Commission Communication concerning the Development of the Social Dialogue at Community level
Date: 1996-09-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European social policy, employment policy, social dialogue (EU), social partners

COMMISSION  OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES 

•ù 

TÛT 

Brussels,  18.09.1*)% 
COM(%)  448  final 

Commission  Communication  concerning the Development  of 
the Social Dialogue at Community  level 

Commission  Communication  concerning the Development  of 
the  Social Dialogue at Community  level 

Contents: 

Page: 

1. WHAT  IS THE  PURPOSE  OF THIS  COMMUNICATION? 

2.  AN ASSESSMENT  OF THE  SOCIAL DIALOGUE  AND 

PERSPECTIVES  FOR ITS  DEVELOPMENT 

A  The Interprofessional  social  dialogue 

A.I 
ATI 

Val  Duchesse  Social  Dialogue 
Interprofessional  Advisory  Committees 

B  Sectoral -social dialogue 

C  The  Standing  Committee  on  Employment 

D  Social  Dialogue  under the Agreement  on Social  Policy 

D.I 
D.II 

Consultation  of the  Social  Partners 
Negotiation  under the Agreement  on Social Policy 

E  Broader  issues for  the development  of  social  dialogue 

2 

2 

2 
4 

6 

8 

11 

11 
13 

14 

3.  CONCLUSIONS 

16 

ANNEXES 

Annex I 

A description  of how the  Social Dialogue works 

Annex  II 

The  institutional  framework  (structures)  of the  Social  Dialogue 

Annex  III 

List of European social partner organisations currently consulted in accordance 
with  Article  3 of the Agreement  on Social Policy 

A<L 

1. 

WHAT  IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS  COMMUNICATION? 

1. 
In  view  of  the  major  policy  changes  facing  the  European  Union,  the  Commission 
considers  that  it  is  time  to  reflect  on  the  whole  framework  of  the  social  dialogue  at 
Community  level.  The Commission has a formal  obligation under the Treaty  (Art.  118b) to 
develop the social dialogue between management and labour (the social partners) at European 
level.  Furthermore,  under  the  Agreement  attached  to  the  Protocol  on  Social  Policy  in  the 
Treaty  on European  Union  (the  Agreement on  Social  Policy), the  Commission  has the task 
of  promoting  the  consultation  of  the  social  partners  at  Community  level  and  taking  any 
relevant measures to facilitate the social dialogue.  The aim of this Communication, therefore, 
is to find  ways to strengthen  the social dialogue, to make it more adaptable and to associate 
the work of the social partners more closely  in the development  and implementation  of EU 
policies, particularly  employment  and economic growth. 

In the Medium Term Social Policy Action Programme1 the Commission undertook to 
2. 
present  a  number  of  different  documents  in  the  field  of  social  dialogue,  reviewing  the 
Standing Committee on Employment, the sectoral social dialogue and the development of the 
social dialogue in general.  The Commission has decided to regroup all three subjects  in this 
Communication,  which  is  consultative  in  form,  so  that  the  issues  to  be  tackled  and  the 
different  possible  solutions can be  identified  in  a coherent way.  The  Communication  also 
fulfils  a commitment jn the 1993 Communication concerning the application of the Agreement 
on Social Policy2, for  a regular pattern  of appraisal  and re-examination  of the way  in which 
social  dialogue works. 

3. 
The social dialogue at European level covers discussions between the European social 
partners, joint  action  and possible negotiation between them, as well as discussions between 
the social partners and the institutions of the European Union.  It has played an important role 
in policy development and policy implementation ever since the establishment of the European 
Coal and Steel Community.  It has allowed the social partners to communicate their views to 
the EU institutions, and reciprocally to informing their members of initiatives of direct interest 
to  them.  This  has  improved  the  quality  of  political  decisions  and  facilitated 
the 
implementation  of policies in the economic  and  social field. 

4. 
The  most  important  issue  facing  the  EU  is  employment,  on  which  there  have  been 
significant  developments  in  the  last  few  years,  notably  the  Commission's  White  Paper  on 
Growth, Competitiveness and Employment3, and the action points on employment  agreed at 
the  European  Council  in  Essen.  These  have  led  to  closer  co-ordination  of  employment 
policies,  and  have  opened  the  way  for  a  much  greater  role  for  the  social  partners  in 
supporting,  completing  and  possibly  correcting  Community  action  in  this  domain.  The 
importance  of  this  role  is  reflected  in  the  proposal  by  the  Commission  for  a  Pact  of 
Confidence for Employment in Europe, and leads inevitably to a greater focusing of the social 
dialogue, including  sectoral dialogue, on employment.  Adapting  social  dialogue structures, 
some of  which  were not  developed  to  cope with  this task,  is a major  preoccupation  of  this 
Communication. 

1 

2 

3 

COM (95)  134,  12 April 1995 

COM(93) 600 final,  14 December  1993; notably paras. 21 and 49 

COM(93) 700 final, 5 December 1993 

5. 
The Commission's approach is based on the view, as explained  in its Opinion on the 
IGC, that the Agreement on  Social Policy must be integrated  into the Treaty.  This view is 
supported by all but one of the Members States, the European Parliament, the ECOSOC and 
the  Committee  of  Regions.  Such  a  step  would  provide  the  EU  with  greater  authority  to 
address the social  challenges with which it is faced,  and would  ensure a central  role  for  the 
social  dialogue  in  preparing  the EU response to these challenges. 

6. 
In  setting  out  its  analysis,  the  Commission  is  aware  of  the  importance  of  a  wider 
partnership and the involvement of other interest groups in a wider civic dialogue, particularly 
in relation to the issues of employment and social cohesion, as evidenced by their participation 
in the  Social Policy  Forum organised  by the Commission in March  1996.  The Commission 
will  continue  to  consult  non-governmental  organisations  on  a  wide-range  of  social  issues. 
However,  this  Communication  focuses  on  the  dialogue  involving  representatives  of 
management and labour concerning employment, industrial relations and working conditions, 
for which the Commission has an explicit responsibility  in the Treaty, and which rests on the 
role  and  tradition  of  social  dialogue at national  level. 

This  Communication  contains  an  analysis of  the  potential  of  the  social  dialogue,  as 
7. 
well  as  an  objective  appraisal  of  the  efficiency  and  impact  of  the  current  structures.  The 
Commission  has  posed  a  series  of  questions  concerning  possible  steps  for  developing  the 
social dialogue and, where appropriate, stated its views on a number of issues where changes 
are  required.  On  this  basis,  the  Commission  wishes  to  stimulate  a  debate  with  the  social 
partner  organisations  and  with  the  EU  institutions,  and  then  to  incorporate  the  most 
appropriate solutions'for the development of the social dialogue into a second Communication 
in  1997.  To  achieve  this  objective  the  Commission  wishes  to  receive  the  views  of  all 
interested  parties  on the issues raised by 31 December  1996. 

2. 

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE DIALOGUE AND PERSPECTIVES FOR IIS DEVELOPMENT 

The social dialogue has a number of different  forms  and is carried  out with  differing 
8. 
participating  organisations.  The  Commission  has  deliberately  kept the  description  of  these 
features to a minimum, preferring  to concentrate on identifying  the strengths and weaknesses 
and  suggesting  possibilities  for  reform  and  development.  The  social  dialogue  bodies  are 
analyzed  one-by-one,  as  well  as  a  small  number  of  broader  issues,  and  the  Commission 
suggestions  for  action  or  questions  for  debate  identified  alongside.  A  more  detailed 
description  of the results of the social dialogue is set out in Annex I, while Annex II  contains 
a  listing  of the  various  structures  and committees. 

A 

THE  INTERPROFESSIONAL  SOCIAL  DIALOGUE 

A.I  Val  Duchesse  Social  Dialogue 

Situation 
9. 
The Val Duchesse Social Dialogue, named after  the place where the first meeting was 
held  in  1985,  brings  together  the  three  European  organisations  who  represent  the  main 
national  interprofessional  employer  and  trade  union  confederations.  While  meetings  have 
taken  place  under  different  formulations,  including  'Social  Dialogue  Summits'  and,  since 
1992, the 'Social Dialogue Committee', the Val Duchesse social dialogue is informal and voluntary. 

10. 
Under the informal  Val Duchesse system, the social partners have negotiated a number 
of joint  opinions  on  important  policy  matters  for  submission  to  the  Commission  and  the 
Council. Of equal significance  were the joint declarations on macro-economic, labour market 
and training  issues, and the high-level discussion during a number of Summits in the  period 
1985-1995. In total 21 joint opinions and declarations have been adopted, two key agreements 
concluded, and seven high-level summits have been held involving the Commission  President 
and  senior  representatives  of the national  and European  social  partner  organisations. 

This interprofessional  social dialogue has thus made a positive  contribution  for  over 
11. 
ten years now, allowing the social partners to give their views on developments  in European 
social policy and to take their own initiative in this domain. Through the measures they  have 
taken, the social  partners have helped to stimulate  and orientate  Community  developments -
on the question  of employment,  on macroeconomic policies, on training  initiatives  or at  the 
1991  1GC on  the changes to the wording  of Article  118b of the Treaty. 

12. 
In the  last  months, there have been  major  political  developments  which  demonstrate 
the  important  role  of  the  social  dialogue.  The Joint  Declaration  on the  Essen  Employment 
Process,  which  was  transmitted  to  the  Madrid  European  Council,  was  an  important 
contribution  to  reinforcing  the  EU's  key  policy  objectives.  Secondly,  the  first  European 
Agreement  (the  Agreement  on Parental  Leave) was a significant  development  which  shows 
that the social partners are willing to assume the responsibilities given to them in the TEU and 
thereby  play  a  direct  role  alongside  the  EU  institutions  in  the  formulation  of  EU  policy. 
Lastly,  the creation  of the  European  Centre  for  Industrial  Relations, or the  launching  of  the 
"support  system  for  innovatory  practises  in training  in companies"  drawn  up jointly  by  the 
European social partners, illustrate clearly that effective joint action is possible at Community 
level. 

Lessons  to  be  learned 
13. 
The  launch  of the  Val  Duchesse  Social  Dialogue  in  1985 was a key  development  in 
attempts  to  revive  the  EEC  and  to  make  a  reality  the  free  movement  of  people,  goods  and 
services.  Considering  how  unpromising  the  initial  situation  was  when  the  Val  Duchesse 
experiment  got  underway  in  1985, the  fact  that  any  direct  dialogue  has  been  established 
between  the  social  partners must rank  as an achievement  in itself. 

