Education - Training - Research-The obstacles to transnational mobility - Green Paper
Date: 1996-10-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, education, geographical mobility, research, vocational training

COMMISSION  OF  THE  EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES 

Brussels,  02.10.1996 
COM(96)  462  final 

Education - Training - Research 

The  obstacles  to  transnational  mobility 

Green Paper 

(presented by  the  Commission) 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SUMI\1.ARY 

PART A: TRANSNATIONAL  MOBILITY AND  WHAT IT MEANS 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

. MOBILITY  AND  EUROPEAN  CITIZENSHIP 

THE  ADV ANT AGES  OF  MOBILITY  IN  TERMS  OF  EDUCATION,  TRAINING 
AND  RESEARCH 

MOBILITY  IN  THE  CONTEXT  OF  COMMISSION  INITIATIVES 

THE  STATE  OF  PLAY 

THE  OBJECTIVES  OF  THE  GREEN  PAPER 

THE  TARGET  PUBLIC 

PART B:  THE  OBSTACLES  TO  MOBILITY 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

PROBLEMS  CONCERNING  THE  RIGHT  OF  RESIDENCE 

NATIONAL  DIFFERENCES  IN  THE  SITUATION  OF  RESEARCH  TRAINEES 

COMPULSORY  CONTRIBUTIONS 

SOCIAL  PROTECTION 

RECOGNITION,  CERTIFICATION,  VALIDATION 

THE  TERRITORIALLY  RESTRICTED  NATURE  OF  NATIONAL  GRANTS 

SOCIOECONOMIC  OBSTACLES 

ADMINISTRATIVE  OBSTACLES  ASSOCIATED  WITH  THE  ORGANISATION 
OF  SCHOOLS  AND  UNIVERSITIES 

LINGUISTIC  AND  CULTURAL  OBSTACLES 

10 

PRACTICAL  OBSTACLES 

29.09.96 

PART  C:  LINES  OF  ACTION 

LINE  OF  ACTION  1:  According  specific  status  to  trainees  on placements and to 

voluntary  workers  in the  European Community 

LINE  OF  ACTION  2:  Equal  treatment  for  all  Community  grant-aided  research 

trainees 

LINE  OF  ACTION  3:  Ensuring  social  protection  for  everyone  benefiting  from 

transnational  mobility  as  part of their training 

LINE  OF  ACTION  4:  Creating  of a European area of qualifications 

LINE  OF  ACTION  5:  Removing  territorial  restrictions  on  grants  and  nationai 

financing 

LINE  OF  ACTION  6: 

Improving  the  situation  of  nationals  of  third  countries 
legally  resident  in the  European  Commission with  regard 
to  training 

LINE  OF  ACTION  7:  Reducing  the  socioecionomic  obstacles 

LINE  OF  ACTION  8:  Reducing  linguistic  and  cultural  obstacles 

LINE  OF  ACTION  9: 

Improving  the  information  available  and  administrative 
practices 

ANNEXES 

Annex  1: 

Definition of the  target  categories 

Annex  2: 

a) 
b) 

Transnational  mobility  in the  context of Community programmes 
Achievements  and  description  of Community  programmes  in  the 
field  of education and  training 

Annex  3: 

The  context  of  and  Community  programmes  relating  to  training  and 
mobility  grants  for  researchers  (Marie  Curie  grants). 

Annex  4: 

Reference  documents 

Annex  5: 

Joint opinions  of the  social  partners 

Annex  6: 

Obstacles  encountered  in  the  European  Community  and  countries  of the 
European  Economic  Area  by  beneficiaries  of Community  grants  coming 
fl om Central  and  Eastern European countries 

Annex  7: 

Glossary 

29.09.96 

SUMMARY 

The abolition of obstacles to  the free  movement of people is  one of the basic objectives 
of a united Europe, included since the Treaty of Rome.  Indeed, the freedom to come and 
go  is  one  of the  fundamental  conditions  for  the  existence  of a  true  "citizens'  Europe". 
Without it,  it is not possible to  speak of a European social area.  Equally, mobility is one 
of the responses to  current economic change - caused by the  establishment of the  single 
market and the globalisation of trade - and its  social consequences, notably in relation to 
employment creation.  It is  a requirement of European research,  which is  disadvantaged 
by  its  compartmentalisation  and  the  dispersal  of effort,  and  will  thus  return  to  the 
Community  the  capacity  for  innovation  that  it  sometimes  lacks,  notably  in  high 
technology  sectors. 

Why  a  Green Paper? 

All of this de.eply  affects an ever growing number of European citizens.  The demand for 
mobility  wiH grow,  as  proven  by  the  success  of Community  programmes  promoting 
transnational exchanges and placements of researchers, students, teachers, workers or the 
unemployed undergoing training and trainers.  In 1987/8 3,000 students and 745  teachers 
benefitted from  such mobility under the ERASMUS programme; by  1995/6 these figures 
had  grown to  170,000 and  14,000. 

However it has to  be acknowledged that even today there are  still too  many obstacles to 
mobility  and  that  capital,  goods  and  services  move  more  freely  within  the  Union  than 
people,  which can do  no  good to  the  attitude  of its  citizens  towards  the  construction  of 
the  European  Community  (EC).  Such  hindrances  are  encountered  every  day  in  the 
implementation of Community programmes for  education, training and research,  and act 
as  a  brake  to  the  further  development  effectiveness  of  such  programmes.  This  is 
supported by anecdotal evidence, detailing where possibilities of training were not taken 
up,  as  well  as  lost opportunities for exchanges, communication and cooperation between 
students,  teachers  and  researchers  at  European  level.  The  obstacles  to  mobility 
particularly  affect young  people  from  more  deprived backgrounds  and the  unemployed. 

According  to  the  Treaty  on  the  European  Community,  Community  action  should 
encourage  mobility  in  the  areas  of education,  training  and  research. 
It  is  with-this  in 
mind that the  Commission has  drawn up  a  Green Paper on transnational mobility.  This 
document  identifies  obstacles to  mobility  and  proposes  for  consideration  some  possible 
lines of action to remove such obstacles.  It answers an important need, expressed by the 
Council  of 21  July  1991  establishing  the  PETRA  II  programme,  which  related  to  the 
obstacles  to  the  mobility  of young  people  undergoing  initial  vocational  training. 

29.09.96 

What obstacles, what solutions? 

After consideration of these obstacles - which are the object of concrete case studies - the 
Green Paper proposes  several  Lines  of Action.  These  should be  considered,  in the  light 
of their  individual  competences,  by  all  those  involved  (the  European  Community,  its 
Member States,  other responsible  organisations and  structures). 

Five  major obstacles  have  been identified : 

1. 

An obstacle to  transnational  trajnin~ f'or  the  unemployed. 

Case Study  : Somebody looking for work and wanting to undergo training in 
another  Member  State  loses  his  rights  to  unemployment  benefit  and  social 
security  if this  training  lasts  longer  than  three  months. 
In  certain  Member 
States,  on his  return  he  must undergo  further  training  in  order to  regain  his 
In  certain  states,  he  automatically  loses  his  rights  on 
rights  to  benefits. 
leaving  the  state  for  more than three  months. 

Line  of action  :  Extend  to  the  unemployed  in  training  Community  law  that 
allows job searching  in another  Member  State  for  six  months  without a  loss 
of rights  and  ensure  the  continued  right  to  unemployment  benefits  for  the 
unemployed undertaking  training  in another Member State. 

29.09.96 

II 

2. 

Statutozy problems  for  trainees  and  young  people  doing  voluntary  work. 

Case  study: 

a) 

b) 

c) 

A  student  wishing  to  take  up  a  traineeship  in  a  company  in  another 
Member State is  confronted in certain Member States with difficulties 
in  finding  a  host  company,  as  legislation  in  certain  Member  States 
would  consider  him  as  an  employee,  and  the  company  would 
therefore  have  to  pay  him  at  least  a  nominal  wage  and  would  be 
responsible  for  associated  social  payments. 

A  young  graduate  undergoing  an  unpaid traineeship  (unpaid  either in 
cash  or  in  kind)  in  another  Member  State  is  not  covered  by 
Community  level  coordination  or  rules  relating  to  social  security, 
insofar as  he is neither worker,  or a member of a worker's family,  nor 
student.  This  lack  of specific  legal  category  means  that  he  has  no 
rights  in  terms  of social  security,  and  can  also  lead  to  problems with 
rights  of residence  if the  training  takes  more  than three  months. 

themselves 

in  a  similar  situation  when  doing 
Volunteers  find 
voluntary  work  for  a period  of more  than  3 months,  as  their position 
is  not  recognised.  In  certain  Member  States,  they  are  even  required 
to  pay tax  on their allowances  and  expenses  for  maintenance. 

Line  of action  : Give  a  legal  framework  to  the  situation of trainees  and 
volunteers  within the  European Community . 

. 3. 

·  Territorial  restrictiqn  of student  grants. 

Case  study  :  In  most  Member  States,  students  entitled  to  grants  or  other 
forms  of assistance lose them  if they  pursue their studies  in another Member 
State  :  these  grants  are  only  paid  for  studies  in  the  Member  State  paying 
them.  This  situation  has  a  most  detrimental  effect  on  young  people  from 
less  well-off backgrounds  whose  parents  cannot  take  on  the  costs  of their 
children  going  overseas. 

-

Line  of action  : Remove  the  "territoriality"  of grants  and  other assistance. 

29.09.96 

III 

4. 

The fiscal  arrangements  for  research  flrants. 

Case  study  :  Community  research  grants  are  implemented  differently-across 
the  Community  depending  on the  status  given to  the  researchers  by  the  host 
country,  i.e.  that  of  student,  employee  or  self-employed.  This  leads  to 
divergent fiscal  arrangements,  and thus has a direct effect on the possibilities 
of mobility for  researchers.  Certain Member States deduct up  to  50%  of the 
value  of the  grant  (in taxes  and  social  security  contributions). 

This  situation impacts  on Community research policy.  The  Commission has 
to  compensate 
the  Fourth  Framework  Programme, 
decided,  within 
researchers  for  such  losses  in  income,  by  adapting  the  value  of their  grant. 
This means that some of the budget intended to  finance  European research is 
used to  pay this  compensation rather than being  used  for  actual  research and 
becomes  tax  receipts  in the  Member  State.  There  is  also  a  reduction  in  the 
number of researchers  receiving  a Community  grant. 

Line  of action  : Apply  the  same  rules  to  Community  funded  researchers 
in  all  Member  States  of the  European  Union,  either  by  the  exemption  of 
grants,  or coordination of the  rules  applied  in  all  the  Member  States. 

5. 

Problems  of mutual  recognition  of academic  and  vocational  qualifications. 

Case  study  : Employees  wanting  to  undergo  training  in  a country  other than 
their  own  can  face  problems  due  to  the  lack  of  mutual  recognition  of 
qualifications,  training  courses  and  placements.  This  lack  of recognition  has 
a  very  strong  discouraging  effect. 
The  development  of  permanent 
transnational  training  is  greatly  hindered  and  thus,  as  a  consequence, 
professional  mobility  with  the  European  Union. 

Line  of  action  :  Move  towards  mutual  recognition  of  placements  and 
vocational  training  courses,  extend  the  European  credit  transfer  system 
(ECTS)  already  established  in  higher  education  through  Community  action, 
to  the  vocational  training  sector. 

29.09.96 

IV 

There  are  other  obstacles  to  mobility  in  the  area  of education,  training  and  research. 
Some  are  of a  general  nature  - weakness  in  foreign  language  skills  or  the -financial 
position of the less well-off can have an effect on access to transnational training.  Other 
problems are more specific, such as the access of those resident in third-countries (pupils, 
students  and  workers)  to  education  and  training  activities  in  Member  States  other  than 
their host country. 

The  Green  Paper emphasises  the  necessity  of a  concerted  information  campaign on the 
issue of mobility  : information for  citizens, so  that they are aware of the possibilities on 
offer;  but  also  information  for  the  different  public  authorities  and  their  agencies  on 
Community law, the lack of knowledge of the law and the rules applying to transnational 
mobility,  which do  in themselves  create  an  obstacle. 

These obstacles are the object of suggestions for  reflection,  discussion and action among 
all  those  concerned. 

29.09.96 

v 

PART A:  TRANSNATIONAL MOBILITY  AND  WHAT IT MEANS 

1 

MOBILITY  AND  EUROPEAN  CITIZENSHIP 

Europe  has  now become  an  open area where,  in principle,  it  is  possible  for  all  citizens 
of the European Community to  move from  one country to  another,  as  an integral part of 
a unified whole. It is therefore essential that freedom  of movement should be guaranteed 
for  all  without hindrance. 

Virtual  mobility  generated  by  the  access  to  new  information  technologies,  such  as 
teleworking complements mobility.  However,  it is  important to  observe that the tools  of 
the  information  society  cannot replace  actual  physical  mobility. 

With  this 
increasing  freedom  of  movement  should  come  a  growing  European 
consciousness instilled through greater awareness of others as a result of exposure to new 
cultures  and  societies.  Mobility  within  the  Community  ought  to  contribute  to  the 
development of solidarity between all  Europeans at all  levels and in all  areas,  helping to 
raise standards throughout Europe and providing opportunities for all both at present and 
in the  future. 

2 

THE  ADVANTAGES  OF  MOBILilY  IN  TERMS  OF  EDUCATION,  TRAINING  AND 
RESEARCH 

Personal  mobility  is  a  vital  element of the  European  Community's  investment  in  human 
resources,  which is  seen as  one of the keys  to  successfully meeting the  economic,  social 
and  cultural  challenges  of  the  21st  century.  This  mobility  is  encouraged  by  the 
Commission  through  a  variety  of programmes  for  the  transnational  mobility  of persons 
who  are  keen  to  undergo  training,  broaden  their  horizons  or  contribute  to  training 
activities  in  another Member  State  of the  Community. 

Transnational  mobility  also  looks  to  foster  improvement  of the  understanding  of other 
European  societies  and  cultures;  it  also  enhances  the  social  skills  of individuals,  who 
learn  how  to  communicate  and  live  within  those  societies  and  to  respect  diversity; 
furthermore,  it  encourages  the  acquisition  of  linguistic  skills  and  contributes  to  the 
development of "European citizenship" complementing existing citizenship, of the country 
of origin. 

Transnational  mobility  also  encourages  cooperation  between  education  and  research 
institutions and  the  world of work,  thereby  helping to  improve  the  quality  of education, 
training  and  research.  It affords  greater  scope  for  education,  training  and  research,  and 
opens  the  door  to  the  transfer  of  professional  skills  and  knowledge,  particularly  in 
innovative  areas  such  as  new technologies,  new  management methods  and  organisation 
of work.  A  heightened  sense  of creativity,  initiative  and  entrepreneurial  spirit  is  thus 
engendered.  Transnational  mobility  offers  a  brighter  future  for  all  those  who  avail 
themselves of the opportunity, helping them to  adapt to  the changing needs of the labour 
market  within the  Community. 

In the occupational sphere, mobility paves the way for the creation of an employment and 
work area ori. a Community-wide scale. It gives each individual the opportunity to acquire 

29.09.96 

theoretical,  practical  and  behavioural  knowledge  and,  more  broadly,  skills  and 
qualifications  suited to  the  Single  Market. 

In economic terms, mobility is an essential aspect of competitiveness in that it encourages 
the  sharing  of  the  most  significant  innovative  experiences  as  regards  technology, 
organisation and production. 

Parliament  believes  that  increased  student  mobility  is  vital  in  order  to  provide 
better  qualified people  who  have  experience  of studying,  living  and  working  in 
other Member  States.  It  has  also,  on  several  occasions,  stressed  the  importance  of 
language  learning  in  the  interest  of mobility,  and  calledjor  the  creation  of a 
European  voluntary  service. 

The  Counci/2  has,  in  tum,  advocated: 
• 

cooperation  with  the  emphasis  on  fostering  the  mobility  of studen/_L and 
teachers,  · chiefly  through  the  elimination  of  administrative  and  social 
obstacles,  focusing also  on  improving the  teaching of foreign  languages; 
the  promotion  of measures  to  boost  contacts  between  pupils  and  teachers 
fro'!"  different countries. 

• 

The  social var(ners  at European  level have,  for their part,  stressed the  importance  of 
promoting  geographic  and  occupational  mobility 
the  acquisition  of 
sufficiently  broad-based  qualifications  which  are  known  and  transferable  at 
European  level.  These  qualifications should meet the  needs of the  labour market and 
the  ongoing process of technological and structural change as  well as  the  aspirations 
of individual workers3

through 

. 

Resolution  on  the  Commission  memorandum  on  higher  education  in  the  European  Community,  15  July  1993,  OJ  C 
255/161. 
Resolution  concerning  language  teaching  in  the  Community,  OJ  C  68/105  of 14.3.1983  and  Resolution  on  the  use  of 
languages  in  the Community, OJ  C  127/139of14.5.1984. 
European  Parliament Resolution  of 22  September  1995  on  the  establishment of European  civilian  service,  OJ  C  2691232 
of 16.10.1995. 

Resolution  of the  Ministers  for  Education  of 16  November  1971  on  cooperation  in  the  field  of education  (published  in 
"European  educational  policy  s~tements", Council  of the  European  Communities,  Secretariat-General,  3rd  edition,  June 
1987,  Luxembourg,  Office for  Official  Publications  of the  European Communities,  1988). 
Resolution  of the  Ministers  for  Education  meeting  within  the  Council  of 6 June  1974  on  cooperation  in  the  field  of 
education,  OJ C  98  of 20.  8.  1974. 
Conclusions of the Council  and the Ministers for  Education meeting within the Council of 27  November  1992 on measures 
for  developing the  European dimension  in  higher education,  OJ  C 336of19.12.1992. 
Conclusions of the Council and the Ministers for  Education meeting within the Council of 6 October  1989, on cooperation 
and  Community  policy  in  respect of education  (situation  in  1993),  OJ  C  277  of 31. l 0.  1989. 
Resolution of the  Council  and  the  Ministers  for  Education  meeting  within  the  Council  of 24  May  1988,  on the  European 
dimension  in education,  OJ C  177 of 6. 7 .1988. 

