WRITTEN QUESTION E-2802/00 by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission. Health and safety on rail transport (France).
Date: 2000-09-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: provision of services, rail transport, transport company, transport safety, transport user

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/179

(2001/C 113 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2802/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Health and safety on rail transport (France)

I am trying to assist constituents who travelled from Paris to Florence on 21/22 July 2000, during the
strike on the French railways. These were the problems suffered by them on the outward journey:

1. The lights were not working in the coach until midnight.

2. The beds were stuck and they could not use them, spending the entire night sitting up.

3. No sheets, towels or blankets were provided.

4. There was a strong smell of urine in the cabin and in the toilets.

5. No heating in the cabin.

6. No restaurant car.

7. No security (cid:129) apparently no rail official on the train other than the driver.

On the return journey the couple had similar problems, but including:

1. No toilet paper in the toilets and no water to wash hands in the toilets.

2. No provisions of drinks or food for over 13 hours.

My constituents conclude their letter to me by saying:
passengers on both journeys were put at risk(cid:146).

(cid:145)We feel that the health and safety of all the

Would the European Commission please inform me whether the European Union has any laws or
regulations covering the health and safety of rail passengers, and if so, whether they would apply in this
particular case?

My constituents point out that such intolerable circumstances would have not been allowed on a British
train.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 2000)

The Commission fully agrees that the circumstances that the constituents of the Honourable Member met
are intolerable and can assure the Honourable Member that the Commission shares their feelings in this
respect. The contractual relationship between the railways and their passengers is not covered by a specific
Community legal instrument. Detailed requirements on the health and safety of passengers, as well as the
quality of service, are subject to national law and internal railway rules.

Since the Honourable Member(cid:146)s constituents seem to have travelled in an international train (Paris-
it is worth mentioning that there is a convention concerning international carriage by rail
Florence),
(COTIF) in force regulating the international carriage of passengers and luggage by rail. All Member States,
including France and Italy, are among the 40 signatories of the convention. The railways(cid:146)
liability for
suffering or injuries is primarily limited to the consequences of accidents. In addition the convention
regulates for example the obligation of partial or whole refunding when a ticket, owing to the shortage of
seats, has been used in a class or on a train of a lower fare category than shown on the ticket (Article 25).

including a more
The Commission has actively promoted a revitalisation of the European railways,
business-like performance and better services to customers.
initiative, better known as the
(cid:145)Infrastructure package(cid:146) (1) is currently subject to a conciliation procedure between the Parliament and the

Its last

C 113 E/180

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

Council. Once these legislative acts are adopted the Commission will prepare further proposals to improve
the railways(cid:146) competitiveness on the transport market. In connection with this initiative the Commission
recognises that it may be necessary to improve the rights of the passengers. After careful study of the
present legal situation, appropriate proposals could be made in this respect.

(1) COM(1999) 616 final.

(2001/C 113 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2804/00

by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Failure to credit insured employment in another Member State for the purposes of unemployment

benefit

Is the Commission aware that entitlement to unemployment benefit in the Federal Republic of Germany
depends upon where the last period of insured employment took place, and is this compatible with the
rules of the European Union?

Is Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) still compatible with present-day realities?

A German citizen worked for nine months in Germany, during and after her training, and then worked for
six months in Britain in order to broaden her experience. In the Federal Republic of Germany entitlement
to unemployment benefit basically starts 12 months after a period of insured employment which took
place within the preceding three years.

In the case in question, the application for unemployment benefit was rejected because the person
concerned, after the end of her job in Britain, had no subsequent employment in Germany. Since she
was pregnant, however, she was no longer available for work. The rejection of the application for
unemployment benefit referred, in this connection, to Article 76(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71.

(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 October 2000)

in particular Council Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 (1)
Community law in the field of social security,
coordinates, but does not harmonise, national social security systems in order to ensure that migrant
workers and their family members do not lose their social protection when moving within the Commun-
ity.

With regard to unemployment benefits, Article 67 of the Regulation provides that if a person becomes
unemployed, the Member State in which this person claims unemployment benefit is obliged to take
account of periods of insurance or employment under the legislation of any other Member State, if this is
necessary for the entitlement to unemployment benefit in the State where the claim was submitted. In this
context, it is also stated that this applies only if this person completed such periods in the Member States
concerned immediately before becoming unemployed.

However, the above Regulation foresees an exception which would apply to the case raised by the
Honourable Member if the person concerned had maintained her residence in Germany (Article 71(1)(b)(ii)).
if she becomes fully unemployed, she could choose whether she wants to receive
In such a case,
unemployment benefits in the United Kingdom or in Germany.

To establish whether the person concerned maintained her residence in a Member State,
in this case
Germany, the Court of Justice held that account should be taken of the length and continuity of residence
before the person concerned moved, the length and purpose of her absence, the occupation found in the