WRITTEN QUESTION E-2778/99 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Failure to maintain current job levels at a subsidised plant owned by pasta-producer MISKO.
Date: 2000-01-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, business location, cessation of trading, job preservation, labour relations, reassignment

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/205

Article 9 of Directive 75/368/EEC states that proof that the conditions laid down in Article 5 and Article
7(1) (concerning the nature and length of the activity exercised by the person concerned in their Member
State of origin) are satisfied shall be established by a certificate issued by the competent authority or body
in the Member State of origin or Member State from which the person comes. The Commission considers
that (cid:145)competent authority or body in the Member State of origin(cid:146) means a State authority or a body which
has been delegated powers by this State authority. Depending on the Member State, this could be
ministries, prefects or chambers of commerce.
In the Commission(cid:146)s opinion, confirmation from the
employer alone is not sufficient, unless the employer is actually the body which has been delegated
powers by the State authority. Similarly, an individual(cid:146)s tax return would not be sufficient proof under
Directive 75/368/EEC as this is a purely unilateral act by the migrant.

According to the latest information given to the Commission, the current authorities in Greece which are
competent to issue these certificates are the prefects, in accordance with Presidential decree 33/1993.

that,

for migrant professionals, the national

The Commission considers it essential
law transposing
Directive 75/368/EEC includes the criteria referred to in Article 7, allowing nationals of other Member
States to take up or pursue a career as a courier. Moreover, following the adoption of Directive 1999/42/
EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 June 1999 establishing a mechanism for the
recognition of qualifications in respect of the professional activities covered by the Directives on liberal-
isation and transitional measures and supplementing the general systems for the recognition of qualifica-
tions (4), nationals of other Member States will also be able to have their diplomas and other training
certificates recognised, which they have acquired in their Member State of origin or in the Member State
from which they come, according to the principles which govern the general system for the recognition of
professional qualifications (Article 3 of Directive 1999/42/EC). There are also good grounds for giving
migrants this possibility in the national transposing law.

The certificate referred to in Article 7(1)(b) of Directive 75/368/EEC which testifies to the vocational
training undertaken by the migrant must be (cid:145)recognised by the State or regarded by the competent
professional or trade body as fully satisfying its requirements(cid:146). Directive 75/368/EEC does not give a
precise definition of the term (cid:145)certificate(cid:146) and there is nothing to indicate that the training undertaken by
the migrant has to have been subject to an evaluation. Moreover, as it is the Member States(cid:146) responsibility
to organise training courses, the Commission considers that it is up to the competent professional body of
the Member State of origin to decide whether a course attendance certificate is sufficient or not.

(1) OJ L 167, 30.6.1975.
(2) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
(3) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
(4) OJ L 201, 31.7.1999.

(2000/C 225 E/233)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2778/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Failure to maintain current job levels at a subsidised plant owned by pasta-producer MISKO

MISKO, the pasta-producing subsidiary of the Italian company Barilla, has received funding under Greek
development law 1892/90 to set up a new production plant at Thiva on condition that it maintains the
present number of 275 permanent jobs. Before completing construction of the new plant, the company
closed down its pasta factory in Patras, compelling the current workforce either to resign or agree to being
transferred to other company plants. However, the company has not informed those workers who agree to
a transfer of the exact place or starting-date of their employment, the type of work, level of pay or the cost
of relocating. It did not even inform them of where they would be employed after the closure of the Patras
factory (cid:129) which occurred on 10 September 1999 (cid:129) until the new plant was opened at Thiva.

C 225 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

Since the company(cid:146)s decision to close down the Patras factory is in breach of the requirement to maintain
the present number of jobs and was taken without prior consultation of the workers, which is expressly
prescribed by Directive 94/45 (1):

Will the Commission say:

whether it will check that the company has complied with the condition of maintaining the present

1.
number of jobs in receiving subsidies for its new plant, and

2.
whether it will examine whether there has been compliance with the provisions laid down in
Directive 94/45 concerning the obligation to inform, consult and negotiate with the workers, and the
participation of the MISKO workers(cid:146) union in the European Works Council of Barilla, MISKO(cid:146)s parent
company?

(1) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994, p. 64.

(2000/C 225 E/234)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2779/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Assistance for MISKO company workers forced to relocate

(18 January 2000)

MISKO, the pasta-producing subsidiary of the Italian company Barilla, has received funding under Greek
development law 1892/90 to set up a new production plant at Thiva on condition that it maintains the
present number of 275 permanent jobs. Before completing construction of the new plant, the company
closed down its pasta factory in Patras, compelling the current workforce either to resign or agree to being
transferred to other company plants. The workers who agree to be transferred, however, are faced with an
expensive relocation bill and they are therefore forced to leave their jobs and run the risk of remaining
unemployed.

Is it possible to assist these workers to cover the expense of their enforced relocation? Which programmes
and procedures may be used to provide such assistance?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2778/99 and E-2779/99
given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2000/C 225 E/235)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2790/99

by Paul Lannoye (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 January 2000)

Subject: Research projects on healthcare systems within the fifth framework-programme

The deadline for submitting research projects (Call Identifier: 1999/C/ 64/13) on healthcare systems within
the fifth research framework-programme was 15 November 1999. The projects submitted include several
assessing non-conventional medicines (Research Programme 1.1.1. (cid:129) Thematic priority 1.1.1.-10.1-
(i)(ii)(iii) (cid:129) Public Health research, Health Services Research and Health and Safety/evaluation of the
effectiveness of non conventional therapies).