WRITTEN QUESTION E-2153/99 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Working conditions and competition at Piaggio.
Date: 1999-11-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, State aid, competence of the Member States, cycle and motorcycle industry, directive (EU), infringement procedure (EU), job creation, national implementing measure, rate of work, restriction on competition, working conditions

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/59

Moreover, the Commission received the recommendations made at the meeting of the Spanish Coopecos
on 20 September 1999 in good time and intends at all events to deal with them appropriately.

(2000/C 225 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2143/99

by Guido Viceconte (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: Serious damage to chestnut groves in various parts of Calabria

The sharp drop in night-time temperatures in early October caused considerable damage to chestnut
groves, seriously jeopardising the entire harvest in various parts of Calabria, particularly in the munici-
palities of Cicala, Sorbo San Basile, Gimigliano, Carlopoli, Sersale, Petron(cid:224), Petilia, Mesorarca, San Pietro
Apostolo, Serrastretta, Decollatura, Soveria Mannelli, Conflenti, Platania, Fossato Serralta, Pentone, Pedivi-
gliano, Colosomini, Bianchi, Panettieri, Taverna and many others.

Can the Commission take action to support the areas stricken by this disaster, given that a large portion of
the local population earns a living primarily from the harvesting, processing and marketing of chestnuts?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2000)

Community legislation does not authorise the Commission to intervene to provide compensation for losses
of income caused by natural disasters.

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2085/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4256/88 laying
down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Agricultural
Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Guidance Section (1)
(for the period 19941999) and Council
Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (2)
(for the period 2000-2006) provide only for the possibility of assistance from the EAGGF for the
reconstitution of agricultural production potential damaged by natural disasters and the introduction of
appropriate means of prevention.

Measures will be selected and proposed by the national or regional authorities, as appropriate. In the case
of the natural disaster in question it is therefore for the regional government of Calabria to determine
whether the nature of the damage is such that it is possible for the EAGGF to provide part-financing under
the abovementioned legislation.

The Member States are currently drawing up the programmes for 2000-2006 and according to the
information available there are no plans for EAGGF aid to be granted in the case referred to.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2000/C 225 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2153/99

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: Working conditions and competition at Piaggio

Over the past few months the Italian Government has granted special incentives for the scrapping of
motorcycles. This has led to a higher turnover for motorcycle manufacturers. At the same time, however,

C 225 E/60

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

Piaggio, one of the top companies in the sector, has introduced tough shifts in which workers have had to
work at weekends and on bank holidays throughout the summer with the same pay and harsher working
conditions (the temperature can reach 40(cid:176) C on the shop floor). Many workers have also been laid off,
resulting in further loss of wages.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Does the Commission therefore not think that the above-mentioned incentives could have been

justified only if extra jobs had been created (cid:129) which was patently not the case at Piaggio?

2. Does it not believe that the Piaggio management should be censured for its disregard of European

rules on working conditions?

3.

Is it not of the opinion that, unless Piaggio(cid:146)s increased turnover (cid:129) brought about by the above
incentives (cid:129) leads to new jobs or improved working conditions, the ensuing capital, which could be
invested by the company, could become an unfair competitive advantage, to the detriment of free
competition?

4. Will the Commission give its general views on the matter?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 2000)

According to the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Italian Government has introduced
special grants for the owners of old motorcycles for scrapping them. These grants are paid to all owners of
old motorcycles regardless of make. Owners must then purchase a new motorcycle, allowing manufac-
turers, especially Piaggio, to increase their turnover significantly.

On the basis of this information, the Commission sees this as a general consumer aid measure, rather than
aid to a company in possible contravention of Article 87 of the EC Treaty. All companies manufacturing
similar vehicles in Italy have benefited from the (cid:145)replacement market(cid:146) created by the State measure in
question. Furthermore,
it was neither the aim nor the effect of the measure to reduce Piaggio(cid:146)s costs.
Consequently, the measure does not appear to contravene Community rules on State aid.

Council Directive 93/104/EC (1) on the organisation of working time lays down minimum requirements
with regard to breaks, daily and weekly rest periods and maximum average working time of workers. The
Italian government has not notified the Commission of its measures to implement this directive. The
Commission has brought this failure to notify it of the relevant national measures before the Court of
Justice (pending case C-386/98). On the basis of the information presented, it is not possible to judge
whether the provisions of the directive and any relevant national provisions have been respected or not.

Council Directive 89/654/EEC of 30 November 1989 concerning the minimum safety and health
individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of
requirements for the workplace (first
Directive 89/391/EEC (2)) states in Annexes I and II (Minimum safety and health requirements for work-
places used for the first time after 31 December 1992 and for workplaces already in use before 1 January
1993 respectively) that the temperature in rooms containing workplaces must be adequate for human
beings during working hours, having regard to the working methods used and the physical demands
placed on the workers (cf. 7.1 of Annexes I and II). Italy has communicated to the Commission the
national measures implementing Directive 89/654/EEC, which correctly transpose the minimum require-
ment relating to workplace temperature. It is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure adequate
controls and monitoring of the national provisions transposing the Directive. This means that any
questions regarding enforcement must be referred to the Italian authorities, which must organise and
carry out the inspections and checks necessary to ensure proper enforcement.

(1) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.
(2) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989.