Over the past few years it has certainly  led to a better mutual understanding  between 
14. 
social partners at European and at national  level.  But the social dialogue was not an end  in 
itself - it also gave more legitimacy to the social and economic policies which were being put 
in place at European  level.  This is significant  when we consider that the circumstances  and 
character  of the national  organisations  vary  considerably  from  country to  country. 

15. 
The results of the social dialogue deserve much greater attention.  They are not made 
sufficiently  clear  to  the  members  of  the  social  partners'  organisations  at  grass  roots  level. 
Therefore,  there  is  a  need  to  ensure  greater  transparency  in  and  awareness  of  the  different 
social  dialogue  activities among  all interested  parties.  The success of the  social  dialogue at 
European  level  requires the involvement  of  social  partners from  every  level: local, regional 
and  national. 

Perspectives  for  development 

Continuation of the  Val Duchesse model * 
16. 

The  Val  Duchesse  dialogue  has  made  significant  achievements,  and  it  shows  rich 

potential  for developing a partnership approach to social policy, which can play an important 
role  in  supporting  steps  towards  European  integration.  Therefore,  the  Commission  will 
continue to give its full support to the "Val Duchesse" social dialogue in the spirit of the 
Article  118B of the Treaty. 

Participation 
17. 
Participation  in the Val Duchesse social dialogue is based on the mutual  recognition 
of  the  parties,  not  on  a  decision  of  the  Commission.  Nevertheless,  the  Commission  has 
received  a  series  of  requests  to  participate  in  the  interprofessional  social  dialogue  from 
organisations  who were not party to the original  initiative. 

18. 
The  issue  of  participation  is  dealt  with  in  more  detail  in  the  section  of  this 
Communication dealing with the consultation and negotiation procedures under the Agreement 
on  Social  Policy.  The  Commission  is  conscious  of  the  practical  problems  posed  by  a 
multiplicity  of  potential  actors,  and  believes  that  only  the  social  partner  organisations 
themselves  are  in  a  position  to  develop  their  own  dialogue  and  negotiating  structures. 
Nonetheless,  there  continue  to  be  some  problems  concerning  the  participation  and 
representation  of  certain  organisations  in  this  process.  The  Commission  cannot  designate 
participants  in the Social Dialogue Committee, but calls on the social partners  themselves 
to reinforce  the social  dialogue by ensuring adequate  representation  of all  appropriate 
interests. 

A.II 

Interprofessional Advisory  Committees 

Situation 
19. 
The interprofessional  Advisory Committees have the task of advising the Commission 
in the drawing up of specific  policies and assisting the Commission  in their  implementation, 
and have an important role in communicating the views of those who are directly affected  by 
Community policies.  There exist also a number of other consultative structures which involve 
the  social  partners (for  example the LEONARDO Committee  or the  annual consultation  on 
the  Structural  Funds). 

20.  .  The  ECSC  Treaty  (Article  18)  itself  recognised  the  role  of  the  Social  Partners  by 
establishing a consultative committee, containing representatives of governments and the social 
partners.  Apart  from  this  committee  there  are  six  advisory  committees  in the  social  policy 
area4, which  are appointed by the Commission,  on the basis of nominations by the Member 
States, with  representatives  of governments, trade unions  and  employer  organisations.  The 
Commission consults them regularly on technical and policy matters (e.g. implementation of 
the  Social  Fund  Regulations,  drawing  up  of  technical  health  and  safety  regulations  in  the 
context  of the framework  health and  safety  Directive, vocational training, etc.). 

Lessons  to  be  learned 
21. 
Systematic  and  timely  consultation  in  the  advisory  committees  on  proposals  being 
prepared  by the  Commission does not always take place.  The advisory  Committees are not 
actively  involved  in the  implementation  of policies. An example  of this is the current  poor 
functioning  of the Committee of the European  Social Fund, despite its important  position in 

These are the Committee of the European Social Fund, and the Advisory Committees on Social Security 
for  Migrant  Workers,  on  Freedom  of  Movement  for  Workers,  on  Vocational  Training,  on  Safety, 
Hygiene  and  Health  Protection  at  Work,  and  on  Equal  Opportunities  for  Women  and Men. 

relation to a key  structural  instrument of the EU. 

input  with  regard  on  policy. 

Social  partners  often  find  that  they  have  to  rely  on  other  means  than  the  advisory 
22. 
committees  to  have  an  effective 
In  June  1993  the 
interprofessional  Social  Partners  adopted  a  recommendation  on  the  advisory  committees, 
which  supported  the principle of such committees, but was critical  of their  operation  and of 
some of their structures, for example the existence of separate Committees on social  security 
of migrant workers and on freedom of movement for workers.  Social partners also experience 
difficulties  in  trying  to  participate  actively  in  the  operation  of  the  Structural  Funds  in  the 
context  of the mechanisms currently in place to provide for  their  participation. 

23. 
As a result of recent developments, the European social partner organisations are now 
full  members of the Advisory Committee on equal opportunities between women and  men5. 
In the other Committees, however the European social partners are either not present or only 
have observer  status.  Added to the fact that the national social partner representatives in the 
Committees are nominated  according to very different  procedures  and criteria depending  on 
the Member State involved, this situation means that the position of the social partners is often 
not coordinated  with the views expressed in other  fora. 

24. 
This  has been  highlighted  since the  introduction  of the new consultation  procedures 
under  Article  3  of  the  Agreement  on  Social  Policy,  where  the  existence  of  the 
interprofessional  advisory  committees  means  that  two  procedures  sometimes  operate  in 
parallel:  consultation  of  European  social  partners  by  written  procedure  and  consultation  of 
individual  social  partner representatives  in the advisory committees. 

Perspectives  for  development 

Review of structures and tasks 
As the functioning  and working methods of the advisory Committees continue to be 
25. 
problematic,  their  continuation  in their  present  form will  be examined.  There  is also  a 
need to define  clearly the different  tasks and objectives of the advisory committees on social 
policies and vocational training, and of the consultative committees operating  in the  context 
of  sectoral  policies. 

26.  Where  possible,  the  tasks  of  the  advisory  committees  could  be  streamlined.  For 
example, the Health and Safety Committee has recently agreed to revise its working methods, 
by reducing the number of plenary meetings and electing a programme committee.  Another 
suggestion  is that  the advisory  committee  on social security for  migrants workers  and 
the advisory committee on freedom of movement for workers could be merged and cover 
all problems linked to free  movement of workers and questions relating to immigration  from 
third countries, as was suggested by social partners in their joint statement of June  1993.  This 
would  of  course  involve  a close examination  of the detailed  regulations  in place. 

Are there other reforms which should be considered for  improving their functioning? 

Adapting membership 
The Commission considers that it is necessary to review the status  of the European 
27. 
Social partner organisations on the advisory committees, with the objective of assuring the 

Since a Commission  decision on 19/7/95, 10 representatives of the European social partner organisations 
are members  of the advisory  committee  on equal  opportunities  for  women  and men. 

autonomy  of  the  social  partners  and  at the  same time  ensuring  greater  continuity  with  any 
bilateral  consultations  which may take place under the Agreement  on Social  Policy. 

B. 

SECTORAL  SOCIAL  DIALOGUE 

Situation 
28. 
Some of the earliest social dialogue structures were in the sectors, often  those with a 
particular significance  in economic of employment terms.  They are organised either as Joint 
Committees  (JCs), appointed by the Commission usually in sectors corresponding  to  one of 
the common  policies, or Informal  Working Parties  (IWPs), organised  in response  to  a joint 
request  of the social  partners.  In either case, the Commission identified  those  organisations 
who represent at European level the national confederations  in the sectors concerned, and the 
members of the JCs or  IWPs are nominated  directly  by the social partners. 

29. 
There  are  ten  Joint  Committees  and  ten  informal  working  groups  in  sixteen  key 
sectors.  Since  they  were  set  up,  both  the  JCs  and  IWPs  have  issued  nearly  one  hundred 
opinions and recommendations focusing above all on the Community proposals for legislation 
or regulation  having  social  implications  for  their particular  industry. 

Lessons  to  be  learned 
30. 
Thanks  to  these  opinions  and  recommendations,  the  Commission  has  been  well-
informed  about  the  positions  of the partners  on  the  objectives  and  content  of  its proposals. 
The  process  has  demonstrated  in  most  cases  that  the  social  partners  are  able  to  respond 
pertinently  and  in  reasonable  time  with  their  views on the  possible  scope  of  a  Community 
action  or the envisaged  proposal,  and that a high degree of cooperation exists.6 

Although consultations have been useful,  it has to be underlined that the Commission 
31. 
normally  is not obliged to hold consultations during the stage preceding the formal  adoption 
of a text  (the exception being social policy where there are formal  procedures under  Article 
3  of  the  Agreement  on  Social  Policy).  The potential  of the JCs and  IWPs  as  consultative 
bodies has therefore  not been'used to the full  in respect of envisaged proposals having  social 
implications.  The  opinions  of  the  JCs and  IWPs on  envisaged  proposals  have,  up  to  now, 
been requested only on a few occasions and the sectoral bodies have often been unable to give 
their  opinion  until  after  the Commission has adopted  the text in question. 

32.  A further  point is that the terms of reference  of the JCs (and mutatis mutandis of the 
IWPs  as  well)  are  restricted 
to  the  social  aspects  of  Community  policies.  The 
compartmentalisation  between  social  and  economic  aspects  is  artificial,  usually  to  the 
detriment of  social  policy  considerations, which tend to be neglected.  Furthermore, over the 
years  the  Commission  has  established  various  technical  and  consultative  committees  in 
addition to the JCs and IWPs on which the social partners are not represented on a joint basis. 

33. 
Although it is true that the social dialogue has demonstrated a strong continuity  over 
the  years,  one  fault  has been  the tendency  of  some  of  the  JCs  and  IWPs to  become  over-
institutionalised  or  to  preserve  structures  which  have outlived  their  usefulness.  With  more 
than  130 meetings per year (in  1994) and numerous participants at each meeting (between 24 
and  50), these bodies impose a heavy budgetary and administrative burden. Attention  should 

Annex  1  includes  a description  of how  consultation  and  dialogue have worked  in the sectors 

6 

be drawn here in particular  to the specific  workload of the JCs, with their plenary  meetings 
(usually  one or two a year), their  Bureau meetings (up to four  a year) plus the meetings of 
their various working parties. Because of the status they convey, in the past the social partners 
have  preferred  additional  JCs  (for  example  on  postal  services),  despite  the  fact  that  it 
represents  a heavy  workload  for  the Commission,  and that more efficient  means exist. 

