EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/637

(2004/C 84 E/0718)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0614/04

by Harlem Désir (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Subject: Closure of the 280-employee DHL site at Blanc Mesnil (France)

At the start of 2004, news was leaked to the 280 employees of the small-package carrier DHL France (a subsidiary of the European consortium Deutsche Post World Net [DPWN]) that the DHL site at Blanc Mesnil was to close and that a total of 1 200 jobs at several centres in France would be lost.

Only after the workers went on strike at the end of January 2004 did the company managers confirm their intentions by means of a supposedly ‘confidential’ circular. It would appear that DPWN has drawn up a job-abolition and collective-redundancy plan which contravenes Community legislation, in particular Council Directive 94/45/EC (1) of 22 September 1994 on European works councils, which stipulates that ‘certain decisions having a significant effect on the interests of employees must be the subject of information and consultation of the employees’ appointed representatives as soon as possible. The subsidiary requirements specify that ‘where there are exceptional circumstances affecting the employees’ interests to a considerable extent, particularly in the event of relocations, the closure of establishments or undertakings or collective redundancies, the select committee or, where no such committee exists, the European Works Council shall have the right to be informed. Pursuant to Council Directive 98/59/EC (2) on collective redundancies, ‘where an employer is contemplating collective redundancies, he shall begin consultations with the workers’ representatives in good time with a view to reaching an agreement', ‘[the] consultations shall, at least, cover ways and means of avoiding collective redundancies or reducing the number of workers affected, and of mitigating the consequences by recourse to accompanying social measures aimed, inter alia, at aid for redeploying or retraining workers made redundant’, ‘employers shall notify the competent public authority in writing of any projected collective redundancies’, and ‘employers shall forward to the workers’ representatives a copy of the notification.'

Pursuant to Directive 2002/14/EC (3) of 11 March 2002, which is currently being transposed, ‘timely information and consultation is a prerequisite for the success of the restructuring and adaptation of undertakings’, and ‘information shall be given at such time, in such fashion and with such content as are appropriate to enable, in particular, employees’ representatives to conduct an adequate study and, where necessary, prepare for consultation. The Directives quoted provide for sanctions to be imposed on companies which do not honour their obligations vis-à-vis their workers.

What action is the Commission intending to take with regard to the Member States concerned (France and Germany, where the consortium has its headquarters) in order ensure that those States genuinely force DPWN to comply with Community law?

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 2004)

As the Honourable Member rightly points out, several Community Directives lay down procedures for informing and for consulting workers' representatives which may be applicable in the event of closures of companies, in particular Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning collective redundancies (4), and Council Directive 94/45/EC, of 22 September 1994, on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (5). Another Directive was also adopted on 11 March 2002 by the Parliament and the Council with the aim of supplementing Community arrangements governing this matter (Directive 2002/14/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the Community — Joint declaration of the Parliament, the Council and the Commission on employee representation (6)). The first two Directives were transposed into the national laws of the Member States (the third having to be transposed only by 23 March 2005).

It is the responsibility of the Member States to transpose and implement the above Directives. In the first place, it is up to the national authorities to ensure that the Directives are applied correctly and to provide for administrative and judicial remedies in national legislation. It is also the duty of the Commission, in its capacity as the guardian of the Treaty, to take any steps it deems appropriate, including those provided for under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, to ensure that the above provisions are complied with.

The information submitted by the Honourable Member relates to the practical implementation of the national legislation transposing the Directives mentioned in this written question. Monitoring and supervision of implementation are, in the first place, the responsibility of the authorities (including the judicial authorities) of the Member States concerned. There is no indication that judicial and/or administrative proceedings have been initiated by the workers of the company or their representatives in order to enforce the obligations laid down by the above Directives.

The Commission has, moreover, not received any complaint with regard to this matter and has no information suggesting that any infringement of these Directives has occurred.

(1) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994, p. 64.

(2) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998, p. 16.

(3) OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 29.

(4) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998.

(5) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994.

(6) OJ L 80, 23.3.2002.