ARCHIVESHISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(73)1980
Vol.1973/0352

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement(CEE,Euratom)n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernantl'ouvertureaupublicdesarchiveshistoriquesdelaCommunauté économique
européenneetdelaCommunautéeuropéennedel'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement(CE,Euratom)n°1700/2003du22septembre2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003,p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiésconformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
InaccordancewithCouncilRegulation(EEC,Euratom)No354/83of1February1983
concerningtheopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropeanEconomic
CommunityandtheEuropeanAtomicEnergyCommunity(OJL43,15.2.1983,p.1),as
amendedbyRegulation(EC,Euratom)No1700/2003of22September2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003,p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary,classifieddocumentsinthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformitywithArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung(EWG,Euratom)Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar1983überdieFreigabederhistorischen ArchivederEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung(EG,Euratom)Nr.1700/2003vom22.September2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003,S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeitzugänglich.Soweit
erforderlich,wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenanntenVerordnungfreigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(73)1980 final
Brussels ,26November 1973
Amended
Proposal for aCouncil Directive onthe
harmonization ofthelegislation ofthe
Member States relating tomass dismissals
(Presented bytheCommission totheCouncil
pursuant tothe second paragraph ofArticle
149oftheEECTreaty )
■ i
C0M (73)1980 final

V/905/73-E fin .
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Acomparison ofthoprovisions inforce inthe Community
countries ondismissals shows certain notable differences as
regards conditions andprocedures and themeasures taken to
lessen thenegative consequences ofdismissal forworkers .
These important differences asregards protection of
workers incases ofmass dismissals have adirect effect onthe
functioning onthe Common Market insofar asthey create dispa­
rities inconditions ofcompetition which arelikely toinfluence
thedecisions byenterprises ,whether national ormultinational ,
onthedistribution oftheposts they have tobefilled .It
must for example beexpected that any firm intending toreorga­
nize itself byaplan including thepartial ortotal closedown
ofcertain departments ,will decide which departments toclose
down onthebasis ,atleast inpart ,ofthelevel ofprotection
offered tothe workers .This and other situations cam exert
pressure contrary tosocial progress and prejudicial toa
balanced overall and regional development within the Community
since itcreates areas ofmass under-employment .
Inthis way economic integration and theaccompanying
progressive interdependance ofnational markets ,together with
theincreasingly tough competition atwoi-ld level ,the rate
oftechnological progress andthechanges (rationalization ,
cooperation ,mergers )which firms undergo directly orindirectly
asaresult ofthefunctioning oftheCommon Market ,have profound
repercussions onthesecurity ofemployment forworkers .

-2- V/905/73-E fin .
Theeconomic changes andclosures ofenterprises which these
caninvolve arehowever anintegral part ofadevelopment towards
more promising activities .Itistherefore necessary not toimpede
them ,but toplace this professional mobility vrithin aframework of
appropriate guarantees . v
Moreover ,itisincreasingly less justifiable socially to
apply very different provisions which have equally different results
todismissals ofworkers who areincomparable situations .
This inequality
-has become even more manifest asaresult ofthe free move­
ment ofworkers ;
-isharmful tothe fanctioning oftheCommon Market ,which in
accordance with Article 117oftheEECTreaty includes theimprovement
intheworking andliving conditions ofworkers andtheir upward har­
monization . '
For these reasons itisnecessary toeliminate known dispari­
ties byharmonizing therelevant national provisions .Inthat respect
theCommission innowayloses sight ofthe fact that anyrules go­
verning mass dismissals can form only one special aspect oi'thelaws
•ondismissal intheir entirety ,onwhich theCommission started work
initsreport onprovisions infavour toworkers faced with dismissal(1 ^
andinwhich report itpoints tothedirection which initsopinion
should betaken byanydiscussion ontheharmonization ofthelaws
ondismissal .
(1)Document n°875^/2/70addressed tothe .Council on ,16May1972

-3- V/9CV73-E fin
Nevertheless the special socio-economic importance of
mass dismissals justifies special Community rules being adopted
inadvance .
Anaffirmative answer tothequestion ofwhether themass
dismissal provisions inforce inthe countries ofthe Community
should beharmonized does not imply that the autonomy ofmanage­
ment andlabour would becalled inquestion .Onthecontrary :
intheproposed directive ,this autonomy isconsidered asa
point ofdeparture and creates the framework which brings the
two sides tothenegotiating table ,clearly showing the aims
ofthenegotiations but leaving theorganization ofthose nego­
tiations tothe two sides .
Inits draft Directive ,the Commission has voluntarily
restricted itself toafew essential points prompted bythe
thought that systematic joint action bymanagement ,the autho­
rities and workers representatives isthe best method ofobtai­
ning community regulation ofmass dismissals which will best
serve their dual purpose -ofproviding social protection and
acting asaneconomic regulator .
Itisalong these lines that theproposed directive
which follows has been conceived .Onthe one hand itisbased
onprovisions andprocedures inforce intheMember States .
Onthe other hand itmakes provisions for them tobeharmonized
inorder toeliminate consequences which are very different -
indeed contradictory .
Dismissals effected pursuant tocontrafcts ofemployment
forlimited periods oftime are not covered bythis Directive

V/905/73-E fin »
Amended
Proposal for aCouncil Directive ontheharmonization ofthe
legislation oftheMember States relating tomass dismissals
THECOUNCIL ,,OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
having regard tothe Treaty establishing the European Economic
Community ,and inparticular Article 100thereof ,
having regard totheproposal from the Commission ,
having regard tothe Opinion oftheEuropean Parliament ,
having regard totheOpinion oftheEconomic and ,Social Committee ,
whereas notable differences are tobefound intheprovisions in
force intheMember States ofthe Community onmass dismissals as
regards conditions and procedure andmeasures which have been
taken toalleviate the consequences ofdismissal forworkers ;
whereas these differences have widened inthe last years ;
whereas these important divergences intheprotection ofworkers
incases ofmass dismissals have adirect effect on .tiie functio­
ning ofthe Common Market ,because they create disparities in
theconditions ofcompetition which influence decisions taken
byenterprises ,and inparticular multinational enterprises ,on'
thedistribution of .the .posts they have tobefilled ,thus
creating pressures contrary tosocial progress Tandprejudicial
toabalanced overall and regional development within the
Community ;whereas these divergences aremoreover harmful tothe
functioning ofthemarket insofarasthey arenot compatible
with thenecessity ofimproving living andworking conditions
forworkers toput them onanequal footing inadeveloping

-5- V/905/73-E fin .
society ;moreover economic changes and the closure ofbusiness en­
terprises which these may involve -may beanintegral part ofapro­
cess leading tomore promising activities ; •
whereas economic integration intheCommunity ,ever increasing world­
wide competition ,therate oftechnological progress ,changes inthe
structure ofdemand ,therapid development ofmultinational enter­
prises and theimbalance ofeconomic and social development inthe
« * • •
Community arehaving ever widening repercussions onthesecurity of
employment forworkers ; -
whereas moreover thebalanced economic and social development ofthe
Community requires -the'provisions mentioned above tobeimproved
and harmonised inaprogressive manner within themeaning ofArticle
117sothat theprocess ofeconomic -integration does notgive xise to
large pockets ofunemployment orunderemployment ;
whereas itisnecessary asaresult toeliminate disparities inthis
matter andtherefore toharmonize national provisions bysetting up
minimum Caaraurïity rules .
HAS ADOPTED' THIS DIRECTIVE : ' '
Article 1 ,
1)Where an .employer .intends toeffect dismissals foroneormore
reasons not related tothe .individual behaviour ofthe workers
concerned ■that employer must notify theappropriate public authority ~-
oftheMember State ofsuch intention incases where over onemonth ,the
■proposed number ofdismissals is : :<
1.At'least 5in .enterprises normally employing more than 20and
less than 50workers ; ,

-6V/9C5/73-E fin ,
2.Atleast 10%oftheusual number ofworkers inenterprises
normally employing 50ormore and less than 250workers ;
3«Atleast 25inenterprises normally employing 250 ormore
workers *
This notification shall contain all relevant information such as
thereasons fortheredundancies ,theexact number ofworkers to
bemade redundant and the time over which these redundancies are
tobemade .
For thepurposes ofthis directive ,theenterprise shall bethe
local i^nit ofemployment «
2)Theoutcome ofconsultations oftheworkers 'representatives
provided forinArticle 4must beenclosed wi^h this notification .
Iftheoutcome isnot known atthe time ofnotification ,the latter
shall beaccompanied byacommunication concerning theopening and
theprogress ofthe consultation procedure :theoutcome thereof
must besent within three weeks .
Article 2 .
1)Except where otherwise stated bytheappropriate public authority ,
thedismissals notified tothat authority inaccordance with Ar­
ticle 1(1 )and (2)shall take effect not earlier than onemonth
after such notification ,without prejudicing thereby anyindi­
vidual rights regarding length ofnotice .
2)This period shall beused bythepublic authority toseek solutions
totheproblems raised bytheproposed redundancies .

7 V/905/73-^fin .
3)Iftheefforts ,mentioned inparagraph 2,oftheappropriate
public authority are tonoavail ,this period may ,exceptionally ,
beextended byonemonth ,provided that thesurvival oftheunder­
taking isnot jeopardised thereby .The employer must be -informed
oftheextension and ofreasons that render itnecessary notlater
than three weeks after the notification .
Article 3
1)Thecompetent public authority mayprohibit thenotified dismissals
if,after investigation ,itisfound that thereasons ,within the
meaning ofArticle 1,invoked bytheemployer arenon-existant •
2)!Eheappropriate public authority maysuspend thedismissals measures
andextend theperiod stipulated inArticle 2(1)bynotmore than
onemonth ifarequest has been made formediation asprovided for
inArticle k(k).
Article «f
1)Before notifying thepublic authority ofdismissals inaccordance
with Article 1,theemployer shall arrange consultation of^workers'
representatives intheundertaking concerned ,with aview toreaching
anagreement .Therepresentatives .,consulted shall bethose stipu­
lated intherelevant national provisions .
2)These consultations should cover inparticular :
-thepossibilities ofavoiding orreducing theproposed dismissals ,
-what criteria toapply .when deciding which workers todismiss ,
-thepossibility ofgiving other .jobs inthesame enterprise towork-
kera threatened with dismissal ,whether byretraining ,bytrans -
;r .,. . .. j
fertoanother part oftheenterprise orbyamending thexr con­
ditions ofemployment ,
!

V/905/73-S fin .
.-possibly ,compensation forreductions insalary and other benefits ,
-measures tobetaken infavour ofworkers tobedismissed ,inpar­
ticular with ,regard tothepossibility ofseverance grants and
priority for re-emplojrment , -
-procedural details ,inparticular the staggering ofdismissals .
3)Tothis end ,theemployer must supply theworkers 'representatives
mentioned above with allnecessary information ,inwriting ,and in
allcases must give theinformation setoutinArticle 1(1),so
that they canput forward constructive proposals .
*0Ifagreement isnotreached between theparties attheconsultations ,
they may agree onamediation procedure .Ifnoagreement isreached on
themediation procedure ,either oftheparties mayrequest thepu­
blic antbnrity toact asamediator .Ifoneparty only should request
themediation ofthepublic authority ,theother party shall be
bound totake part inthis procedure , . .
Article 5
Dismissals effected persuant tocontracts ofemployment for
limited periods oftime orfor adetermined task are not covered bythis
directive .
Article 6
Within six months from the date ofnotification ofthis Direc­
tive ,the Memb.er States shall amend their legislation toconform tothe
preceding provisions and shall immediately inform theCommission thereof .
The legislation thus amended shall beapplied atthelatest one'year
thereafter .