34. 
The Joint Committees and Working Parties are focused  on quite specific policy areas, 
which often correspond to the interests of the branch organisations (trades unions) or industry 
associations  (employers).  This  means  that  information  on  the  results  and  activities  of  the 
sectoral  social  dialogue  has  tended  not  to  be  widely  diffused  outside  the  groups  directly 
concerned,  and  there  has  been  very  little  interlinking  between  sectors  or  with  the 
interprofessional  dialogue. This lack of exchange and information  must be addressed  so that 
the  sectors  can  learn  from  experience  in other  areas, and  take  account  of  horizontal  policy 
considerations  being  developed  in  the  interprofessional  dialogue,  while  the  latter  must  be 
aware  of the  issues and concerns of the sectors. 

In  view  of  the  current  exercise  of  assessing  the  Social  Dialogue,  the  Commission 
35. 
postponed the renewal of the mandate of some of the Joint Committees, and has yet to  modify 
their  statutes  in  order  to  appoint  representatives  from  the  three  newest  Member  States. 
However  representatives  from  Sweden,  Finland  and  Austria  will  be  formally  nominated  as 
soon as possible. 

Perspectives  for development 

Review of the structures 
36. 
The fact that the social dialogue structures were developed on an ad hoc basis, largely 
reflecting  the historical  importance  of a  sectoral  policy  rather  than  any  overall  strategy  for 
sectoral  dialogue,  has  created  inconsistencies  in  the  sectoral  dialogue  coverage.  More 
substance could be given to the social dialogue at sectoral level by focusing it on strategic 
issues  and  sectors,  particularly  where the  social  partners  are  clearly  active.  These  priority 
issues should  cover  the social  implications of the relevant  social  policy  as well  as questions 
of  general  interest  to the  sectoral  social  partners,  from  employment,  work  organisation  and 
the  improvement  of working  conditions, to vocational  training  and the acquisition  of skills. 

The Commission wishes to have the views of all interested parties  on how to develop a more 
effective and relevant sectoral social dialogue. 

Organisation  of consultations 
The Commission will strengthen co-operation and co-ordination within its services 
37. 
concerning the consultation procedures, which sets out the obligations of the Commission's 
services  prior  to  preparing  formal  proposals  for  the  Commission,  and  commits  the 
Directorates-General  to  sectoral  consultations  during  the  preparatory  stage  of  Commission 
initiatives.  This  will  also  sets  limits  on  the  number  of  meetings  and  the  number  of 
participants in such consultations, and provide for equal treatment of all sectoral committees. 

38. 
A further  suggestion is for the Commission to move some of the tasks relating to the 
JCs and IWPs from  DGV to the relevant sectoral DGs. In the belief that the sectoral JCs and 
IWPs  are the  forum  where  social  partners  can  express their  views  on  all  measures  taken  in 
the context of their sector, such a move could reduce the compartmentalisation  between social 
policy  and  the  social  effects  of  sectoral  policy.  Under  this  system,  which  aims  for  a 
rationalisation  of consultative bodies, the responsibility  and  administrative  structure, at  least 

tor  die  Joint  Committees  which  cover  a  Common  Policy  of  the  EU,  would  involve  the 
relevant Directorate General more directly, with DGV retaining responsibility for  coordination, 
for  dialogue  on  social  policy  and  for  monitoring  the  effectiveness  of  social  dialogue  and  its 
input  to  employment  policies. 

What  are your  views  on  the  organisation  of  responsibilities  for  sectoral  dialogue?  What  do 
you  think  of  the  alternative  suggestion  for  the  management  of  consultations? 

A  study  of  the  representativeness  of  social  partner  organisations 
The  Commission  does  not  have  a  comprehensive  picture  of  the  activities  and 
39. 
membership  of  sectoral  social  partner  organisations,  especially  as  the  changing  social  and 
economic  priorities of the EU has an impact on the importance of different  sectors and on  the 
relationship  between  partners  within  those  sectors.  A  study  of  the  representativeness  of 
social partner organisations in the sectors will be launched in  1996, which will also  update 
ihe  data  collected  on  the  representativeness  of  interprofessional  organisations  collected  in  a 
similar  study  in  1992. 

Adapting  the  membership 
40. 
The  sectoral  Joint  Committees  cannot  continue  to  expand  exponentially  with  every 
enlargement,  so  without  prejudice  to  the  overall  review  of  structures  referred  to  above,  the 
Commission  considers  that  in  order  to  ensure  efficiency  the  number  of  members  of  the 
Joint  Committees  should  be  reduced. 
In  changing  the  Decisions  creating  the  Joint 
Committees,  the  Commission  will take account of special circumstances  in the  representation 
of  social partners, using  the study referred  to above, including the problem  of certain  sectoral 
organisations  who  are  not  members  of  specific  Joint  Committees. 

Operational  reforms 
The  Commission  will  proceed  with  operational  reforms  in the  sectoral  dialogue,  with 
41. 
particular  attention needing to be paid to the problem of ever-increasing demands for  meetings 
and  the  associated  problems  of  interpretation  and translation  resources.  The  sectoral  JCs  and 
IWPs  should  be  able  to  operate  in  a  more  flexible  manner  and  under  a  restricted  linguistic 
regime,  in order  to make consultation  in advance  more feasible.  The use of new  technologies 
could be envisaged  to enhance the ability of the European social partners to communicate  with 
their  national  members  For  example,  by  equipping  them  with  communications  technology, 
the  conditions  for  a  fast  and  flexible  dissemination  of  information  would  be  created,  which 
would  also  allow  for  a  quicker  response  to  consultations. 

How  can  the  sectoral  dialogue  operate  more  effectively  and  with  a  view  to  the  efficient 
allocation  of  resources? 

Improving  information  and  coordination 
42. 
In any  event,  it is proposed to strengthen inter-sectoral coordination, bringing  together 
representatives  from  the different  sectoral  dialogues for  information  from  the Commission  on 
the  initiatives  likely  to  interest  them  and  an  exchange  of  information  between  the  sectoral 
social  partners  on  the  progress  of  their  work.  This  would  provide  for  a  more  efficient  way 
of  informing  social  partners,  avoiding  duplication  and  ensuring  that  important  information 
went  to  all  sectors. 

What are your  views  on  the  co-ordination  of  the sectoral  social  dialogue  and  communicating 
its  results  ? 

C. 

THE STANDING  COMMITTEE ON  EMPLOYMENT 

Situation 
43. 
The Standing Committee on Employment (SCE) was established by a Council Decision 
in  December  1970,  and  its  composition  was  amended  in  January  19757.  It  is  a  tripartite 
consultative  body  bringing together  the Council, the Commission and  representatives  of the 
social partners. 

The tasks of the SCE are laid down in Article 2 of the Council Decision  establishing 

44. 
it.  "The  task of the Committee shall be to ensure,  in compliance  with the Treaties and with 
due regard for the powers of the institutions and organs of the Communities,  that there should 
be  continuous  dialogue, joint  action  and  consultation  between the  Council -  or, where 
appropriate,  the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States - the  Commission 
and the two sides of industry in order to facilitate coordination by the Member States of their 
employment policies in harmony with the objectives of the Community.  The  Committee shall 
fulfil its function before any measures are adopted by the relevant institutions". 

45. 
Between  1971 and  1996, the  Committee  held  49  meetings. It did  not  meet  between 
October  1972 and  February  1975, nor during the second  half of  1992.  Discussions between 
Social  partners,  the  Council  and  the  Commission  have  also  taken  place  in  other  fora.  For 
example, in recent years,  representatives of the social partners have been invited to take part 
in an exchange of views with Ministers on questions relating to employment and social policy 
immediately prior to informal  meetings of the Social Affairs  Council.  In addition the French 
Presidency decided to organise an informal  meeting of the Committee on 30 March  1995 in 
the form  of  a "Social  Conference". 

46.  More  recently  the  informal  European  Council  in  Turin  put  forward  the  idea  of  a 
Tripartite  Conference  on  Employment  and  Growth,  with  participation  based  on  the 
membership  of  the  SCE,  which  was  held  in  Rome  on  14/15  June  1996.  The  Conference 
highlighted  the  usefulness  and  relevance  of  the  'tripartite'  approach  (even  if  it  does  not 
correspond  exactly to the tripartite model from  the Member  States) particularly  in regard  to 
action on employment which concerns the Member  States, the EU institutions and the social 
partners. 

Lessons to  be  learned 
Over the years meetings of the Standing Committee have discussed a very wide range 
47. 
of  questions  relating  to  employment:  the  operation  of  the  labour  market,  reorganisation  of 
work,  employment  for  young  people,  technological  changes,  long-term  unemployment, 
women's employment, immigration and continuing vocational training. Despite the abundance 
of  subjects,  these meetings have only  rarely  resulted  in real  consultation. 

48. 
The  ambitions  with  regard  to  joint  action,  which  underlay  the  setting  up  of  the 
Standing  Committee  on  Employment,  have  been  realised  only  to  a  very  limited  extent. 
Debates within the Committee are mostly limited to a succession of interventions setting out 
each member's position; this is far from being a debate, let alone joint action. As a ritual with 
no obligation to achieve a result, the Committee no longer attracts the attention of the leading 
players. The  large number of participants often  leads to a great deal of unhelpful  repetition. 

Council  Decision  of  14  December  1970  (OJ  L  273,  17.12.70),  amended  by  Council  Decision  of 
20 January  1975 (OJ  L 21, 28.01.75). 

49. 
Although the parties are sounded out in advance, the conclusions of the SCE meetings 
are  entirely  at the  responsibility  of the  Presidency.  They  vary  in their  content  and  are  little 
used. Therefore  the responsibility  of the various parties involved  for  developing joint action 
on employment  is not  engaged  by the present  functioning  of the SCE. 

Perspectives  for  development 

Preserving the  objectives 
50. 
The tasks set out in the  1970 Decision establishing  the Committee remain  valid. The 
role  and  objectives  are  still  relevant,  particularly  with  regard  to  the  implementation  of  the 
conclusions  of  the  Essen  European  Council.  The  European  Council  in  Madrid  decided  to 
create  a  permanent  and  stable  structure  for  employment  policy,  including  an  Employment 
Committee of senior representatives of the Member States, and a close coordination between 
employment  and  economic  policy.  The  Commission  considers  that  the  reform  of  the 
Standing  Committee  on  Employment  should  be  linked  to  the  implementation  of  this 
European Council decision on a stable structure for employment, given that this will lead 
to a new way of preparing  initiatives on employment  policy and will have an impact on the 
role of the SCE.  The results of the IGC in this domain, of course, will also have to be taken 
into  account. 

Renewal of working methods 
51. 
As  stated  in  the  1970  Decision,  continuity  in  the  work  of  the  Committee  should 
become a priority. This is a key to its success, enabling it to proceed  with analyses and make 
good  use  of  experience  acquired.  This  continuity  should  be  sought  in  organisational 
procedures and  in the choice of subjects  and their follow-up.  The SCE should  establish a 
work  programme,  setting  its  work  in  a  long-term  context.  The  Commission  could  also 
establish  a secretariat  to prepare the  SCE work 

Improving the output of the SCE 
52. 
An effective  Committee providing genuine Community  added value is a precondition 
for  successful  joint  action.  Committee  meetings  should  enable  the  Council  to  gain  a better 
awareness of the social partners' concerns. In keeping with this, the Committee's conclusions 
would  be  more  transparent  and  more  effective  if  they  were  truly joint  conclusions.  They 
should  be published  through official  channels and  systematically  forwarded  to the  European 
Council,  while  clearly  indicating  if  necessary  the  points  of  divergence  between  the  social 
partners on the one hand and the social  partners and the Council  on the other or, as the case 
may  be,  between  Member  States. 

Do you support the idea that the conclusions of SCE meetings must be given a higher profile? 

Updating the  membership 
53. 
The current composition  of the Committee should be modified  and  rationalised. 
Dating  from  1975, the relevant Council Decision has not been revised to take account of the 
successive  enlargements  of  the  Community  and  developments  affecting  the  representative 
organisations. Because it is called upon to discuss questions relating to trends in employment 
and  drafts  submitted  for  discussion  within the  Social  Affairs  Council, the  Committee  is the 
forum  for  the  expression  of  general  interests  and  solidarity  across  industry.  Its  composition 
should  reflect  this  approach,  concentrating  on  interprofessional  organisations  at  European 
level, particularly  as sectoral  consultation  bodies  also  exist. 

Liaison  committee 
The Commission proposes that, for the sake of clarity in debates and in order to avoid 
54. 
a  proliferation  of statements, the various social  partners' organisations  should  be called 
upon  to  express  their views through  a liaison committee. 

D. 

SOCIAL  DIALOGUE  UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON SOCIAL  POLICY 

55. 
The most significant  change in European social dialogue in recent years has been the 
introduction of the new consultation and negotiation mechanism under the Protocol on social 
policy attached to the Treaty on European Union.  The use of these mechanisms,  particularly 
the successful  completion of the negotiations leading to the first European Agreement between 
social partners, and its subsequent adoption by the Council, was an innovative and challenging 
experience  for  social  partners and the EU  institutions alike. 

D.I  Consultation  of the Social  Partners 

Situation 
56. 
The Commission has consulted the social partners on an informal basis for many years, 
but the Agreement on Social Policy formalised  its obligation to consult in advance on social 
policy  initiatives,  and the new consultation process is explained  in Annex I. 

57. 
The Agreement did not specify which social partner organisations were to be involved 
In  its  Communication  on  the  application  of  the 
in  Community-level  social  dialogue. 
Agreement on Social Policy, the Commission set out criteria to deal with the key issue of the 
organisations  that  can  be  considered  as  social  partners  for  the  purposes  of  consultation  at 
Community  level. 

58. 
A  list  of  the social  partner  organisations  which fulfil  these criteria  was compiled  on 
the basis of a study on the representativeness of such organisations conducted in collaboration 
with  the  Member  States.  Apart  from  the  major  interprofessional  umbrella  organisations 
UNICE,  CEEP  and  ETUC,  the  original  list  of  28  organisations  included  some  European 
organisations representing certain categories of workers or undertakings, such as UEAPME8 
or CEC9, and a series of sectoral employers' organisations (e.g. in the area of the distributive 
trades, banking,  insurance  and transport)10. 

59. 
In addition, the Commission continues its  policy of wide-ranging consultations which 
cover all European or, where appropriate, national organisations which might be affected  by 
the Community's social policy.  This wider consultation therefore  covers those organisations, 
who are  European  in vocation  but not represented  in most of the  Member  States, who  were 
excluded  from  the  list  annexed to the  Commission's  1993  Communication. 

Lessons to be learned 
60. 

The  consultations  have  worked  very  well  so  far,  and  the  Commission  is  generally 

8 

9 

10 

European  Association  of Craft,  Small  and Medium-sized  Enterprises. 

Confederation  Européen  des Cadres  (European  Management  Confederation). 

The  full  list  is set out  in  Annex  III 

11 

satisfied  with  the operation  of the procedures  established  in  its  1993 Communication.  The 
consultation  of  social  partners  does  not  in  itself  imply  access  to  negotiations,  and  the 
Commission  is  striving  to  hold  wider  consultations  with  all  European  social  partners 
organisations.  All the contributions received are fully  taken into account by the Commission. 
However,  the  first  experiences of  the new procedures  have  shown  that there  are  limitations 
to  the  capacity  of  the  social  partners  to  respond,  but  also  some  problems  with  regard  to 
procedure. 

61. 
The  list  of  organisations  corresponding  to  the  criteria  is  kept  under  review  by  the 
Commission, but certain problems identified  since  1993 suggest that the Commission  should 
re-evaluate  the  appropriateness  of  these  criteria  and  ensure  that  those  participating  are 
mandated  to  do  so,  and  that  the  views  submitted  under  consultations  organised  by  the 
Commission  are  representative. 

Perspectives  for  development 

Reviewing (he criteria for identifying organisations to be  consulted 

62. 
The European Parliament suggested adapting the criteria to determine the organisations 
to be consulted formally under the Agreement on Social Policy, established in the Commission 
Communication,  by  including  two further  considerations  to the  list: 

that  eligible  organisations  are  composed  of  organisations  representing  employers  or 
workers  with  membership  which  is voluntary  at both national  and  European  level; 
that they have a mandate from  their members to represent  them  in the context  of the 
Community  social  dialogue and can demonstrate  their  representativeness. 

Do you agree with adapting the representativeness criteria for organisations to be consulted'? 

The organisations consulted 
63. 
Based  on these  existing  criteria,  and  in  order  to ensure  the representativeness  of  the 
views  which  it  receives,  the  Commission  will  keep  under  review  the  list  of  European 
organisations to be consulted at interprofessional  and sectoral level.  This conforms with the 
undertaking  in  the Commission's  Communication  in  1993 to review the list  annexed  to  that 
Communication  in the  light  of experience. 

64. 
At  the  same  lime,  and  as  suggested-in  1993,  the  Commission  will  promote  the 
development  of  linking  structures between all social partners.  Special attention  will  be paid 
here  to  the  due  representation  of  small  and  medium-sized  undertakings.  In  that  spirit  the 
Commission  will  organise  regular  meetings  between  all  interested  social  partner 
organisations  for  information  and  an  exchange  of  views  on  developments  in  relation  to 
consultations and  social  policy  in general. 

For this to be successful,  what measures do the social partners  consider necessary in order 
to develop linking structures? 

Amending consultation procedures 
65. 
In  the  light  of  early  experience  with  consultations  based  on  Art.  3  of  the  Social 
Protocol,  the  Commission  considers  that  it  is  useful  to  amend  the  procedures  which  it 
established in the 1993 Communication concerning negotiations.  The time-limit of  the first-
stage consultations should be reconsidered.  The Commission  suggests that, while keeping 

12 

the general six-week time limit, the deadline for consultations should be adaptable and should 
be fixed by the Commission  on a case-by-case basis depending on the nature and complexity 
of  the  subject. 

Are there other procedural changes  which should be  considered? 

D.II  Negotiation  under the Agreement  on Social  Policy 

Situation 
66. 
The negotiation procedures are still relatively untried, but the first formal  negotiations 
ended  successfully  in  the  European  Agreement  between  social  partners  on  parental  leave, 
which was signed on  14 December  1995 and adopted by the Council as a Directive on 3 June 
1996.  The negotiation  procedures are described  in Annex  I. 

67. 
As the Commission makes greater use of the consultation procedures, so the potential 
for  negotiations grows accordingly.  Certain issues are clearly not suitable for  negotiation, as 
was the case for the recent consultations on a possible initiative to reverse the burden of proof 
in case of alleged  gender discrimination.  However, the social partners have recently  agreed 
to  open  formal  negotiations  on  the  vitally  important  subject  of  flexibility  in  working  time 
(fixed-term,  part-time  and  temporary  work) and  the security  of employees. 

Lessons  to  be  learned 
68. 
The experience of the negotiations and conclusion of the Agreement on Parental Leave 
brought  the  procedures  in  Articles  3  and  4  of  the  Protocol  into  focus,  and  confirmed  the 
analysis of the  Commission  set out in  its Communication  on the  Protocol  [COM(93)600  of 
December  1993].  A description  of the events leading to the signing of the Agreement by the 
Social  Partners,  and  its  subsequent  adoption  as  a  Directive,  is  included  in  Annex  1.  The 
following  remarks can be made concerning  this experience  of  forma! negotiations: 

the time elapsed between the signature of the framework  agreement  and the  adoption 
of the  Directive  was very  short; 

this  experience  has  made  it  clear  that,  where  the  signatory  parties  request  the 
implementation  of  an  agreement  through  a  Council  decision,  the  choice  of  legal 
instrument  depends on the content  of  the  agreement; 

the European  Parliament reacted critically to the fact that it has no role in this decision 
making  procedure  (as evidenced  in  its opinion  of  15 March  1996); 

the  Council  accepted  that  it  could  not  modify  the  agreement,  but  nevertheless 
expressed  its  concern  about  certain  elements  of  the  content,  which  some  Member 
States felt were the responsibility  of national  authorities or concerned procedural  and 
institutional  matters; 

certain  social partner  organisations have criticised the fact  that they were not party to 
the negotiations, and have questioned the validity of the Agreement on Parental Leave 
and whether it is applicable to them.  UEAPME have indicated their intention to have 
this question referred  to the Court of Justice.  Before transmitting the agreement to the 
Council  for  a decision, the Commission examined this issue carefully  and  considered 
the  criteria  of  representativeness 
that  the  three  organisations  involved  fulfilled 

13 

necessary  to  render  the agreement  valid.  The Commission  also organised  a  meeting 
of all organisations  who had been consulted on the initiative but who  were not party 
to the negotiations, to  inform  them  fully  about the  agreement. 

Perspectives  for  development 

Reviewing procedures 
69. 
As regards  negotiations, the Commission  would be happy to receive the views of all 
interested  parties  on the  lessons to be drawn  from  the first negotiation  (on  parental  leave) -
particularly  the procedural  aspects. This would clarify  the steps to be taken in the context of 
future  negotiations  so as to avoid  as many  difficulties  as possible. 

What are your  views on the first  experience  of negotiation of an Agreement? 

Representativeness  of the contracting parties 
70. 
The  issue of  participation  in negotiations under  the Agreement  on  Social  Policy  has 
obviously proved to be sensitive and controversial.  The Commission continues to believe that 
only the social partners themselves can develop their own dialogue and negotiating structures, 
and  that  it cannot  impose participants  on a freely  undertaken  negotiation. 

Nevertheless,  in  cases  where  Art  3.2  of  the  Agreement  is  being  applied,  the 
71. 
Commission does have the responsibility to assess the validity of an agreement in light of its 
content, which requires an assessment of whether those affected  by the agreement  have been 
represented.  The  Commission  considers  that  the  question  of  the  representativeness  of  the 
parties engaged  in a negotiation must be examined  on a case by case basis, as the  conditions 
will vary depending on the subject  matter under negotiation.  The Commission  must  therefore 
examine whether  those  involved  in the negotiation  have a genuine  interest  in the  matter  and 
can demonstrate  significant  representation  in the domain  concerned. 

72. 
The  Commission  would  like to encourage the European  social  partner  organisations 
to  co-operate  more  closely  in  finding  a  solution  to  this  question.  It  appeals  to  the  social 
partners  to  be  open  and flexible on the  issue  in order  to ensure  appropriate  participation  in 
negotiations.  The Commission  is ready to  help and  support any positive  steps taken  by the 
social  partners  in this  regard. 

What  steps  can  the  social  partners  take  to  reinforce  the  acceptability  of  a  negotiated 
agreement  to  all  interested parties,  including  social partner  organisations  who  did  not 
participate, the Council, the Commission and the European Parliament? 

E 

BROADER  ISSUES  FOR  THE  DEVELOPMENT  OF  SOCIAL  DIALOGUE 

E.I 

Employment  and  the changing policy  environment 

73. 
Employment  is the principal economic, social and political objective  of the  EU.  The 
White  Paper  on  Growth,  Competitiveness  and  Employment,  and  the  European  Councils  at 
Essen,  Cannes  and  Madrid  gave  clear  indications  of  the  role  they  wished  to  see  the  social 
partners play in implementing employment measures.  The Madrid Council welcomed the fact 
that  the  Social  Partners  at  European  level  arrived  at  a  common  criterion  for  measures  to 
promote employment (the Joint declaration) and the broad degree of convergence between this 
agreement  and  the  Single  Report  on  employment  to  the  Summit.  Following  that,  the 

14 

Commission  met the European social partners in a Round Table on Employment,  to discuss 
its suggestion for  a European Pact of Confidence  for Employment.  In June, the Commission 
issued  a  formal  Communication  on the  Pact,  which  has three objectives:  to mobilize  all  the 
actors  in  a  comprehensive  strategy  for  employment,  to  make  better  use  of  the  European 
multiplier  effect  and  to incorporate  the fight against  unemployment  in a medium  and  long-
term  view of  society. 

74. 
It is now a natural  step to focus the social  dialogue at interprofessional  as well as 
at  sectoral  level  on  employment,  while  continuing  their  work  on  the  social  impact  of 
industrial and sectoral policies, as well as their involvement in policies dealing with economic 
and  social  cohesion.  The social partners have  a key  role  in developing  and  complementing 
action on employment  at Community  level, particularly  in the context of their  responsibility 
for  determining  working  conditions and  labour  market  rules concerning flexibility, working 
time, access to training and the acquisition of skills, and the insertion of young people.  The 
Social  Dialogue  Committee  and  the  sectoral  committees  are  therefore  expected  to  be  the 
driving  force  in the development  of social dialogue  on a coordinated  employment  policy. 

E.H  Social  dialogue  and  enlargement 

75. 
There  is  a  vital  need  to  assist  the  countries  of  Eastern  and  Central  Europe  in  the 
development of an appropriate system of social dialogue as part of their social and economic 
development.  In the context  of  the  future  enlargement  of the  EU to certain  ECE  countries 
it is vital to develop a dialogue with and between the social partners in the countries applying 
for membership, who have fundamentally  different  traditions in industrial relations and social 
dialogue, so that they will be able to play their role both  in preparing for  accession and once 
their  countries  have joined  the EU. 

76.  Where the  EU social  partners have been  requested  by their  counterpart  organisations 
in Eastern and Central  Europe to help the latter  in developing their structures and their social 
dialogue  activities,  the  Commission  is  willing  to  assist  the  EU  social  partners  in 
developing  links  and  practical  cooperation. 

77. 
In  countries which  have applied  for  membership  of the EU,  as a complement  to the 
projects financed  through the PHARE programme (e.g.  10m ECU for trade union activities), 
the  Commission  can  encourage  activities  linked  to  reform  which  should  lead  to  the  social 
partners in those countries being able to play their role both before  and after  accession.  The 
limited  access  for  ECE  countries  established  by  the  European  Parliament  to  budget  lines 
dealing with the social dialogue can also be exploited  for the development  of social  dialogue 
in these countries, a task in which the European social partners have a principal role to play. 

E.III  Information  and  Communication 

78. 
It  is proposed  to  hold  regular  meetings  for the exchange  of  information  between 
interprofessional  social  dialogue  and  sectoral  social  dialogue  representatives  .  These 
meetings  would  not  replace  the  existing  dialogue  structures,  and  they  would  involve  the 
European  organisations  which are currently  not part  of the social  dialogue  structures. 

79. 
The work  and results of the European  social dialogue  are not sufficiently  familiar  to 
workers and employers in the Member States even though their interests are directly  affected. 
This  is  manifested  by  an  absence  of  activity  at  national  and  regional  level  relating  to  the 
output  of the  European  social  dialogue.  Therefore,  the  Commission  wishes  to  ensure  the 

15 

dissemination  of information  about the European social  dialogue and to encourage  the 
social partner organisations  to inform their members on the activities and results of the 
social  dialogue  and  on social  policy  in general.  This in turn  should  stimulate  national  and 
regional follow-up, and ensure a high level of participation and feedback  in this representative 
process. 

What steps and practical assistance are necessary to create an effective information policy on 
social dialogue? 

As much of the work  of the social dialogue structures addresses policy  developments 
80. 
in  which  the  institutions  have  a  formal  role  the  Commission  will  provide  regular 
information  to the EU institutions on developments in the social dialogue. The Agreement 
on parental  leave highlighted  the need for  regularly  informing  the Council and the  European 
Parliament of what is going on, particularly if institutional and procedural prerogatives are not 
to become a stumbling block for the development of the dialogue.  In line with the obligations 
of  the  Agreement  on  Social  Policy,  the  Commission  will  also  issue  annual  reports  on  the 
balanced  support  for  the parties  involved  in social dialogue. 

E.IV  Support  measures  for  joint  initiatives 

The Commission  feels that the EU can do more to support the co-operative  activities 
81. 
of the  social  partners, both those  in the framework  of Community  action programmes  or  in 
the  form  of  autonomous  initiatives.  Bodies  set up  by  recognized  European  social  partners, 
with  the  objective  of  furthering  the  goals of European  social  dialogue,  such  as training  and 
research  institutes, need to be supported financially by the EU because of their important  role 
in developing  European awareness and education in key grass roots organisations and  for  the 
public  in  general. 

It  is  proposed  to  strengthen  and  support  operational  joint  initiatives  under  the 
82. 
social  dialogue;  to provide  a quick  response  to requests  for  the  funding  of  such  initiatives; 
and  to  make better  use of the existing  bodies - either those  of a tripartite  nature  established 
through a Council decision (the Dublin Foundation, CEDEFOP) or through the joint initiatives 
of  European  social partner  organisations  (such as CERI). 

E.V  New  levels  of  social  dialogue 

83.  While the principal  levels of Community social dialogue are the interprofessional  and 
sectoral  dialogue, organised centrally, there is a growing need  to assist the development  of 
new  levels  of dialogue  in the  light  of challenges facing  the  EU.  These  include: 

the  social  dialogue  in  the  growing  transnational  industries.  The  European  Works 
Council  Directive  has  already  played  an  important  role  in  encouraging  greater 
dialogue, but has demonstrated  how national-based  industrial  relations systems are no 
longer  sufficient; 

the  social  dialogue  at  regional  level,  particularly  in  cross-border  regions  where  the 
Internal  Market and other EU policies are having a significant  effect,  and  in  light of 
the  decentralisation  of  collective  bargaining:-  current  pilot  projects  in this  field  will 
indicate  what  contribution  can be made by the EU. 

16 

3. 

CONCLUSIONS 

84. 
In  order  to  strengthen  the  social  dialogue, the  Commission  has  set  out  certain  steps 
which  it  considers  essential  for  the  reform  process,  and  which  will  be  put  into  effect 
immediately.  The  Communication  has  also  identified  a  number  of  questions  concerning 
important, and sometimes sensitive, issues where a debate is required in order to identify  the 
best answers.  The social partners, the Member States and the European institutions are invited 
to  reflect  on  these  issue  and  to  present  their  views  to  the  Commission.  The  second 
Communication  from  the  Commission,  planned  for  next  year,  will  take  account  of  the 
opinions which  are received  following  this  reflection. 