Joint  opinion on  "the  future  role  and  actions  of the  Community  in  the  field  of education  and  training,  including  the  role 
of the  social  partners".  SEC (94)  1758,  24.10.1994. 

29.09.96 

2 

3 

MOBILITY  IN  THE  CONTEXT  OF COMMISSION  INITIATIVES 

The proposals contained in the White  Paper "Growth, competitiveness and emp!!Jyment: 
the challenges and ways forward into the 21st century (1993)"  emphasise the importance 
of mobility. They are based on two premises : human capital, the European Community's 
greatest  resource,  gives  it  a  competitive  edge  over third  countries,  and  the  diversity  of 
cultures, traditions, languages, research and training enhances the potential for adaptation 
and  the  opportunities for  development. 

The White Paper on European social policy points out that the challenge to the European 
Community is to create a genuine European mobility area in which freedom of movement 
becomes  not only  a  legal  entitlement but also  a daily  reality4

• 

More  specifically,  the  White  Paper  on  education  and  training  "Teaching  and  learning: 
towards the learning society511
,  which was approved by the Commission on 29 November 
1995,  points  out  that  broad  access  to  education  and  training  calls  for  mobility  between 
educational  establishments  and  that  such  mobility,  which  is  now  being  actively 
encouraged  among  the  Member  States,  has  to  be  reinforced.  It  considers  that  mobility 
ought to  enable  individuals  to  exercise  responsibility  in building  up  their skills. 
A  further  point  made  in  the  White  Paper  is  that  mobility  has  increased  markedly 
throughout  Europe  and  the  Community  has  made  a  significant  contribution  to  this 
process,  particularly  through  action  programmes  in  the  field  of education,  training  and 
research,  yet  mobility  levels  remain unsatisfactory. 

In  the  White  Paper  on  Innovation6
,  the  Commission's  proposed  areas  of action  include 
measures to  encourage the mobility of students, engineers and researchers in the context 
of the  'Leonardo  da Vinci'  programme and  the  programme  for  Training  and Mobility  of 
Researchers. 

In  its  working  document  "Towards  a  European  Voluntary  Service  for  Young  People" 7
, 
the  Commission  draws  attention  to  the  need  to  clarify  the  status  of young  voluntary 
workers in Europe. Lack of such clarification is a further hindrance to the free  movement 
of these  young  people  and  poses  various  tax  and  social  security-related  problems. 

The  'Citizens  First'  initiative,  which  will  be  launched  by  the  Commission at the  end  of 
1996  aims,  through guides and  national  publications,  to  inform European  citizens about 
their rights and possibilities for,  among other things,  study, work, travel and residence in 
the  European  Community. 

Also  of note  are  the  activities  of the  high-level  group  of experts  chaired by Ms  Simone 
Veil, which was set up by the Commission8 to examine the persisting obstacles to the free 
movement of workers and individuals.  Once the report,  due  for  February  1997, has  been 

COM(94)  333  of 27  July  1994 

Published  by  the  Office  for  Official  Publications  of the  European  Communities  (ISBN+92+827+5699+8) 

Green  Paper on  Innovation,  COM(95)  688  final  of 20  December  1995 

Commission  working document,  XXIl/24/96 

Communication  to  the  Commission of 24.1.1996  - High-level  group  of experts  on  the  free  movement of persons. 

29.09.96 

3 

completed, the Commission will publish a White Paper proposing ways  of removing the 
obstacles thus  identified,  be they  of a  legislative,  administrative  or practical  nature. 

Finally,  the  communication  approved  by  the  Commission  on  5  June  1996  pro-poses  a 
"European Confidence Pact for Employment", the broad outlines of which were taken up 
by  the  European  Council  in Florence  on  20-21  June  1996.  It sets  out  a  certain  number 
of measures  to  combat  unemployment  and  exclusion  more  effectively,  with  increased 
focus  on future  growth areas  with more  potential  for job creation.  The  general  strategy, 
which is designed both to increase company competitiveness and to promote employment, 
must also  take  into  account qualifications  and  sectoral  and  geographical  mobility. 

4 

THE  STATE OF  PLAY 

The  Community  programmes  on  education,  training  and  research  have  contributed  to 
developing mobility in the Community by enabling a growing number of young people, 
students,  workers  and  researchers  to  undergo  training  in  another  Member  State  (see 
annexes  2  and  3). 

Freedom of movement for  persons  is  one of the  fundamental  principles  of the  Treaty of 
Rome  [Article  3(c)]  (hereinafter referred to  as  the  EC  Treaty).  Several provisions of the 
Treaty deal with mobility.  For instance, Article  8a confers on every citizen of the Union 
the  right to  move  and reside  freely  within the  territory  of the  Member  States,  subject to 
the  limitations  and  conditions  laid  down  by  the  Treaty  and  by  secondary  legislation. 
Depending on the categories of persons and matters covered, the right to intra-Community 
mobility  is  governed  by  the  provisions  on  freedom  of movement  for  workers,  freedom 
of  establishment,  provision  of  services  and  many  other  instruments  of  secondary 
legislation9

• 

The added value of transnational  mobility has  been officially recognised by  inclusion in 
the  EC  Treaty where,  for  the first  time,  it is  stated in Articles  126,  127  and  130g(d) that 
transnational  mobility  should  be  encouraged  and  should  form  an  integral  part  of 
Community policy  in  the  fields  of education,  training  and  research. 

With  regard  to  the  development  of quality  education  in  the  Community,  Article  126(2) 
specifies that "Community action shall be aimed at encouraging mobility of students and 
teachers,  inter alia by encouraging the  academic  recognition of diplomas  and  periods  of 
study". 

Article  127,  under  which  the  Community  is  to  implement  a  vocational  training  policy, 
also stipulates that "Community action shall aim to encourage mobility of instructors and 
trainees  and  particularly  young  people". 

Persons targeted by this  Green Paper may,  for  example, fall  within the  scope of one or other of the  following  instruments: 
Directive  68/360  of 15  October  1968  on  the  abolition  of restrictions  on  movement  and  residence  within  the  Community 
for workers  of the  Member States  and  their families:  OJ  L  257,  19.10.1968; 
Regulation  No  1612168  of 15  October  1968  on  freedom  of movement  for  workers  within  the  Community:  OJ  L  257, 
19.10.1968; 
Directive  73/148  of 21  May  1973  on  the  abolition  of restrictions  on  movement  and  residence  within  the  Community  for 
nationals  of the  Member States  with  regard  to  establishment and  the  provision  of services:  OJ  L  172,  28.6.1973; 
Directive  90/364of28 June  1990 on the  right of residence:  OJ  L  180,  13.7.1990; 
Directive  93/96of29 October  1993  on the  right of residence  for  students:  OJ  L  317,  18.12.1993. 

29.-09.96 

4 

In the interest of strengthening the scientific and technological bases of the Community's 
industry, encouraging it to become more competitive at international level and promoting 
research  activities,  Article  130g( d)  states  that  "the  Community  shall  carry  out  the 
following  activities,  complementing  the  activities  carried  out  in  the  Member States: 
stimulation of the  training  and  mobility of researchers  in the  Community". 

5 

THE  OBJECTIVES  OF THE  GREEN  PAPER 

In  spite  of  an  unquestioned  resolve  to  promote  mobility  and  the  numerous  legal 
provisions  adopted  in  connection  with  the  Single  Market,  there  are  still  obstacles  to 
genuine freedom of movement for persons undergoing training, including training through 
research,  and those  working  in training. 

Transnational  mobility,  as  considered  in  this  Green  Paper,  will  not therefore  be  limited 
solely  to  the  initiatives  taken  under  Community  action  programmes.  Account  will  be 
taken also  of all  transnational  mobility-oriented measures  designated as  "spontaneous". 

Mobility-oriented activities may be bilateral or multilateral, developed at different levels 
(regional,  local,  etc.)  and  may  derive  from  initiatives  in  the  public  sector  (regional 
councils, local authorities), the semi-public or the private sector (Chambers of Commerce, 
foundations,  the  social  partners,  etc.),  or  may  be  purely  personal.  Participants  include 
education establishments, education and training structures, research centres/institutes, the 
social  partners,  young people's organisations  and  voluntary  associations. 

It  should  be  stressed  that  the  obstacles  to  mobility  are  necessarily  more  difficult  to 
overcome  for  those  who  "spontaneously"  seek to  undertake  training  in  another Member 
State. 

This  Green  Paper  does  not  seek  merely  to  describe  the  difficulties  faced  nowadays  by 
persons  moving  from  one  country to  another  for  training  purposes.  It highlights  certain 
problems within the  competence of the  Community and the Member States,  in  line with 
the principle of subsidiarity, in the  fields  of education, training and research.  It proposes 
lines  of action  intended  to  stimulate  debate  both  at  Community  level  and  within  the 
Member States, putting forward points for consideration with a view to  finding  solutions 
to  the  obstacles  which are  still  encountered by  those  concerned. 

The Commission intends to follow-up the consultation launched by the Green Paper with 
concrete  initiatives,  appropriate  within its  field  of competence. 

29.09.96 

5 

6 

THE  TARGET  PUBLIC 

This Green Paper takes into consideration nationals of a Member State of the EC  or the 
European  Economic  Area (EEA 10
),  as  well  as  non-nationals  who  are  legally  resident  in 
the  European  Community on a permanent basis. 

At  a  later date,  particular  attention  should  be  given  to  nationals  of Central  and  Eastern 
European  countries,  Malta,  Cyprus,  who  came  to  live  in  a  Member  State  of  the 
Community in the  context of their participation in  Community programmes from  1997. 

It also  targets  students and  young people,  including those holding university degrees,  as 
well  as  language  assistants,  researchers,  teachers  and  trainers,  and  voluntary  workers. 

A number of those falling within the above categories may be regarded as wotke~ within 
the  meaning of Article 48  of the EC  Treaty, thereby enjoying the attendant rights (being 
entitled in particular to equal  access to  employment and to  equal treatment in respect of 
living  and  working  conditions  and the  right  of residence) 11

• 

To  qualify as  an employed person under Community law, the  worker concerned must be 
a  Community  national  and:  be  engaged  in  actual  activities,  be  working  under  an 
employment contract,  and  be  receiving  pay. 

In  the  case  of children  of migrant  workers,  who  have  often  been  settled  in  the  host 
country for  a long time,  intra-Community mobility does  not mean living and studying in 
the  country  to  which  the  parents  moved  for  their job,  but  moving  to  another  Member 
State,  which  may  in  some  cases  be  the  family's  country  of origin12

• 

* 
*  * 

to 

II 

12 

Island,  Lichtenstein, Norway 

The  concept  of  "worker"  takes  on  a  Community  dimension,  as  clarified  by  the  Court  of Justice  of  the  European 
Communities,  and  is  distinct from  the  designation  of the  person  concerned  under  the  national  law  of the  host  country  as 
an  employee,  self-employed  person  or even  student 

On this  point cf.  the judgment of 13.11.1990, Case C-308/89,  di  Leo. 

29.09.96 

6 

Part B:  TlIE OBSTACLES TO MOBUJTY 

Persons  moving  from  one  country  to  another,  whether  within  the  framework  of 
Community programmes or in another context,  are  normally  protected by the  principles 
which underpin Community law. 

Community workers and members of their family benefit from the Community rules when 
they  exercise  their  right  to  freedom  of movement  both  on  an  individual  basis  and  in 
conjunction with a  Community programme. 

Nationals  of the  Member  States  of the  European  Community  are  entitled  to  study  and 
undergo training anywhere within the Community, whether they move to another Member 
State for that purpose or whether they themselves or their parents are already resident in 
a  Member  State  as  an  employed  or  self-employed  person.  European  citizens  therefore 
have the  right to  engage  in education,  although the  scope  of such entitlement is  not the 
same  in all  cases. 

As the Court of Justice of the European Communities has confirmed on several occasions, 
access  to  courses  of vocational  training  and  education  falls  within the  scope  of the  EC 
Treaty 13
•  The  concept of "non-discrimination on grounds of nationality",  a fundamental 
principle  of  Community  law,  has  thus  been  given  a  broad  interpretation  through 
development  of the  concept  of "indirect  discrimination"  to  mean  any  measure  which, 
while not in itself constituting discrimination between nationals and non-nationals, would 
in  practice result  in  a  specific  handicap  for  the  latter category. 

However  such  obstacles  still  exist.  A  distinction  can  be  made  between  those  which 
actually  prevent  mobility  and  those  which  make  it  difficult.  They  may  be  of a  purely 
legislative  nature  or may just as  easily  be  caused  by  such  factors  as  overly  stringent .or 
lax application of legislation, erroneous or unduly restrictive interpretation of Community 
law in the Member States, or even administrative "difficulties". There are, however, other 
barriers  of an  economic,  linguistic,  practical  or  basically  psychological  nature  which 
somehow hinder transnational  mobility. 

The  diversity  of  national  circumstances,  together  with  insufficient  coordination  and 
information  in the  Member States  can  equally  create  obstacles  to  mobility. 

1 

PROBLEMS  CONCERNING  THE  RIGHT  OF  RESIDENCE 

Citizens  of the  European 'Union  engaged  in  training  or  research  training  or  working 
professionally  in  training  in  another  Member  State  are  unable  to  benefit  from  the 
provisions  of Community  law. 

13 

This  field  is  now  covered  by Articles  126  and  127  of the  EC  Treaty.  It should  be  borne  in  mind  that there  is  a substantial 
body  of Court  of Justice  case  law  (including  the  Forcheri  and  Gravier judgments  on  the  direct  applicability  of Article  7, 
which  has  now  become  Article  6  of the  Treaty). 

29.09.96 

7 

Students  in  vocational  training  are  covered  by  Directive  93/96  on the  right of residence 
for  students14
•  They must meet the conditions laid down by this Directive, which are:  to 
be  enrolled  in  a  recognised  educational  establishment  for  the  principal  purpose  of 
following  a  vocational training course,  to have sickness  insurance cover,  and toprovide 
the  competent authority,  by means  of a  declaration  or by  such alternative  means  as  the 
student may  choose that are  at least equivalent,  with evidence of sufficient resources to 
avoid  becoming  a  burden on the  host Member State. 

Students  who  meet  these  conditions  have  right  of residence  for  the  duration  of their 
training course. This right is evidenced by a residence permit, obtained by presentive their 
identity card or passport and providing the required proof of sufficient resources, sickness 
insurance  and  enrolment in a  recognised  establishment.  Where  the training  course  lasts 
~ore than  one  year,  the  residence  permit  may  be  restricted  to  one  year,  renewable 
annually. 

Nevertheless, there may well be a number of people engaged in training who are unable 
to  claim  any  entitlement  under  Directive  93/96  because  their  course  is  not  at  a 
"recognised establishment"  within the meaning  of the  Directive. 

For  the  other  citizens  of the  European  Union  moving  within  the  Community  for  the 
purposes  of obtaining  or providing training,  it  is  worth  considering  whether they  could 
be  regarded  as  workers  within  the  meaning  of Article  48  EC.  Definition as  a  "worker" 
is,  however,  not  a  straightforward  matter  in  certain  circumstances,  and  it  is  up  to  the 
national  courts  to  decide,  case  by  case,  whether the  circumstances  present the  essential 
characteristics of an employment relationship, where appropriate basing their decision on 
a  preliminary  ruling  by the  Court of Justice. 

Persons on short-term placements and researchers can also be classified as workers under 
Article  48  if they  provide  services  for  a  certain time  for  and  under the  management of 
a  third party,  for  which they receive  remuneration15

• 

It is also possible for an individual engaged in training to claim the right of residence in 
connection  with  the  provision  of services  as  covered  by  Directive  731148  of 21  May 
1973.  The  persons  concerned may be providers  of services  (e.g.  persons  providing paid 
tuition in a training establishment for a limited period) or service recipients (e.g.  persons 
following  training  courses on a  paying  basis). 

The right of residence of the provider or receiver of services lasts for the duration of the 
training course.  If this  extends beyond three  months,  the right of residence is  evidenced 
by  a  residence  permit  for  which  the  person  concerned  must  present  his  or her  identity 
card or passport along with evidence of the service he or she intends to supply or receive. 

Finally, persons  not falling  within any  of the  above-mentioned categories  can claim the 
right  of residence  under  the  terms  of Directive  90/364  on  the  right  of residence.  Such 

14 

IS 

Directive  93/96of29 October  1993  related  to  the  right of residence  of students,  OJ  L  137of18.12.1993. 
Children  of migrant workers  remain  covered,  where  their  right  of residence  in  the  parents'  host  country  is  concerned,  by 
the  provisions  on  the  right of residence  of employed  and  self-employed  workers,  up  to  the  age  of 21  or as  long  as  they 
are  dependent  on  their  parents.  They  are  also  covered  by  the  provisions  entitling  them  to  equal  treatment  with  nationals 
of the  country  concerned. 

The right of residence of workers  is  evidenced  by  a residence permit obtainable upon  presentation of a passport or identity 
card  and  evidence of employment. 

