EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/206

(2004/C 84 E/0251)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0445/04

by Mario Mastella (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 February 2004)

Subject: Crisis at the AST plant in Terni

The German group Thyssen-Krupp, the leading steel producer which owns the AST plant at Terni in Italy, recently announced the closure of the electrical steel department there.

This decision will affect at least 900 workers, including those in related industries. The closure seems totally unjustified and has aroused considerable dismay and prompted strong protest from the workers involved and the trade unions represented in the firm. The closure would entail the dismantling of a well-established industrial centre which is at the forefront of the industry because of its facilities, equipment and, above all, the highly skilled workforce, and would have significant social repercussions, since it contributes to a high level of employment in the area, especially among young people.

Can the Commission therefore:

— ascertain whether the decision was taken in accordance with the European directives safeguarding workers and whether, more specifically, it may constitute an infringement of Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 (1) of 12 December 2002 on State aid for employment;

— ascertain whether consultations were held in good time between management and workers' representatives, as stipulated in Article 2 of Council Directive 98/59/EC (2);

— state, finally, what steps it will take to safeguard the future of the 900 workers, since Italy continues to have one of the highest rates of unemployment in the European Union?

Joint answer

to Written Questions P-0376/04, P-0388/04 and P-0445/04

given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 2004)

The Commission has no authority to prevent or defer the closure of a company or a part thereof. It falls to the social partners and other third parties to negotiate with the company a possible alternative. The Commission hopes, however, that it will be possible to find an acceptable solution in order to alleviate the important impact for the region affected by this restructuring.

With regard to possible use of the Structural Funds, the Commission can confirm that the Terni area is eligible for funding from the European Regional Development Fund. The regional authorities may therefore ask for funding, for example as part of the mid-term review of the Umbria SPD in 2004, for measures to redevelop the Terni region in order to address the impact of the company closure.

Similarly, as far as the intervention of the European Social Fund (ESF) is concerned, the Commission informs the Honourable Members that the Operational Programme for the Umbria Region has an ESF budget of over EUR 97 million, which accounts for 45 % of the total programme, the rest being supplied by national funds. The region of Umbria published on the 26th January 2003, an Interregional call for proposals for the Iron and Steel Sector: ‘Dispositions for Projects Submission — under the Regional Operational Programme Objective 3, 2000-2006’. The call is financed under Measures A2, A3 and D1 of the Regional Operational Programme objective 3.

The interventions, which have or are being funded, are aimed at:

— introduction/re-Introduction in the Labour Market of young people and adults under a preventive approach. (Measure A2, Funding EUR 350 000);

— introduction/re-Introduction in the Labour Market of both men and women who were unemployed for more than six or twelve months (Measure A3, Funding EUR 350 000);

— development of Life long learning, flexibility of the Labour Market and competitiveness in both public and private enterprises. (Measure Dl, Funding EUR 500 000).

Several Community Directives lay down procedures of information and of consultation of workers' representatives which can prove to be applicable in the event of closures of companies, in particular Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning collective redundancies, and Council Directive 94/45/EC, of 22 September 1994, concerning the European Works Councils. Another directive was also adopted on 11 March 2002 by the Parliament and the Council with the aim of supplementing the Community mechanism on the matter (Directive 2002/14/EC establishing a general framework relating to information and consultation of workers in the EC). The first two Directives were transposed in the national laws of the Member States (the third having to be transposed only by 23 March 2005). It is up to the competent national authorities (notably courts) to appreciate their correct and effective application in each case.

It is important to keep in mind that the Directive 98/59/EC on collective redundancies stipulates that, when an employer envisages collective redundancies, it is required to carry out, in good time, consultations with the workers' representatives with a view to reaching an agreement. These consultations cover at least the possibilities of avoiding or of reducing collective redundancies as well as the possibilities of alleviating their consequences by recourse to social accompanying measures aiming, at in particular, aid for redeployment and retraining of the redundant workers.

Because of the widespread concerns about restructuring and its social consequences the Commission has sought to widen and deepen the debate on the contribution that can be made at Community level to ensuring that restructuring is managed having due regard to its social consequences. In 2002, Commission adopted the first stage of consultation of the social partners: ‘Anticipating and managing change: a dynamic approach to the social aspects of corporate restructuring’. The paper advocated a positive approach to corporate restructuring balancing the interests of businesses faced with changes in the conditions governing their activity and those of employees threatened with the loss of their jobs.

In response to the paper, the social partners agreed to explore the possibilities of social dialogue on this issue and included it as a key element of their joint work programme adopted in November 2002. Following a number of seminars exploring practical experience on restructuring, the social partners submitted to the Commission in October 2003 a joint text: ‘Orientations for reference in managing change and its social consequences’. The Commission very much welcomes the fact that the social partners have indicated their intention to pursue work on topics relevant to this theme under their work programme for the period 2003-2005.

A number of other initiatives pursued by the Commission are also relevant to the issue of corporate restructuring:

— follow-up to the Green Paper on Corporate Social Responsibility and the subsequent Communication of the Commission (3). The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility implies a continuous commitment by business to behave fairly and responsibly and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the work force and their families as well as of the local community and society at large, including in times of restructuring and in the anticipation of change;

— the Communication from the Commission, ‘The European Social Dialogue, a force for innovation and change’ (4). In the Communication, the Commission underlines that attainment of the strategic goals set in Lisbon -full employment and reinforced social cohesion- depends, to a considerable extent, on the action taken by the social partners at all levels. European social dialogue is therefore seen as a key tool for ensuring the positive management of change, in order to reconcile the flexibility essential to businesses with the security needed by employees, particularly in the event of major restructuring;

— a European Monitoring Centre on Change (EMCC) has been established to provide accessible, reliable data and opportunities to exchange views, ideas and practice to bring about better understanding, anticipation and management of change. The EMCC's objective is to provide the tools for key actors in European social policy to make more informed decisions about managing the processes of change.

As regards the verification of a violation of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 (5), the Commission does not have information that any aid has been granted to Acciai Speciali Terni under this Regulation.

From the elements of information submitted by the Honourable Member, it cannot be concluded that there has been a violation of the Community competition rules, in particular, of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (6) and Article 82 of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 337, 13.12.2002, p. 3.

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

(3) COM(2002) 347 final.

(4) COM(2002) 341 final.

(5) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of Articles87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment.

(6) Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings.