners call for a revaluing of the Barcelona targets on childcare, notably by a gradual increase of the 33% target on enrolment of children under the age of 3 to 50%. The European Platform for Rehabilitation asks for sub-targets to be added, including targets on employment and poverty of persons with disabilities. For several organisations, the Action Plan should set a quantified target on the accessibility and quality of long-term care services, in particular home-care and community-based services. Belgian employers support a cross-cutting employment rate target of 80%. The European Youth Forum asks that Member States should invest at least 6% of their GDP in education and asks for a headline target of 50% reduction in the NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training) rate among people aged 15-29. It also proposes a headline target of a 50% reduction of the proportion of workers on temporary contracts, with a corresponding sub-target for the age group 15-29. The European Women’s Lobby (EWL) asks targets for men’s take-up of paternity, parental and care leave. While the Council supports the setting of employment and social targets at EU level, some Member States stress the very different social performance of Member States and the need to make sure that the EU framework is compatible with the different national contexts and starting points. Sweden argues for complementing EU targets with tailored national commitments. Some civil society organisations point out that better performing Member States should have more ambitious targets. On policy priorities and concrete proposals The contributions received cover a vast array of topics. A number of core policy priorities can be identified, which the Action Plan should address in the context of the recovery and the green, digital and demographic transitions. Specific policy ideas and proposals are listed under each of these core policy priorities.

Education, training and skills There is a consensus on the crucial role of skills to enable everyone to benefit from the new opportunities arising from the green and digital economy. Many contributors put a particular emphasis on closing the digital skills gap. Some contributors highlight the role of soft skills, such as flexibility, the ability to work in a team, problem solving and other skills gaps. Others emphasise entrepreneurial skills. Skills should be acquired and kept up to date via access to universal, quality and affordable education, vocational education and training (VET) and lifelong learning. This right should be warranted throughout the career and also be transferable between Member States. Portugal would like to see EU support for national lifelong learning centres and common methodologies for lifelong learning guidance to individuals. While the EESC, ILO, employers and several citizens stress that education and lifelong learning policies should be more geared towards labour market needs, some trade unions, civil society organisations and several citizens argue that the EU should take a broader perspective, targeting those with the lowest level of educational attainment, in adult literacy, and those from low income families or suffering from discrimination. In this regard, the Zurich Insurance Group proposes to systematically include financial education into school curricula. Several stakeholders highlight the indispensable role of EU funds, such as notably the European Social Fund plus (ESF+), the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Erasmus+, the Just Transition Fund (JTF), the Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI) programme and InvestEU in investing in education and training, upskilling and reskilling. Employers call on Member States to fully utilise financial resources, particularly those available through the RRF, to invest in digital skills provision and Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) attainment. The national recovery and resilience plans should identify investments in skills as one of the priorities and be devised and implemented in cooperation with social partners. Specific priorities and proposals were highlighted: ·There is widespread support for the Commission’s European Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience, including the proposed Council Recommendation on vocational education and Training and the Pact for Skills. This also pertains to the Commission’s announced proposals on individual learning accounts and a European approach to micro-credentials. The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) proposes to create a minimum training entitlement per worker per year and to measure companies’ investments in employees’ skills development. Employers and trade unions from Denmark and Sweden express their concern about potential conflicts with already existing and tailor-made continued learning and competence development systems at national level, in particular when enshrined in collective agreements. The European Youth Forum demands paid educational leave policies that allow young workers to attend training during work hours and at no personal cost. ·Italy and EU employer organisations call on the Commission to include in its Action Plan support to Member States to enhance the quality and effectiveness of VET provision, both initial and continuous, by involving employers in the timely updating of curricula and qualifications to better take into account changing labour market needs. In this respect, the Sectoral Councils Alliance of Slovakia encourages the Commission to further support modern skills forecasting techniques and graduate tracking. ·The European Parliament, social partners and civil society organisations agree on the fundamental importance of inclusive access to education and training. Portugal, the Austrian Chamber of Labour and several citizens call for accessible ‘requalification schemes’ offering all citizens the opportunity to re-orient their professional career. The ILO, social partners and civil society organisations recall the importance of basic skills for social inclusion, and ask for targeted strategies for groups in situations of vulnerability, in particular against the background of the green and digital transitions. ·As regards the education of groups in situations of vulnerability and marginalisation, the European Roma Grassroots Organisation (ERGO) and Fundación Secretariado Gitano (FSG) stress i.a. the need for specific support structures to schools, free school meals and equipment and a zero-tolerance policy against school segregation. Romania highlights instruments such as an early warning mechanism for early school leaving, adapting integrated services to better serve disadvantaged children and a renewed focus on teacher education and on school infrastructure and equipment. Autism-Europe calls for common European standards on the qualification of support teachers and assistants and guidelines on the prevention of abuse and bullying. The European Association for the Education of Adults (EAEA) and the European Center for Evidence-Based Mentoring (ECEBM) recall the importance of mentoring relationships and career guidance at an early age for successful long-term education outcomes. ·According to many contributors, particular attention should be paid to the attainment of digital skills, and the infrastructure that would facilitate online and blended learning. Portugal supports a ‘Digital Guarantee’ to ensure inclusion throughout the lifecycle. Like the European Parliament, a few citizens make the link between digitally accessible training pathways and social inclusion. In this regard, Czechia stresses the link with the Commission’s Digital Education Action Plan. Estonia welcomes the particular focus of the proposed RRF on digital skills. It stresses: (1) digital skills in combination with self-directed digital learning pathways; (2) digital focus in lifelong learning; (3) green curricula and learning. The Spanish association DigitalES highlights the need to modernise curricula in order to train specialists in digital occupations: cloud specialists, software developers, data analysts, etc. This cannot go without the promotion of more women in ICT sectors. ·The German DGB recommends to enhance the European Framework for Quality and Effective Apprenticeships by introducing more mandatory minimum standards, such as apprenticeship contracts, the determination of education goals, a remuneration for apprentices in companies and schools, the right to social protection, the right to career counselling and the inclusion of social partners in the design of the apprenticeship system. ·The ETUC, the Social Platform and its members stress the validation of the non-formal acquisition of skills in the workplace and in society, in particular regarding care competences. The European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN) proposes that the Commission should have an EU-wide inventory of existing systems and procedures to validate non-formal education, training and life skills as the basis to elaborate recommendations to EU Member States with non-existing or underdeveloped validation systems. To validate non-formal workplace, the EUWIN proposes a skills passport held by all workers to validate skills learnt on the job. The European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) asks to further develop instruments like the EU Skills Profile Tool for Third Country Nationals and the Council of Europe’s European Qualification Passport for Refugees, in order to simplify the recognition of third-country qualifications. ·Contributors from Portugal see an untapped potential in the mobility of learners. France Stratégie puts forward far-reaching proposals for an enhanced mobility of students and learners: gradually, the validity of every higher education degree should be made conditional upon a six month period in another EU Member State. On top, there should be a European programme for mobility of 15-17 year old students and a European loan scheme for trainings in occupations in high demand. Equal opportunities Many citizens and organisations point out that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected children, young people, women, older people, persons with disabilities, single parents, mobile workers, LGBTIQ people and groups in situations of vulnerability. While existing inequalities are likely to deepen, the ongoing transformation of our labour market and society also bring opportunities to close the gaps, instead of further deepening them. Civil society organisations recall that for equal opportunities to exist for everyone, discrimination on all grounds covered in Article 21 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights (and beyond) and in all fields must be tackled and a new legislative initiative by the Commission is needed. Eurocities, trade unions and civil society organisations at EU level call on the Commission to develop a systematic gender mainstreaming and equality impact assessment and monitoring, to be enshrined in EU policies, monitoring and budgeting relevant to the implementation of the Pillar. Many contributions focus on the crucial role of accessible and affordable quality childcare for closing gender gaps. The ETUC is in favour of new benchmarks for work-life balance, such as childcare facilities and days of work lost due to family care. The European Disability Forum (EDF) and its members welcome the Commission’s commitment to present a new Disability Rights Strategy in 2021. They recall that the obligations arising from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities should be taken on board across all measures implementing the Pillar involving persons with disabilities and their representative organisations. Several citizens with disabilities provide testimonies of their personal situation of social exclusion. Organisations representing Roma confirm the need for a new EU Strategic Framework targeting Roma equality, inclusion and participation, that the Commission has presented in the meantime. They encourage the Commission to engage more directly with Roma and their representative associations, often facing multiple discrimination and weak interaction with public authorities.

The Austrian Chamber of Labour sees the need to address possible systematic discrimination caused by the development and increased use of artificial intelligence based applications in companies’ human resources policies. Specific priorities and proposals were highlighted: ·Some Member States, the Social Platform and its members and some trade unions urge the EU to make progress in the adoption by the Council of the Commission’s proposal for a horizontal Equal Treatment Directive, which provides for equal treatment based on sexual orientation, age, disability and religion or belief in diverse areas. Civil society organisations would welcome a new proposal for a directive to implement the anti-discrimination principle for all citizens in matters of social protection, education and access to public goods and services, in line with relevant Treaty provisions. ·Some Member States and stakeholders explicitly ask the Commission to strengthen gender mainstreaming across policies. The German trade union DGB specifies that this requires concrete goals for the implementation of gender-sensitive regulatory impact assessments and gender budgeting. As discrimination based on sex is often combined with other factors, some civil society stakeholders insist on an intersectional perspective. In relation to this, the EDF advocates for the full mainstreaming of the rights of women and girls in the new European Disability Rights Strategy. Likewise, the Commission’s EU Roma strategic framework, which the Commission presented in the meantime, should take into account that Roma women are subjected to multiple forms of discrimination. Some citizens ask for increased attention for the increasing underperformance of young men in education and employment. The European Youth Forum asks for including age-based discrimination in the mandate of equality bodies under all relevant EU equality legislation. ·Some respondents emphasise the need to combat violence against women. From a legal perspective, civil society organisations and trade unions urge the EU to ratify the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. The EWL and its members also ask for a dedicated EU strategy and directive for its implementation. As part of a comprehensive EU strategy, Social Platform proposes to appoint an EU coordinator on ending violence against women and girls, advocates for an adequate and systematic data collection on gender-based violence (including segregated data per age group) and combating gender stereotyping. The Dutch Section of the International Commission of Jurists (NJCM) suggests legislation allowing the eviction of the violent partner, while the Portuguese Platform for Women’s Rights (PpDM) states that services to protect victims of male violence against women should be considered essential. ·Apart from representative organisations of persons with disabilities, the European Parliament, some Member States regions and stakeholders also explicitly welcome the prospect of a new European Disability Rights Strategy. Social Platform demands the inclusion of a strong gender dimension in the European Disability Rights Strategy, while the ETUC requests to consider the impact of the pandemic on persons with disabilities. The EDF recalls that disability issues should be mainstreamed, including in the Youth Guarantee, the Child Guarantee, the European Gender Equality Strategy and the updated Skills Agenda. The European Network on Independent Living (ENIL) stresses the need to take into account personal assistance expenses in all EU labour law initiatives aimed at promoting fair working conditions. The NJCM proposes to establish a platform for exchange of best practices and to develop more guidance to Member States on the application and implementation of rights of persons with disabilities. Autism-Europe recommends going beyond, by harmonising assessment criteria for disability status recognition at national level. ·EDF, Social Platform and EAPN suggest establishing a Disability Rights Guarantee, to which Member States should commit, to ensure that all persons with disabilities who declare themselves able to and/or wanting to enter the labour market receive a good quality offer of employment, a traineeship, an apprenticeship or VET. The Disability Rights Guarantee (and indeed all other EU initiatives for fostering employment) must be open to persons with disabilities receiving disability allowance. The Belgian association of social profit enterprises Verso calls for mechanisms which oblige companies to hire a quota of persons with disabilities or, alternatively, to outsource certain tasks to organisations employing persons with disabilities. The Finnish Pension Alliance (TELA) calls for more attention to medical and vocational rehabilitation services in order to prolong working lives, in particular of people with partial workability. ·Several contributors stress the opportunities technology provides to involve persons with disabilities and older persons in society, increase independence, and offer solutions for individuals in situations of vulnerability. Some voices recall the need to further improve accessibility in different communication and information channels, in particular with services of general interest. One Romanian citizen calls on authorities to make education material accessible to children with disabilities and has set up a website to distribute accessible school books. ·For several civil society respondents, it is important that the new EU Roma strategic framework, that the Commission has presented in the meantime, is linked to the implementation of the Pillar, but also the European Green Deal and the UN SDGs. Social Platform welcomes the inclusion of the fight against antigypsyism and poverty and the promotion of the participation of Roma in political, social, economic and cultural life as horizontal objectives. However, it regrets the lack of ambition of the commitments set in the area of education, health, housing, the fight against antigypsyism and discrimination and participation. ·Amnesty International argues that the Pillar should apply also to groups such as asylum seekers and undocumented migrants. In this regard, the EWL calls for the EU and its Member States to accede to the UN International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. ECRE calls for a strong link with the Commission’s action plan on integration and inclusion, its scoreboard and the anti-racism action plan. On the latter, the EU should ensure that all Member States develop and adopt national action plans against racism and adopt common principles for their implementation, carrying out a series of measures: 1) proposing potential new legislation to address racism in law enforcement; 2) ensuring that EU policies benefit all and do not contribute to further racial inequalities; 3) improving racial diversity and representation within governments and EU institutions. Quality jobs, fair working conditions and social dialogue Thanks to the unprecedented efforts at all levels to preserve jobs and livelihoods of workers, notably via short-time work schemes, unemployment has only moderately increased in 2020 and is projected to increase further in 2021. In this context, there is a strong consensus on the important role that the European instrument for temporary Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks (SURE) has played and continues to play during the pandemic. The European Parliament asks to examine the introduction of a permanent instrument and notably demands to ensure the compliance of beneficiaries with fundamental values enshrined in the Treaties and a number of social conditions. Some Member States and trade unions explicitly ask for an extension or its replacement by a permanent instrument to accompany workers through transitions. However, the German Confederation of Skilled Crafts (ZDH) insists on the short-term nature of the scheme. SMEunited highlights the benefits of attaching training, upskilling and reskilling measures to short-time work schemes and of their extension to self-employed. Italy adds that continued efforts remain necessary to effectively integrate long-term unemployed into the labour market, in synergy between public employment services and other social services. Employers stress the need to focus on competitiveness, innovation, flexibility and productivity as a means to allow new job creation and social progress. Open, flexible and mobile labour markets are needed to support new and more diverse career paths and smooth transitions between jobs, sectors and employment statuses . The German Employers' Associations BDA and ZDH argue that flexible forms of employment are wrongly vilified as precarious, as they prevent unemployment by making it easier to join or re-join the labour market and often support a better work-life balance of employees. BusinessEurope and SMEunited call for European action to improve reform coordination in the area of active labour market policies. This improved coordination process should involve social partners. There is widespread support for the reinforced Youth Guarantee. The Initiative Diverse Young Leaders underlines that more needs to be done for young people with a migration background, including EU citizens, notably by ensuring equal access to internships (whose allowances are usually not adapted to the cost of life) and providing targeted transition programmes from education to work. Several contributors draw the attention to the job creation potential and the inclusiveness of the social economy and welcome the prospect of a dedicated Commission Action Plan on the Social Economy in 2021. According to the Euclid Network, it should focus on the visibility of social enterprises, access to skilled labour and business support, access to finance, access to (public) markets and the promotion of the model at global level. In the light of the major transformation of the labour market, many contributions ask for a renewed focus on the quality of jobs, starting by fair remuneration. While employers and Nordic trade unions express concerns about the Commission’s proposal for a legal instrument and the respect of the subsidiarity principle, the EESC, most trade unions and civil society organisations welcome the Commission’s proposal for a Directive on adequate minimum wages in the European Union as a means to support upwards convergence of wages and of the quality of social dialogue and collective bargaining in the EU. Some trade unions see scope for further legal provisions, which should i.a. guarantee workers a minimum number of working hours, prevent the use of zero-hour contracts and forbid derogations for categories like interns or workers in sheltered employment. According to civil society organisations, minimum wages should be set at 60% of Member States’ median wage but concurrently adjusted to the actual cost of living including additional payments for access to social services, that may be determined by regular scientific research. The European Parliament asks the Commission to carry out a study on a living wage index, which could serve as a reference tool for social partners. In line with long-standing demands by social partners and the European Parliament, Sweden, Denmark and Belgium call on the European Commission to contribute to a stronger social dialogue at national level, inter alia by capacity building, promoting transparency and the exchange of best practice between Member States and by giving more attention to social dialogue in the European Semester and in the Commission’s impact assessments. Sweden and Denmark also advocate for giving social partners more margin for the implementation of European legislation, or even for the derogation thereof.

As regards social dialogue at company level, the European Parliament, the EESC and trade unions also call for a further development of the EU acquis on worker information, consultation and participation and on European Works Councils. Some Member States, the European Parliament and most trade unions call for EU regulatory action on new forms of work, in particular platform workers, ensuring the same working conditions, including access to collective bargaining, and social protection for workers on open-ended employment contracts and atypical workers. They oppose the creation of a ‘third statute’ between self-employed and workers. The EESC sees the need to define a legal status for labour in the digital platform economy. Employers are against new EU legislation regulating the working conditions of platform workers, whether self-employed or employee, pointing at the protection under existing legal provisions. The European Parliament asks a targeted revision of EU competition law, so as to allow collective price-setting for the precarious self-employed, in order to ensure a better balance in bargaining power and a fairer internal market. As several Member States, the European Parliament and the EESC, they recall the need to update the EU’s legislative framework on Occupational Health and Safety and to address new risks related to the development of Artificial Intelligence in the workplace and the strong emergence of telework. Malta stresses the importance of providing workers with fair and equal treatment regarding working conditions, while providing a legal framework so that they can avail themselves of more innovative forms of work, such as remote work, telework or flexible hours. France calls for a stronger involvement of sectoral social partners at EU level. The European Parliament, Portugal and Italy ask the Commission to propose a regulatory framework on the ‘right to disconnect’. However, in its resolution of 21 January 2021 with recommendations to the Commission on the right to disconnect recalls that the EU social partners’ Framework Agreement on Digitalisation “provides for the social partners to take implementation measures within the next three years and that a legislative proposal before the end of that implementation period would disregard the role of social partners laid down in the TFEU”. BusinessEurope opposes the latter, referring to the EU Social Partners’ framework agreement on digitalisation and its provisions related to use of digital tools at the workplace (work organisation, working conditions), connecting and disconnecting. The European Association of Mutual Benefit Societies (AIM) urges the Commission to propose a stronger regulation of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Churches express their concern about the further devaluation of Sunday as a day of rest caused by digitalisation and propose to re-instate a right to a 24-hour uninterrupted rest period for all employees. Specific priorities and proposals were highlighted: ·A strengthened Youth Guarantee should reach those experiencing multiple vulnerabilities (e.g. youth with disabilities) and provide young people with access to long-term social security and decent working conditions. Moreover, career guidance, mentorship programmes and clear labour market information on employment opportunities and wage levels provide young people with a better basis to choose and find a job and simplify transition periods between education and employment. Several organisations wish to see quality criteria attached to the offers received by young people under the Youth Guarantee instrument. The European Parliament asks to make the Youth Guarantee binding for all Member States. The German Land of Berlin stresses the added value of the European Voluntary Service, in particular when it comes to developing green skills. One citizen proposes to establish a ‘European Climate Workforce’. ·BusinessEurope calls for EU action to support the reform of active labour market policies, through three strands: “1) enhancing efficiency of Public Employment Services, notably by fostering progress towards better use of evidence based employment measures that leads to more employment and digital solutions supporting the operation and coordination of employment services offered to employers, the unemployed/inactive, and workers; 2) Fostering cooperation-oriented partnerships between Public and Private Employment Services, building on their respective strengths; 3) Supporting the development of innovative solutions, on top of short-time work schemes, and of traditional employment services, to strengthen the resilience of labour markets in responding to the challenges and new needs created by Covid-19. The World Employment Confederation (WEC) stresses the underutilised potential of career management services, while civil society organisations call for more tailor-made employment support to groups in situations of vulnerability. The European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC) calls for legislation to ensure cancer survivors’ return to work, including a ‘right to be forgotten’ towards i.a. insurance companies. ·As part of its planned Action Plan on the Social Economy, the Commission should i.a. address the access to financial resources, the lack of a legal framework, the limited capacity to scale-up social entrepreneurship ecosystems, and the business management skills of social entrepreneurs. The European Parliament calls on the Commission to update its framework for the establishment and development of cooperatives and social economy enterprises. Some social economy organisations would welcome a recognition of this business model in EU primary law and ask for a review of state aid rules, in particular regarding exemptions for social economy activities in the social services and care sector. The Portuguese Association of Mutualities consider a European Mutuality Statute as essential to guarantee the expansion of the mutualist model, which promotes inclusion and guarantees social and territorial cohesion. Others wish to see an acknowledgement of the role of the cooperative model as driver of social inclusion. The EESC calls for an inter-sectoral strategy on social innovation. The European Venture Philanthropy Association (EVPA) illustrates the heterogeneous social investment space in Europe and calls on the Commission to intensify non-financial support on capacity building and technical assistance in particular in Central and Eastern European Member States to incubate more social enterprises, as well as to provide financial support to set up more investment funds. ·Some trade unions and the Social Platform call for a common European definition of a ‘worker’, which on the other hand is explicitly opposed by employers and trade unions from Sweden and Denmark. The associated minimum standards should include minimum labour law requirements (written contract, adequate remuneration, safety at work, regulated working hours and entitlement to paid leave) and access to social security (entitlement to unemployment insurance, continued payment of wages in case of sickness and accident insurance) with a special focus on young people’s jobs. In this regard, the ILO refers to its Recommendation No. 198 which provides criteria to determine whether an employment relationship exists in a given situation. ·Several civil society organisations, trade unions and citizens call for work at EU level to improve the quality and the access to internships. The ETUC stresses that employers should be obliged to sign an internship contract at the start of an internship. ·In response to the rise of telework, some trade unions call for a European directive on privacy in the workplace that prohibits control mechanisms for teleworking and platform work (e.g. screenshots and registration of keyboard activity). The European Parliament urges the Commission to take legislative action to also address new risks related to telework, while others specify that this could take part as part of an overhaul of European legislation regarding occupational health and safety. ·The Austrian Chamber of Labour calls for new EU-wide legal minimum standards on protection of workers against involuntary job transfers and on the continuation of pay in cases of illness or care of close relatives. In relation to dismissal protection and the flexibilisation of labour markets, one citizen raises a concern about the significantly weaker entitlements to social protection in case of a voluntary termination of an employment contract. ·To strengthen social dialogue at national level, national and sectoral employers would welcome if the Commission could incentivise the formation of employer organisations at national level and to encourage already existing organisations to become more involved in European sectoral social dialogue structures and the implementation of the Pillar. The ILO also argues that the Commission and Member States should strive for the removal of obstacles to the freedom of association and the right of collective bargaining at national level. Moreover, according to trade unions, collective bargaining at national level would benefit from conditionality attached to the participation in public procurement and the allocation of funds at EU level. The European Parliament asks a revision of these Directives in order to establish a preferential treatment for companies complying with collective agreements. Furthermore, it asks to make all EU financial support to undertakings conditional on their compliance with obligations resulting from the relevant collective agreements. Nordic trade unions see merit in an EU-level Ombudsman to monitor the development of social dialogue at national level. ·As regards company-level social dialogue, the ETUC proposes reinforced rights for workers in case of company restructuring related to technological or environmental transitions. This includes a right to training, and a package of active labour market policies and the right to information and consultation in case more than five workers are affected. In this regard, the European Parliament and the ETUC also ask for a revision of the European Works Councils Directive and for a legislative initiative on information, consultation and participation, including legally-binding minimum standards on workers’ board-level representation for European company forms to be also applied in case of cross-border company mobility in the EU Single Market. The EESC believes that the European Commission should revise the EU Quality Framework for Anticipation of Change and Restructuring and propose a legal basis for specific framework conditions concerning worker participation in view of managing the challenges of the Green Deal and the digital transformation. The European Parliament calls on the Commission to promote employee share ownership. It also “calls for a directive on binding human rights, due diligence and responsible business conduct, including workers’ rights, (…) establishing mandatory due diligence covering companies’ activities and business relationships, including supply and subcontracting chains”. ·Several contributors call for the full implementation of the Work-Life Balance Directive. Further actions proposed by stakeholders mainly focus on the implications of care work and involve (1) financial support, (2) the possibility for flexible working time arrangements, and (3) an adequate social service structure including childcare and long-term care. The NJCM recommends that all fathers, including self-employed, should receive full pay during minimum two weeks of paternity leave. Several citizens ask for equal and non-transferrable parental leave between parents. Work Equal proposes to introduce fully transferrable leaves for men and women, including maternity leave, in the first year after the birth of the baby. In addition, employers should be legally obligated to disclose their policies on maternity, paternity and parental leave, and associated supports. The European Organisation for Rare Diseases (EURORDIS) calls on Member States to link flexible work and leave arrangements under the Work-Life Balance Directive to the obligation of employers to provide reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in the workplace under the Employment Equality Directive. ·One organisation and several citizens call for a reduction in (average) weekly working time by one day, in order to improve work-life balance, combat unemployment and the precariousness of part-time work. ·Many contributors call for a new Strategy on Occupational Health and Safety. The European Parliament and Sweden advocate for a ‘vision zero approach’ with regard to fatal accidents at work. Special attention should be given to psychosocial risks (also in relation with telework), carcinogens and musculoskeletal disorders. The ETUC proposes to develop a uniform standard methodology and a common information system in the EU on reporting occupational accidents, information on insurance systems for occupational accidents and diseases, and sharing of good practices. The French Association interprofessionnelle des Centres Médicaux et Sociaux de Santé au Travail stresses the need to strengthen occupational health and safety components in professional education and training. Some governments and stakeholders argue that mental health issues have become more important. They support prevention programs at all levels of society and the development of an EU mental health strategy. Social protection, health and long-term care Reflecting on the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic, many contributions contain a notable emphasis on strengthening the resilience of health care and long-term care. Social partners and civil society organisations ask for actions to improve working conditions in the care and social sector (through funding, standards, mutual recognition) and to raise the attractiveness of these sectors, in which the majority of workers are women. The European Parliament and EuroHealthNet point out the interconnection of people’s health status, social situation and economic conditions. The implementation of the Pillar provides crucial opportunities to achieve access to quality health care for all. The European Parliament therefore calls on the Commission to develop common indicators and methodologies to monitor health, as well as the performance and accessibility of healthcare systems, with a view to reducing inequalities, identifying and prioritising areas in need of improvement and obtaining increased funding. The European Public Health Alliance (EPHA) calls for a comprehensive action plan to effectively close health and social gaps between groups in situations of vulnerability and the general population. The European Parliament and several organisations call for an EU quality framework for (long-term) care and a legislative initiative to tackle all related challenges related to quality, access, sustainability, workforce development and informal carers.