29.09.96 

8 

persons may, on the basis of this  Directive, have the right of residence on condition that 
they  have  sufficient resources  and sickness insurance  cover in  respect of all  risks  in the 
host  Member  State.  These  two  requirements  of resources  and  sickness  insurance  have 
been incorporated  into the national  legislation of those countries which have transposed 
the  Directive.  They  may,  in  many  cases,  comprise  an  obstacle,  particularly  for  people 
in a  vulnerable  social  situation. 

In a  certain,  if limited,  number of cases,  the  person concerned is  not covered  by  any  of 
the  situations provided  for  in secondary  legislation.  One example is  the  case of persons 
who  cannot provide  evidence  of sufficient resources  to  benefit from  Directi~e 90/364. 

For stays of over three months - and many training periods are longer than three months -
students  must apply  to  the  authorities  in the  host  Member State  for  a  residence  permit, 
for  which  they  must  present  a  certificate  of enrolment  in  an  educational  or  training 
establishment and a  declarati~n of adequate  resources  and  sickness  insurance  cover. 

a) 

Trainees  on placements  and voluntuy workers 

Because of their lack of specific legal  status,  people on industrial  placements  in  another 
Member  State,  i.e.  young  people  who  are  neither  students  nor  workers/officially 
unemployed 
(i.e.  with  no  entitlement  to  unemployment  benefit),  encounter  serious 
difficulties  and  in  some  cases  are  actually  unable  to  move  to  another country. 

Under Community law,  it is up to  the national  courts to  establish,  case by case,  whether 
the  circumstances  of a  placement present the  essential  characteristics  of an employment 
relationship,  i.e.  actual  performance  of activities,  employer/employee  relationship  and 
remuneration.  All citizens of the Union have  ;:1  three-month right of residence in another 
Member State as tourists (in the category of receivers of services under Directive 73/148), 
for which they  require only an identity card or passport.  If,  however,  young people wish 
to  prolong  their stay  abroad  beyond three  months,  which is  encouraged in the  European 
Community's action programmes 16
,  they must apply to the authorities in the host Member 
State  for  a residence permit,  for  which they  must present,  as  appropriate,  a  certificate of 
paid employment or of enrolment in an educational  or training establishment,  as  well as 
evidence  of adequate  resources  and  sickness  insurance  cover,  which  may  be  difficult  if 
they  have  ceased to  be  students  and  are  on an  unpaid placement. 

Such  problems  can  also  apply 
SOCRATES/LINGUA  programme. 

to 

language  assistants  participating  m 

the 

The  problems  affecting  trainees  on placements  also  apply  to  voluntary  workers,  as  they 
have  no  specific  status. 

For trainees  and voluntaiy  workers,  the  Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 
1,  page  25 

J(, 

Industrial  placements  can  last  up  to  12  months,  as  is  the  case  under  the  Community's  LEONARDO  da VINCI  programme. 

29.09.96 

9 

b) 

Nationals  of thinl countries  legally  resident in a  Member State  of the  European 
Community 

The situation of third country nationals wishing to enter a Member State in order to study 
is  currently  governed  by  national  law  in  the  Member  States.  The  latter have,  however, 
been urged to  base their approach on the principles set out in the Council Resolution of 
30  November  1994  on  the  admission  of third  country  nationals  to  the  territory  of the 
Member States of the  European Union for  study  purposes. 

-

Generally  speaking,  the  right  of residence  in  one  Member  State  does  not  confer  any 
particular entitlement  to  apply for  the right of residence in another.  As a rule,  however, 
residents  of a  Member  State  can  enter  another  Member  State  for  a  maximum  of three 
months (with or without a visa depending on their nationality), without losing their right 
of residence  in the initial  country.  They may  not engage  in any paid activity during the 
three-month  period,  but  are  usually  authorised  to  pursue  certain  training  activities 
(summer courses,  language courses,  etc.). 

The  Schengen  Agreement17  puts  a  residence  permit  on  an  equal  footing  with  a  visa. 
According  to  this  principle,  a  national  of a third  country with a residence  permit issued 
by a  Schengen country can enter other Schengen countries without first  obtaining a visa. 
Such persons must be in possession of an identity document and residence permit when 
entering  another  Schengen country. 

This  principle  of equivalence  means  that,  irrespective  of the  purpose  of the  trip  to  the 
· other  Member  State,  nationals  of third  countries  who  are  in  possession  of a  residence 
permit no longer need a visa for short stays. This also applies to short-term training visits. 
However,  the  Schengen Agreement  is  principally  concerned  with  short  visits,  and  does 
not  cover  long  stays  (i.e.  over three  months),  access  to  employment  or  engagement  in 
self-employed activities. 

The principle  of equivalence between residence permit and visa is  also  contained in the 
proposal  for  a  Council  Directive  on the  right  of third-country  nationals  to  travel  in  the 
Community (COM (95) 346 final),  for stays of less than three months. This Commission 
proposal is  currently  being examined by  the  Parliament and the  Council. 

If the proposal is adopted, nationals of third countries in possession of a residence permit 
who wish to  visit another Member State for a period of less than three months, including 
-those  visiting the country for study purposes, will have their residence permit recognised 
as  the  equivalent of a  visa. 

For nationals  of thinl countries,  the  Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 6, 
page 28 

17 

For the  moment.  the  Schengen  Agreement applies  in  seven  Member States:  B,  D,  FR.  ES,  L,  NL and  P. 

29.09.96 

10 

2 

DIFFERENCES  AMONG  MEMBER STATES  IN  THE  TREATMENT  OF  RESEARCHERS 

Research trainees  in receipt of the  Community  "Marie Curie"  mobility grants who move 
within the  Community do  not have the  same  status  in all  Member States.  Each Member 
State  applies  its  own rules  to  researchers  in  respect  of social  security  contributions  and 
direct taxation.  While in the majority of cases they are considered as  employed workers, 
they  sometimes have  the  status  of students  or self-employed workers.  These differences 
in  the  rules  applied  to  researchers  and  the  grants  they  receive  have  an  impact  on  two 
levels. 

Firstly, they affect the amount of Community funds actually directed into research.  When 
the  Community  allocates  a  grant,  either through  an  intermediary  institution  in  the  host 
country  or directly  to  the  recipient,  application  of the  rules  in  force  in the  host country, 
with  the  corresponding  compulsory  contributions,  has  a  direct  influence  on  the  final 
amount  of the  Community grant  going  into  the  research once  the  recipient has  paid the 
compulsory  contributions  under the  system  in the  host  country. 

· 

The  second  major  consequence  is  that  the  differences  in  the  national  compulsory 
contribution  systems  can  affect  the  relative  attractiveness  of  the  Community  grants 
available  under  joint  research  projects  financed  by  the  Community  in  the  different 
Member States. This then biases the choice of host institution, which is overly influenced 
by  financial  considerations  when  it  should  be  based  essentially  on  scientific  criteria.  If 
these  differences  persist,  they  may  eventually  discourage  potential  candidates  from 
applying  for  Community  grants  for  the  purposes  of undertaking  research  in  another 
Member  State  and  provoke  a  "brain  drain"  to  third  countries  offering  better conditions. 

For  implementation  of the  programme  on  Training  and  Mobility  of Researchers,  the 
Commission  set  up,  on  the  basis  of the  conclusions  of the  15.12.94  Research  Council, 
a  temporary  scheme  ensuring  that  the  legal,  financial  and  social  conditions  applying  to 
grant-aided  research  trainees  are  comparable  to  those  applying  to  researchers  of an 
equivalent level  who  are  nationals  of the host country,  while allowing  the  differences  in 
· 
status  between  Member  States  to  remain. 

The  conclusions  stated  that  a  "single  system  should  be  implemented  to  standardise 
conditions  for  research  trainees  in  receipt  of grants  in  the  different  Member  States, 
making  them  comparable  with  those  offered to  researchers  of the  same  level  in the host 
country". 

Such  a  system  has  been  proposed  on  the  basis  of  Article  130  I  (adoption  of  the 
framework programme) and in accordance with the European Parliament's opinion on the 
training  and  mobility  of 
Commission  proposal  concerning 
researchers 18
,  which 
envisaged  setting  up  a  single  system  of research  training  grants,  with  exemption  from 
national  income  tax  for  such  grants  paid  directly  by  the  Commission  to  the  researchers 
concerned.  The  Council Decision20  adopting the programme on the training and mobility 

•  The  Commission  presented  an  amended  version  of this  proposal 19

the  programme  on 

JR 

19 

COM  (94)  68  final  of 30.4.94 

COM  (94)  243  final  of 3.6.94 

94/916/EC  of 15.12.94 

29.09.96 

11 

of researchers did not include either the principle of a single system or that of exemption 
from  national  taxation. 

It  is  therefore  important  to  find  ways  of improving  the  situation  of Community  grant-
aided  researchers,  which  will  probably  mean  making  changes  in  certain  areas  such  as 
labour  law  and  taxation  systems  which,  as  Community  law  stands  at  the  moment,  are 
mainly the  preserve  of national  policy. 

~ 

For Community-funded researchers,  the  Green Paper proposes  Line  of 
Action 2,  page 25 

3 

COMPULSORY  CONTRIBUTIONS 

These include both tax and social  security  contributions.  The tax  systems  applied in the 
Member States cannot in themselves be considered an obstacle to  mobility, except where 
they  fail  to  respect the fundamental  principles  of Community  law.  However,  the-risk of 
discrimination  should  not  be  underestimated,  in  circunstances  where  an  individual  is 
subject  to  the  fiscal  regime  of  one  country  and  the  social  regime  of  another.  The 
coherence  wich exists  in one  country  between  fiscal  and  social  arrangements  cannot be 
guaranteed when these two  different sets of legislation are  applied  in different countries. 

3.1 

Direct taxation 

Policy on direct taxation is,  in principle, the competence of the Member States. The latter 
must,  however,  respect the fundamental  rules laid down by Community law,  particularly 
in  respect  of the  free  movement  of persons,  such  as  non-discrimination  on  grounds  of 
nationality  and the  principle of equal  treatment.  Differences  can exist in the  way  grants 
are  treated  for  tax  purposes  in  different  Member  States  because  of the  way  they  are 
classified. 

In  many countries,  grants  and  other awards  received  by  persons  engaged  in training  are 
regarded  as  income  and  as  such  are  subject to  personal  income  tax.  In  others,  they  are 
classed as  reimbursement of expenses and not as  taxable  income.  There  is  also  a  risk  of 
double taxation for employed persons exercising their right to  move from one country to 
another. 

In  international  fiscal  law,  taxability  is  based  on the  criterion  of tax  domicile.  Persons 
resident  in  one  country,  i.e.  their  domicile  for  tax  purposes,  are  generally  obliged  to 
declare  all  their  income  to  the  authorities  of that  country,  irrespective  of whether  that 
income  is  from  internal  or  external  sources.  Non-residents,  on  the  other  hand,  are 
generally  taxed  only  on  income  received  in  that  country.  These  competing  demands  in 
the  law can lead  to  double  taxation21

• 

It is therefore possible for persons engaged in training to  be taxed on their grants by both 
the  country of origin and  the  host  country. 

21 

International  double  taxation  exists  where  a  person  is  subject  to  tax  on  the  same  income  by  more  than  one  country; 
economic double  taxation  exists  where  two  different persons  are  subject to  tax  on  the  same  income. 

29.09.96 

12 

On  the  whole,  of course,  double  taxation  is  avoided  by  application  of the  rules  on 
precedence in taxation rights set out in the international agreements, most of which follow 
the  model  convention  drawn  up  by  the  OECD22
•  These  do  not,  however,  cov~r all  the 
instances  of double  taxation  which could  arise  in  the  event,  for  example,  of conflicting 
interpretation  of  certain  provisions  by  the  countries  concerned.  Furthermore,  such 
agreements  do  not  always  exist.  The  existing  agreements  within the  Community  do  not 
cover all the  105  possible combinations. Ten or so bilateral agreements are lacking or are 
not yet  in force. 

a) 

Students 

Students  are,  without  exception,  exempt  from  taxation  in  the  host  country  on  sums 
received  from  abroad which  are  intended  to  cover  their  costs.  Article  20  of the  OECD 
Model,  on which other agreements are  generally  based,  contains the  principle that sums 
received  by  students  or business  apprentices  should be  tax-exempt.  Such  sums  must be 
intended  to  cover  maintenance  and  study/training  costs  and  be  received  from  sources 
outside the territory of residence.  The exemption applies only to persons who are or were 
immediately before  visiting a contracting  State resident in another contracting State and 
whose  visit  is  solely for  the purpose  of pursuing  their studies  or training. 

This  exemption does  not  apply  to  sums  received  from  within  the  territory  in which the 
person concerned is resident.  This is the case where the grant is paid by the host country 
or  by  an  institution  or  company  established  there.  In  these  circumstances,  the  grant  is 
taxable  in the  host country  under its  own national  law23

• 

b) 

Voluntaiy worlcers 

Some  Member  States  regard  as  taxable  income  allowances,  board  and  lodging  and 
subsistence  costs  paid to  voluntary  workers.  Volunteers  can  be  subject to  deductions  at 
source,  and  even if they  are  subsequently able  to  claim  a  rebate  if their total  income  is 
below  the  minimum  tax  threshold,  this  can  cause  them  difficulties  in  the  short  term. 
There  is  also  a  possibility  of double  taxation,  depending  on  the  length  of time  the 
voluntary  worker  is  resident  in  the  host  country  and  the  double  taxation  agreements  in 
force  between the  host country  and the  country  of origin.  Volunteers  may  be taxable  in 
the host country on income from sources unconnected with their voluntary service, if they 
are considered resident for the purposes of national tax law.  They may have to deal with 
a  lot  of administrative red  tape  in the  host country,  such  as  the  formalities  for  applying 
for  a  tax  rebate,  or  providing  evidence  of domicile  in  the  country  in  which  they  are 
normally  resident. 

22 

In  1963  the  OECD Fiscal  Committee  drew  up  a  draft convention on double  taxation of income  and  of capital.  Commonly 
known  as  the  "OECD  Model",  this  has  been  regularly  updated  and  is  intended  to  harmonise  fiscal  agreements  between  -
Member States  and give standard principles, definitions, rules and  interpretations. In a recommendation, the OECD Council 
requested  the  governments  of the  Member States  to  follow  this  model  when  concluding or revising fiscal  agreements.  All 
the  Member States  of the  European Community  are  members  of the  OECD. 

On  this  point,  the  1992 judgment of the  Danish  fiscal  court of 12  June  1991  (650-8896-00014),  ruling  that  the  Ministry 
of Economic  Affairs'  attempts  to  add  the  ERASMUS  grant to  students'  "salary"  (in  Denmark,  students  are  normally  paid 
a "salary") were illegal,  is  quite  illuminating. Those concerned would thus  have moved into a higher tax bracket. Following 
the  ruling,  Denmark made mobility  grants,  including the  ERASMUS  grants,  tax-exempt,  thereby recognising that the  grant 
is  not a salary but intended  to  cover subsistence  and  travel  costs. 

29.09.96 

13 

The  treatment  of  the  host  organisations  as  employers  would  mean  social  security 
contributions  having  to  be paid in respect of voluntary  workers  and  would also  involve 
complex administrative procedures, such as the obligation to complete annual t~returns. 

For voluntaiy woke~, the  Green Paper proposes  Line of Action 1,  page 25 

c) 

Teache~ 

Teachers encounter certain tax obstacles if moving from one country to another for a long 
period.  Studies by the Liaison Committee of Rectors  Conferences in  1993  demonstrated 
the difficulties created by the substantial differences in net income caused by differences 
in  national  legislation24

• 

d) 

Researche~ in receipt of Community  grants 

Researchers can also encounter obstacles as  a result of the taxation system to which they 
are  subject  (see  point  3.2).  The  provisional  arrangements  put  into  place  by  the 
Commission  still  present  the  problem  of taking  funds  from  the  Community  research 
budget. 

For Community-funded  researche~, the  Green Paper proposes  Line  of 
Action 2,  page 25 

3.2 

Social security  contributions 

The  Community  rules  enabling  the  legislation  applicable  to  social  security,  including 
contributions,  to  be  determined,  were  laid  down  by  Council  Regulation  1408171  of 14 
June  1971  on the  application  of social  security  schemes  to  employed  persons  and  their 
families  moving  within  the  Community25
•  Since  1 January  1994,  these  rules  have  also 
been  applicable  to  nationals  and to  the  social  security  systems of the  18  Member States 
of the  European Economic  Area (EEA). 

The  objective  of this  Community  Regulation  is  purely  one  of coordination,  and  it  does 
not  affect  in  any  way  the  freedom  of Member  States  to  determine  their  own  social 
security systems. Its aim is to make workers moving within the Community subjec.t to the 
social security system of a single Member State in order to avoid the complications which 
can  ensue when the  legislation of more than one  country  is involved.  It also  means that 
no  Member State other than that to  whose  legislation the  worker concerned is  subject is 
entitled  to  require  contributions  from  that  worker. 

The rules set out in this Regulation are  binding,  which means that the persons concerned 
cannot be  free  to  choose the legislative system to  which they would prefer to  be subject, 

Rectors  Conference,  Liaison  Committee of Rectors  Conferences,  Brussels,  1993. 

25 

Consolidated  version  published  in  OJ C  325  of 10.12.1992 

29.09.96 

14 

and the  Member  States have  no  power to  determine  the  extent  of their own jurisdiction 
or that  of another Member State. 

Only  the  legislation  of one  country  can  be  applicable  at  any  one  time.  The  persons 
concerned cannot be subject during the same period to different insurance schemes under 
the  legislation of two  or more  Member  Stat~s. 

