WRITTEN QUESTION E-2632/01 by Hans Karlsson (PSE) to the Commission. Employees' right to information.
Date: 2001-09-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common position, labour law, labour relations, worker consultation, worker information

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/65

In this resolution (2), Parliament argued that neither the Commission, nor national governments should
interfere in the organisation and management of the Internet. Parliament stipulated that Commission and
national governments should give the Internet sufficient independence and a legal basis at international
level so that it can be an independent network.

The Commission is aware that the types of names that can be registered under the Top Level Domain
currently vary between European ccTLDs. It is also aware that some ccTLDs in the Member States apply
restrictions on the use of certain configurations of numbers in domain names. The Commission
understands that decisions to restrict the use of these domain names appear to have been made for
technical reasons related to the need to ensure stability on the Internet, as well as to minimise confusion
amongst users. From the information available to the Commission, it is not clear in which way these
restrictions could give rise to a distortion of competition at European level.

Furthermore, it has to be pointed out that the Internet Engineering Task Force issues Internet Requests for
Comments (RFCs), not the Commission.

As far as competition policy considerations are concerned, the Commission has not received any antitrust
complaint relating to the registration of domain names of numbers only. Under the circumstances
described by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not in a position to conclude that there are
distortions of competition, which would justify an own initiative procedure. The Commission is however
investigating other cases where potential abuse of a market-dominating position may be occurring in the
form of restriction on ccTLD name registration.

(1) COM(2000) 202 final.
(2) A5-0063/2001.

(2002/C 134 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2632/01

by Hans Karlsson (PSE) to the Commission

(27 September 2001)

Subject: Employees’ right to information

It is most important for workers to be given information in good time on planned changes to the
undertaking where they work. Efforts to improve the right to information date back a long way, and were
a live issue most recently during the Swedish Presidency this year.

There is now a clear trend for employers not to meet their obligation to inform workers of changes in the
undertaking’s activities. There are grounds for suspecting that employers are deliberately withholding
important information. The most recent case was when Avesta Polarit decided to close the Degerfors
foundry and Carrier decided to move its production from Arvika to Hungary.

Is the Commission aware of this trend?

What action can the Commission take to ensure that employees are given information on planned changes
at a workplace?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 2001)

The Commission shares the concerns of the Honourable Member that workers be given information in
good time on planned changes in the undertaking where they work. It is to ensure that this happens that
the Commission, in 1998, made a proposal for a Council Directive establishing a general framework for
informing and consulting employees in the Community (1).

C 134 E/66

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

The proposal is intended to fill the gaps and counter the shortcomings of national legislation in the field of
information and consultation to ensure that workers are informed and consulted before decisions affecting
them are taken. To address concerns regarding the failure of employers to meet their obligations to inform
and consult, such as the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member, the Commission proposed that
certain decisions taken by employers in serious breach of the Directive’s provisions would not have legal
effect.

The Commission very much welcomes the fact that the Council finally adopted a common position on the
proposal under the Swedish Presidency (2). Parliament is now undertaking its second reading and the
Commission will offer every assistance to enable Council and Parliament to reach final agreement on the
Directive before the end of 2001.

(1) OJ C 2, 5.1.1999.
(2) P. R. No 9397/01.

(2002/C 134 E/068)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2634/01

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 October 2001)

Subject: Arrangements for replacing the ECSC Consultative Committee

The ECSC Consultative Committee is, after 50 years of operation, to be integrated into the European
Union’s Economic and Social Committee. Its membership comprises 108 representatives of producers,
employees, consumers and traders in the coal and steel sector, drawn from all 15 Member States. In the
past, environmental interests have not been represented either on the ECSC Consultative Committee or on
the Economic and Social Committee.

Does the Commission intend to include representatives from the environmental sector when, as

1.
planned, the ECSC Consultative Committee is integrated into the Economic and Social Committee?

2.

How many members does the Commission envisage the new committee having?

3.
Does the Commission consider it necessary to include representatives from the environmental sector
in the European Union’s new enlarged Economic and Social Committee so as to ensure that the Agenda 21
process is firmly established?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(21 November 2001)

The Commission put forward its proposals for the future of the ECSC Consultative Committee in its
communication ‘The future of structured dialogue after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty’, adopted on
27 September 2000 (1).

While acknowledging that the expiry of the ECSC Treaty means that the ECSC’s procedures and structures
will cease to exist in legal terms, the Commission stressed the importance of the Consultative Committee’s
experience and its unique contribution to the decision-making process and social consensus, particularly as
regards the far-reaching changes which have transformed the coal and steel sectors.

To put that experience to good use while recognising the new situation arising from the expiry of the
ECSC Treaty, the Commission recommended that the Economic and Social Committee (ESC) take over
some of the ECSC Consultative Committee’s advisory tasks. The ESC can, after all, be regarded as a natural
successor to the Consultative Committee: set up in 1957 on the basis of experience with the latter, it is
one of the ordinary advisory bodies for which the EC Treaty provides. The Commission also proposed that
the ESC envisage adapting its structures and working methods so as to derive full benefit from the
Consultative Committee’s assets.