The proposals and questions on which the Commission wishes to hear the views of all 

85. 
interested  parties  are  as  follows: 

VAL  DUCHESSE  SOCIAL  DIALOGUE 

The  Commission  will  continue  to  give  its  full  support  to  the  "Val  Duchesse"  social 
dialogue. 

The Commission  calls on the social partners themselves to reinforce  the social  dialogue 
by ensuring  adequate  representation  of all  appropriate  interests. 

INTERPROFESSIONAL  ADVISORY  COMMITTEES 

The continuation  of the committees  in their  present  form  will  be examined. 

The  advisory  committee  on  social  security  for  migrants  workers  and  the  advisory 
committee  on freedom  of  movement  for workers  could  be merged 

Are there other reforms which should be considered for  improving their functioning? 

The status  of  the  European  Social  partners  on the committees will  be reviewed. 

SECTORAL  SOCIAL  DIALOGUE 

More substance  could  be given  to  the social dialogue at sectoral  level  by focusing  it on 
strategic  issues  and sectors. 

The Commission  wishes to have the views of all interested parties on how to develop a more 
intensive and relevant sectoral social dialogue. 

The  Commission  will  strengthen  co-operation  and  co-ordination  within  its  services 
concerning  the  consultation  procedures. 

What  are your  views on the organisation of responsibilities for sectoral dialogue?  What do 
you  think of the alternative suggestion for the management of consultations? 

17 

A study  of  the  representativeness of  social  partner  organisations  in the sectors will  be 
launched. 

The Commission  considers that in order to ensure efficiency  the number of members of 
the Joint  Committees  should  be reduced. 

How  can  the  sectoral  dialogue operate more  effectively and  with  a  view  to  the efficient 
allocation of re so urces ? 

What are your  views on the co-ordination of the sectoral social dialogue and communicating 
its results ? 

THE STANDING  COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT 

The  reform  of  the  Standing  Committee  on  Employment  should  be  linked  to  the 
implementation of this European Council decision on a stable structure for employment. 

The  SCE should  establish  a work  programme. 

Do you support the idea that the conclusions of SCE meetings must be given a higher profile? 

The current  composition  of  the Committee  should  be modified  and  rationalised. 

The  various  social  partner  organisations  should  be  called  upon  to  express  their  views 
through  a liaison  committee. 

CONSULTATIONS  UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON SOCIAL POLICY 

Do you agree with adapting the representativeness criteria for  organisations to be consulted? 

The  Commission  will  keep  under  review  the  list  of  European  organisations  to  be 
consulted,  in  line with  the undertaking  in its  1993  Communication. 

The  Commission  will  organise  regular  meetings  between  all  interested  social  partner 
organisations  for  information  and  an exchange  of views. 

For this to be successful, what measures do the social partners  consider necessary in order 
to develop linking structures? 

The  time-limit  of  the first-stage  consultations  should  be  reconsidered. 

Are there other procedural changes which should be  considered? 

1« 

NEGOTIATIONS  UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON SOCIAL POLICY 

What  are your views on the first experience  of negotiation  of an Agreement? 

What steps  can  the  social  partners  take  to  reinforce the  acceptability  of  a  negotiated 
agreement to all  interested parties? 

BROADER ISSUES  FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL DIALOGUE 

Focus the  social  dialogue  on  employment. 

Assist  the  EU  social  partners  in developing  links and practical  cooperation  with  social 
partner  organisations  in  Eastern  and  Central  European  countries. 

Hold  regular meetings for the exchange of information  between interprofessional  social 
dialogue  and  sectoral  social  dialogue  representatives. 

Disseminate  information  about  the  European  social  dialogue  and  encourage  the  social 
partner organisations to inform their members on the activities and results of the social 
dialogue. 

What steps and practical assistance are necessary to create an effective information policy on 
social dialogue? 

Provide  regular  information  to  the  EU  institutions  on  developments  in  the  social 
dialogue. 

Strengthen  and  support  operational joint  initiatives  under the social  dialogue. 

Assist the development of new levels of dialogue in the light of challenges facing the EU. 

Ï9 

HOW DOES THE SOCIAL DIALOGUE WORK? 

ANNEXI 

Val Duchesse: Interprofessional  dialogue 
In the initial phase (1985-1988) the Val Duchesse social dialogue sought to involve the social 
partners in the plans for completing the Internal Market, which made cooperation between the 
European institutions and the social partners more important than ever.  Therefore, the Social 
Dialogue was relaunched  on the initiative of  the Commission,  bringing together  in the 'Val 
Duchesse' meetings1 those organisations who were ready to start a dialogue at EU level.  A 
forum' was created  to contribute  to  the  debate on the  social  aspects  of  the  internal  market, 
while  at  the  same  time  two  working  groups,  one  on  macroeconomics  and  one  on 
microeconomics, were  established. 

Since the outset, the Val Duchesse meetings between the Union of Industrial  and Employers 
Confederations  of  Europe  (UNICE),  the  European  Centre  of  Enterprises  with  Public 
Participation (CEEP) and the European Trade Union Confederation  (ETUC) had an informal 
status and were based on mutual  recognition  of the parties  involved. 

With the introduction of Article  118b into the EEC Treaty by means of the Single European 
Act  in  1986,  the  promotion  of  social  dialogue  at  Community  level  became  one  of  the 
Commission's  official  tasks:  "The  Commission  shall  endeavour  to  develop  the  dialogue 
between management and labour at European  level which could, if the two sides consider it 
desirable,  lead  to  relations  based  on  agreement".  This  obligation  was  reinforced  by  the 
political recognition given to the social dimension of EU policies by the Social Charter of the 
Fundamental Social Rights of Workers adopted in 1989, which required a greater involvement 
of the social  partners and the promotion  of dialogue between  management  and  labour. 

At  the  same time,  the dialogue  was  reinforced  by the  establishment  of  a  political  Steering 
Group, made up of high-ranking representatives of the three European umbrella organisations 
and their national member organisations. The adoption of the Social Action Programme of the 
Commission  also  provided  fresh  stimulus,  as  it  provided  for  consultation  of  the  social 
partners'  umbrella  organisations  on  Commission  proposals  in  areas  where  there  were  no 
advisory  committees. 

The  negotiations  of  1991  in  the  Inter-governmental  Conference  leading  to  the  Treaty  on 
European  Union were distinguished  by the willingness of most Member  States to  introduce 
qualified-majority  decisions  in  the  Council  for  areas  of  social  policy  in  order  to  overcome 
obstacles  in  implementing  the  SAP.  Having  discussed  the  question  of  how  both  sides' 
influence  in  this  area  could  be  increased,  UNICE,  CEEP  and  ETUC  adopted  a  Joint 
Agreement  on  31 October  1991  addressed  to  the  Inter-governmental  Conference,  which 
provided  for  mandatory  consultation  of the social  partners  on Commission  proposals  in  the 
field of social affairs  and an option for  negotiations between the social partners which could 
possibly  lead to framework  agreements. 

Named after  the place where the first  meeting was held on 31 January  1985 in Brussels. 

This joint agreement was carried over almost verbatim into the Agreement (of the eleven) on 
Social Policy (Agreement on Social Policy), thus becoming an integral parrof the EU Treaty, 
and  included  the  possibility  of  social  partner  agreements  which  may  be  implemented,  in 
accordance with Article 4, by the social  partners at national  level  or by  a Council  decision 
on the basis of a proposal from the Commission. 

In October 1992, following the signing of the Treaty on European Union, UNÏCE, CEEP and 
ETUC  formed  a  new  Social  Dialogue  Committee  which,  under  the  new  circumstances, 
operates  as  a forum  for  orienting  the  dialogue.2  This  Committee  has  laid  down  terms  of 
reference for additional working parties: on Education and Training, in existence since 1989, 
on Macroeconomics, which has been reactivated and has been concentrating on a cooperative 
growth  strategy  and  the  follow-up  of  the  White  Paper  on  growth,  competitiveness  and 
employment.  The  Social  Dialogue  Committee  is  also  consulted  on  broad  social  policy, 
macro-economic  and  employment  policy,  as  well  as  vocational  training  policy  and other 
developments of interest to social partners. 

Interprofessional  Advisory Committees 
Apart from the Advisory  Committee under the European Coal  and Steel  Community, there 
are six  interprofessional  advisory committees in various areas of  Community  social  policy. 
These are the Committee of the European Social Fund, the Advisory  Committees  on Social 
Security  for  Migrant  Workers,  on  Freedom  of  Movement  for  Workers,  on  Vocational 
Training, on Safety, Hygiene and Health Protection at Work, and on Equal Opportunities for 
Women and Men. 

While  managed  by  the  Commission,  the  Advisory  Committees  are  made  up  of  national 
tripartite delegations  (employers,  trade unions and national  representatives  of  government) 
who  are nominated by the Member States and appointed by the  Council.  Since June  last 
year, ten members of the Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities are appointed directly 
by the European  Social Partners. 

The  Committees  have  the  task  of  advising  and  assisting  the  Commission  in  the 
implementation  of  specific  social  policies,  and  are  not,  generally  speaking,  a  forum  for 
dialogue with the social partners, but they are a formal part of the legal framework for certain 
social  policies,  and it is important that social  partners have a place in them. 

Sectoral  dialogue 
At sectoral level, the dialogue between social  partners has been in existence for some years, 
with  the  Joint  Committees  (JCs)  and  the  Informai  Working  Parties  (IWPs)  operating  as 
consultation, dialogue and even sometimes as negotiation bodies.  They give their views on 
the formulation and implementation of Community  sectoral  policies aimed at improving and 
harmonising  living  and  working  conditions  and  also,  in  some  cases,  at  improving  the 

This Committee is currently made up of 45 members in all, plus 2 observers from EFTA countries. On 
the employers' side: UNICE Secretariat  (3), national  member organisations of UNICE  (15 European 
Union and 1 EEA = 16), CEEP (4) and one EFTA observer. On the trade union side: ETUC Secretariat 
(3),  national  member  organisations  of the  ETUC  (15  European  Union  and  1 EEA  =  16), European 
industry  committees  (3) and one EFTA  observer. 

ii 

^/ 

economic and competitive position of the sector in question.  This dialogue tends to take the 
form  of discussions  of these policies, on which joint  opinions can be drawn up. 