The point of departure of Regulation  1408/71  is  the principle of "lex  loci laboris",  i.e.  a 
person employed in the territory of one Member State is  subject to the legislation of that 
Member State even if resident in another Member State or if the registered office or place 
of business  of the  undertaking  or  individual  employing  him  or  her  is  situated  in  the 
territory  of another  Member State. 

There are exceptions to this principle which are expressly provided for in the Regulation. 
One  such exception  is  the  case  of persons  employed  in the  territory  of a  Member  State 
by  an  undertaking  to  which  they  are  normally  attached  who  are  posted  Jzy  that 
undertaking  to  the  territory  of another  Member  State  to  perform  work  there  for  that 
undertaking.  Such persons  continue  to  be  subject to  the  legislation  of the  first  Member 
State,  provided  that  the  anticipated  duration  of that  work  does  not  exceed  12  months. 
Provision  is  also  made  for  two  or  more  Member  States,  or  the  competent  bodies 
designated by them, to provide for other exceptions by common agreement in the interest 
of certain categories  of persons  or of certain  persons. 

The  social  security  legislation  applicable  under  these  rules  does  not  always  correspond 
to  tax  legislation  (see  point  3 .1 ). 

Furthermore,  the  rules  are  applicable  only to  Community nationals  insured  as  employed 
or  self-employed  workers  and  their  families  as· they  are  within  the  scope  of Regulation 
1408/71, which excludes some of the categories targeted by this Green Paper, notably all 
workers  who  are  nationals  of third  countries,  even  those  who  are  legally  resident  in  a 
Member  State. 

As  the  Regulation  stands  at the  moment,  students  are  covered  if they  are  insured  under 
the  social  security  scheme of one  of the  Member States  as  workers  (e.g.  in Germany)  or 
as  members  of  the  family  of  an  insured  worker.  The  Commission  has  presented  a 
proposal  to  extend  the  scope  of the  Regulation  to  all  insured  persons,  including  those 
insured  under  special  schemes  for  students26

• 

I 

Sometimes, voluntaiy workers  or trainees  on placements  are  not  insured  at all  under the 
social security scheme of a Member State. Adoption of the above-mentioned Commission 
proposal  of 13  December  1991  would  do  nothing  to  change  this  situation. 

Teachers  and  researchers,  if they  are  civil  service  employees  or  treated  as  such,  are 
covered  by  the  legislation  applicable  to  the  public  authority  employing  them  (and 
therefore pay the  corresponding contributions). If this  is  not the  case,  they  are  classed as 
employed  or self-employed workers  and  are  therefore,  in  principle,  subject to  the  social 
security  legislation  of the  Member  State  in  which  they  are  working. 

Proposal  of 13  December  1991,  OJ  C  46 of 20.2.1992 

29.09.96 

15 

Such  persons  will  generally  have  to  switch  social  security  schemes  if they  move  to 
another country to work. In order to avoid excessive red tape where the situation does not 
justify complex procedures (e.g.  where the move is  only for a  short time), recourse  may 
be  made  to  the  above-mentioned  exception  clauses,  which  provide  for  the  necessary 
flexibility. 

The Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 1  and 3.b, pages  25  & 26 

4 

SOCIAL PROTECTION 

The deduction of social contributions is the quid pro quo of the right to social protection. 
For people  involved in mobility,  this  protection may  sometimes prove  inadequate. 

4.1 

Loss  of benefit entitlement for unemployed  pe~ons moving  between  clJlllltries 
while  engaged in training 

In  some  Member  States,  unemployed  persons  taking  up  a  transnational  training  or 
industrial  placement  lose  the  unemployed  status  which  entitles  them  to  social  security 
cover and unemployment benefit. 

In all  Member  States,  unemployed  status  is  restricted to  persons  residing  in the  country 
concerned and registered as job seekers there in accordance with national legislation and 
practice. However, there is Community legislation on social security27  enabling Europe.an 
Community nationals to continue to draw unemployment benefit for a maximum of three 
months  if they  extend  their  job  search  to  another  Member  State  and  register  as  job 
seekers  there. 

Persons  moving  to  another country  for  training  purposes  are  not  considered  as  meeting 
this criterion,  since they are not looking for a job in the host country.  During this period 
they  are  therefore  not  able  to  keep  their  unemployed  status  or  the  associated  social 
security benefits. Some Member States have, however, made an exception for participants 
in Community programmes,  by putting a flexible  interpretation on their own legislation. 

In  some  Member  States,  a  further  difficulty  can  arise  for  such  persons  when,  upon 
returning  to  the  country  of origin,  they  are  subject to  a  further  qualifying  period before 
they  officially  regain entitlement to  their rights. 

Loss  of benefit  rights  is  a  major  obstacle  to  participation  by  unemployed  persons  in 
transnational training or industrial  placements. They are therefore denied the opportunity 
to  gain  experienc~, skills  and  qualifications  which  such measures  can provide. 

For unemployed pe~on undergoing  transnational  training,  the  Green Paper 
proposes  Line  of Action 3.a,  page 26 

27 

Article  69  of Council  Regulation  (EEC)  1408/71  of 14  June  1971.  A consolidated  version  was  published  in  OJ  C 325  of 
l 0  December  1992. 

29.09.96 

16 

4.2 

Lack of social  security  cover in the  host counny 

Regulation  1408/71  on the application of social security schemes (cf.  4.2) does not apply 
to special schemes for civil servants and persons treated as such. Teache~ and researche~ 
with  civil  servant  status  are  therefore  covered  as  insured  persons,  but can only  benefit 
from  the  coordination of social  security  schemes  if they  are  or have  been members of a 
general  social  security  scheme  in their country  of origin,  which is  not  always  the  case, 
indeed  far  from  it.  As  a  result,  teachers  and  researchers  who  are  members  of a  special 
scheme  for  civil  servants  are  entitled to  benefits  in the  country  of the  scheme  to  which 
they  belong,  but not in the  host country. 

As  previously  stated,  students,  in their capacity as  such,  are  excluded from  the  scope of 
this Regulation.  A very recent amendment to Regulation  1408/71  entitles any national of 
a Member State (and any members of their family residing with them),  insured under the 
legislation  of a  Member  State,  to  cover  for  immediate  health  care  requirements,  to  be 
covered by a corresponding institution in the place of stay or residence (by means of form 
"E  111 ")28
•  This  also  applies  to  trainees  on  placements  and  to  volunta:1y  wotke~. The 
Commission has just presented  a  proposal  that the  condition of immediate  necessity  for 
students and those  in vocational training  no  lonher be  a requirement  so  that such people 
are  covered by  the  field  of application of the  regulation29

• 

Thinl  country  nationals  who  are  legally  resident  in  a  Member State  of the  European 
Community  or  European  Economic  Area  encounter  a  further  practical  obstacle  when 
trying  to  move  from  one  country  to  another.  Current  Community  legislation  on  social 
security30  applies  only to  Community nationals. 

In practice, this means that persons in this sitr:ation are not covered by the social security 
arrangements,  including those for  immediate essential health care (form "E  111 ")  during 
their  exchange  visit or transnational  training  or  industrial  placement31

. 

The  Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 3.b and 6,  pages  26  &  28 

5 

RECOGNffiON,  CERTIFICATION,  VALIDATION 

The lack of recognition and of transparency of training diplomas and certificates, and the 
lack  of certification  or validation  of placement periods  in  another Member  State  can  be 
a  handicap  to  people  participating  in mobility  arrangements32

• 

Regulation  (EC)  3095/95  introduced  a  new  Article  22a  into  Regulation  (EEC)  1408171  (cf.  OJ  L  335  of 30  December 
1995). 

29 

)) 

. 12 

COM(96)  452  final 

Article  2  of Regulation  1408/71/EEC. 

In  the  sole  case  of immediately  essential  health  care  during  a  stay  in  the  territory  ot  a  Member  State  other  than  the 
competent State,  following  the  European Parliament opinion on  the  1994  proposal  for  various  amendments  (which became 
Regulation  (EEC)  3095/95),  the  Commission  presented  an  amended  proposal  for  a  regulation  containing  a  provision 
intended  to  extend  Article  22  (l) (a)  and  (c)  to  cover workers  from  third  countries.  The  proposal  was  not  adopted  by  the 
Council  in  December  1995 . 

In  the  Debates  of the European  Parliament,  (OJ  4-470/14  of 13.11.95) several  types of recognition  were  identified: 
- recognition  of periods  of study; 
- recognition  of academic  qualifications  for  further  study  abroad; 

29.09.96 

17 

The non-recognition of training periods spent abroad acts as a disincentive because it can 
mean  that  the  periods  concerned  have  to  be  repeated,  or  even  a  loss  of credit  on  the 
curriculum.  It  can  also  be  a  barrier  to  finding  work  in  the  host  country  or  t~ finding 
another job when returning  home. 

a) 

Students/young  people 

Under the Community SOCRATES/ERASMUS programme, academic recognition 
is  an essential  prerequisite  for  mobility,  and· is  therefore  generally  obtained  as  a 
matter of course. 

The  European Credit Transfer  System  (ECTS)  is  of interest  in  that  it  is  entirely 
based on cooperation by the universities, who work together of their own free will 
and  on their own responsibility to  facilitate  the  academic  recognition  of periods 
of study  in establishments  in other Member  States.  However,  outside the  above 
mentioned. programme,  academic recognition,  which falls  within the competence 
of the Member States, is far from universal.  However some action on information 
is undertaken through the Network of National Academic Recognition Information 
Centres  (NARIC)33

• 

The  situation  is  even more difficult in the  field  of vocational training34

• 

While recognition of training  and placement periods  in another Member State  is 
still problematic, the European Community has taken several initiatives to promote 
transparency  and transnational  recognition of vocational  qualifications. 

In the case of the non-regulated professions, there is no legal obstacle to mobility, 
but  insufficient  familiarity  with  the  qualifications  of  other  countries  is  a 
considerable  barrier.  In view of this,  the  European  Community has,  since  1985, 
with  the  support  of CEDEFOP,  initiated  a  series  of measures  to  improve  the 
comparability,  transparency  and  recognition  of skills  and  qualifications35
•  These 
objectives  are  still  being pursued under the  Leonardo  da Vinci  programme. 

- recognition  of foreign  academic  qualifications  for  the  purposes  of obtaining a national  qualification; 
- recognition  of academic  qualifications  for  employment  in  a given  profession. 

Created  on  the  initiative  of the  Commission  of the  European  Communities  in  1984,  the  aim  of the  NARIC  network  is  to 
improve  the  recognition  of academic  qualifications  and  study  periods  in  the  Member  States  of the  European  Community 
and  of the  European  Free  Trade  Association.  The  network  forms  part  of the  Community's  SOCRATES/ERASMUS 
programme. 

A report  drawn  up  in  1994  at  the  request  of the  PETRA  Advisory  Committee,  on  the  recognition  of training  periods  and 
industrial  placements  in  other  Member  States  was  based  on  national  studies  in  twelve  Member  States  on  the  recognition 
of placements  in  a training  structure  or  company  in  another  Member  State  undertaken  under  the  PETRA  programme  by 
young  people  in  initial  vocational  training. 

The  report concluded that the systems  in  the  various  Member States were  not yet  prepared to  integrate and  recognise  such 
periods spent abroad  in their courses.  It did,  however, acknowledge that requests to the national authorities from  individuals 
wishing  to  include  such  mobility  in  their  training  could  prompt  recognition  of the  need  to  accord  specific  status  to 
transnational  placements  and  progressively  encourage  integration  and  recognition  by  the  respective  systems. 

The  project to  provide  a basis  for  comparison  of qualifications  has  already  led  to  publication  in  the  ECOJ,  between  1989 
and  1993,  of comparative tables  covering 209 occupations  in the  skilled worker category,  divided  into  19  different sectors. 
In  addition,  an  individual  skills  portfolio  project  to  improve  the  transnational  transparency  of skills  and  qualifications  has 
been  drawn  up  and  tested  at European  level  (cf.  "Individual  portfolio  project:  final  report",  NCVQ  1995). 
In  1994,  a call  for  proposals  as  part  of a move  to  promote  initiatives  in  the  field  of mutual  recognition  of qualifications 
enabled  35  transnational  projects  promoting comparison,  transparency or recognition of qualifications  to  be  supported. 

34 

JS 

29.09.96 

18 

A  Commission  Communication  has  also  been  published36  which  identifies  the 
areas  for  cooperation  and  coordination  needed  in  the  field  of  recognition  of 
diplomas37

• 

b) 

Teachers  and trainers 

The  teaching  profession,  particularly  in  public  educational  establishments,  is 
regulated  in most  of the  European  Community  countries38
•  Since  the  entry  into 
force  of Directive 89/48/EEC on the  mutual recognition of diplomas and the end 
of 1994,  at least  11  000  people,  including 5  000  teachers  (in primary,  secondary 
and  higher  education)  have  had  their  diplomas  recognised  in  another  Member 
State. Application of the Directive has, however, highlighted certain obstacles. For 
example,  there  is  a  problem with  the  countries  which have  not  yet transposed  it 
into national legislation, which is the case with Belgium and Greece. In these two 
countries, applications from teachers from  other Member States for recognition of 
their  qualifications  have  been  "blocked"  pending  adoption  of  the  national 
implementing  measures..  In  Germany,  there  are  still  three  Lander  (Baden 
Wlirttemberg,  Brandenburg  and  Sachsen-Anhalt)  which  have  not  yet  adopted 
implementing  measures  for  Directive  89/48/EEC  in  respect  of teachers. 

Another  obstacle  encountered  has  been  the  non-recognition  in  Germany  of 
teaching diplomas obtained in higher education institutions other than universities. 
For  the  purposes  of  recognition,  the  Directive  puts  diplomas  obtained  in 
universities, higher education establishments and other training establishments of 
the  same  level  on  an  equal  footing.  Despite  this,  however,  holders  of teaching 
diplomas obtained in Austrian teacher training academies, certain British colleges 
and  other similar institutions  in the Netherlands  and  Denmark have been refused 
recognition  of their  diplomas  in  Germany.  Non-application  of the  Directive  to 
teachers  has  also  been  registered  in  France. 

Some  Member  States  require  secondary-level  teachers  to  have  a  qualification 
allowing  them to  teach  two  subjects  (e.g.  mathematics  and  physics;  history  and 
geography). 

~7 

~K 

COM(94)  596  final  of 13.12.1994.  The  scope of the  Communication  is  restricted to  university-level  qualifications,  but the 
subject  is  dealt with  in  the  broader context of recognition  of qualifications  in  the  European Community. 

"The  Council  of Education  Ministers,  in  its  conclusions  of 6  May  1996,  invites  the  Member  States  and  the  Commission 
to  encourage  improved  coordination  between the  national  structures  concerned  with  disseminating  information in the  two 
areas  of recognition  (academic  and  professional),  such  as  the  Naric,  the  Euro-Info-centres  etc.,  and  to  reinforce  databases 
such as Ortelius, so as  to  promote greater transparency of higher-education systems; invites the Commission, in  cooperation 
with  the  Member  States,  to  encourage  representatives  of the  economic  and  professional  world,  the  social  partners  and 
students  to  participate  in  all  appropriate  'thematic  networks'  set  up  under  Socrates,  to  evaluate  the  possibilities  for  the 
introduction  on  a  voluntary  basis  of a  European  administrative  annex  to  the  diploma.  This  annex  would  consist  of a 
description  of the  studies  pursued  by  the  holder  of the  diploma,  the  aim  being  to  facilitate  transparency  and  recognition 
of the  studies  in  States  other than  that in  which  they  were  dispensed;  it would  take  into  account the  experience  that other 
organisations  such  as  the  Council  of Europe  and  Unesco,  have  had  in  this  area,  to  examine  the  desirability  of identifying 
and  giving  wider  publicity  to  procedures  at  national  or  Community  level  which  might  facilitate  amicable  settlement  of 
disputes  concerning  recognition  of qualifications,  in  response  to  individual  request sent directly  or  preferably  through  the 
Naric  network or through  the  network of coordinators  of the  various  Directives." 

Considerable  progress  has  been  made  in  the  field  of the  "regulated"  professions  on  the  basis  of Articles  57,  49  and  66  of 
the  EC  Treaty,  by  virtue  of which  the  European  Community  is  able  to  adopt  "directives  for  the  mutual  recognition  of 
diplomas,  certificates and other evidence of formal  qualifications".  Directives 89/48/EEC and 92/51/EEC, for example, have 
set  up  a  general  system  for  recognition  of diplomas,  enabling  persons  wishing  to  move  within  Europe  to  have  their 
qualifications  recognised  in  Member States  other than  that  in  which  they  were  acquired. 

29.09.96 

19 

There have also  been certain instances of indirect discrimination.  Even where the 
teacher's  duties  are  such  as  to  justify  knowledge  of the  language  of the  host 
country,  some national  legislation, particularly in Germany  and  Greece, jmposes 
language  requirements  which  are  completely  disproportionate,  and  in  practice 
constitute  indirect  discrimination.  This  is  particularly  obvious  in  the  case  of 
migrants wishing to teach their mother tongue as  a foreign language in schools in 
the  host country. 

The  Green Paper proposes  Lines  of Action 4  and~' pages  27  &  30 

6 

THE  TERRITORIALLY  RESTRICTED  NATURE  OF  NATIONAL  GRANTS 

fact 

that,  with 

The  territorially  restricted  nature  of national  grants  may  constitute  a  serious  obstacle to 
"spontaneous"  mobility.  The 
the 
is 
SOCRATES/ERASMUS  programme,  which  makes  full  provision  for  eliminating  the 
territorial  aspect,  it  is  difficult  for  students  travelling  abroad  to  transfer  their  grants.  In 
most  Member  States,  it  is  impossible  to  transfer  the  grant  in  order  to  undertake  a  full 
course  of study  abroad.  Such  transfer  is  subject  to  more  or  less  restrictive  conditions; 
greater  openness  by  Member  States  towards  geographically  close  regions  can  be 
observed.  This  difficulty  considerably  reduces  the  possibility of mobility,  especially  for 
underprivileged  persons  who  in  particular  experience  socio-economic  and  practical 
disadvantages. 

exception  ef 

the 

The  Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 5,  page  28 

7 

SOCIOECONOMIC  OBSTACLES 

7.1 

Job stability 

A worker who wants to unde1take a period of training/further training in another Member 
State  does  not  always  have  a  gt:ura.ntee  that  he  will  be  able  to  resume  his  former 
emplo~rment on  his  return.  Where  this  guarantee  does  exist,  it  is  not  always  applicable 
to  trainees  on placement coming  back from  another  Member  State. 

29.09.96 

20 

7.2 

Inadequate  financial  support 

The  remarkable  development  of  mobility  under  ERASMUS  demonstrates  1hat  the 
enthusiasm  for  such  exchanges  has  not  diminished.  The  generally  limited  amounts  of 
grants  have  so  far  resulted  in  some  students  selected  to  take  part  in an exchange  being 
unable  to  benefit from  mobility  because of a  lack of resources. 

The above also  applies to  a large extent to  teachers, who all too often receive inadequate 
financial  support.  Given that  most  of them continue to  reside  in their country  of origin, 
the  cost  of  their  mobility  is  often  very  high.  Outside  Community  programmes  the 
teacher's situation depends of course on national legislation and on any agreements which 
might have been concluded which, for example, make provision for the payment of salary 
during  mobility. 

The  situation  is  particularly  precarious  for  the  unemployed  who  lose  their  rights  to 
unemployment  benefit  in  their  Member  State.  The  situation  of young  graduate~ of all 
levels  entering the  labour market  for  the  first  time  is  even more  difficult. 

The Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action  7,  page  29 

8 

ADMINISTRATIVE OBSTACLES  ASSOCIATED  WITH  THE  ORGANISATION  OF SCHOOIS 

AND  UNIVERSITIES 

8.1 

Structure  of the  school/academic year 

The  structure  of the  academic  year  depends  to  some  extent  on  measures  adopted  at 
national  level  and  to  some  extent  on  the  structure  of the  education  system  itself.  This 
structure  may pose problems if it  is  not the  same  in the  Member  State  of origin and  the 
host  Member State39

• 

The Council of Ministers has already stated in one of its conclusions40  that "a further step 
should be to harmonise the start of the academic year for higher education establishments, 
which  might  also  facilitate  the  synchronisation  of examinations  during  the  academic 
year." 

8.2 

Examinations 

Students benefiting from  mobility are sometimes no  longer in the  host country when the 
examinations  are  held  or cannot,  due  to  their absence,  take  examinations  in their  home 
institution.  This  can  have  repercussions  for  the  awarding  of their  qualification.  Also, 
examinations  taken  in  the  host  country  may  not  always  be  recognised  in  the  home 
country.  In  some  Member  States  the  possibility  to  sit  examinations  in  an  institution  is 

39 

40 

A  student  in  northern  Europe,  for  example,  usually  begins  the  new  university  academic  year  in  August.  A  student  in 
western or southern  Europe,  however,  usually  does  not start university  until  October. 
Rectors  Conference on the  organisation  of the  academic  year,  Liaison Committee of Rectors  Conferences,  Brussels,  May 
1993. 

OJ  C  321of12.12.1991 

29.09.96 

21 

dependent on the number of hours of classes taken in that institution within the academic 
year. Moreover, in some Member States students are not allowed to be absent prior to and 
during  examinations,  which  reduces  the  possibilities  of mobility,  particularly _for  long 
periods. 

8.3 

Periods  of training not incorporated in the  course  cuniculum 

Some  Member  States  do  not  recognise  the  work  placements  of students  undergoing 
vocational training as an integral part of the course curriculum; periods of mobility must 
be  combined  with  holidays  or,  at  the  end  of the  year,  the  year's  study  and  the  final 
diploma may  not be  officially  accredited. 

8.4 

Non-replacement of absent teachers 

In most cases teachers/instructors  are  not replaced during their absence.  This means that 
they  must  ''catch  up"  with  the  subject  matter  on  their  return.  This  places  an  additional 
burden on themselves  and  on the  persons  being  taught. 

The Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 9,  page 31 

9 

Linguistic  and cultural  obstacles 

The  lack  of knowledge  of a  foreign  language  remains  one  of the  main  obstacles  to 
mobility.  This is equally true for certain cultural aspects which need to  be acknowledged 
in order to be able to encourage mobility and gain the maximum advantage from periods 
spent  abroad.  Most  mobility  is  concentrated  in  the  Germany/France/United  Kingdom 
triangle.  Learning  of less  widely  used  languages  is  the  key  to  a  diversification  of the 
flows  of students  and hence  to  a  greater variety  of exchanges41

• 

The  Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 8,  page 30 

10 

PRACTICAL  OBSTACLES 

These  obstacles  often prevent the  achievement of high  quality  mobility,  and  sometimes 
present  such  barriers  that  the  discouraged  participants  do  not  leave  to  take  part  in  the 
project or return to their country of origin without having benefited from the opportunities 
of mobility which were offered to them.  Students face difficulties before, during and after 
their  stay: 

a) 

41 

42 

For example, they may have problems due to  a lack of information prior to going 
abroad (lack of knowledge of training opportunities, administrative requirements, 
living conditions in the host country).  This is a particularly sensitive aspect in the 
case  of  disabled  students,  especially  with  regard  to  welcaring  facilities  and 
accommodation42

• 

A  series  of pilot  projects  in  intensive  preparatory  language  training  for  SOCRATES/ERASMUS  students  heading  for 
Portugal,  Greece,  Italy,  Denmark and  Finland  has  been  launched with  this  in  mind  for  the  1996/97  academic year. 

It should be  noted that establishments which have set up an  ERASMUS office often find  it easier to manage the programme 
and  to  provide  full  infonnation  to  those  interested.  The  grouping  of several  educational  establishments  and  local  and 
regional  bodies  into  a  "European  centre"  may  lead  to  considerable economies  of scale. 

29.09.96 

22 

b) 

c) 

d) 

e) 

f) 

The  lack  of host  companies  remains  a  crucial  problem  for  those  undergoing 
training  and/or  on  a  placement.  Companies  are  not  yet  accustomed,  or  are  still 
unable  for  operational  reasons  or  because  of the  working  language,  to  accept 
trainees  who  have  to  be  supervised. 

Community research grant-holders undergoing a period of training in industry are 
confronted  with  a  restricted  choice  of RTD  projects  offered  by  companies  and 
also  experience difficulties  in publishing results,  which are  often confidential. 

Lack  of  suitable  or  affordable  accommodation  (level  of  rents,  deposit)  is  a 
problem  in  some  cases.  There  is  often  only  limited  accommodation  available  in 
university halls of residence or education centres.  Some students or teachers who 
leave  for  short/medium-term  periods  often  cannot  give  up  their  accommodation 
in their country of origin for  fear  of not finding  anything when they  return,  or at 
least  nothing  at  a  reasonable  price. 

In  numerous  cases,  students  benefiting  from  mobility  must  take  out  additional 
insurance (repatriation in the event of illness/accident, third-party insurance, etc.). 

Family commitment can also  have a negative effect on m(·bility:  the need to  find 
creches,  nurseries  or  schools,  or  different  employments  for  the  spouse, ... 

Bank  and  exchange  charges  can  consume  up  to  20%  of an  individual  grant,  not 
to  mention the-cost  associated  with  procedural  delays. 

All  these practical obstacles are rendered more acute  for the economically disadvantaged 
and  to  those  with  severe  disabilities. 

The  Green Paper proposes  Line  of Action 9,  page  31 

29.09.96 

23 

PART C:  LINES  OF ACTION 

Initiatives can be  taken at various  levels.  An attempt should be made to  "fill  in the  grey 
areas"  of Community legislation;  i;e.,  verify the  extent to  which  Community  legislation 
has  been  transposed  by  the  Member  States  and  examine  the  measures  to  be  taken  to 
encourage  Member States  to  do  this. 

It is,  moreover,  vital,  in  accordance  with  the  principle  of subsidiarity,  for  the  Member 
States,  the  Commission,  other  Community  bodies,  and  all  the  parties  involved  in 
education, training and research,  to consider other measures which might be taken at the 
appropriate  level  to  encourage  and  facilitate  the  transnational  mobility  of the  greatest 
possible number of people  in their education,  training  and  research  activities. 

The Commission would like to receive opinions from people and organisations concerned 
(public authorities, social partnei:s, others organisations, educational, training, and research 
institutions.  The  impact of a wide  distribution of this  Green Paper will  be reinforced  by 
a  series  of events  (seminars,  conferences,  meetings)  organised  at all  levels. 

You  are  invited to  send  your views,  observations  and  suggestions  to: 

European  Commission 
Directorate-General  XXII 
Education,  Training  and  Youth 
Green Paper  "Education-Training-Research:  The  obstacles to  transnational mobility" 
200  rue  de  la  Loi 
1049  Bruxelles 
E-Mail:  Alice.Copette@dg22.cec.be 
Fax:  +32/2-295.78.30 

The  nine  lines  of action  proposed  are  not  exhaustive,  but  should  help  to  open  a  debate 
which will  no  doubt  bring  other problems  and  obstacles  to  light,  illustrated  by  concrete 
exemples. 

Following  the  six-month consultation period,  the  Commission  will  draw up  a  suinmary 
report  with recommendations. 

29.09.96 

24 

LINE  OF  ACTION  1:  ACCORDING  SPECIF1C  STATUS  TO  TRAINEES  ON  PLACEMENTS 
AND  TO  VOLUNTARY  WORKERS  IN  TIIE  EUROPEAN  COMMUNITY 

(See  analysis  of the  situation  in points B.l.a and b,  3.1.b  et 3.2,  pages  9,10,  14 & 
15) 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Similar  legal  recognition  in  their  home  and  host  countries  would  guarantee 
to  trainees on placement and voluntary workers,  conditions of mobility equal 
to  those  of other European citizens  . 

In taking  a  number  of steps  in  respect  of rights  of residence,  social  security 
and  tax  arrangements,  Member  States  would  enable  a  greater  number  of 
trainees  and  volunteers  to  participate  more  easily  in  such  activities  on  a 
transnational  basis  for  periods  of over  three  months.  Such  measures  would 
assist  the  implementation  of,  for  exemple,  the  pilot  action  of a  European 
voluntary  service,  presented by  the  Commission  in  1996. 

Information  on  their  rights  and  obligations  should  be  given  to  trainees  and 
voluntary  workers  and  this,  at  all  levels. 

To  allow  the  full  development  of  a  combined  work/training  courses  at 
European  level,  a  "European apprentice/trainee"  status  should  be  envisaged. 

To  promote  employment  for  young  people,  a  mobility  programme  for 
apprentices which aims to  develop  links between schools and companies,  i.e. 
an  "Erasmus  for  apprentices",  would  be  of great benefit. 

LINE  OF  ACTION  2  - EQUAL  TREATMENT  FOR  ALL  COMMUNITY  GRANT-AIDED 
RESEARCH  TRAINEES 

(See  the  analysis  of the  situation  under B.2  and 3.1,  page  J 1  &  12) 

To  eliminate  discriminatory 
Community  grants,  a  solution must  be  found: 

treatment  among  Member  States  which  harms 

• 

• 

by  exemption of grants  under the  legal  system providing  for  their financing, 

by  coordination  of  the  systems  applied  to  employed  researchers  in  the 
various  member  states  in  respect  of both  direct  taxation  and  social  security 
contributions. 

29.09.96 

25 

LINE  OF  ACTION  3:  ENSURING  SOCIAL  PROTECTION  FOR  EVERYONE  BENEFITING 
FROM  MOBILOY  AS  PART  OF THEIR TRAINING 

(See  the  analysis  of obstacles  under points B.4.1  and 4.2,  page  16) 

a) 

• 

b) 

• 

• 

Ensuring  benefit entitlement for unemployed  pe~ons undergoing  training  in 
another Member State 

In  order  to  maintain  the  right  to  unemployment  benefits  for  unemployed 
people  in  training,  the  Commission's  proposal43  should  be  adopted  without 
delay.  This proposal allows benefits to  be continued after an initial period of 
three  months,  without  the  total  duration  of the  benefit  period or the  amount 
of  the  benefits  exceeding  the  period  or  amount  provided  for  by  the 
legislation  of the  Member  State  in which the  unemployed  person  is  lo..oking 
for  work  or  the  period  or  amount  provided  for  by  the  legislation  of the 
Member  State  which pays  the  benefits. 

Guaranteeing social  protection in the  host counny 

To  guarantee  social  protection  in  the  host  country,  current  regimes  relating 
to  trainees,  especially  students  should  be  brought  into  line  with  those  of 
salaried  and  non-salaried  workers  and  their  families.  The  Commission 
proposal  to  the  Council  seeking  to  extend  the  scope  of the  Regulation to  all 
persons  insured under the  legislation of a Member State should be adopted44

• 

The  Commission  has  also  proposed  to  the  Council45  that  the  condition  of 
'immediate  necessity'  for  health  care  for  persons  referred  to  in  this  Green 
Paper  who  currently  fall  within  the  scope  of the  Regulation  (1408/71)  and 
who,  on  account  of their  studies,  are  residing  in  a  Member  State  other  than 
. the  competent Member State  be removed. 

43 

44 

45 

COM  (95)  734  final,  of 10  January  1996. 

OJ No  C 46,  20.02.1992. 

COM  (96)  452  of 20 September  1996. 

29.09.96 

26 

LINE  OF  ACTION  4:  CREA. TING  A  EUROPEAN  AREA  OF QUALIFICATIONS 

(See  the  analysis  of obstacles  under point B. 5,  pages  17 to  19) 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Mutual academic recognition should be developed through general use of the 
system of transfer of educational  "credits"46

• 

Similar  arrangements  should  be  applied  to  vocational  training,  with  the 
objective  of the  mutual  recognition  of training  courses.  This  approach  could 
give  preference  to  agreements  among  education  and  training  establishments 
and  among  different professional  sectors47

• 

It  is  important  to  establish  a  system  of mutual  recognition  of placements  in 
the  Member  States,  as  well  as  their incorporation  in the  curricula. 

The  recognition  and  validation  of  skills  acquisition,  as  well  as  lifelong 
access  at European  level  should be  encouraged. 

It  is  important  that  those  concerned  continue  to  consider  the  most  effective 
methods  to  increase  the  transparency  of competences  and  qualifications,  in 
order  to  give  everyone  the  possibility  to  exercise  his  chosen  profession 
anywhere  in the  European Union. 

Specific  action  should  be  taken to  facilitate  the  recognition  of qualifications 
among  the  various  Metnber  States,  to  encourage  workers  to  take  part  in 
training  programmes  outside their own national  system. 

Consideration  should  also  be  given  to  the  possibility  of incorporating  into 
the  Directive  on  the  regulated  professions  (Directive  89/48/EEC)  the 
obligation  for  the  host  Member  State  to  take  into  consideration  experience 
acquired  after obtaining  a  diploma. 

As  suggested  by  the  Council  of Education  Ministers48
,  the  Commission  and 
the  Member  States  should jointly  assess· the  value  of identifying  procedures 
at  national  and  Comm.unity  levels  with  the  aim  of facilitating· the  search  of 
amicable  solutions to  disputes concerning the recognition of qualifications,  in 
response  to  individual  requests. 

One  of  the  proposals  of  the  Green  Paper  on  Innovation49  should  be 
promoted:  namely,  to  apply  the  designation  "European  Researcher"  to 
researchers  who  have  participated  to  a  significant  extent  in  Community 
programmes. 

46 

47 

4R 

49 

Along the  lines  of the  ECTS  - European Credit Transfer System. 
White  Paper  of the  Commission  "Teaching  and  Leaming:  towards  the  learning  society",  page  55,  Office  for  official 
publications  of the  European Communities 

Taken  from  the  conclusions  of the  Council  of Education  Ministers,  Brussels,  6  May  1996. 

Green  Paper on  Innovation  - Communication  adopted  by  the  Commission  on  20  December  1995,  COM  (95)  688  final. 

29.09.96 

27 

Line of action 5:  REMOVING  TERRITORIAL RESTRICTIONS  ON  GRANTS  AND  NA'FIONAL 
FINANCING 

(See  the  analysis  of obstacles  under point B. 6,  page  20) 

• 

As  in the Community programmes, where entitlement to  grants is maintained 
in  the  event  of study  periods  spent  abroad,  there  is  still  room  for  greater 
transferability  of grants  awarded  by  national  authorities  or other bodies. 

LINE  OF ACTION  6:  IMPROVING  THE  SITUATION  OF NATIONALS  OF THIRD  COUNTRIES 
LEGALLY  RESIDENT  IN  THE  EUROPEAN  UNION  WITII  REGARD  TO  TRAINING 

(See  the  analysis  of obstacles  under points B.J.b  and 4.2,  pages  10  &  17) 

• 

the  need  to  improve  the  situation  of nationals  of third  countries  legally 
settled  in  a  Member  State  was  emphasised  by  the  Commission  iri  the 
Communication  of  February  1994  on 
immigration  and  asylum.  The 
Commission  indicated  the  importance  of  having  a  common  set  of  rules 
concerning  the  admission  of third-country  nationals,  including  after  studies 
and  vocational  training,  and  bearing  in  mind  the  rights  of  long-term 
residents. 
The  rules  should  be  grouped  into  a  single  binding  legal 
instrument. 

29.09.96 

28 

LINE  OF  ACTION  7:  REDUCING  THE  SOCIOEOONOMIC  OBSTACLES 

(See  the  analysis  of the  obstacles  under point B. 7,  page  20) 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

To  promote  mobility,  various  measures  offering  financial  aid  and  support 
(allowances,  grants,  subsidies,  loans  etc.)  should  be  encouraged,  at  all  levels 
talcing  account  of  budgetary 
(national,  regional, 
constraints. 

local,  private  etc.), 

It  is  essential  to  have  a  proper  national  policy  for  the  distribution  of 
SOCRATES/ERASMUS  grants,  above  all  in  order  to  take  into  account 
specific  problems  at  national  level.  By  linking  up  internal  aid  systems  for 
students  with the  SOCRATES/ERASMUS  grant,  the  optimum adjustment of 
the  total  amount  received  by  the  student  during  his/her  mobility  will  be 
ensured  and a  dissipated  effort,  detrimental to  mobility,  will  be  avoided. 

With  regard  to  young  people  receiving  assistance  under  the  Community 
programmes  for  vocational  training,  co-financing  from  the  educational 
establishment, host companies, associations, trade unions, regional authorities 
or banks  should be  encouraged. 

Tax  incentives  granted  to  companies  by  the  competent  authorities  could 
encourage them to  welcome trainees  or persons  receiving training. 

Organisations involved in exchanges  should have  specific resources enabling 
them  to  set  up  the  necessary  structures  for  reception,  monitoring  and 
evaluation to  ensure  that mobility projects  have  the  best possible  chances  of 
success,  particular for  young  people. 

2~0~96 

29 

LINE  OF ACTION  8:  REDUCING  LINGUISTIC  AND  CULTURAL  OBSTACLES 

(See  the  analysis  of the  obstacles  under point B.9,  page  22) 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Leaming  at  least  two  Community  languages  has  become  a  precondition  if 
citizens of the European Union are to  benefit from  occupational and personal 
opportunities  open to  them  in  the  Single  Market. 

All  mobility actions should be  preceded by a  period of linguistic preparation. 

Any training  should be  accompanied  by  cultural  preparation and  an  initiation 
to  living  and  working  practices  in  the  host  country. 

Pilot  actions  should  be  developed  in  Member  States  to  make  young  people 
_ in particular aware  of 'European  citizenship'  and  to  increase  their respect  for 

cultural  and  social  differences. 

The  national  bodies  in  charge  of activities  under  Community  programmes 
should provide  still  more  help  for  people  wishing to  undertake  transnational 
training  in  a  Member  State  who's  language  is  "less  widely  used  and  taught". 

29.09.96 

30 

LINE  OF ACTION  9: 
ADMINISTRATIVE  PRACTICES 

IMPROVING 

THE 

INFORMATION  AVAILABLE  AND 

(See  analysis  of the  obstacles  under point B.10,  page  22) 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

The  quality  and  amount  of information  available  within  the  Community  on 
education,  training  and  research  requires  better  coordination  of the  national 
structuq:!s  responsible. 

Information  on  the  possibilities  and  conditions  for  achieving  transnational 
mobility  should be  more  widely  disseminated  and  should  take  more  account 
of differences  in the  potential  audience. 

All  useful  information  for  people  in  mobility  should  be  available  over  the 
- INTERNET  as  well  as  through  European  databases  such  as  EURES50

, 

ORTELIUS,  EURODESC,  CORDIS,  NARIC,  EURYDICE. 

There  should  be  a  wider use  of tools  provided  by  the  Information  Society. 

National  guides  and  information  leaflets  explaining  citizens'  rights  and 
obligations  under the  "Citizens  First"  initiative  should  be  widely  distributed. 

A  sound  training  in  Community  law  and  its  implementation  for  decision 
makers and administrators  within each Member State,  applying  experience of 
relevant  Community programmes,  should  be  encouraged. 

Educational  institutions  should  be  encouraged  to  improve  knowledge  at 
European  level  of the  quality  and  nature  of the  education they  provide. 

Students  undertaking  mobility  in  another  Member  State  should  have  the 
possibility  to  take  some  exams  by  correspondance,  if necessary,  subject  to 
the  necessary  controls. 

University-Enterprise partnerships  should  be  stimulated51 

• 

so 

SI 

Use  of tools  such  as  the  EURES  database,  which  can  be  consulted  by  the  Euroadvisers,  can  also  help  promote  mobility 
by  supplying  useful  information on job possibilities  in  the  various  Member States. 

In_this  context,  the  recommendation of the  IRDAC  report:  Quality  and  relevance"  25.03.1994  should  be  noted. 
Industrial  Research  and  Development Advisory Committee  (IRDAC)  - set up  by  the  Commission  in  1984. 

29.09.96 

31 

Part D:  ANNEXES 

Annex  1: 

Definition of the  target categories 

The  exact  definitions  for  the  different  categories  of person  outlined  below  are  difficult 
to  establish  and  there  is  sometimes  overlap,  as  they  are  subject  to  certain  legal 
instruments  which  are  not  mutually  exclusive.  The  definitions  proposed  here  are  as  set 
out in the  Council  Decision establishing the  various  Community programmes. 

A.Pupils:  All  persons  enrolled  in that  capacity  at  a  school52

• 

Students: 

In  the  European  Parliament  and  Council  Decision  establishing  the  SOCRATES 
programme53
,  the term "students" covers "persons registered in universities, whatever their 
field of study, in order to follow higher education studies leading to a degree or diploma 
(or equivalent),  up  to  and  including  the  level  of doctorate". 

It should,  however,  be  borne  in  mind  that  there  is  a  wider  definition  in  the  context  of 
social  security  for  migrant  workers,  where  the  term  "students54
"  refers  to  any  person, 
other than  an  employed  or self-employed worker  or  member  of the  latter's  family,  who 
is  officially  enrolled  on  a  course  of study  or  vocational  training  in  an  establishment 
recognised or approved by the national authorities of a Member State, and who is insured 
under  a  special  social  security  scheme  for  students. 

52 

53 

54 

This  definition  is  found  in  the  European  Parliament  and  Council  Decision  establishing  the  'Socrates'  Community  action 
programme  (Article  2),  as  is  the  definition  of ~: All  types  of institutions  whether  providing  general,  vocational  or 
technical  education  and,  exceptionally,  non-school  institutions  providing  apprenticeship  training  for  the  purpose  of 
promoting measures  in  the  framework  of language  training,  particularly exchanges  of pupils. 
-OJ L  87,  20.4.1995. 
Article  1 of Directive  93/96  on  the  right  of residence  for  students  provides  as  follows:  "In  order  to  lay  down  conditions 
to  facilitate  the  exercise  of the  right  of residence  and  with  a  view  to  guaranteeing  access  to  vocational  training  in  a 
non-discriminatory  manner for  a national  of a Member State who has  been accepted to  attend  a vocational training course 
in  another  Member State,  the  Member  States  shall  recognize  the  right  of residence  for  any  student who  is  a  national  of a 
Member  State  and  who  does  not enjoy  that  right  under  other  provisions  of Community  law,  and  for  the  student's  spouse 
and their dependent children, where the student assures the relevant national authority, by means of a declaration or by such 
alternative  means  as  the  student may  choos~ that are  at least equivalent,  that he  has  sufficient resources  to avoid  becoming 
a  burden  on  the  social  assistance  system  of the  host  Member  State  during  their  period  of residence,  provided  that  the 
student  is  enrolled  in  a  recognized  educational  establishment  for  the  principal  purpose  of following  a  vocational  training 
course  there  and  that  he  is  covered  by  sickness  insurance  in  respect  of all  risks  in  the  host  Member  State."  OJ  L  317, 
18.12.1993. 

Socrates' Decision 819/95/EC of the  European Parliament and  the  Council  of 14  March  1995:  OJ L  87,  20.4.1995. 
"University":  all  types  of higher  education  institutions  which,  in  accordance  with  national  laws  and/or  practices,  offer 
qualifications  or diplomas  at that level,  whatever such establishments may  be  called  in  the  Member States. 

This  definition  was  agreed  by  the  Administrative  Commission  on  Social  Security  for  Migrant  Workers  (CA.SS.TM.)  in 

1~8. 

29.09.96 

32 

B.  Young people: 

The  YOUTH FOR EUROPE programme is  aimed at all  young people between the  ages 
of  15  and  25  who  are  permanently  resident  in  the  European  Union  or  Iceland, 
Liechtenstein or Norway. This age group is traditionally used by the Commission to refer 
to  "young people"  and  "youth"  (EUROSTAT  statistics). 
However,  in the LEONARDO da VINCI programme55
,  "young people"  is taken to mean 
any person undergoing training,  in employment or looking for work under the age of 28. 
The  programme· targets  both  young  people  undergoing  initial  vocational  training  and 
young  workers. 

In the  context of support for placement programmes within companies,  it may also refer 
to  "people undergoing university training and graduates prior to obtaining their first job". 
Such programmes  are  incorporated  in  cooperation  agreements  between  universities  and 
companies. 

The  student,  pupil  or young  person  may  be  a  member  of the  family  of a  citizen  of the 
Union who exercises  his or her right to  freedom  of movement, thereby  being entitled to 
treatment on the  same basis as  nationals of the host country (in particular as  regards the 
award  of grants  and other social  benefits). 

C.  Voluntmy workers 

Voluntary or unpaid service is a  "sui  generis"  activity which must be distinguished from 
paid  work  and  conventional  systems  of vocational  training.  It  affords  opportunities  for 
gaining formative experience through voluntary participation in activities of benefit to the 
community  or to  individuals. 

While  voluntary  work  attracts  participants  of all  ages,  it  is  voluntary  service  for  young 
people  which  has  been  recognised  in  several  Member  States.  For  the  most  part,  such 
schemes  are  of limited duration and  do  not lead  on to  multilateral  activities.  There  has, 
however,  been  some  expansion  of transnational  voluntary  service  activities  in  recent 
years56

• 

D.  Language  assistants: 

SOCRATES/LINGUA  assistants  are  future  language  teachers  (students  or  young 
graduates) who teach in the  host establishment of another Member State for a  period of 
between three  and  eight months,  thereby  acquiring  training  and professional  experience 
which will  help  them become  better language teachers57

• 

SS 

Leonardo  da Vinci'  Council  Decision  94/819/EC  of 6  December  1994:  OJ  L  340,  29.12.1994;  age  limit  specified  in  the 
Promoters'  Guide,  1995  edition. 

At Community  level,  the  YOUTH  FOR EUROPE  programme  has  allowed some  experimentation  in this  field  since  1992. 
On  the  basis  of this  experience,  the  Commission  has,  in  1996,  launched  a European  Voluntary  Service scheme  for  young 
people,  which  is  designed  to  enable  some  2  500  young  people  living  in  a  European  Union  Member  State  to  carry  out  a 
community service  activity with a local  project in  another Member State for  a period of between six months and one year. 
The  Commission  is  planning to  extend  this  scheme and  set up  a multi-annual  European  Voluntary  Service programme  for 
young  people. 

S1 

Cf the  Parliament and  Council  Decision establishing the  SOCRATES  Community action  programme. 

29.09.96 

33 

E  Researehers 

This Green Paper takes account only of researchers who are undergoing training.and who 
wish  to  move  abroad  for  that  purpose.  In  particular,  under  the  Community's  RTD 
programmes, these researchers, known as  "Marie Curie fellows",  are classified in one of 
the  following  categories  in  accordance  with  the  Council  Decision  concerning  the 
programme  for  the  Training  and Mobility  of Researchers58

: 

post-graduate level: young researcher holding a degree obtained from a university 
or equivalent higher education establishment, which qualifies  the holder directly 
to  embark on a  doctorate  or equivalent degree; 

post-doctoral  level:  young  researcher  with  a  doctoral  degree  or equivalent  level 
of  education  or,  alternatively,  having  at  least  four  years'  full-time  research 
experience  at post-graduate  level; 

experienced  researcher:  researcher  with  at  least  eight  years'  full-time  research 
experience  at post-graduate level. 

In addition to the grant-award mechanism, organised and structured within the framework 
of  the  programme  for  Training  and  Mobility  of  Researchers,  a  large  number  of 
researchers, especially young people, take part in Community-level training and mobility 
schemes  involving consortia or networks  of specific  RTD  programmes. 

F.  Teachers  and  traine~ 

The  term  teacheriteaching staf:f59  covers  persons  who,  through their  duties,  are  involved 
directly in the educational process of a Member State, in accordance with th~ organisation 
of its  educational  system. 

The  term  traineriinstructof0  refers  both  to  those  providing  vocational  and  technical 
training  or  secondary  and  other  forms  of  higher  education,  and  to  instructors  at 
apprenticeship  centres  or within companies. 

5K 

59 

(~I 

Programme  in  the  field  of training  and  mobility  of researchers  - Council  Decision  94/916/EC  of 15  December  1994:  OJ 
L 361,  3l.l2.1994. 

'Socrates'  programme - European  Parliament and  Council  Decision  819/95/EC of 14  March  1995:  OJ  L  87,  20.4. I 995. 

'Leonardo  da  Vinci'  programme-Council Decision  94/819/EC  of 6  December  1994:  OJ  L 340,  29.12.1994. 

29.09.96 

34 

Annex  2a: 

Transnational mobility within the framework of Community  programmes 

The  sample  figures  below  speak  for  themselves.  They  show  the  growing  number  of 
beneficiaries  of transnational  mobility  under  Community programmes. 

* 

ERASMUS 

Council Decision: 
Numbers  involved: 

1987 
1987-88 
1988-89 
1995-96 
1995-96 

3  000 
745 
170  000 
14  000 

grant-aided  students. 
teachers 
students 
teachers 

* 

'LINGUA (teachers/students) 

Council  Decision: 
Continuing training  of teachers: 

1989 
1990-1991  (pilot phase) 

1994-1995 

516 

7  450 

Young  people participating  in joint educational  projects 
(CEC) 

1990/1991 
1994/1995 

4  018 
32  109 

Teachers  participating  in joint educational  projects: 

1990/1991 
1994/1995 

317 
3  580 

29.09.96 

35 

* 

SOCRATES 

In  1996-97,  150  482  applications  for  student  mobility  and  1-2  775 
applications  for  teaching  staff mobility  were  approved. 
From  1997-98  onwards,  these  activities  will  take  on  another  dimension  in 
that  they  will  be  guided  by  the  policy  of each  university,  with  cooperation 
being  governed  by  an  "institutional  contract"  between  the  higher  education 
establishment and  the  European  Commission. 
A  new  measure  to  promote  language  teaching  and  learning  has  been 
introduced  into  the  SOCRATES  programme.  This  system  of assistantships 
enables  future  language  teachers  to  work  as  language  assistants  in  host 
establishments  abroad  for  a  fixed  period  as  part of their training. 
During  the  pilot  year,  1996/1996,  over  200  language  assistants  took  part  in 
this  scheme.  In  the  1996/1997  academic  year,  this  number  is  expected  to 
increase  to  600. 

In  1995/1996,  as  part  of  the  partnership  scheme  involving  educational 
establishments  under  the  SOCRA TES/COMENIUS  programme,  689  teacher 
exchanges  took  place,  and  215  teachers  undertook  industrial  placements. 
From  summer  1996,  teachers  from  the  EC  and the  three  EEA countries  will 
be  able  to  participate  in  continuing  training  courses  in  other  EC  and  EEA 
countries  given by teams  of European training  staff. 

* YOUTH  FOR EUROPE  III  (European Parliament and  Council  Decision,  1995) 

Exchanges 

Young  people's  initiatives 

Voluntary  service 

Exchanges  with third  countries 

(*  provisional  figure) 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

50  000  participants* 

930  participants 

75  participants 

2  805  participants. 

* EUROPEAN  VOLUNTARY  SERVICE  FOR  YOUNG  PEOPLE  (Pilot project) 

Young  voluntary  workers 

1996/1997  approx.  2  500  participants 

29.09.96 

36 

* 

COMETT II:  (university/industry cooperation  and  student traineeships) 

Council  Decision: 
Numbers  involved: 

1988 
1990  4 400  students  in transnational 
traineeships 
1994  8 700  students  in transnational 
traineeships 

In all,  75% of companies  participating  in  Cornett projects  were  SMEs. 

*  PETRA  II  (youni people  undergoing  initial  vocational  training  and young 

workers) 

Council  Decision: 
Numbers  involved: 

1991 
1992-94 

23  566 

13  053 

young  people  undergoing 
initial  vocational  training 
young  workers 

*  LEONARDO  DA  VINCI 

Established  by the  Council  Decision of 6 December  1994,  the  LEONARDO  DA 
VINCI  programme provides  for  three  types  of action,  which  include the 
transnational  placement and  exchange  programmes.  The  call  for  proposals  issued 
in  1995  showed  young  people  to  be  the  group  taking  most advantage  of the 
mobility  projects. 

Numbers  involved: 

1995 

11  564 

Numbers  involved: 

1996 
(Forecast) 

4  826 

5  175 

2  300 

11  564 

4  826 
5  175 

2  369 

young  people  in  initial 
vocational  training  young 
workers 
young  people  in higher 
education (students  and 
graduates) 
trainers 

young  people  in  initial  · 
.vocational  training 
young  workers 
young  people  in higher 
education (students  and 
graduates) 
trainers 

29.09.96 

37 

* 

* 

* 

TRAINING AND  MOBILITY OF RESEARCHERS 

2nd framework programme  1987-91: 

2  3 00  grants  in connection with 
specific RID programmes 

3rd framework programme  1990-94: 

Human Capital and  Mobility Programme:  1 800 

individual  grants 

760 
and institutional  grants 
(corresponding to 
some 2  000  research 
trainees) 
grants 

Other specific RID programmes: 

700 

* 

4th framework  programme  1994-98 
Marie  Curie  grants: 

Programme  for  training  and 
mobility of researchers: 
Other specific  RID programmes: 

1 300  grants  already  awarded 
grants  already  awarded 
200 

29.09.96 

38 

Annex 2b: 

Description  of  Community  programmes  in  the  field  of  educf!tion  and 
training 

A. 

