Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 on access to the market in the carriage of goods by road within the Community to and from the territory of a Member State or passing across the territory of one or more Member States as regards a uniform Driver Attestation"
Date: 2001-04-25
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: carriage of goods, intra-EU transport, market access, road transport, transport licence

C 193/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.7.2001

3.3.
Furthermore, given the concern shown by the Scientific
Committee on toxicity, ecotoxicity and the environment
(CSTEE), and on the basis of the data on the exposure of
breast-fed children to pentaBDE, the ESC calls for a scientific
research programme to ascertain and assess what other
protective measures may be necessary.

Although the risk assessment on octabromodiphenyl
3.4.
ether (octaBDE) mentioned in the fifth recital
is not yet
complete, the Committee calls on the Commission to assess
whether there is a case for applying the precautionary principle
to this product as well.

Brussels, 25 April 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament and the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 on access to the
market in the carriage of goods by road within the Community to and from the territory of a
Member State or passing across the territory of one or more Member States as regards a uniform
Driver Attestation’

(2001/C 193/06)

On 7 March 2001, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 71
of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 2 April 2001. The rapporteur
was Mr Kielman.

At its 381st plenary session (meeting of 25 April 2001), the Economic and Social Committee adopted
the following opinion with 60 votes in favour and two abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The purpose of this proposal for amending Regulation
(EEC) No 881/92 is to introduce a uniform document attesting
that the driver of a vehicle engaged in the international carriage
of goods by road is entitled to drive that vehicle on behalf of
the haulier. The absence of such a document has led to serious
enforcement problems, given that widespread irregular use is
made of drivers, often from outside the Community.

transport sector. Drivers from outside the Community often
take over the wheel at the frontier of a Member State, i.e. the
regular national driver is replaced by an irregular driver, who
then continues to drive the vehicle throughout the Community.
These drivers receive low black-market wages and their
working conditions are outside the Member States’ control.
Competition is distorted as a result.

1.2.
This was shown to be so in a survey which the
Commission conducted in the Member States in August 1999
and whose results were discussed in meetings with experts
from the Member States and the social partners in the road

Such practices are possible at the moment because
1.3.
effective control of the regularity of the driver’s employment
status is only feasible in the Member State where the haulier is
established. Ignorance of the relevant laws and provisions of
other Member States in that area and the sheer diversity of
documents and languages they are drawn up in makes effective
supervision impossible.

10.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 193/29

1.4. Member States have indicated that they would welcome
the power to check whether the Member State where a haulier
is established has authorised a driver to drive a vehicle on the
haulier’s behalf.

In addition, the social partners think that enforcement
1.5.
should be made more effective because the present situation
leads to a distortion of competition between hauliers who use
irregular drivers and those who do not or are not in a position
to do so. More often than not it is large companies which are
regularly engaged in international transport operations that
can profit, while small companies or companies which only
operate nationally do not have this possibility to the same
extent.

authorisation. The proposed amendment requires that the
driver of a vehicle engaged in international carriage must be in
possession of both a Community authorisation and a driver
attestation. The Council of Ministers decided at its meeting on
20-21 December 2000 that such an attestation is to be
required only in the case of drivers who are nationals of non-
EU countries. This decision was taken in order to keep the
administrative burden to a minimum, especially with regard to
the practicability of the checks, and to allow businesses as
much flexibility as possible. The Committee endorses this link
between the attestation and the Community authorisation and
the Council of Ministers’ decision to restrict the attestation to
drivers of EU-registered vehicles who are nationals of non-EU
countries.

1.6.
The Commission survey also showed that the con-
ditions of employment for irregularly employed drivers tend
to be poor. This gives cause for concern about road safety in
the eyes of the Commission.

1.7.
It seems that most Member States and the social
partners are in favour of a Community-wide solution in the
form of a simple but conclusive ‘enforcement action’ involving
relatively little paperwork, such as a uniform driver attestation.

2.4.
The Commission does not think that a driver attest-
ation has to be carried on board a vehicle in all instances. For
example, if the names of the driver and the holder of the
Community authorisation are identical (as in the case of the
vast majority of so-called ‘owner drivers’), a Community
authorisation suffices. In all other cases a driver attestation will
be required on top of the Community authorisation if the
driver is the national of a non-EU country. The Committee
approves this solution since it will reduce the administrative
burden.

2. General comments

The aim of the proposal is to create a situation in the
2.1.
Community where the driver of a Community vehicle engaged
in the international carriage of goods by road using a
Community authorisation can be checked properly by the
relevant Member State authorities as a result of the introduc-
tion of a uniform document, the driver attestation, at Com-
munity level.

2.2.
These checks are all the more necessary now that the
drivers of Community vehicles are being found time and again
to come from countries outside the European Union. The
authorities carrying out the checks are unable to determine
whether these drivers are employed legally, as determined by
the terms of employment applicable in the Member State
where the haulier is established. The purpose of a uniform
driver attestation is therefore to prevent unfair competition
with regard to wages and terms of employment.

2.3.
Since a Community authorisation is already required,
within the framework of market access, by hauliers operating
for hire or reward in the Community, it is an obvious move to
seek to link the driver attestation to the Community

2.5.
The Commission proposal amending Regulation (EEC)
No 881/92 relates only to the carriage of goods by hauliers
operating for hire or reward, since a Community authorisation
is only required for this type of transport. Own-account
transport is therefore excluded, since this is not subject in the
EU to the rules governing access to the profession of transport
operator. However, own-account operators are also engaged
in international transport even though their share of the
market may be small. The Committee thinks that if a driver
attestation is to be introduced for the driver of a Community
vehicle used for the carriage of goods by a haulier operating
for hire or reward, it should be made clear how problems
could arise for the drivers of vehicles engaged in own-account
international haulage. The Commission proposal contains
nothing to this effect.