The  form  and  the  outcome  of  this  dialogue  varies  considerably  from  sector  to  sector. 
Sometimes the result  is no more than  a better understanding  of European  developments by 
the two sides of industry. But experience has shown that it can produce more practical results. 
In addition to the opportunity for meetings, for exchanges of ideas and information under such 
dialogue  arrangements,  there  have  also  been  a  certain  number  of  specific  initiatives,  for 
instance  joint  participation  by  the  social  partners  in  Community  vocational  training 
programmes resulting from  the adoption of a joint position, the creation of databases and job 
creation  studies. 

As  early  as  1978,  for  example,  the  social  partners  in  the  JC  on  Social  Problems  of 
Agricultural  Workers adopted a first  recommendation fixing the working week of permanent 
workers  employed  on  arable  land.  This  recommendation  was  extended  to  all  agricultural 
workers in  1981, and is currently being renegotiated by the social  partners in the sector with 
the support  of the  Commission. 

In the context  of the  Internal  Market,  the  social  partners in the Commerce  and  Retail  IWP 
adopted  in  1988 a memorandum  noting the lack of vocational  training structures in the retail 
trade  and  recommending  that  the  Commission  draw  up  minimum  training  standards  at 
Community  level.  Otfier  initiatives  have  followed  on from  this  memorandum:  a  European 
Forum  on  the  social  aspects  of  the  retail  trade  and  a  first  transnational  project  in  the 
vocational training field  (ASSIST) which  constitutes a step towards the practical  application 
of the general  principles laid  down in the  1988 memorandum. 

In  1995, the  social  partners  in  the IWP  on  the  Cleaning  Industry  adopted joint  guidelines 
concerning the application of the Directive on the organisation of working time in their sector. 

As far as Community social policy is concerned, the sectoral social partner organisations have 
been  consulted  in particular in the context of initiatives proposed  by the Commission  under 
its  1989 action programme implementing the Community  Charter of the Fundamental  Social 
Rights of Workers.  Since  1993 the social  partner organisations represented  in JCs and IWPs 
have been formally  consulted  in accordance with Article 3 of the Agreement on social  policy 
on any social  policy  initiative.  Sometimes they have been consulted  on industrial  initiatives 
having a social impact on the sector (for example, in  1996, consultation by DG III of the IWP 
for  Textiles and  Clothing  on the draft  Communication  on  subcontracting). 

The  Standing Committee on Employment 
The Standing Committee on Employment (SCE) was created in 1970 by Council decision, and 
is a formalised  mechanism for joint action, which also takes place within the ad hoc tripartite 
Conferences  held under the auspices of the Council Presidency,  and to a lesser  extent in the 
interprofessional  advisory  committees.  The  SCE,  which  brings  social  partners  and  the 
Commission  together  with  the Council  of Ministers, has the task  "to ensure  (...)  continuous 
dialogue, joint action and consultation between the Council (...), the Commission and the two 
sides of industry in order to facilitate coordination by the Member States of their employment 

in 

Tl 

policies in harmony with the objectives of the Community".3 

Since 1974, each Council Presidency convened on average one meeting. Preparations for each 
meeting  begin  with  the  convening  by  the  Commission  of  a  "steering  group"  comprising 
representatives  of  the  Presidency,  the  Commission  and  social  partners,  with  the  task  of 
establishing the subject for discussion. The Commission then draws up a working document, 
on the basis of which the Presidency prepares draft conclusions in coordination with the social 
partners.  A  "mini-debate" on the  eve  of  the  meeting  enables these  draft  conclusions  to be 
finalised, but has tended to leave little room for genuine debate and exchange of views in the 
meeting proper. This meeting itself opens with a restricted meeting of Ministers, followed in 
plenary  session  by  a series  of  speeches  by the  social  partners and Council  members.  The 
Presidency  is solely  responsible for the conclusions of the meeting. 

Consultations under the Agreement on Social  Policy 
At the Intergovernmental  Conference in  1991, an important step was taken to strengthen the 
role of the social partners in the European decision-making process.  Articles 3 and 4 of the 
Agreement on Social Policy constituted  a significant  development of Article  118b of the EC 
Treaty.  Article  3(1)  states:  "The  Commission  shall  have  the  task  of  promoting  the 
consultation  of  management  and  labour  at  Community  level  and  shall  take  any  relevant 
measure to facilitate their dialogue by ensuring balanced support for the parties." Articles 3(2) 
and 3(3) imposes an obligation on the Commission to consult management and labour before 
presenting proposals in the social  policy field.  In addition,  new avenues were opened up in 
the dialogue between the social  partners at Community level, including possible agreements 
which may be implemented, under Article 4 of the Agreement,  either by a Council  decision 
on the basis of  a proposal  from the Commission,  or in accordance with the procedures and 
practises specific  to management and labour and the Member States. 

The consultation procedures set down in the Agreement on Social Policy  provide for a two-
stage consultation before the Commission issues a legislative proposal.  In the first stage the 
Commission informs the Social  Partners that it is considering action on a particular subject 
and  asks  their  views  on  the  "possible  direction  of  Community  action"  (Art.  3  §2).  The 
partners can, individually or collectively,  give their response to the Commission. This means 
that the Commission gains a clear view of the issues before deciding on whether to proceed. 

The second stage of the procedure is  launched  "if,  after  such consultation, the Commission 
considers Community action advisable, it shall consult management and labour on the content 
of  the  envisaged  proposal.  Management  and  labour  shall  forward  to  the  Commission  an 
opinion or, where appropriate, a recommendation" (Art. 3 §3).  This gives a direct input, in 
advance, to the measures to be proposed.  The new consultation procedure is mandatory only 
within the context of the Agreement on  Social  Policy.  In order to  standardise its approach, 
the Commission has, however, committed itself to applying the procedures of Article 3 of the 
Agreement on Social  Policy,  irrespective  of the legal  basis (EC Treaty  or the Protocol) for 

3  Article  2 of Council  Decision  in OJ L273/25  1970. In fact,  linked  to the  creation  of  SCE as  a joint 
action  body,  arrangements  were  originally  made  for  dialogue  at  Community  level  with  the  social 
partners' most important umbrella organisations in form of "tripartite conferences". For various reasons, 
this first  attempt  at a social  dialogue  with and between  social  partners  stopped  in  1978. 

IV 

•io 

all social policy initiatives. In addition, the Commission has signalled the possibility of formal 
consultations on envisaged proposals for legislation of a horizontal  or specific  sectoral  nature 
which  have social  implications. Here, however, the Commission  reserves the right to decide 
whether and  how  such  consultation  should  be  conducted. 

Negotiations  under the Agreement  on  Social  Policy 
In the second stage of consultations on the basis of Art. 3 of the Agreement on Social Policy, 
the  Social Partners  can decide to negotiate an agreement on the issue in hand.  In this case, 
the  Commission  suspends  its  activities  and  the  Social  Partners  have  up  to  nine  months  to 
negotiate an agreement, or longer if both parties and the Commission agree.  If an agreement 
is  concluded,  this  can  be  implemented  by  the  Social  Partners  in  accordance  with  national 
structures  and  practises.  Alternatively,  the partners  can  request the Commission  to  transmit 
the Agreement to the Council  for  adoption as a decision, which will give it the status of EU 
legislation.  Even  if  no  agreement  is  reached  in  such  negotiations,  the  elaboration  of  both 
sides' positions and the problems evoked in the course of negotiations will be very useful  for 
the Commission  in  drafting  its own proposal. 

As soon as the Maastricht Treaty came into force in  1993, the Commission decided to consult 
the  social  partners  on  the  possible  direction  of  Community  action  on  information  and 
consultation  procedures in Community-scale  undertakings, in accordance with the procedure 
under Article 3 of the Protocol Agreement on Social Policy. Following a second  consultation 
on the content of the envisaged  proposal  in February  1994, and  despite a series of  informal 
meetings to  see if  there were possibilities  for  a negotiation,  the  social  partners  decided  not 
to open negotiations.  So the first trial with the new procedures led to a Council Directive on 
the  establishment  of  a  European  Works  Council  or  a  procedure  in  Community-scale 
undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings, which was adopted in September 
1994 (94/45/EC) . 

Reconciling  working  and  family  life  is  a  key  element  in  equal  opportunities  policy,  and 
in  1983 the Commission  submitted  a proposal  for  a Council Directive on parental  leave and 
leave for family  reasons4.  As, after  eleven years, no progress had been made in the Council, 
the Commission  decided  to take advantage  of the new procedures under the  Agreement  on 
social policy and to initiate the procedure under Article 3.  On 22 February  1995 it therefore 
gave its approval  for  consultation  of the social  partners under Article 3(2) of the Agreement 
on  the basis  of  a  text  which  retraced  the steps of the Commission's  conciliation  policy  and 
examined  it from  various  points of view. 

The  social  partners'  responses  showed  that there was a consensus  on the  need for  action  on 
conciliation  in  one  form  or  another  in  accordance  with  the  guidelines  in  the  Commission's 
first  document.  The  social  partners  came out very  clearly  in  support  of  promotion  of  equal 
opportunities  for  men  and  women.  As  regards  the  proper  form  and  level  for  action  to  be 
undertaken in this area, it was generally  acknowledged that a Community  initiative might be 
what was  needed.  At the very  least,  a Community  text might  recommend  various  measures 
and standards, and a binding Community framework  measure was also suggested to establish 
guidelines  which  could  be  implemented  at  national,  local  or  enterprise  level.  Many  of  the 

COM (83) 686  final. 

2*1 

responses  also  recommended  that  the  social  partners  play  an  active  role  in  drafting  the 
principles and  in putting them  into practice through  collective  negotiations. 

After  analysing the reactions to its document, the Commission  decided  to initiate the second 
round  of consultation  provided for  under Article 3(3) of the Agreement  on social  policy. On 
5 July  1995, three organisations (UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC) announced their intention of 
starting negotiations  on this matter and, in particular,  on parental  leave. At the end  of these 
negotiations, the three organisations concluded a framework agreement on  14 December.  At 
the  same  time  they  forwarded  the  agreement  to  the  Commission,  asking  for  it  to  be 
implemented  by a Council  decision  on  a proposal  from  the Commission  in  accordance  with 
Article 4(2) of the Agreement  on  social  policy. 