V/9C5/73-E fin .
Article 7
Within twoyears from the date ,-onwhich theyear mentioned in
Article 5«expires ,theMember 1States' shall forward allnesessary in~
formation totheCommission toenable ittodraw upareport forsub­
mission totheCouncil ontheapplication ofthis Directive,'
Moreover ,Member States shall ,from the date ofnotification
ofthis Directive ,inform theCpmmission ,ingood time forittomake
anyobservations ,ofall later draft lav;s ,regulations andadminis­
trative provisions which thet may adopt inthe field covered bythis
Directive .
Article -8
This Directive isaddressed tothe Member States .

V/1299/73-s
Survey ofthe amendments proposed by
theEuropean Parliament and theEconomic and
Social Committee totheproposal for aCouncil
Directive ontheapproximation ofthelaws of
theMember States relating tolarge scale
redundancies
1.General
The European Parliament ,and' the Economic and Social Committee
have ©jecepted the legal basis and type ofinstrument chosen bythe
Commission ,aswell asthe three f-jndamental criteria underlying the
proposed directive ,namely :
-theobligation incumbent upon the employer tonotify the
competent authorities oflarge scale redundancies ,
-Thepossibility ofintervention by ,the ^competent national
authorities ;
-theprinciple ofconsultation between employers andrepre - :
aentatives oftheworkers oftheenterprise concerned .
Theamendments proposed bytiienEuropean Parliament and the ,
Economic and Social Committee are rather ofa,textual and technical
nature and donot effect t'liebasic guidelines ofthis proposed directive .

-2- V/905/72-E
2•Specific observations
A.RECITALS +)
whereas these important divergences intheprotection ofworkers
incases ofmass dismissals have adirect effect cnthefunctioning of
theCommon Market ,because they create disparities intheconditions of
competition which' influence decisions taken byenterprises ,andinpar­
ticular multinational enterprises ,onthedistribution oftheposts
have tobefilled ,thus creating pressures contrary tosocial progress
andprejudicial toabalanced ovefali andregional development within
theCommunity ;whereas these 1divergences aremoreover harmful tothe
functioning ofthemarked insofarasShey arenot compatible with the
necessity ofimproving living andworking conditions forworkers toput
them onanequal footing inadeveloping society ;
whereas economic integration inthe -Community ,ever increasing
vworldwide competition ,the -rate oftechnological progress ,changes in
thestructure ofdemand ,therapid development ofmultinational enter­
prises andtheUnbalance ofeconomic andsocial development intheCom­
munity arehaving ever widening repercussions onthesecurity ofemployment
forworkers ; : .'j
whereas moreover ,thebalanced economic andsocial development of
theCommunity requires theprovisions mentioned above to-beimproved and
harmonized sothat theprocess ofeconomic integration i§prevented ,from
creating pockets ofmass unemployment . . ,
b)EP :Unchanged from theCommission proposal
;;c)ESC :After thesecond recital ,addathird andnewrecital to
read asfollows
"Moreover ,economic changes andtheclosure ofbusiness enter­
prises which these mayinvolve may beanintegral part ofaprocess
leading tomore promising activities ",
+)Recitals andindividual provisions oftheproposal foraDirective
towhich thecomments oftheEuropean Parliament andtheEconomic
and Social Committee refer are set out below .

-3- V/905/73-E
-amend the fourth recital asfollows :
"Whereas moreover thebalanced economic andsocial development
oftheCommunity requires theprovisions mentioned above tobeimproved
andharmonised inaprogressive manner inaccordance with Article 11?
sothat theprocess ofeconomic integration does not give rise tolarge
pockets ofunemployment orunderemployment"® j
d)Remarks
The amendments proposed bytheEconomic andSocial Committee
presents alegal problem :Itwould appear necessary torequest the
opinion oftheLegal Service ,astowhether thereference toArticle
117 oftheTreaty iscompatible v/ith Article 100thereof which forms
thelegal basis fortheproposed directive (seethenote totheLegal
Service of31July 1973 -NO73-035^5 )*
B.ARTICLE 1-al»1
a)Initial
where anemployer intends todismiss ten ormore workers for one
ormore reasons ,inparticular for economic ortechnical reasons and in­
«<
dependent oftheindividual behaviour ofthose workers ,such intention
lr?
andallrelevant information such asthereasons fordismissal ,the
exact number ofworkers to'be'"dismissed and theperiod during which
thedismissals are tobecarried outmust benotified tothe competent
public authority oftheMember State .
b)EP :Unchanged from theCommission proposal
c)ESC :Amend asfollows :
"Where anemployer intends toeffect redundancies forone ormore
reasons notrelating totheworkers themselves ,that employer must noti­
fytheappropriate public authority oftheMember State ofsuch inten­
tion incases where over onemonth ,theproposed number ofredundancies is
1.more than 5inenterprises normally employing more than 20and
less than 50workers ;
2.more than 10%oftheusual number ofemployees and .more than
25inenterprises normally employing 50ormore and less than
500 workers ;
3«50ormore inenterprises normally employing 500 ormore workers .,

-k-V/1299/73-E
The notification shall contain all relevant information such as
the reasons for the redundancies the exact ,number ofworkers tobemade
redundant and the time over which those redundancies are to.be made .
For thepurposes ofarticle 1,the .enterprise shall bethe
local unit ofemployment . ,
d)Remarks ' .
With theexception ofcertain textual amendments ,theproposal
ofthe ESC istothe effect that the number ofdismissals tobenotified
should bekept inproportion with thetotal staff complement ofthe
enterprise inquestion .The committee ishere taking upanidea already -
setforth bytheCommission indocument V/875^/2/70(provisions infa­
vour ofworkers affected byredundancy tinder thelaws oftheMember Sta­
tesoftheEuropean Community-Summary report ■and conclusions oftheCom­
mission ).
This consideration has not been included intheoriginal text of
theproposed directive forthe following reasons :thenotification to
thecompetent special authorities oftheproposed dismissals isof
great importance foremployment policy asregards thelocal labour market
Following this notification ,thecompetent national authorities must be
prepared totake themeasures required ,mainly with regard tomaking
available existing posts orcreating newposts .fortheworkers made
redundant .
1Inthis context ,only thenumber ofworkers tobemade redundant
isofprime importance ,while thetotal staff complement oftheenter­
prise concerned only plays asecondary role .
However ,there are noreal reasons fornotaccepting theESC's
proposal ,particularly astherepresentatives oftheworkers' and
employers' organisations expressed afavourable opinion onthis
version .Nevertheless ,itappeared necessary toalter thecombination
ofnumbers proposed bytheESCtheinterests ofclairty without charging
theactual substance ofthe proposal' -.-

-5- V/1299/73-E
C.ARTICLE 1-Al .2
a)Initial text ofthe Commission
The results ofconsultations with the workers' representatives ,
provided forinArticle must beannexed tothenotification orsent
assoon aspossible .
b)EP :This notification shall beaccompanied byastatement ofthe
outcome oftheconsultation ofworkers' srepresentatives stipulated in
Article k(sixwords deleted ).
c)ESC :tobeamended asfollows : ..
The outcome ofconsultations oftheworkers *representatives
provided for inArticle must beenclosed with this notification .
Iftheoutcome isnotknow atthetime ofnotification ,thelatter
shall beaccompanied byacommunication concerning theopening and
theprogress ofthe consultation procedure ;theoutcome thereof must
besent within tL^ee weeks .
d)Remarks
Theamendments proposed bytheEuropean Parliament andbythe
Economic and Social Committee aremainly concerned with defining the
conditions under v/hich the employer must transmit theresults ofcon­
sultations with the workers 1representatives tothe public authorities ,
tothe extent that these details have not been attached directly tothe
notification itself .
Whereas thepresent text oftheproposed directive provides for
thepossibility insuch acase oftransmitting these results assoon as
possible ,the ESC fixes aperiod ofthree weeks within which this shall
bedone ,while theEuropean Parliament would wish simply toabolish this
delay altogether ,andasks that theresults oftheconsultations bedi­
rectly attached .
Theproposal from theEuropean Parliament does not seem realistic .
Itdoes not take account ofthe fact that those consultations may last
some time ,andinsuch acase would prevent theemployer from notifying the
proposed dismissals tothepublic authorities ,although itisinevery
interest oftheletter tobeinformed ofthese assoon aspossible .
,The proposal from the ESC takes the situation into consideration
butnevertheless restricts theperiod tothree weeks .Intheopinion of
therepresentatives oftrade andprofessional organizations meeting within
thecommittee ofexperts ,this seems togive adequate time .This proposal
has theadvantage ofmaking thepresent text ofthedirective more precise
and the latter would therefore beamended tothis effect .

-'6- V/1299/73-E
D.ARTICLE 2-al. 1
■■– i.m l i n ■. i nii f
a)Initial text oftheCommission ..... ., i/ :
Except where otherwise stated bythecompetent public authority ,tH*
dismissals notified tothat authority shall take effect onemonth after ;
such notification ,without prejudice toanyindividual rights regarding
length ofnotice .
b)EP :Unchanged from theCommission proposal
ESC :Except where otherwise stated bythe appropriate public autho­
rity ,the redundancies notified tothat authority inaccordance with Ar­
ticle •1.(1),and (2)shall take effect onemonth after such notification ,
without prejudice toany individual rights regarding length ofnotice ,
d)Remarks
The textual amendments proposed bytheESC areacceptable .
E.ARTICLE 2-al. 2
a)Initial text ofthe Commission
This period shall beused bythepublic authority toseek solu­
tions totheproblems raised bytheproposed redundancies .
b+c)EP+ESC :
This period shall beused bythepublic authority toseek solu­
tions totheproblems raised bytheproposed redundancies .
d)Remarks
Theamendment proposed jointly bytheEuropean Parliamenb and
bytheESCwould give anobligatory character tothepresent optional
provision .Since this isinaccordance with theobjectives ofthepro­
*-posed directive ,theamendment may beaccepted .

-7- V/1299/73-E
F.ARTICLE 2-al. 3
a)Initial text ofthe Commission
The public ruthority may extend this period byonemonth ,the
employer must beinformed oftheextension not later than three weeks
after this notification .
b)EP :Unchanged from theCommission proposal
c)ESC :Iftheefforts ,mentioned inparagraph 2,oftheappropria­
tepublic authority are tonoavail ,this period may ,exceptionally ,
beextended byonemonth ,provided that the survival oftheunderta­
king isnot jeopardised thereby .The employer must beinformed ofthe
extension and ofreasons that render itnecessary not later than three
weeks after the notification .
d)Remarks
Theversion proposed bythe ESCunderlines the exceptional na­
ture ofthis provision and isalone thelines ofthe initial -text of
theproposed directive .Itmay therefore beaccepted .
6.ARTICLE .3-Al.1
a)Initial text ofthe Commission
The competent public authority may oppose all orpart of
the dismissals notified if,after investigation ,itisfound that
thereasons ,within themeaning ofArticle 1,invoked bythe employer
are inexact .
b)EP :unchanged from theCommission proposal
c)ESC : '^. """
The competent public authority may refuse toauthorise the
redundancies notified if,after investigation ,itisfound
.that the reasons ,within themeaning ofArticle 1,invoked
bythe employer arewithout foundation .
d)Remarks
Theconsiderations onwhich thewording iftheproposed
directive isbased take account ofthe fact that thecompetent
authorities may donomore than note the existence ofthemotives
invoked bytheemployer inrelation totheproposed redundancies
Theauthorities arenot empowered tojudge either thelegality or
advisability oftheproposed measures andconsequently may not
encroach upon thejurisdiction ofthecourts oronthemanagement of
the enterprise concerned .
Astheamendment proposed bytheESCmakes this position
clear ,itmay beaccepted .

-δ- V/1299/73-E
H.ARTICLE k-Al.1
a)Initial text oftheCommission
The competent public authority may suspend the dismissals
iftheconsultation with theworkers representatives provided forin
Article 3»1•and 2.has nottaken place ,orwhere appropriate ,if
application hasbeen made formediation asprovided forinArticle
3*Insuch cases the competent authority may extend theperiod
provided for inArticle 2,1.bynotmore than twomonths . '"
b)EP :
The appropriate public authority may suspend theredundancy
measures andextend theperiod stipulated inArticle 2(1)
bynotmore than twomonths ifthe consultation ofworkers
representatives stipulated inArticle k(1)and (2)has
been concluded without agreement and arequest accordingly
made for conciliation .
c)ESC :Theappropriate public authority maysuspend theredun­
dancy measures and extend theperiod stipulated inArti­
cle 2(1)bynotmore than onemonth ifarequest has
been made formediation asprovided forinArticle ^(3)«
d)Remarks :Theamendments proposed bytheEuropean Parliament
and theESChave thesame object ,namely ,toprovide that theperiod
referred toinArticle 2(1)mayonly beprolonged incases where
themediation procedure referred toinArticle 4hasbeen requested .
i
Following thenewversion ofArticle 1(2)proposed bytheEuropean
Parlisient andbytheESC ,theprovision included intheinitial text
oftheproposed directive under which theperiod isprolonged ifthe
workers 'representatives have not yetbeen consulted becomes supa --
fluous and may bedeleted .
Theproposal from theESC toextend theperiod toa
maximum ofonemonth (instead oftwo )where themediation procedure
hasbeen initiated should also beaccepted .

-9- V/1299/73-E
I.ARTICLE k-Al.1
a.)Initial text ofthe Commission
Ifthe number ofdismissals referred toinArticle 1is50or
more the employer shall consult therepresentatives oftheworkers of
theenterprise inquestion before notifying these dismissals tothe
competent public authority with the object ofreaching anagreement .
Inthe number ofdismissals isless than 50,the compe­
tent public authority may ask the employer toconsult theworkers'
representatives ,ifitconsiders itnecessary .The representatives
shall bethose provided forbynational procedures inforce .
b)EP :Before notifying thepublic authority ofredundancy
measures inaccordance with Article 1,the employer ;shall
arrange consultation ofworkers 'representatives inthe .
undertaking concerned ,with aview toreaching anagree­
ment .The representatives consulted shall bethose stipu­
lated inthe relevant national provisions .
c)ETC :Before notifying theappropriate public authority ofthe
redundancy measures referred toinArticle 1,the
employer shall beobliged toarrange consultation ofre­
presentatives oftheworkers concerned inorder totry
toreach anagreement .
d)Remarks :
TheEuropean -Parliament and theESCpropose that the
present text oftheproposed directive beamended toprovide that
theworkers representatives shall beconsulted inthe case ofdis­
missals asreferred toinArticle 1(1),while thepresent text pro­
vides forobligatory consultation only inthe case ofredundancies ,
involving fifty workers ormore ,alesser number ofdismissals only
requiring application tothepublic authorities .
Theamendment proposed bytheEuropean Parliament and the
ESCundoubtedly affords theworkers greater protection and isin
accordance with present daythinking ivhich aims atincreasing
workers 'participation inthedecisions taken bymanagement .
Itwould therefore bepreferable tothe text ofthe
proposed directive accordingly .

-10- V/1299/73-E
J.ARTICLE k-Al.2
a'Initial text ofthe Commission v
These consultation may cover inparticular :
-thepossibilities ofavoiding orreducing theproposed dismissals ,
-what criteria toapply when deciding which workers todismiss ,
thepossibility ofgiving other jobs inthe same enterprise to
workers threatened with dismissal ,whether byretraining ,by
transfer toanother part ofthe enterprise orbyamending their
conditions ofemployment ,
-compensation for reductions insalary and other benefits ,
-measures tobetaken infavour ofworkers tobedismissed ,in
particular with regard toseverance grants andpriority for
re-employment ,
-procedural details ,inparticular thestaggering ofdismissals .
Tothis end ,theemployer must supply theworkers 'repre­
sentatives mentioned above with allnecessary information ,in
writing ,and inall cases must give theinformation setput in
Article 1,1.,sothat they canput forward constructive proposals .
b)EP :Unchanged from theCommission proposal
c)E5C :-possibly ,compensation forreductions insalary and
othed benefits ,
-measures tobetaken infavour ofworkers tobe
dismissed ,inparticular with regard tothepossibility
ofseverance grants andpriority forre-employment .
d)Remarks Asregards thefourth andfifth indents intheinitial
text ,there .isnoobjection tothetextual amendments proposed bythe
ESC .

-11- V/1299/73-E
ARTICLE k-Alo3
a)Initial text oftheCommission :Ifagreement isnot reached between
theparties attheconsultations ,,each nayrequest thepublic autho­
rity toact asmediator# .
b)33?" :Unchanged from theCcrrmission proposal
c)ESC :Ifagreement ±3nobreached between theparties attheconsul­
tations ,each may request thepublic authority toact asme-
diator® Ifoneparty only should request themediation ofthe
public authority ,the other party shall bebound totake part
inthis procedure 1,
d)Remark s:Theamendment proposed bytheEGGprovides that ,where one
oftheparties -has decided tohave recourse tothemediation proce­
dure ,theother party should beobliged toaccept this *This inorder
toavoid one oftheparties refusing toparticipate insuch mediation
which would therefore not take place ,inspite .ofthe desire ofthe
other ,party to -employ this procedure with aview tosolving the con­
flict . ■
Itmust nevertheless beaccepted that obligatory recoarse toa
mediation procedure innoway commits either oftheparties tothe
acceptance ortherejection ofthe results ofsuch procedure#
The proposed amendment put forward bytheESC canbeaccepted
insofar as,inview ofthepresent situation incertain Member States
theprevisions arewarded insuch away astoenable theparties con­
cerned tofirst ofall avail themselves ofamediation procedure
which '.dose not involve intervention bythepublic authorities®
Assistance from thepublic authorities may berequest byeither
oftheparties where agreement onamediation procedure between them
has not proved possible#

-12- V/1299/73-E
L.ARTICLE 5 - ■
a)Initial text oftheCommission :Within sixmonth from thedate
ofnotification ofthis Directive ,the'Member States shall ,amend
their legislation toconform topreceding -provisions andshall
immediately inform theCommission thereof .Thelegislation thus amended
shall beapplied atthelatest oneyear thereafter .
b)EP :Unchanged from theCommission proposal
c)CES :Insert theword "minimum "before theword "provisions "in
the third line
d)Remarks
Therequest made bytheESC toinsert theconcept of"minimum
provisions "into the text cannot beaccepted forlegal reasons .A
form ofwording along similar lines hasbeen included atthe endof
the recitals .
M.ARTICLES 6and 7
TheEuropean Parliament ana theEconomical andSocial
Committee have notmade any remarks concerning these Articles .