More broadly and in view of the proliferation of new and atypical forms of employment, access to social protection becomes an increasingly pressing priority, given the already considerable impact on the financial sustainability and the adequacy of social protection. SMEunited calls for continued attention at EU level for the access to social protection for the self-employed. Furthermore, several Member States and stakeholders argue that the Action Plan needs to address the social and economic impact of demographic change on social protection systems, including in particular population ageing, which varies across regions. The Council calls on the Commission to “consider a separate chapter on older persons in the announced 2021 ‘Action Plan on the Implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights’ assessing how measures at EU-level can be designed to achieve and enhance the autonomy of older persons in times of digitalisation and promote the participation of older persons in active life and in shaping society, thus improving the well-being in older age”. Slovakia calls for a mainstreaming of family policy across the Action Plan. In this context, Czechia would welcome more work at EU level around the ‘silver economy’ and stresses the need to adapt the organisation of work to the individual capabilities of older people, for instance regarding targeted lifelong learning and physical adaptations. The Services of General Interest Europe (SGI Europe) and several stakeholders ask the Commission to provide an impetus to the effective provision of services of general (economic) interest, social services and social protection. Eurodiaconia asks for an overarching Communication on Social Services. Social Services Europe (SSE) calls to improve the Voluntary European Quality Framework for Social Services. EWL asks for a Strategy on Social Protection. Specific priorities and proposals were highlighted: ·In the implementation of the Council Recommendation on Access to Social Protection, special attention should be given to coverage and adequacy of social protection benefits, irrespective of the form of employment (unemployed, temporary employed, short-term contracts, independent, self-employed, micro entrepreneurs etc.). European trade unions and civil society organisation state that an impact assessment should be carried out in 4 years’ time to ascertain whether a directive is needed. ·Social protection benefits should be adequate and take into account part-time work throughout the whole or a large part of the working career (in particular of women) or self-employment with very low income for many years. Zurich Insurance Group recalls the recommendations of the High-Level Expert Group on the Impact of the Digital Transformation, with regard to portable benefits attached to the worker or establishing underemployment insurance systems for workers with fluctuating income in the gig economy. France Stratégie proposes the creation of personal activity accounts ensuring the portability of benefits, in the long run also at EU level. ·On top of a permanent European Unemployment Benefit Re-insurance Scheme, Portugal, trade unions, civil society organisations and some citizens are in favour of creating European minimum standards for unemployment insurance, while safeguarding features of national systems. For civil society organisations, people should also have direct access to minimum income support when their right to unemployment benefits have been exhausted. ·The European Parliament, several citizens, trade unions and civil society organisations express concern about the adequacy of pensions and the pension gap between men and women. Some call on the Commission to think about creating EU standards for a ‘minimum pension’ and to ensure pension, life and health insurance portability. Some argue against the automatic linking of pensionable age to life expectancy. There is a need to study the impact of COVID-related financial vulnerabilities on pensions, especially for pensioners with lower pension entitlements . The Social Platform states that baskets of goods and services should be developed at national level to assess whether the pension is adequate to cover the goods and services retired people need. The EU could put together recommendations as part of the Pension Adequacy Report. The European Association of Paritarian Institutions (AEIP) recommends a stronger EU-level non-legislative support for take up of occupational pension schemes. ·The EESC welcomes the Commission’s initiatives towards a ‘European Health Union’. Civil society and trade unions call for a European infrastructure for medicines to improve the European response to health crises, with a nd One citizen proposes to create a standing European medical service in order to respond to shortages of staff in the case of a health emergency in a particular European region. ·The demographic change has increased the pressure on peoples’ right to affordable high-quality long-term care, including home and community-based care. Sweden, Romania and TELA explicitly call for deepening the reflection as part of the follow-up to the Commission Green Paper on Ageing. For TELA, this reflection should notably be linked with labour mobility, migration and family policies. The European Senior Organisation asks for an action programme against ageism. Italy and Portugal stress active ageing policies as a means to foster inclusion and participation of older people. Portugal calls for a European Strategy for longevity and active ageing with an ‘Elderly Guarantee’. For civil society organisations, there should be a tailored people-centred evaluation of care needs, embedded in a preventive approach. The EU should introduce effective monitoring mechanisms of long-term care provision with concrete indicators and targets, which allow for benchmarking. Active and healthy ageing measures should be included in recovery plans addressing the specificities of rural areas. The residential model of social and health care for the older and people with disabilities should be transformed, reinforcing the community-based nature of care. This should include better support to family caregivers. Civil society calls to embrace opportunities to monitor and improve the quality of care through digital solutions, for instance through the development of a regulatory framework on a ‘European health data space’ and the creation of a coordinating body supervising the application of quality standards. ·According to civil society actors the EU should create an adequate framework to guarantee the right to universal, affordable, quality health and social care services for all, guaranteeing non-discriminatory access and covering all essential health and care services and goods (including prevention, primary, community, hospital and specialist care, dental, mental health, social and long-term care, reproductive health care and the cost of medicines). Belgian and French health insurances (mutualities) call for a new directive on social services of general interest, stress the need to invest in health literacy and see the need for an ambitious EU Pharmaceuticals Strategy. Portugal calls for an EU initiative on health literacy. Poverty and social exclusion are major social determinants of health inequalities which leads to long-term social and economic costs. According to the EAPN, a study must be made of the COVID-19 impact on health inequalities and lack of access to health and care services due to poverty. ILGA-Europe stresses the need to reduce stigma and discrimination among healthcare services and providers. In particular in times of crisis, LGBTIQ people should have equal and non-discriminatory access to testing, treatment, and care, including with regard to HIV-related medications, ongoing hormone treatments and other vital care. ·To trigger upward convergence of health care systems the Hungarian Chamber of Doctors argues that the EU should take an initiative on a minimum content of health care in the European Union. The ETUC calls for a ‘EURight2Care programme’, backed by national action plans. EURORDIS stresses that the continuity of health care should be warranted in crisis situations, by investing in the medical workforce and equipment, adopting concrete protocols for the provision of emergency healthcare and facilitating virtual and home-based (health) care. ·For several