The Commission adopted its proposal for a Directive5 on 31 January  1996. This proposal took 
into account the representative status of the signatory parties, the legality  of the clauses of the 
framework  agreement and the respect for provisions regarding SMEs. In spite of the fact that 
the legal basis does not foresee the participation  of the European Parliament in the legislative 
process, the Commission  sent it the proposal for information.  This allowed the EP to deliver, 
on  15 March  1996, an opinion  on the issue. The Directive was approved  by  the Council  on 
29 March  1996, and formally  adopted  on  3 June. 

On  5 July  1995, the  Commission  launched  the  first  phase  of  a  consultation  concerning  the 
burden  of  proof  in  cases  of  male/female  discrimination.  The  social  partners  gave  their 
opinions but indicated  clearly that they  did not envisage any negotiation on that matter.  The 
Commission  subsequently  decided  to  consult  the  social  partners  on  the  content  of  an 
envisaged  proposal  in this field.  On 27  September  1995, the Commission  also launched  the 
first phase of consultation on the issue of flexibility  of working time and security of workers. 
Given the complexity of the issues, the Commission did not consider that a six-week deadline 
was appropriate for  the receipt  of views of social  partner. 

It  was  only  in  April  1996,  having  considered  all the  responses to  the consultation,  that  the 
Commission  decided  that  it  was  appropriate  to  proceed  and  launched  a  second-stage 
consultation  of  the  social  partners  concerning  the  possible  contents  of  a  proposal.  On  19 
June,  the  social  partners  formally  notified  the  Commission  that  they  wished  to  enter  into 
negotiations under Art.  3 of the Agreement  on  Social  Policy. 

Finally,  on  14 November  1995, the Commission  adopted  a Communication  [COM  (95)  547 
final]  which  had  the  purpose  of  consulting  the  social  partners  and  the  EU  institutions  on 
worker information  and consultation,  concerning the impact of the Works Council  Directive 
on  other  proposals,  pending  before  the  Council,  which  contain  provisions  concerning 
information  and consultation  of workers. 

COM(96) 26  final 

vi 

is 

Annex  II:  Institutional  framework  of  the  social  dialogue  at  Community  level 

WÊÊ&ÊÊËÊmRfflïïÊiÊ 

,  trntfurnvtn 

&mp*teM*$, 

CONSULTATION 

1.  Cross-Industry  Advisory Committees 

Council Regulation  1408/71 - OJ L49,  5.07.71 

6  per Member state  : (2 unions; 
2  employers.; 2  government) 

Examine  general 
questions/regulations 

Social  Security  for  Migrants  workers 
(1959) 

European  Social  Fund  (1960) 

Freedom  of movement  for  workers 
(1961) 

Council  Regulations  15/61  - OJ L57,  26.8.61  -
and  1612/68 - OJ L257,  15.10.68 

Art  124 Treaty  and  Council Regulation  2082/93 
OJ LI 93,  31.7.93 

Idem 

Idem 

Vocational  Training  (1963) 

Council  Decision  of  9/04/68  - OJ L9Î,  12.4.68 

Idem 

Safety,  Hygiene  and  Health  Protection at 
work  (1974) 

Equal  Opportunities  for  Women  and Men 
(1981) 

Council  Decision  of 27/06/74 *  OJ LI 85,  9.7.74 

Idem 

Commission  Decision 95/42  - OJ L249,  17.10.95 

2 per Member  State (bodies  responsible 
for womens'  affairs)  +  10 European 
social partners 

2.  Sectoral level 

Joint  Committees  (JC) 
Agriculture  (1963) 

Road  Transport  (1965) 

Inland  waterways (1967) 
Rail transport  (1972) 

Fishing  (1974) 

Sea transport (198"?) 
Civil  aviation  (1990) 
Telecommunications  (1990) 
Postal  sen-ices  (1994) 

Commission 
87/445  - OJ 
Commission 
and  87/447 -
Commission 
Commission 
91/407 - OJ 
Commission 
87/446  - OJ 
Commission 
Commission 
Commission 
Commission 

Decisions 74/442 -
L240, 22.8.87 
Decisions  85/516 
• OJ L240, 22.8.87 
Decision  80/991 -
Decisions  85/13  -
L276,  14.8.91 
Decisions 74/441 -
L240, 22.8.87 
Decision  87/467 -
Decision  90/449 • 
Decision  450/90 -
Decision  595/94 -

OJ L243, 5.9.74 and 

COPA / EFA 

-  OJ  L317,  28.11.85 

OJL297. 6.11.80 
OJ  L8,  10.1.85  and 

IRU /  CSTCE 

ESO, UINF / CSTCE 
CCFE / CSTCE 

OJ L243, 5.9.74 and 

EUROPECHE-COGECA  /CSTCE 

OJ L253,  4.9.87 
O)  L230, 24.8.90 
OJ  L230, 24.8.90 
0JL225,  31.8.94 

ECS A / CSTCE 
AEA, ACI, ACE / CSTCE 
Operators / PTTI 
Operators / PTTI 

Assist the  Commission 

Effect  of implement  of 
regulation  1612/68 

Reasoned  opinions 

Assist the  Commission 

Advise the  Commission 

Assist the  Commission 
Joint  opinions 

H 
X 
H 

i^^mhi^mA^' 

t  ,  te 

-* 

•' 

Informal  Working  Parties 
Hotel and  catering  (1984) 
Sugar  (1984) 
Commerce  and  retail  (1985) 
Insurance  (1987) 
Banking  (1990) 
Furniture  (1991) 
Footwear (1977) 
Construction  (1991) 
Cleaning  industry  (1992) 
Textiles  and  clothing  (1992) 
Wood  (1994) 
Private  security  (1994) 

(IWP) 

-

<( 

3/ 

Application  of the Agreement on social policy (ASP) 

Mandatory 
All social policy proposals 
(based  on  Agreement on  Social  Policy) 

Art 3  of ASP 

Optional 
Horizontal or sectoral-type  proposal 
which  has social  implications 

No formal  competence 

HOTREC / SETA, UITA 
CEFS / SETA.UITA 
EUROCOMMERCE/EUROFIET 
UPEA-CEA-AACE-BIPAR/ EUROFIET 
FB, GBC, QCE'EUROFIET 
UEA / FETBB 
CEC /  CSE, THC 
FIEC  /FETBB 
EFCI / EUROFIET 
COMITEXTTL, ECLA / CSE-THC 
CEI WOOD / FETBB 
COESS, IPSA ' EUROFIET 

28 organisations  identified  in the 
COM(93)600 of  14/12/93 

Under the terms of Attack 
3(1) of tbe Agreement, th* 
social partaars aow have a 
right te be coMufcedkytke 
Commission on social policy 

'^ÊÊÊ^mÊ^^^Mè 

Composition 

C«mpei«n,ces. ^ 

DIALOGUE  AND  NEGOTIATION 

1.  Cross  Industry  level  ("Val  Duchesse" Social  Dialogue) 

Treaty:  Art  118B 
Art. 3 and  4 ASP 

UNICE - CEEP  - CES 

Volontary  dialogue 
Every  subject  under the 
responsability  of social 
partners 

Summit 
Social  Dialogue  Committee 
Working  parties 
- Macroeconomics 
- Education and Training 
- Labour market 

2.  Sectoral  level 

Joint  Committees 

Treaty:  Art  118B 
Art. 3 and 4 ASP 

Idem  consultation 

Informal  Working  Parties 

Idem 

Idem  consultation 

Dialogue  between  social 
partners, sometimes 
negotiation. 
Links with  EU policies 
Volontary  dialogue 
Every 
responsability  of 
partners 

subject  under 

the 
social 

3.  Application  of the Agreement  on social  policy 

Negotiation  on  Parental  leave 

Art 4 of ASP 

Mutual  recognition  by parties  concerned  I  Autonomous  negotiation 

CONCERTATION 

Standing  Committee  on  Employment 

SCE 

(1970) 

Council Decision of  14/12/1970 - OJ L273,  17.12.70 
-  amended  by  Council  Decision  of  20/01/1975  - OJ 
L21,  28.01.75 

UNICE, COCEE ,UACEE, CEA, COP A, 
CEEP 
CES, CGT, CGC, CFTC 

Continuous  dialogue, joint 
action  and  consultation. 
Facilitate  coordination  of 
employment  policies 

List of European  social  partner  organisations 
currently  consulted  in accordance with  Article 3  of the ASP 

A N N EX  III 

1. 

General  cross-industry  organisations  :  * 

Union  of  Industrial  and  Employers'  Confederations  of  Europe  (UNICE) 
European  Centre  of  Enterprises  with  Public  Participation  (CEEP) 
European  Trade  Union  Confederation  (ETUC) 

2. 

Cross-industry  organisations  representing  certain  categories  of  workers  or  undertakings: 

European  Association  of  Craft,  Small  and  Medium-Sized  Enterprises  (UEAPME 
"Joint  Committee  of  Social  Dialogue") 
Confédération  européenne  des  cadres  (CEC) 
Eurocadres 

Specific  organisations 

EUROCFIAMBRES 

Sectoral  organisations  with  no  cross-industry  affiliation 

Eurocommerce 
COPA/COGECA 
EUROPECHE 
Association  of  European  Cooperative  Insurers,  AECI 
International  Association  of  Insurance  and  Reinsurance  Intermediaries,  BIPAR 
European  Insurance  Committee,  CEA 
Banking  Federation  of  the  European  Community 
Savings  Banks  Group  of  the  European  Community,  GCECEE 
Association  of  Cooperative  Banks  of  the  EC 
European  Confederation  of  woodworking  industries,  CEI-bois 
Confederation  of the National  Hotel  and  Restaurant  Associations  in  the EC. HOTREC 
European  Construction  Industry  Federation 
European  Regional  Airlines  Association,  ERA 
Airports  Council  International  -  European  Region,  ACI-Europe 
Association  des  Transports  aériens  à  la  demande 
Association  of  European  Community  Airlines,  AECI 
Association  of  European  Airlines,  AEA 
Organisation  européenne  des  bateliers 
International  Union  for  Inland  Navigation 
European  Community  Shipowners  Association,  ECSA 
Community  of  European  Railways,  CER 
International  Road  Transport  Union,  IRU 

Sectoral organisations of  UNICE  and  committees  of  the  ETUC  also consulted  as  required 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(96) 448  final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

05 

Catalogue number  :  CB-CO-96-475-EN-C 

ISBN  92-78-09102-2 

Office for Official  Publications of the European Communities 

L-2985 Luxembourg