'.' S'"s • if ' - ' M COMVIISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMVTUNITIES 
C0M(91) 316 final - SYN 359 
Brussels, 5 September 1991 
V 
' '4; 
E 4 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) 
Changing Part II of Regulation (EEC) NO 1612/68 on freedom of 
movement for workers within the Community 
(presented by the Commission) 
EXPLANATORY MJMQRAypuy 
1. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 
1.1. Existing system 
Part II of Regulation 1612/68 on the free movement of workers in 
the Community concerns the workings of an exchange system of job 
vacancies, applications for employment and cooperation between the 
employment services of the Member states and the Commission, in an 
effort to facilitate the mobility of workers within the Community. 
2 
The mechanism, known as SEDOC (Système Européen de Diffusion des 
Offres et demandes d'emploi en Compensation), brings together for 
the purpose two elements : a codified and rigid procedure (for the 
exchange of information relating to job vacancies, requests for 
employment, living and working conditions) between employment 
services, and a network of human correspondents in the public 
employment services of each country feeding into and utilising the 
system. At least once a month, lists of unfilled job vacancies and 
applications are exchanged by telex between these services which 
then try to ensure that as many matchings as possible are made 
between the two lists. 
1.2. Reasons for the proposed revision 
The way this system works in practice has never given real cause 
for satisfaction for a variety of reasons linked to the changing 
situation of national labour markets, insufficient promotion of its 
use, the rapid obsolescence of the tool in relation to modern 
technologies for the handling and distribution of information, and 
also to the self limiting constraints imposed by the Regulation. 
These are notably : 
Only information on vacancies "unfilled... by manpower from 
the national labour market" should be exchanged. This 
situation condemns the exchange to be centered almost 
exclusively on vacancies which tend to be less attractive at 
national level. These vacancies very often couldn't be filled 
either at Community level. This situation does not tally with 
the principle of non discrimination between nationals of the 
Community within a single European labour market. 
Regarding applications for employment, the search for jobs is 
normally limited to the pool of those unfilled vacancies. 
These have mostly completely different characteristics in 
comparison with the applications. Clearance is therefore 
normally difficult and not successful. 
On the other hand there are no measures to ensure that appli­
cants will receive a response to their request for information 
on job opportunities. 
The Regulation imposes on labour administrations and the 
Commission cumbersome bureaucratic constraints which are not 
felt to be justified in this day and age. 
4 
The Commission's work programme implementing the Community 
Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers, and th 
Resolution of the European Parliament on this programme 
envisage the renovation of the SEDOC system and consequently 
the updating of Part II of Regulation 1612/68. 
1.3. The legal basis for the proposed revision 
Article 49 of the Treaty as amended by the Single Act constitutes 
the legal basis for regulations and directives on freedom of 
movement; it states that the Council shall act Hby a qualified 
majority on a proposal from the Commission, in cooperation with the 
European Parliament and after consulting the Economic and Social 
Committee". 
1.4. Objectives of the proposed revision 
It is proposed to revise Part II of the Regulation along three main 
guidelines : 
encourage Member States to distribute vacancies and requests 
likely to be filled at Community level in the framework of 
worker mobility; 
5 
guarantee to those job seekers who wish to work in 
another Member state that they can obtain from the 
employment service of their country of residence the 
quality and rapidity of service at least equal to that 
they would obtain if they moved to the Member state where 
they wish to work. 
- simplify procedures for users and administrations. 
2. EXAMINATION IN DETAIL OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO REGUIATION 
1612/68 
The proposal concerns Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the 
Regulation which should be changed. These changes put forward based 
on the following reasons : 
2.1 Article 14 , paragraph 1 and paragraph 2; 
The first sentence should adapted to the rules concerning the 
procedure for committees. Within the overall objective of 
simplifying both the Regulation and the tasks of the Member States, 
it is appropriate to alleviate those obligations on Member States 
concerning technical details and other information which the Member 
States provide as part of their cooperation with the Commission. 
The technical details of the delivery and the exchange of 
information which may be useful in a future SEDOC system should be 
determined by the Commission in co-operation with the Technical 
Committee. This simplification of the Regulation could enable the 
partners to react more flexibly to the requirements of the system 
and avoid overdetailed obligations of the Member States which 
cannot be met or aren't useful in the context of a renovated 
exchange system. 
6 
2.2. Article 14 paragraph 3 
The first sentence should be adapted to the rules concerning the 
procedure for committees. 
2.3. Article 15 and Article 16 
These are the central part of the Regulation concerning the SEDOC 
system and contain in their revised text the most important changes 
and adaptations. 
Using new data communication techniques, new possibilities are 
opened up for rapid exchange of information, and in particular 
regarding vacancies and applications for employment. Therefore, 
"returns" according to Article 15 paragraph lf first sentence will 
not be necessary if a new SEDOC system is capable of exchanging 
information and messages rapidly. 
2.3.1. Article 15. parag. 1(a) and (h) 
The objective of the changes in Article 15 paragraph 1(a) is to 
delete the restrictions on the selection of vacancies distributed 
in the past by the clearance mechanism, and to encourage the 
employment services to distribute all vacancies which could appeal 
to Communitiy workers. It would be desirable as an ideal system of 
a single labour market to implement a full sharing out of all 
registered job vacancies but this is at the moment basically not 
practical. Nevertheless, vacan-cies which may be interesting on a 
Community labour market basis should be selected as sub-sets of a 
Community nature from within the national data bases. 
7 
Thus the Community dimension of the labour market may be added to 
the national procedures of clearance for vacancies and applications 
for employment. 
The context also implies the insertion of a new alinéa (b), that 
ensures a better transparency of the Community labour market. 
2.3.2 Article 15 paragraph 1(c) and fd) : 
It distinguishes in the revised text between two types of 
applicants for employment, on the one hand those applicants who 
wish to work in another Member State and who express this wish 
"formally" (Article 15 para 1 (c)). This first category of 
applicants isn't provided for in the existing texts, but experience 
shows that it is the group of applicants which is the most 
interested in the Community labour market. On the other hand the 
revised text refers in Article 15 para 1 (d) to those applicants 
who are ready and able to accept employment in another Member 
State. In both cases the aim of Article 15 para 1 (c) and (d) is to 
allow for any positive measures on the part of the employment 
services to help all job seekers who have decided on mobility. It 
should guarantee that these job seekers obtain from the employment 
services of their country of residence the quality and rapidity of 
service at least equal to that they would obtain if they moved to 
the Member State where they wish to work. 
2.3.3 Article 15. parag. 2 
The last part of Article 15 paragraph 2 should be deleted because 
the time delay of eighteen months related only to 1968 and up to 
and including the Decisions concerning SEDOC in 1972. 
8 
2.3.4. Article 16 : 
It contains the details of the procedure for clearance of vacancies 
and applications for employment. 
The changes in Article 16 paragraph 1 have to follow the changes in 
Article 15 paragraph 1 and regulate therefore a different kind of 
clearance. Furthermore the revised text lifts cumbersome 
obligations under the current procedures. The second sentence in 
Article 16 paragraph 1 (revised text) is transferred from paragraph 
2 in the current version and concerns the possible responses 
regarding vacancies. 
2.3.5. Article 16 paragraph 2 : 
This paragraph establishes a new procedure for applications for 
employment in Article 15 paragr. 1 (c), which are introduced with 
a degree of emphasis and which should get a response in a 
reasonable delay whether there is a suitable vacancy or not. The 
delay has to be flexible enough for the employment services to be 
able to react as a consequence. 
2.3.6. Article 16 parag. 3 : 
The principle of equality of treatment between nationals and the 
subjects of other Member States in the Community specificially 
enunciated by Article 16 paragraph 2 (existing text) is reiterated 
in paragraph 3 of Article 16 (revised). 
The overdetailed and cumbersomme procedures in Article 16 paragraph 
3 of the existing text were not of any practical use in the past 
and should be deleted. 
9 
2.4. Article 17 
The change concerning the "returns" in Article 17 paragraph 1 
subparagraph (ai fiY follows the changes in Article 15.The word 
"outstanding" in Article 17 paragraph 1 subparagraph (b) is unclear 
(because it can be understood as "unfilled"in Article 15 existing 
text) and defunct as well. Article 17 should incite the Member 
States to organize as far as possible the exchange of all vacancies 
and applications for employment in the cross border regions. 
I 2.5 Article 19 
I * 
'%• • •• . 
\ 
f.7-
i The first paragraph represents the legal basis for the monitoring 
j of the clearance system and as such should remain. Nevertheless the 
| obligations should be simplified. The periodicity in Article 19 
? paragraph 1 first sentence f"Twice a year") should be handled more 
I'-É S 
flexibly. Regarding Article .19 paragraph 1 second and third indents 
I the text is simplified taking into account that the reports 
>t-I ... 
I referred to could already be provided for in Article 14. 
JO 
2.6 Article 20 
It contains very cumbersome and hardly useful detailed obligations 
f - -. ^ 
for the Member States. A new clearance system makes such provisions 
unnecessary. In facft, the new system allows to react immediately 
and without any special administrative measures in front of any 
major changes andf disturbances on tfce regional or national 
industrial labour markets. 
2.7 The ANNEX (to rArtiele 16) 
It is no longer applicable because Article 16 paragraph 3 is 
deleted. 2 
M 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EBC) 
Changing Part II of Regulation (EEC) NO 1612/68 on freedom of 
movement for workers within the Community 
The Council of the European Community, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community and in particular Article 49 thereof, 
- Wr 
In cooperation with the European Parliament, 
Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social 
Committee, 
t 
Whereas the free movement of workers within the Community 
constitutes a fundamental right established by the Treaty; 
M-
Whereas to give effect to the freedom of movement of workers 
coming from the Member States in the Community it is necessary 
to reinforce the mechanism for clearance of vacancies and 
applications for employment; 
Whereas the principle of non-discrimination between Community 
workers implies the recognition, in fact and in law, for all 
nationals of the Member States of the same priority in the 
labour market as enjoyed by national workers of each Member 
State; that this priority is established equally in the 
framework of the mechanism for clearance of vacancies and 
applications for employment; 
Whereas it is advisable to ensure the greatest possible 
transparency of the Community labour market, especially when 
determining vacancies and applications for employment which 
are the subject of Community clearance. 
JÏ 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
ARTICLE 1 
Regulation (EEC) N° 1612/68 is hereby changed as follows 
1. In Article 14 : 
are deleted in paragraph 1 the words "by region and 
by branch of activity" 
paragraph 2 is replaced by : 
"2. After having obtained the opinion of the 
Technical Committee, the Commission shall determine 
the manner in which the information referred to in 
paragraph 1 shall be drawn up". 
in the first sentence of paragraph 3 the words "in 
agreement with" are replaced by "after having 
obtained the opinion of" 
M 
2. Article 15 is replaced by : 
Article 15 
1. The specialist service of each Member State shall 
regularly send to the specialist services of the 
other Member States and to the European Co­
ordination Office 
(a) the vacancies likely to be filled by Community 
nationals from other Member States 
(b) they acancies addressed to non-Member States 
(c) the applications for employment of those who 
have formally expressed the wish to work in 
another Member State 
(d) information, by occupation and by region, on 
the applicants, who have declared themselves 
actually ready and able to accept employment 
in another country 
The specialist service of each Member State shall 
forward such information to the appropriate 
employment services and agencies. 
JLS 
2. The vacancies and applications messages referred to 
in paragraph 1 shall be circulated according to a 
uniform system to be established by the European 
Co-ordination Office in collaboration with the 
Technical Committee. 
Article 16 is replaced by : 
Article 16 
1. Any vacancy within the meaning of Article 15 
addressed to the employment services of a Member 
State shall be communicated and dealt with by the 
competent employment services of the other Member 
States which are concerned. Such services shall 
forward to the services of that Member State the 
details of suitable applicants who are Community 
nationals. 
2. The applications referred to in subparagraph 1(b) 
of Article 15 shall be responded to by the 
reveiving services of the Member States within a 
reasonable delay. 
3. The employment services grant the same priority to 
the workers of the Member States as is granted by 
the national measures pertinent to national workers 
with regard to workers from non-Member States. 
4. In Article 17, first paragraph : 
- the word "returns" in subparagraph (a)(i) is 
replaced by "messages" 
the word "outstanding" in subparagraph (b) is 
deleted 
5. In Article 19 the first paragraph is replaced by : 
1. On the basis of a report from the Commission drawn 
up from information supplied by the Member States, 
the latter and the Commission shall regularly 
together analyse the results of Community 
arrangements regarding vacancies and applications 
6. Article 20 is replaced by : 
Article 20 
(deleted) 
7. The Annex is deleted 
ARTICLE 2 
This Regulation shall enter into force on 
This Regulation shall be binding in its ejitirety and directly 
fi in­
applicable in all Member States. . y .£ 
Done at Brussels, For the Council 
<A% 
FINANCIAL SHEET 
The proposal does not have any financial consequences for the Comitiunity 
insofar as it does not modify basically the obligations already falling 
on the Member States and on the Commission with regard to the 
implementation of the regulation 1612/68. 
/3 
IMPACT OF CERTAIN LEGISLATIVE MEASURES 
ON SMALL AND MEDIUM-SI2ED ENTERPRISES AND EMPLOYMENT 
1. Administrative obligations arising from the application of 
legislation for enterprises: 
- None 
2. Advantages for enterprises: 
Yes 
Which? 
greater transparency and availability of manpower coming from 
Member States 
3. Disadvantages for enterprises: 
(Additional costs) - none 
4. Effects on employment: 
More flexibility for enterprises and increased intra-Community 
mobility. 
1. Was nere preliminary consultation of the two sides of industry? 
10 
Yes (in the Consultative Committee on free movement of workers) 
Opinion of two aides of induatry : favourable 
6. Is there a less constraining alternative approach? 
No 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(91)316final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 04 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-91-354-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-74907-5 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
I ,-2985 Luxembourg