respondents, there is a lack of adequate care leaves or systems to support informal carers, often women. Women’s rights organisations, the European Association of Service providers for Persons with Disabilities (EASPD) and Eurocarers call for a ‘care deal’ for Europe setting minimum standards and quality guidelines for service provision, workforce development, innovation and integrated care approaches. More specifically, Social Platform and Caritas Europe are in favour of time credits for care work, contributing to the accumulation of pension rights, and of broadening the definition of ‘relative’ in EU law to reflect the diversity of families in Europe. Eurocarers and the EWL also wish to see the introduction of an individualised care leave. MMM advocates for an EU framework on family leave schemes, including the extension of the rights under the Work-Life Balance Directive to parents of children until the age of 18. One citizen brings up legal arrangements in case of short-term care for sick children. ·Some respondents point out that due to poor working conditions and low wages, many health care and long-term care workers have left the sector, leading to understaffing. Especially in rural areas, medical practitioners have left to larger cities or abroad and created ‘medical deserts’. For trade unions and social service providers, carers need to be able to easily obtain official certificates granting them access to fair working conditions and social protection, in order to combat the wide prevalence of undeclared work in the sector. For France, Portugal and many stakeholders, improved policy and funding frameworks for health, social care and support workers are needed at EU level to address workforce shortages, to improve the sectors’ attractiveness for young professionals, training of workforce and working conditions. As part of a legislative package in this regard, the Austrian Chamber of Labour suggests a European directive for health professionals and one for live-in-carers. The CPME emphasises the need to review existing EU legislation on health professionals’ working conditions, including on occupational health and safety. Poverty and social inclusion According to civil society organisations active in the fight against poverty and social exclusion, the Action Plan should bring about a rights-based, person-centred integrated strategy to fight poverty and exclusion, for all groups, through the life course. This multidimensional strategy should link the different individual rights under the Pillar with the overarching goal to end poverty in all its forms (SDG 1), building on the Europe 2020 goal and targets. The strategy should prioritise (1) quality jobs/fair wages, (2) income support and social protection for those who cannot work or access decent jobs and (3) access to quality universal services, guaranteeing the right to affordable, quality housing, universal quality education/training and lifelong learning, child, health and social care, affordable energy/water and transport. Some respondents add that an overarching strategy against poverty should be centered around a European Framework Directive on Minimum Income and should link up with thematic strategies for key target groups: (1) children, with a Child Guarantee, (2) homeless people, supporting a framework for national strategies, (3) older people, people with disabilities, migrants, Roma, LGBTIQ people, and other vulnerable and/or marginalised groups . There is a general concern about the ‘feminisation’ of poverty and social exclusion due to gender-based inequalities. In relation to minimum income, employers indicate that the Council conclusions of 12 October 2020 on “Strengthening Minimum Income Protection in the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond” state that it is for Member States to design and implement national provisions ensuring minimum income protection. They would see a merit in strengthening the ongoing work as part of the European Semester process, including further elaboration of the EU benchmarking framework. Germany supports an EU framework to support and to complement the activities of the Member States in this field. Many contributors and citizens focus on the central role of (social) housing policies in the fight against poverty and the synergies with the EU’s action on the energy efficiency of buildings under the European Green Deal. Several civil society organisations call for a European impetus to end homelessness in the EU.

The challenge of increasing territorial inequalities transpires strongly from the dedicated webinars in many Member States and from several citizens’ contributions. This concerns mainly the increased risk of social exclusion of populations in rural and remote areas, such as the outermost regions. However, Eurocities also points at the specific concentration of inequalities in many cities across Europe. There is a particular inclusion challenge with regard to persons with a migratory background, including EU citizens. Specific priorities and proposals were highlighted: ·The European Parliament, many civil society organisations, trade unions and citizens support the idea of a European framework directive for minimum income, which would guarantee adequate, accessible and enabling minimum income support. Several citizens call for the introduction of an unconditional basic income. According to Eurocities, the lessons learned from recent pilot projects in Finland, Spain and Scotland should be taken into account. On the other hand, employers warn against raising unrealistic expectations on EU action regarding minimum income, also in view of limited EU competences in this field. They stress that measures are mainly needed at national level. ·According to civil society organisations, minimum income benefits should be provided proactively to tackle the high non-take-up and to ensure that the transition to other types of benefits happens without delay. There should be no negative conditionality linked to total (or partial) cuts in adequate minimum income support and benefits could be provided through a system of ‘digital cash’ directly aimed at the lower-income groups. The instrument should be based on common definitions including adequacy linked to at least 60% of the median equivalised disposable income after social transfers (poverty threshold) and underpinned by national reference budgets. Some contributors ask for increased minimum income levels for people with disabilities or chronic diseases, who systematically incur higher health care expenditure. However, the discussion should not be held in solely monetary terms, but also take into account broader social support measures for self-sufficiency. ·The European Parliament, several Member States, regional and local governments and civil society organisations strongly support the Commission’s intention to propose a Child Guarantee. According to the CoR, “the Child Guarantee should ensure children's access to basic services, healthcare, early years education and school until they reach adulthood, and provide them with decent housing and nutrition”. At least 5% of total ESF+ expenditure should be used to help children out of poverty. Most civil society organisations expect the Child Guarantee to be based on the three pillars of the 2013 Commission Recommendation on Investing in Children (access to adequate resources, affordable quality services and children’s right to participate). They ask for multiannual national and subnational strategies including targets, indicators, an earmarked budget and a monitoring mechanism. For Greece, children should be considered as independent holders of social rights, in particular when it comes to affordable and accessible education and care (incl. early childhood education and care), as investments in children are the most effective long-term investments. Estonia and Italy see the need for an integrated approach to children with complex problems and call for a new strategy on the rights of children prioritising ending violence against children and providing safe environment for children. ·For the European Parliament, civil society organisations and several citizens, the availability and affordability of housing should be addressed from a human rights and citizen-centred perspective, instead of solely from a financial point of view. The right to housing should be enforced regardless of residence status, to ensure access to housing for migrants, homeless people and other excluded persons. The Commission’s Renovation Wave, the national recovery and resilience plans and the future EU funds, including the new JTF, should have a strong focus on affordable housing. According to the Association of Dutch Social Housing Corporations (AEDES) and the Swedish Union of Tenants, the Services of General Economic Interest Decision should be revised to include in its scope a much broader range of income groups whose housing needs cannot be met at market conditions. BuildEurope argues however that this might lead to unfair competition in different housing markets in Europe. Several trade unions and civil society organisations call for the EU and Member States to intervene more actively in the private housing market through building permits, rent controls, tax on second properties and support to sustainable housing providers in order to prevent speculation. EU funds should support the growth of new housing provision including local/regional social housing cooperatives owned by people themselves. ·In line with the European Parliament’s call for an EU framework on national homelessness strategies, some civil society organisations ask for the establishment of a European Collaboration Platform on Homelessness. The Platform should monitor homelessness and homelessness policies, support the development of national homelessness strategies, provide mutual learning, transnational exchange, research, challenge the criminalisation of homelessness and mobilise the EU budget, in particular for cities, to end homelessness by 2030. Likewise, France calls for the establishment of a European homelessness observatory and, together with the European Parliament and several civil society organisations, expresses support for promoting the ‘housing first’ approach. ERGO asks for a legal framework on effective protection against unlawful evictions. ·In particular rural areas and remote European regions, such as the outermost regions, have poor access to essential services. Some contributors insist that EU legislation should guarantee the universal free right to internet for families living in situations of vulnerability, poor students and ensure digital inclusion for all. Restos du cœur regrets that access to food has not been included as a principle of the Pillar . Several citizens request free essential services such as housing, transport, health, food, education and internet. Romania explicitly supports the addition of access to the internet as part of the indicators on severe material deprivation, material deprivation and subsequent risk of poverty and social exclusion (AROPE). ·Finance Watch and the Centre d’Appui des Services de Médiation de dettes of the Brussels Capital Region highlight the need to improve access to basic financial services for groups in situations of vulnerability: a payment account, access to cash, a savings account, a safe third pillar pension product, a motor insurance, a health insurance, a home (fire) insurance, and personal liability insurance. Technological progress offers opportunities, but also represents risks in terms of accessibility at reasonable costs of the most common financial and insurance products. Finance Watch calls for the EU to address the legal requirements for selling credit through amending the Consumer Credit Directive. The Confederation of Family Organisations in the European Union (COFACE) asks for EU minimum standards for private insolvency. ·According to anti-poverty organisations, in the context of the fight against energy poverty, the European Green Deal must assert the right to affordable, clean energy for all and there should be binding guidelines for national plans related to climate and energy based on three pillars (adequate income, energy efficiency and fair prices). The phasing out of regulated prices in the energy sector for domestic households should be stopped and social tariffs for customers in situations of vulnerability should be supported. Portugal would like to see an EU programme for support to renewable energy cooperatives. Ireland mentions that the planned revision of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive could further advance the implementation of Pillar principle 20. Fair labour mobility The freedom of movement for workers is widely regarded a one of the key achievements of the European Union. A few citizens indicate that moving from one EU country to another remains too cumbersome in administrative terms. The European Parliament, some Member States and some trade unions explicitly welcome the recent legislative developments at EU level on fair labour mobility. However, they recall that further steps are needed, including the completion of the ongoing revision of the Regulation on the coordination of social security systems. Employer organisations generally argue that global competition, growing digitalisation and new business models require greater labour mobility. Bulgarian employer organisations reiterate their demand to revise the recently adopted Posting of Workers Directive and the Mobility Package for road transport. There is a need to address the negative demographic and economic externalities of brain drain from less developed European regions to other parts of Europe. While some stakeholders focus on the need to spark upward convergence of working conditions for all types of workers within the EU, others notably suggest promoting an easier access of qualified third country nationals to the EU labour market. Specific priorities and proposals were highlighted: ·A number of respondents call for strengthening the mandate of the European Labour Authority (ELA), allowing for a truly cross-border approach to labour inspections. Belgium notably suggests initiatives to regulate the powers of inspectors in other countries, binding rules on the provision of information, electronic charge sheets, and the EU-wide enforceability of sanctions (including fines). The European Parliament calls for considering the inclusion of further EU legislation in the activity scope of ELA as part of its review planned in 2024. ·Germany, alongside a number of national trade unions, stress the importance of a full application of EU law on working conditions of seasonal workers and other cross-border workers in situations of vulnerability, including to address particular shortcomings in the area of occupational health and safety. Some contributors ask the ELA to urgently take forward the provision of comprehensible information to mobile workers, in particular young workers. The European Parliament asks the Commission and Member States to ensure minimum standards for quality housing for cross-border and seasonal workers, decoupled from their remuneration. ·While opposed notably by the WEC, which argues that the Directive still sets an appropriate balance between promoting flexible and adaptable forms of work, and ensuring the protection of temporary agency workers based on equal treatment, the European Parliament calls on the Commission to revise the Temporary Agency Work Directive to ensure decent working conditions and equal treatment for intra-EU seasonal workers and mobile workers on fixed-term contracts with temporary work agencies or any other type of labour market intermediary, including recruiting agencies. This legal framework could include a ban on labour market intermediaries who do not comply with the Directive, a guaranteed minimum wage, a guaranteed minimum number of hours per week/month, no deductions from wages in the case of part-time contracts, guaranteed equal treatment for any person who, in the Member State concerned, is protected as a worker working in the same company/sector, a European registry with a listing and certification requirement for all temporary work agencies operating in the single market, sanctions on companies using fraudulent recruitment practices and trafficking people for labour exploitation, and access to information on employment contracts and labour rights in a language that the worker can understand. ·The European Parliament calls on the Commission and Member States to take legislative measures to end abusive subcontracting, and to ensure general joint and several liability throughout the whole subcontracting chain in order to protect workers’ rights and their claims.

·Some contributions argue that the further digitisation of procedures would greatly support fair labour mobility and call on the Commission to put forward a proposal for a unique European social security number. Denmark encourages the Commission to also explore the merits of a physical ID card for mobile and posted workers on top of the digital infrastructure around a single European social security number. ·As regards third-country nationals, the European Parliament asks the Commission to conduct an extensive investigation into the trends characterising posted third-country nationals with regard to their working conditions, and emphasises the need for possible policy measures at EU or national level based on the outcome of the investigation. It also calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure compliance with applicable laws and rules on employment conditions when dealing with third-country nationals, in order to eliminate abuses. On instruments and cross-cutting engagement for implementation Type of instruments Many contributors call for a use of the different instruments the EU has at its disposal (legislation, policy coordination, funding). They also see a need to better engage the national, regional and local level, social partners and civil society in implementing the Pillar. In line with many other trade unions and civil society organisations, the Central Organisation of Finnish trade unions stresses that the Action Plan should be a legislative programme. Some trade unions moreover express the hope that the Action Plan might trigger a new momentum for bipartite negotiations by cross-industry social partners at EU level . However, some Member States express reservations about the use of legislation at EU level at this point in time. Many Member States stress the combination of the European Semester, the Open Method of Coordination and EU funding instruments as the key channels for the implementation of the Pillar at EU level. Employers are generally opposed to further legislative action at EU level in the field of social policy. Belgian employers add that the level of detail of recent EU legislation does not fit the different starting points of Member States. BusinessEurope and its members see the European Semester as the right tool to implement the Pillar. The Action Plan should be focussed on improving the functioning of the labour market by promoting more resilience, flexibility and hence security. According to the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR), the Pillar should rather constitute a frame of reference based on benchmarks, similar to the UN SDGs. Implementation, enforcement and awareness of EU social/employment law There is a strong agreement among all contributors that the implementation of the Pillar needs to build on a better implementation, enforcement and awareness of existing EU employment and social legislation and policies. While trade unions and civil society mainly highlight the negative impact of implementation and enforcement gaps on the enjoyment of rights, some Member States and employers also note the negative impact on the level playing field in the EU single market. The NJCM sees the need for more preventive and proactive enforcement measures with regards to labour market discrimination, including recommendations on sanctions and policy measures. Several citizens express regret about the low awareness about the Pillar and, more broadly, the EU’s social legislation and policies among Europeans. Some also encourage the Commission to explore innovative ways of awareness raising, in cooperation with the private sector, the audiovisual industry and civil society. Moreover, the EU should continue to improve the transparency of its decision-making. The role of the European Semester, monitoring and indicators Many contributors stress the need to further develop the governance framework of the Pillar, notably by refining the monitoring and strengthening the policy coordination on all 20 principles of the Pillar. There is a strong preference to keep the Pillar strongly anchored at the core of the European Semester and of its country-specific reporting and recommendations. In order to improve monitoring as part of the Semester, the European Parliament, some Member States and many stakeholders call for an update of the Social Scoreboard. The European Parliament refers to economic, social and environmental wellbeing indicators, covering decent work, social justice and equal opportunities, robust social welfare systems and fair mobility, linked with a set of quantitative and qualitative targets. Civil society organisations underline the importance of adding more indicators that must cover all 20 Social Pillar principles and aligning it to new targets. They also see the need to disaggregate data by other characteristics in addition to sex, aiming at measuring the impact of policies on specific marginalised and/or vulnerable groups, such as Roma, persons with disabilities, migrants, LGBTIQ, older people or children. The EESC, ENNHRI and Latvia ask in addition to make sure that progress on the UN SDGs is tracked within the European Semester. The Austrian State of Vienna asks for refining the analysis at sub-regional level via an ‘Urban Scoreboard’. Social housing providers suggest to add housing indicators, such as on affordable rental (and other) housing and on residual income after housing expenditure. The EAPN states that an indicator is needed to measure homelessness, as defined by the ETHOS framework, while ATD asks for additional indicators on extreme poverty, institutional and social abuse. Several organisations ask to develop indicators and statistics on the inclusion of persons with disabilities and to include indicators on access to social services. The ENIL calls for indicators on personal assistance and community-based support. COFACE asks to measure the number of hours spent by children in childcare, on top of enrolment in childcare, while Eurochild suggests i.a. indicators on early childhood development. COFACE also argues in favour of complementary (sub)indicators on work-life balance based on comprehensive data provided by the European Parliament, the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), and Eurofound. AEIP and REIF wish to see indicators on long-term care, (gender gaps in) pensions and the quality of health care. The DGB proposes to include additional indicators related to social dialogue, such as collective agreement coverage rates and the number of companies with co-determination. It also proposes to create a set of new indicators to underpin the development of the European Health Union. Eurocadres suggests a set of sub-indicators on the quality of jobs, among which decent wages, workers on standard employment contracts, access to social protection, lifelong learning opportunities, decent working conditions in safe and healthy workplaces, reasonable working hours with a good work-life balance, and trade union representation and bargaining rights. Swedish employers would support additional indicators measuring conditions for entrepreneurship and the efficiency of public administration. Several contributors from civil society and local authorities argue that a reinforced monitoring framework within the EU’s macro-economic governance set-up should also be the basis to strengthen the accountability of Member States, regions and local authorities to pursue social investments and the implementation of the Pillar. This should involve clear benchmarks and a timetable. National Red Cross Societies propose to establish a monitoring authority to follow closely the implementation of the Pillar and the national recovery plans.

The Croatian institute for Public Finances proposes that the Social Scoreboard should enable the triggering of a ‘social imbalances procedure’ mirroring the existing macro-economic imbalances procedure. In the same vein, some civil society stakeholders call for sanctions in case of insufficient progress by Member States on the implementation of the Pillar. France Stratégie proposes that every Member State should adopt a strategy for upward social convergence of all Social Scoreboard indicators, agreed with the European Commission and the European Parliament. Most Member States see the benefit of an improved monitoring by the Commission, but warn that this should not further burden Member States nor duplicate existing processes. The CEMR warns that there should not be a reporting obligation on regions and municipalities because of the bureaucratic implications. Social partners agree that the implementation of the Pillar at national, but also at sectoral and company level requires a stronger involvement of national social partners in the European Semester. Employer organisations call for a tripartite approach to the preparation and the implementation of the Action Plan. Eurocadres suggests dedicated EU legislation to warrant the involvement of social partners, possibly via a new Directive or via amendments to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/1997. Civil society organisations ask to be involved in the implementation and monitoring of the Pillar at all stages of the process. According to some of them, it should be an open, transparent and regular civil dialog