Education 

After  the  "joint  study  programmes"  of  1976,  which  paved  the  way  for  Community 
cooperation,  the  Commission moved  on to  the  ERASMUS  and  LINGUA  programmes, 
based on the physical mobility of students and teaching staff.  Mobility has since become 
an  integral  part  of the  European  dimension  of education  and  is  therefore  a  prominent 
feature  of the  Community's current  SOCRATES  programme. 

I. 

ERASMUS  (1987-1994) 

Council  Decision of 15  June  1987,  OJ L  166,  25.6.1987; 
Council  Decision of 14 December  1989,  OJ L  395,  30.12.1989; 
Council  Decision of 28  October  1991,  OJ L  322,  3.12.1991. 

ERASMUS, the Community action programme for the mobility of university students and 
teaching staff, made it possible to  promote cooperation between universities  and thereby 
improve mutual recognition of qualifications and encourage gr~ater mobility of students61 
and  teaching  staff  within  the  European  Community.  In  1992,  the  programme  was 
extended to  cover the  European  Free  Trade  Association  (EFTA)  countries. 

The  programme  was  structured  as  follows: 

Action  1:  Creation  of a  European  network  of university  cooperation  through  the  co 
financing  of inter-university  cooperation  programmes  (ICPs)  covering  student  mobility 
(three  to  12  months)  and  the  organisation of mobility  schemes  for  teaching  staff (from 
one  week to  one  year). 

Action  2:  Direct  financial  support for  students  by  means  of ERASMUS  grants  intended 
to  cover the  cost  of mobility  (language  courses,  travel  costs,  differences  in  the  cost  of 
living). 

Action  3:  The  ECTS  pilot project  (European  Community  course  credit transfer  system) 
was  set up  to  facilitate  recognition for  academic purposes of periods of study completed 
abroad. 

Phase  1: 
Budget  1987-1989:  MECU  93.7 

Phase  2: 
Budget  1990-1994:  MECU  426.1 

<>I 

For  disabled  students,  ERASMUS  has  paid  particular  attention  to  guidance,  reception,  physical  accessibility,  pedagogical 
and  technical  support services,  and  financing  of the  associated  extra  costs.  Cf.  ERASMUS  guide  to  good  practice.  These 
aspects  have also been  included  in  the  SOCRATES programme to ensure that disabled students are  genuinely  in  a  position 
to  take  advantage  of the  European  mobility  arrangements. 

29.09.96 

39 

II. 

LINGUA 

Council  Decision of 28  July  1989,  OJ  L  239,  16.8.1989. 

LINGUA,  the  Community  action  programme  to  promote  foreign-language  competence 
in the  European Community,  included the  following  actions: 

Action 1: Assistance with in-service training courses for teachers of foreign languages and 
their trainers. 

Action  2:  Assistance  with  foreign-language  learning  in  universities,  in  particular,  in 
connection with initial  training  of foreign-language  teachers. 

Action 3:  The  promotion of foreign  languages  used  at work and  in  economic  life. 

Action  4:  Assistance  with the  preparation of exchanges  between young  people  who  are 
undergoing specialised, vocational or technical education. These exchanges are organised 
through projects  involving  several  establishments. 

Budget  1990-1994:  MECU  153.893 

III. 

SOCRATES (1995-1999) 

Decision  of the  European  Parliament  and  of the  Council  of 14  March  1995,  OJ  L  87, 
20.4.1995. 

school 

education 

The  SOCRATES action programme encourages cooperation between the Member States 
education 
in 
(ERASMUS/promoting student mobility), the promotion oflanguage skills (LINGUA) and 
upgrading  of teaching  skills.  The  programme  is  intended  for  pupils,  students,  teaching 
staff,  administrative  staff of universities,  trainers  and  the  children  of migrant  workers, 
travellers  and  gypsies. 

(COMENIUS/school 

partnerships), 

higher 

Budget  1995-1999:  ECU  850  million 

IV. 

YOUTH FOR EUROPE (1988-1999) 

Council  Decision of 16  June  1988,  OJ L  158,  26.6.1988; 
Council  Decision of 29  July  1991,  OJ  L  217,  6.8.1991; 
Decision  of the  European  Parliament  and  of the  Council  of 14  March  1995,  OJ  L  87, 
20.4.1995. 

The  main  objective  of the  YOUTH  FOR  EUROPE  programme  is,  through  increased 
cooperation  between  Member  States,  to  contribute  to  young  people's  development  by 
promoting  exchanges  and  complementary  activities  outside  formal  education  . and 
vocational  training  structures.  It  therefore  provides  for  exchanges  for  young  people 
permanently resident in the  European Community (or Iceland,  Liechtenstein or Norway) 
and  those  from  eligible  third  countries  (activities  may  take  place  in  Member  States  or 
third  countries,  including  those  of Central  and  Eastern  Europe,  the  Commonwealth  of 
Independent States,  the  Mediterranean,  Central  and  Latin America and the  ACP), young 
people's initiatives, voluntary  service activities  (which will  now concentrate on the short 
term to avoid confusion with European Voluntary Service) and training for youth leaders. 

29.09.96 

40 

Special  attention  is being paid to  improving  access to the programme  for  disadvantaged 
young people, i.e. those who have most difficulty in participating in Community 1'.national, 
regional  or  local  progr~es for  cultural,  socioeconomic,  physical  or  geographical 
reasons. 

The  programme  is  intended  for  youth  leaders,  people  running  youth  organisations  and 
trainers  and  researchers  in the  youth field. 

Budget  1994:  MECU  11 
Budget  1995:  MECU 24.4 
Budget  1995-1999:  MECU  126 

V. 

TEMPUS  (1990-1995) 

The main objective of TEMPUS  is  to  generate  and promote international cooperation in 
higher education between the  European Union and the  countries  of Central  and  Eastern 
Europe (CEEC), the newly independent states of the former Soviet Union and Mongolia. 

TEMPUS  participates  in  the  restructuring  of  higher  education  systems  and  the 
establishment  of national  and  institutional  policy  in  the  CEEC  and  newly  independent 
states.  It  is  a  flexible  programme  adapting,  on  the  one  hand,  to  new  needs  such  as 
ensuring the quality, training and management of university staff and project management, 
and,  on  the  other,  to  the  recent  inclusion  of countries  such  as  Bosnia-Herzegovina, 
Macedonia and  Turkmenistan. 

Since  1990, around  12 000 projects and 500 institutions and university departments have 
received  aid  under  TEMPUS.  TEMPUS  has  also  enabled  around  15  000  courses  and 
almost  6  000  teaching  documents  to  be  created or adapted. 

TEMPUS  PHARE budget (1990-1996):  MECU  601.8 
TEMPUS  TACIS  budget (1995-1995):  MECU  52. 

29.09.96 

41 

B. 

I. 

Vocational  training 

PETRA  (1988-1994) 

Council  Decision of 1 December  1987,  OJ L  346,  10.12.1987; 
Council  Decision of 21  july  1991,  OJ L  214,  2.8.1991. 

PETRA,  the  Community  action  programme  for  the  vocational  training  of young  people 
and their preparation for adult and working life, was intended to  supplement and support 
the  policies  of the  Member  States  aimed  at  raising  the  standard  and  quality  of initial 
vocational  training. 
The programme  was  structured  as  follows: 

Action  1 a:  Placements  for  young  people  in initial  vocational  training. 
For  young  people  in  initial  vocational  training,  placements  were  intended  to  provide  a 
European  dimension  to  their  training,  enabling  them  to  come  into  contact  with  new 
training  methods,  equipment and  content and differing  forms  of training. 

Action  lb  Placements  for  workers,  young  job  seekers  and  young  people  in  vocational 
training  in an  enterprise  or training  institute  in  another Member  State. 
These  placements  were  intended  to  provide  a  new  vocational  or training  experience  in 
order to  acquire  a  clearer idea of the  world  of work. 

Action  2:  Financial  and  technical  assistance  for  transnational  projects  developed  by 
training  services,  enterprises  and  the  social  partners  in  order  to  establish  a  European 
network  of partnerships,  making  it  possible  to  set  up  joint  training  modules  for  young 
people  and  for  instructors. 

Action  3:  Establishment  of  working  links  between  national  systems  for  vocational 
guidance  and  for  the  training  of vocational  guidance  counsellors. 

II. 

CO:METI (1987-1994) 

Council  Decision  of 24  July  1986,  OJ L  222,  8.8.1996; 
Council  Decision  of 16  December  1988,  OJ  L  13,  17.1.1989. 

COMETT, the cooperation programme between universities and enterprises for education 
and  training  for  technology,  was  intended  to  improve  training  in  advanced  technology, 
develop  highly  qualified  human  resources  and  thereby  enhance  the  competitiveness  of 
European  industry  through joint university-enterprise  training  initiatives. 

Action  I : European  network 
The  establishment of university-enterprise  consortia was  on  a regional  or sectoral  basis. 
The  structures  were,  above  all,  to  establish a training  consortium,  a partnership  between 
universities  and  industry. 

Action  2:  Transnational  exchanges  and  placements 
Introduction of a programme of student placements in enterprises, placements in advanced 
training  for  young  graduates  and  exchanges of university  staff and  company employees. 

29.09.96 

42 

Action  3:  Joint transnational  continuing  vocational  training  programmes 
The development of joint transnational training programmes,  which could take_Jhe  fonn 
of short training  seminars or training  materials,  made use  of various  existing media and 
technologies. 

Budget  1987-1992:  MECU 206.6 
Budget  1990-1994:.  MECU 230 

III. 

EUROTECNET (1990-1994) 

Council  Decision of 18  December  1989,  OJ L  393  of 30.12.1989. 

'fhe objective of the EUROTECNET programme was to promote innovation in the fields 
of initial  and  continuing  training  to  take  account  of current  and  future  technological 
change and its impact on employment, work and the qualifications and skills needed. The 
programme comprised two  types  of (complementary) measures: 

a) 

b) 

Launching  and  implementation  by  the  Member  States  of a  series  of innovative 
projects intended to develop and improve vocational training policies and systems. 
European  Commission  suppC>rt  for  these  projects  in  the  form  of a  European 
network linking them to promote exchange, knowledge transfer and coordination 
between projects. 

IV. 

FORCE  (1991-1994) 

Council  Decision of 29  May  1990,  OJ  L  156,  21.6.1990. 

FORCE, the action programme for the development of continuing vocational tq1ining  in 
the  European  Community,  was  intended  to  improve  the  availability  and  quality  of 
continuing  vocational  training  for  workers  in  undertakings  through  innovation  and  the 
exchange  of experience. 

· 

T~e programme  comprised two  complementary parts: 

a) 

b) 

a  common  framework  of guidelines  designed  to  support  and  complement  the 
policies  and  measures  adopted  by  the  Member  States  with  a  view to  pr..omoting 
the  coherent development  of vocational  training  between the  Member States. 
A  number  of  transnational  measures  implemented  at  Community  level  and 
designed to  support and complement activities  developed  by  and  in the  Member 
States. 

Budget:  MECU  83.4 

29.09.96 

43 

V. 

LEONARDO DA VINO (1995-1999) 

Council  Decision of 6  December  1994,  OJ  L  340,  29.12.1994. 

LEONARDO  DA VINCI,  the  Community  action  programme  for  vocational  training,  is 
intended  to  improve  vocational  training  systems  and  arrangements  in  the  European 
Community  and  improve  vocational  training  measures  by  means  such  as  cooperation 
between universities and undertakings. The programme also supports the development of 
linguistic skills, knowledge and the dissemination of innovation in the field of vocational 
training.  The  programme  is  aimed  at  any  person,  whether  employed  or  not,  and  those 
responsible  for  initial  and  continuing  vocational  training. 

Strand  1 : Support for  the  improvement of vocational training  systems and arrangements 
in  the  Member  States 

Transnational  pilot  projects  cover  cooperation  for  the  improvement  of  initial  and 
continuing  vocational  training.· They  also  support  vocational  information  and  guidance, 
the promotion of equal opportunities for men and women and improvement of the quality 
of vocational  training  facilities  for  persons  at  a  disadvantage  on  the  labour  market. 
Community support is granted for transnational placement programmes for young people 
in initial vocational training and for young workers as  well as  for transnational exchange 
programmes  for  instructors. 

Strand  2:  Support  for  the  improvement  of  vocational  trammg  measures  including 
university/industry  cooperation,  concerning  undertakings  and  workers 

Transnational pilot projects cover innovation in vocational training, with a view to taking 
into account technological change and its impact on work and the necessary qualifications 
and skills. LEONARDO DA VINCI also supports transnational cooperation in investment 
in continuing vocational training for  workers,  the transfer of technological  innovation in 
the  context of cooperation  between  undertakings  and  universities,  and  the  promotion  of 
equal  opportunities  in  vocational  training  for  men  and  women. 

Community  support  is  granted  for  transnational  placement  and  exchange  programmes 
between  undertakings  and  universities  and/or  training  bodies  and  for  transnational 
exchanges  of people  in  charge of training. 

Strand  3:  Support  for  the  development  of  language  skills,  knowledge  and  the 
dissemination  of innovation  in  the  field  of vocational  training 

This  strand  supports  cooperation  with  a  view  to  improving  language  skills  through  the 
design and  implementation of transnational pilot projects and exchange programmes, the 
development of knowledge  by  means  of surveys and  analyses  and through the exchange 
of  comparable  data  in  the  field  of  vocational  training.  This  strand  also  intends  to 
disseminate  innovation  in  the  field  of vocational  training  by  means  of multiplier-effect 
projects  and .transnational  exchange  programmes.  The  latter  exchange  programmes  are 
implemented  under the  study  visit  programme  administered  by  CEDEFOP. 

29.09.96 

44 

Strand  4:  Support measures 

This  strand  concerns  the  coordination  and  monitoring  of the  programme  through  the 
establishment  of a  cooperation  network  between  the  participating  countries  and  the 
implementation of information,  monitoring  and evaluation measures. 

Budget  1995-1999:  MECU  620. 

29.09.96 

45 

Annex 3: 

The  context  of  and  Community  programmes  relating  to  Community 
training  and  mobility  grants  for researehers  (Marie ·Curie  grants!-

A. 

Community measures for training through researeh and the mobility of researehers 

1. 

Summary of the  development of measures 

The  European  Community  has  a  long  tradition  of training  and  mobility  for  researchers 
which goes back to  its origins, particularly within the context of EURA TOM.  Activities 
relating to the training and mobility of researchers have developed in three phases, which 
are  characterised by different political and  administrative guidelines  and by increasingly 
significant budget allocations. 

The  first  phase  covers  the  period  from  the  launching  of  EURATOM  RTD 
activities up until  1985.  During this period,  approximately  50  grants a year were 
awarded,  funded  under a  specific budget heading.  Research projects  covered the 
thematic  fields  of Community RTD  programmes. 

The  second  phase  gave  effect  to  the  decision  by  the  budgetary  authority  to 
"sectoralise"  training through research,  and led to  the  implementation in  1986 of 
a  single  system  applicable  to  all  RTD  programmes.  This  phase  basically  covers 
the period of the  Second Framework Programme (1987-1991)  which enabled the 
funding  of approximately 2  300  grantholders,  corresponding to  a commitment of 
approximately MECU  100, allocated to different programmes.  During this phase, 
the  number of grants  awarded  reached approximately 460  per year. 

The  third  phase  began  with  the  implementation  of  the  Third  Framework 
Programme in 1992. A specific programme, Human Capital and Mobility (HCM) 
was adopted for the training and mobility of researchers. This programme enabled 
the  funding  of: 
* 
* 

approximately  1 800  individual  grants; 
approximately 760 institutional grants (corresponding to financial  support 
for  approximately  2  000  researchers). 

In addition to  this programme, other specific RTD  programmes,  including the JRC,  may 
allocate  a  percentage  of their budget  to  training  and  mobility  measures  for  researchers. 
Since  1992,  these  programmes have  funded  approximately  700  grants. 
In  all,  the  Third  Framework  Programme  has  made  it  possible  to  fund  nearly  1 500 
researchers  per year for  an average  period  of nearly  two  years. 

During  the  last  five  years,  Community  activities  relating  to  training  and  mobility  for 
researchers  have undergone rapid growth in terms of budget and of grants awarded.  It is 
estimat~d  that  Community  efforts  in  this  field  represent  a  significant  proportion 
(approximately  10%) of the financial resources devoted to this end by the Member States. 

2. 

Trainin2  and  mobility  activities  for  researchers  under  the  Fourth  Framework 
Programme (1994-1998) 

All  specific  RTD programmes  under the  Fourth Framework Programme provide  for  the 
funding  of training  through research and  the  mobility  of researchers, 

29.09.96 

46 

- either  as  an  accompanying  meast .re  for  programmes  under  the  first,  second  and  third 
activities, 

- or  as  the  main  measure  for  the  programme  under  the  fourth  activity  (Training  and 
Mobility of Researchers  - TMR). 

This  latter  programme,  which  is  the  reference  programme  in  this  field,  defines  the 
operational  procedures  for  the  single  system  applicable  to  other  RTD  programmes, 
particularly  under the  first  activity62

• 

3. 

The  specific programme  "Training and  Mobility  for  Researchers"  (TMR)  {l 994-
122fil63 

Budget: 

ECU  792  million 

Objectives: 

To  develop  human resources  in Europe  in terms  of quality and  quantity; 
To  provide the  Community  with highly-qualified  scientific  staff; 
To  encourage  participation  by  young  researchers  (aged  under  3 5)  in  the 
various  activities  under the  programme. 

The  main activities  are  as  follows: 

NETWORKS FOR TRAINING THROUGH RESEARCH 

Objectives: 

To  enable  European  research  bodies  to  exchange  or recruit  young  post 
doctoral  researchers  on high-level  projects; 

To  encourage  cooperation between European  laboratories. 

Number of projects: 

Previous  programme  (Human  Capital  and  Mobility):  700  networks  funded, 
representing  6  000  researchers. 
Current programme (Training and Mobility for  Researchers):  the objective is 200 · 
networks  representing  1 200  researchers. 

RESEARCH GRANTS  (Marie  Curie  grants) 

Main objective:  To  enable young  researchers  (under 35  years  of age),  preferably 
at  post-doctoral  level,  to  undertake  a  research project in  another Member State). 

62 

63 

European  Parliament  and  Council  decision  concerning  the  fourth  framework  programme  of the  European  Community 
activities  in  the  field  of research,  technological  development  and  demonstration  (1994-1998),  OJ  L  126/32of18.5.1994. 

Council  Decision  concerning  the  adoption  of the  programme  on  training  and  mobility  of researchers  for  the  period  1994-
1998,  OJ  L  361,  31.12.1994. 

29.09.96 

47 

4. 

The  interim  system  for  the  TMR pro~ramme 

-

The  interim  system  in  force  lays  down  the  net  and  gross  amounts  of the  grants 
received,  so  that  grant holders  benefit  from  terms  and  conditions  comparable to 
those  of  national  researchers  at  an  equivalent  level.  These  amounts  were 
determined by the national delegations on the TMR programme committee. They 
differ significantly from one Member State to another according to the legal status 
of grant  holders  (particularly  concerning  the  gross . amount)  and  national  policy 
relating  to  researchers'  salaries (particularly  concerning the  net amount). 
Depending  on  the  national  legislation  of the  host  country  and  the  level  of the 
researchers,  Community  grant holders  may  be  treated  as  one  of the  following: 

students; 
employees; 
self-employed. 

The total  Community grant paid to  the host institution under a training through research 
contract includes: 

a) 

an  amount allocated  to  the  grant bolder including: 

a  gross  sum  to  cover  subsistence  expenses,  including  compulsory  taxation  and 
social  security  contributions; 
a  mobility  allowance  (ECU  400/month  for  post-doctoral  researchers  and 
EC  300/month for  doctoral  candidates); 
a  single  flat-rate  allowance:  for  travel  expenses; 

b) 

a flat-rate contribution of ECU  830/month to the host institution to cover research 
and  administrative  costs. 

In some countries,  mobility  and travel  allowances may  be treated as  income and subject 
to  statutory  contributions. 

29.09.96 

48 

COUNTRY 

Austria 

Belgium 

Denmark 

Finland 

France 

Germany 

Greece 

Iceland 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Norway 

Portugal 

Spain 

Sweden 

Switzerland 

United  Kingdom 

Schedule  in  ECU/month 

CAT.20 
(pre-doctoral  grant) 

GROSS 

NET 
(indicative) 

STATUS 

CAT.30 
(post-doctoral  grant) 

GROSS 

NET 
(indicative) 

STATUS 

2547 

3797 

3439 

2748 

2397 

2194 

1622 

2158 

1523 

1505 

2781 

2584 

2540 

2258 

1301 

1236 

2956 

1071 

1450 

1400 

1500 

1200 

1200 

1050 

950 

1200 

900 

1050 

1800 

1500 

1450 

1150 

1100 

1200 

1900 

1050 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 
s 
E 

E 

E 

E 

G 

G 

E 

G 

3057 

4947 

4251 

3765 

3390 

4388 

2206 

3150 

2944 

2468 

3951 

3336 

3245 

3377 

3 I I 1 

1905 

4714 

2546 

1700 

1700 

1700 

1550 

1600 

2100 

1300 

1800 

1500 

1800 

2300 

1800 

1750 

1700 

1600 

1900 

2900 

1400 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 
s 
E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

G 

E 

E 

E  =  Employee;  G  =  Grant holder;  S  =  Self-employed 

This system, adopted by the Commission on 31  October 1992, applies to all measures for 
training  researchers  through  research  and  mobility  as  set  out  in  the  Fourth  Framework 
Programme. 

In  the  context  of this  system,  the  following  definitions  are  used: 

Grant for training  through  research (MARIE CURIE grants):  a flat-rate  allocation raised 
from the Community research and technological development (RTD) programme budgets, 
paid  to  an  institution  under  the  terms  of a  contract  setting  out  arrangements  for  the 
reception  and  training  through research and  mobility  of a researcher  (the  grant holder). 

Grant  holder:  the  researcher  accepted  by  the  institution to  carry  out  a project  under the 
terms  of an  agreement  concluded  between  participants,  and  for  whose  benefit  a  part  of 
the  grant  is  allocated. 

Contract:  the  contract between the  Commission and the  institution covering the  funding 
and  execution of the  project. 

Associated  ~ountry:  a  non-member  country  with  a  financial  stake  in  a  specific  RTD 
programme  under the  terms  of an agreement with the  Community. 

Host institution:  an  entity with legal personality with the  particular objectivy of carrying 
out research,  especially a university, research centre or undertaking,  acting as  host to  the 
grant  holder and  meeting  eligibility criteria. 

29.09.96 

49 

Host laboratoiy:  a research unit legally dependent on the institution, situated either within 
the  establishment  or  within  its  State  of establishment,  another  Member  State  or  an 
associated country.  The research unit will  off er the necessary conditions for  c~ing out 
the  project. 

Participants:  the  grant  holder  and  the  institution  taking  part  in  the  execution  of the 
project. 

Host country:  the Member State or associated country in which the project is to be carried 
out. 

Project:  the  RTD  project for  training  the  grant  holder through research. 

B. 

1. 

Report  by  the  Group  of Experts  on  Community  research  training  and  mobility 
grants 

In October  1994 the European Commission set up a Group of Experts nominated 
by  the  Member  States  (CREST  delegates,  chaired  by  Dr.  H.  Pfeiffert  and 
comprising  representatives  of the  Ministries  of Research  and  Finance  of the 
Member  States)  in  order  to  define  a  single  scheme  in  accordance  with  the 
declarations  made  in  the  minutes  of the  Research  Council  of 1 December  1994. 
The  report  and  recommendations  of the  Group  of Experts  were  approved  by  the 
experts  on 4  May  1995.  Its  conclusions  are  listed  below. 

2. 

Summary 

This  report  to  the  Commission  was  prepared  by  a  "Group  of Experts"  (GE) 
composed  of  representatives  of  the  Ministries  of  Finance  and  Science  and 
Technology of the  15  Member States  (Norway)  (MS/AS).  The  GE was  set up  to 
examine  possibilities  for  a  new  fellowship  scheme  for  use  in  the  third  activity 
"Training  through Research"  of the  TMR programme. 

The GE noted that the final  scheme to  implement this activity should be based on 
the  following  principle  as  defined  by  the  Council,  namely: 

"a new single scheme or equivalent measures shaU be adopted for implementation 
with a view  to providing overaU  conditions for the fellow  which  are  comparable 
as  between themselves and with those for researchers at the same level in  the host 
country". 

The  GE  met  in  plenary  session  four  times.  Information  on  national  fiscal  and 
social  regimes  was  provided  by  the  MS/ AS  representatives.  Several  possible 
schemes were discussed, which broadly divided into  those which took account of 
existing national  legislation and those requiring  Community legislative  initiative. 

The  GE  concluded that  : 

In  general,  differences  in  tax  treatment  between  MS/ AS  were  barriers  to 
mobility,  and  posed problems  necessitating  Community  action; 
The  "interim  scheme",  based  on  national  legislation,  is,  after  possible 
improvements,  the  most  viable  scheme  for  TMR at  the  moment. 

29.09.96 

50 

However,  it  was  acknowledged  by  most  of the  members  of the  GE  that 
Community  action  could  bring  benefits  both  by  providing  a  common 
regime guaranteeing comparability between EC fellows and by si_!!lplifying 
the  administration  of the  fellowships  activity.  Such  a  scheme  should  be 
considered for  the  Fifth Framework Programme. 

The  GE  recommended the  following: 

The final scheme for the TMR programme should take account of national 
fiscal  and  social  security  systems  and  be  based  on  the  1995  "interim 
scheme". 

This  "interim  scheme"  should  be  reviewed  in  1996,  providing  an 
opportunity  to  revise  the  1995  financial  provisions  and. to  reexamine  the 
management mechanism. 

-

The  Commission  should  urgently  make  every  attempt  to  propose  a 
common  solution  to  the  problem  of Community  status  for  EC  fellows 
which  would  be  applicable  from  the  start  of  the  Fifth  Framework 
Programme. 
Strong opposition against a Community legislative initiative for equivalent 
legal  EC  status  for  EC  fellows  was expressed by Germany,  Denmark and 
France. 

Measures  to  improve  the  visibility  and  identity  of the  EC  fellowship 
programme  should be  undertaken. 

29.09.96 

51 

Annex  4: 

Reference  documents 

RESIDENCE 

Council  Directive  68/360  of  15  October  1968  on  the  abolition  of  restrictions  on 
movement and residence within the Community for workers of Member States and their 
families,  OJ L  257 of 19.10.1968  (FR version). 
ENGLISH  SPECIAL  EDITION  ... : SERIES-I  68(11)  P.  485. 

Regulation (EEC) No  1612/68of15 October 1968 on freedom ·of movement for workers 
within the  Community,  OJ L  257  of 19.10.1968  (FR version). 
ENGLISH  SPECIAL  EDITION  ... : SERIES-I  68(II)  P.  475. 

Council  Directive  73/148  of 21  May  1973  on the  abolition of restrictions  on movement 
and  residence  within  the  Community  for  nationals  of Member  States  with  regard  to 
establishment and the  provision of services,  OJ  L  172  of 28.6.1973. 

Council  Directive  90/364  of 28  June  1990  on  the  right  of residence,  OJ  L  180  of 
13.7.1990. 

Council Directive 93/96  of 29  October  1993  on the right of residence for  students,  OJ L 
317of18.12.1993. 

SOCIAL  SECURITY FOR MIGRANT  WORKERS 

Regulations 

* 

* 

Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No  1408/71  of 14  June  1971  on  the  application  of 
social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the 
Community,  amended  and  updated  by  Regulation  (EEC)  No  2001/83  of 2  June 
1983  (OJ  L  230,  22.8.1983)  and  subsequently  amended  from  1985  to  1992  by 
eleven  Council  Regulations 

Council  Regulation (EEC) No  574/72 of 21  March  1972  fixing  the procedure for 
the application of social security schemes to  employed persons and their families 
moving  within the  Community 

29.09.96 

52 

Annex 5: 

Joint opinions  of the  social  partners 

"Joint  opinion  on  the  creation  of  a  European  occupational  and  geographical 
mobility  area  and  improving  the  operation  of the  labour  market  in  Europe",  13 
February  1990: 

"The  social partners  emphasise  that  the  establishment  of a  Community  mobility  area 
constitutes a factor of dynamism  in the European economy from  the point of view of both 
its occupational and geographical dimensions,  each of which has its own mechanisms and 
determining  factors  ...  In  a  European  territory  with  no  internal  frontiers,  a  genuine 
European mobility area within which every worker has the right freely to choose his place 
of activity,  many  obstacles  limiting  the  range  of choices  nonetheless  remain.  These 
obstacles are  of the following  types: 

a)  regulatory:  disparities  relating to free  movement and social protection  systems  (non 
transferability  of supplementary pensions,  and certain  other social benefits);  absence  of 
comparability  and reciprocal  recognition  of quaUfications;  limitations  as  regards  access 
to  the public sector;  disparity  of tax  systems ... ; 

b)  economic  and  cultural:  costs  connected  with  removal.  and  resettlement;  language 
difficulties ... 

As regards the measures to be promoted concerning aids to geographical and occupational 
mobility,  the  non-transferability  of supplementary  pensions,  the  non-comparability  of 
occupational qualifications,  the teaching of languages ... , the two sides of industry declare 
their  readiness  to  contribute  to  the  search  for  solutions  in  their  respective  fields  of 
competence.  They  consider that al.I persons wishing to  move must have  at their disposal 
al.I  practical  information  concerning  mobility  and living  and  working  conditions  in  the 
host country. " 

"Joint opinion on education.and trainingtr of 19  June  1990: 

"Increased efforts should be  made  to  encourage  teachers  and instructors  to  take part  in 
exchange  schemes  and  practical  training, 
teachers  with  the  latest 
to  familiarise 
developments put into  effect in fi1ms,  new  technologies ... " 

"Joint  opinion  on  ways  of facilitating  the  broadest  possible  effective  access  to 
training  opportunities"  of 20  December  1991: 

"The  success of the  intemal market will depend to  a large  extent on the  skills of workers 
and the  competitiveness of the firms  which employ  them.  This  means that it is  essential 
for  the  Community  workforce  to  have  the  broadest  possible  access  to 
training 
opportunities  in  order to  upgrade  existing skills and acquire  new  ones. " 

29.09.96 

53 

Annex 6: 

Obstacles  encountered in the  European  Community  and countries  of the 
European Economic Area by recipients of community grants comjng from 
Central  and Eastern European countries 

-

Ten Central  and Eastern European countries  (Poland,  Hungary,  Czech Republic,  Slovak 
Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Slovenia) have signed, or are 
about to sign association agreements with the European Union. In the context of this pre 
accession  strategy,  these  states  are  going  to  be  confronted  with  problems  of  the 
transposition of measures relating  to  the  Single  Market. 

Between  1990 and  1996 about 23000 students  and 30000 teachers  from  these countries 
have  undertaken  periods  of  mobility  in  European  Union  countries.  This  number  is 
significant  enough  to  justify  the  inclusion  of obstacles  to  this  mobility  in  this  Green 
Paper.  these  issues  are  equally  relelvant  to  those  countries  which  are  progressively 
becoming  involved in the  Socrates and  Leonardo  da Vinci  programmes. 

I  - Visas 

There are  a  large number of instances that can be  cited under this heading.  Nationals  of 
certain  Central  European  countries  are  issued  with  visas  allowing  them  to  enter  those 
countries, though they  often encounter significant delays,  thus jeopardising the mobility 
action  in  question.  The  lack  of an  embassy  in  Community  countries,  to  assist  in  the 
reception of mobility candidates,  will  sometimes  lead them to  go  to  a  third  country. 

II  - Social  Security 

In the  absence  of bilateral  agreements  between  some  of the  participating  countries  and 
Member  States,  it  has  been  necessary,  within  a  particular  programme  to  resort  to 
individual  health  insurance for  the  duration of the  stay. 

National  Contact  Points  and  relevant  services  in  universities  are  generally  able  to  give 
advice  about the  best value  options  in this  area. 

III  - Problems  with students'  grants 

The  value  of grants  for  students  is  generally  considered  to  be  adequate,  but  can  be 
stretched to  the  limit in countries  with a  high cost of living  (D,  NL,  UK). 

29.09.96 

54 

IV  - Recognition of periods of study 

Too  often,  students  coming  from  Central  European  countries  do  not  receive  complete 
recognition  of periods  of study  and  are  often  obliged  to  prolong  their  studies  in  their 
home  country  in  order  to  be  able  to  obtain  their  qualification.  this  is  a  regrettable 
situation.  It is true that the problem is  solved when mobility takes place in the  5th year 
(given  over  to  the  writing  of  a  dissertation  or  thesis),  though  this  solution  is  not 
satisfactory,  as  mobility  should be applicable  to  all  levels  of study. 
In the first place, institutions sending students should be more flexibile in the organisation 
of their courses.  After that, the systematic introduction of the ECTS should give students 
a more  concrete  guarantee of recognition. 

V - Language  skills 

Linguistic problems do  not appear to  have caused major problems in the organisation of 
mobility actions from Central Eu~eopan Countries to the European Community, as foreign 
languages  are  widely  spoken  among  the  student  population  of  these  countries  and 
constitute  one  of the  criteria for  awarding  grants  to  students  and  teachers.  however two 
problems  should  be  highlighted: 

the  low number of Central  European students that speak foreign  languages other 
than  English,  French  or  German  makes  mobility  towards  other  Member  States 
difficult; 

on  the  other  side  of the  coin,  development  of the  hitherto  limited  character  of 
TEMPUS  within  the  Socrates  programme  is  hindered  by  linguistic  barriers  for 
students travelling from the European Community to  Central European countries. 

29.09.96 

55 

Annex  7: 

Glossaiy 

CEDEFOP:  European Centre for the  Development of Vocational Training 

EC: 

European Community 

ECfS: 

European Credit Transfer System 

EEA: 

European Economic Area 

EU: 

European Union 

EURFS: 

·European Employment Services 

IRDAC: 

Industrial Research Development Advisory  Committee 

NARIC: 

Network of National Academic  Recognition Infonnation Centres 

OECD: 

Organisation for Economic  Co-operation and Development 

RTD: 

Research and Technological  Development 

TMR: 

'Training and Mobility  for Researche~" programme 

29~~96 

56 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(96) 462 fmal 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

16  15  04 

Catalogue number  :  CB•C0-96-491-EN-C 

ISBN 92-78-09739-X 

Office for Offlcial Publications of the European Communities 

L-2985 Lu"embourg