2.6.
The Commission thinks that implementation can be
left to a very large extent to the Member States because the
driver attestation will simply certify that the relevant national
legislation and provisions governing the employment of
drivers have been respected. Each Member State can therefore
choose the method of implementation that involves the least
paperwork. The Committee considers this to be a practicable
and pragmatic approach.

C 193/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10.7.2001

2.7.
Although, generally speaking, drivers from non-EU
countries are highly trained, there is concern in practice about
the health hazards faced by them as a result of their long
working hours and the long periods they spend in the cabins
of their vehicles (they almost invariably rest and sleep in their
cabins, too). The Committee would urge that special attention
be paid to the possible consequences this may have for traffic
safety.

3.

Specific comments

3.1.
The driver attestation is to be issued by a Member
State, at the request of a haulage company established on its
territory, for each person lawfully employed or put at the
disposal of the haulage company to drive vehicles engaged in
international road haulage. Thus, Member States may not issue
driver attestations for drivers who are only employed abroad.
The Committee thinks this should be so. The Committee
the Member States must be
would also emphasise that
sufficiently mindful of
the need for a fair and uniform
interpretation of what is meant by a business’s place of
establishment. It is necessary to avoid a situation where in one
Member State this is taken to mean the base from which a
business is run permanently in practice, whereas in another
Member State it could simply be a PO box address or branch
where non-EU drivers are employed.

3.2.
The layout of the driver attestation closely follows that
of the Community authorisation. This serves to underline the
just like the
close link between the two. The attestation,
Community authorisation, will take the form of a paper
document and will not, for example, be a plastic card. This
will save time and meet the need for flexibility called for by
businesses. The Committee agrees with this.

3.3.
The Member State issuing the driver attestation may
determine the period of validity in order to allow for flexible
implementation (e.g. so that the attestation’s validity coincides
with the duration of a contract of employment). The maximum
period of validity is to be five years. The attestation is
renewable, but only if the conditions under which it was issued
have not changed. If this is not the case, the haulage company
must return the attestation immediately to the issuing auth-
ority. Since the practice adopted towards the Community
authorisation has been followed in fixing the maximum period
of validity, the Committee gives its approval.

3.4. Member States are to be obliged to check regularly
whether the conditions under which an attestation was issued
have not changed. Despite the fact that implementation is

entirely a matter for the Member States, the Committee thinks
that, by analogy with the arrangements under Regulation (EEC)
No 3821/85 for checking driving and rest periods, agreement
should be reached at Community level on a minimum number
or percentage of checks to be carried out.

3.5.
The Commission draws a parallel, as regards the
punishing of infringements, with the measures applicable to
the Community authorisation. The Committee thinks that this
is the right approach.

4.

Summary and conclusions

4.1.
The Committee agrees in general with the Commission
proposal for introducing a driver attestation for the inter-
national carriage of goods by road, for this is a relatively
simple way of way of countering unfair wage competition
with the aid of a Community-wide instrument. It also agrees
with the Council of Ministers’ decision to require the attestation
only for non-EU drivers.

The Committee would like the Member States to adopt
4.2.
a more uniform approach in their interpretations of the term
‘establishment’, in response to the question of whether driver
attestations may only be issued in the Member States where
companies are physically established, or whether they can also
be issued where a company has a branch or even a PO box
address from where haulage operations are not permanently
conducted.

4.3.
The Committee points out that the Commission wishes
to keep the paperwork associated with the introduction of the
driver attestation to a minimum, and therefore agrees with the
Commission’s plan to link the attestation to the Community
authorisation.

4.4.
In cases where the name on the Community authoris-
ation is that of the driver (as in the case of the vast majority of
so-called ‘owner drivers’),
the Commission proposes that
no driver attestation be required and that a Community
authorisation by itself be sufficient. The Committee endorses
this, since it will reduce the administrative burden.

Since own-account transport is exempt from a Com-
4.5.
munity authorisation, no driver attestation is to be required
for the driver of a vehicle engaged in international own-
account haulage. There is nothing to this effect
in the
Commission proposal. The Committee thinks that this catego-
ry of drivers should be advised on how to act if checked in
another Member State.

10.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 193/31

4.6. With regard to the checks to be carried out by Member
States on driver attestations that have been issued,
the
Committee thinks that the Commission should indicate the

minimum number/percentage that should be checked. This
will help to ensure that the checks are representative and
effective and that the administrative burden is not too high.

Brussels, 25 April 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directives 90/425/EEC and 92/118/EEC as
regards health requirements for animal by-products’

(2001/C 193/07)

On 7 November 2000 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 152(4)(b) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 30 March 2001. The rapporteur
was Mr Leif E. Nielsen.

At its 381st plenary session on 25 and 26 April 2001 (meeting of 26 April 2001), the Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 77 votes to one without any abstentions.

1.

Introduction

2.

General comments

Following the proposal (1) for a new regulation laying down
the health rules concerning animal by-products not intended
for human consumption, Directives 90/425/EEC and
92/118/EEC must be amended accordingly.

(1) COM(2000) 574 final.

The Committee approves the draft directive as a necessary
consequence of the proposed new regulation laying down the
health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for
human consumption.

Brussels, 26 April 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS