WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1418/99 by Roberta ANGELILLI Financing to the value of 5000 billion lire provided by the Italian state railway company to certain trade unions
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: EU law - national law, Italy, control of State aid, leisure, rail transport, trade union

29.1.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 27 E/59

(2000/C 27 E/070)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1418/99

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Financing to the value of 5000 billion lire provided by the Italian state railway company to certain

trade unions

By means of a notarial deed of 10 May 1995 which was drawn up between the Italian state railway
company (FS) and the FILT-CGIL, FIT-CISL, FISAFS-CISAL and UIL-Transporti
trade unions, railway
workers(cid:146) recreational facilities were transferred free of charge to the abovementioned trade union bodies.
These facilities comprise buildings in Rome, Bologna, Verona, Turin, Milan, Naples, Pisa, etc., 60 film
projection rooms, 84 tennis complexes, 300 games rooms, 160 cafeterias, 400 bars, 160 libraries, luxury
hotels, day nurseries, billiard rooms, allotments, campsites, skating rinks, hockey fields, watersports centres,
beach resorts, sports complexes, football fields, volleyball and basketball courts, etc.. They represent a
turnover of approximately 800 billion lire and their total value is estimated at approximately 5000 billion
lire. An annual 0,12 % levy is deducted from the wages of railway employees and 20 % commission is
charged on all organised stays, on enrolment charges and on the fees paid by approximately 270 railway
staff who work at the DLF but are paid by the FS.

In view of the above, can the Commission say whether:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

there are any European directives which prevent trade unions from being financed by employers?

such a transfer constitutes a distortion of free competition in the leisure and tourism sector?

it considers (in view of the fact that the FS is publicly owned) that the transfer constitutes a serious
loss of public assets which in this instance have been given to private individuals belonging to non-
recognised associations?

it considers that the transfer interferes with the current privatisation of the FS?

it is to express a general view on the matter?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 1999)

The Commission has no information about the notarial deed of 10 May 1995 and in particular the details
pertaining to the transfer.

There are no European directives on the financing of trade unions by employers. The financing of

1.
trade unions is governed by the rules and customs specific to the national social traditions.

As regards the possibility of distorting free competition in the leisure and tourism sector, it seems
2.
quite unlikely that this transfer will have any impact at Community level: the consequences for the market
are much the same irrespective of whether the (cid:145)Dopolavoro ferroviario(cid:146) is managed directly by the (cid:145)Ferrovie
dello Stato(cid:146) (FS) or by the trade unions.

3.
FS is a limited company in the form of a (cid:145)Societ(cid:224) per Azione(cid:146) (SpA). Prseumably the FS took the
transfer decision of its own accord. It is not for the Commission to pronounce on the advisability or
impact of this decision. Besides, the legal form under which the trade unions operate, which is governed
by the rules and customs particular to the national social traditions, does not a priori rule out their
managing the assets of (cid:145)Dopolavoro(cid:146).

4.
Pursuant to Article 295 (ex-Article 222), the EC Treaty in no way prejudices the rules in Member
States governing the system of property ownership and the Commission therefore does not pursue a
privatisation policy. Hence it is not for the Commission to pronounce on the privatisation policies of the
Member States.

Since management of the assets of (cid:145)Dopolavoro(cid:146) is a national prerogative, the Commission considers

5.
that it is not competent to pronounce on this matter.