WRITTEN QUESTION E-3894/00 by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission. Impact on employment of a proposal for a regulation on public services in the passenger transport sector.
Date: 2000-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: award of contract, carriage of passengers, competition, contract, labour law, means of public conveyance, provision of services, public service

C 187 E/78

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

(2001/C 187 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3894/00

by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Impact on employment of a proposal for a regulation on public services in the passenger transport

sector

The Commission has just reached a further phase in its frenzied deregulation activity proposing that
invitations to tender for passenger transport, one of the public services, to be issued every five years.

According to Mrs Loyola de Palacio, member of the Commission, the proposed reform will ensure greater
thereby providing a better service for passengers,
competition between public transport operators,
containing costs and ensuring the highest safety standards.

In fact Mrs de Palacio has simply devised a new triangle of conflicting interests. While competition
between public transport operators may keep down costs, this will inevitably be to the detriment of the
quality of services provided (closure of unprofitable routes, less frequent services etc.) or at the expense of
safety standards (less qualified, underpaid and consequently less motivated personnel).

In many countries, the municipal authorities or associations thereof have for a long time been providing
their own public transport services, whose staff in many cases enjoy civil servant, or at least municipal
employee status. Competition with private transport undertakings would in general squeeze out municipal
services with established personnel and staffing structures while private operators entering the market
would be able to recruit (frequently underpaid) employees with no seniority.

By proposing to oblige municipalities and other public bodies to issue invitations to tender every five
years, at least for the provision of public transport services (worth over € 800 000 annually), does the
Commission realise that it would in effect be forcing them to close down their own services and dismiss
their employees?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 2001)

The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that Article 9(3) of its
proposal of 26 July 2000 for a regulation on public services in public transport (1) ensures that authorities
will be able to protect existing employees when contracts change hands. In some cases, protection is
already provided by Council Directive 77/187 of 14 February 1977 on the approximation of the laws of
the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees(cid:146) rights in the event of transfers of under-
takings, businesses or parts of businesses (2). The Commission(cid:146)s proposal allows authorities to insist on this
level of protection, even where it is not required by Community law.
It certainly does not oblige
authorities to make their existing staff redundant.

The Commission(cid:146)s proposal does not require authorities to award contracts to the tenderer making the
cheapest offer. Authorities can award contracts on the basis of quality, not just price. The proposal lists
numerous quality and safety criteria which must be taken into account in awarding contracts.

In-house operators are still undertakings under Community law. They are subject to Community rules on
state aids and exclusive rights. With the emergence of multinational operators, abuses of these rules now
have a Community dimension. The Commission does not intend to put an end to in-house operation of
public transport, or to other publicly owned operators. The proposal simply says that these operators, like
all others, should have to prove from time to time that they are still the best for serving the area and the
community in question. This approach is good for passengers, and it promotes legal certainty.

(1) OJ C 365 E, 19.12.2000.
(2) OJ L 61, 5.3.1977 as amended by Directive 98/50/EC of 29.6.1998 (OJ L 201, 17.7.1998).