WRITTEN QUESTION E-2785/02 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. Federal Mogul factory closure — lack of notification of workforce.
Date: 2002-10-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, labour law, transfer of businesses, worker consultation, worker information

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/215

(2003/C 52 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2773/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 October 2002)

Subject: Health and safety of workers (cid:1) complaint 00/4404, SG(2000) A/3828/2

Recently in Greece, several workers have lost their lives in accidents at work. Industrial diseases are
simply not recorded. Complaints to the Commission on this subject include a file (cid:1) 00/4404, SG(2000)
A/3828/2 (cid:1) containing evidence of a specific refusal to implement the legislation on workers’ health and
safety at the workplace. The Greek General Confederation of Labour (GSEE) has added a mass of data to
this file concerning numerous similar cases. The number of complaints is mounting and it is commonly
held in Greece that the authorities responsible for implementing the directive on workers’ health and safety
are failing in their task. Despite my repeated questions (E-0014/00 (1), E-3049/01 (2), E-3050/01, E-0906/
01 (3)) and its assurances that it will examine the information, the Commission has yet to take action.

1. What means does the Commission have of bringing pressure to bear on the Greek regulatory
authorities to carry out more effective checks within their powers?

Is the Commission considering the possibility of investigating the matter on the spot and examining

2.
all the data supplied by the GSEE?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 158.
(2) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002, p. 187.
(3) OJ C 340 E, 4.12.2001, p. 119.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2002)

1.
It is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure adequate monitoring and supervision of
national measures transposing Community directives in the area of health and safety of workers at work
(cf. Article 4 of Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the
safety and health of workers at work (1)).

However, where concrete facts generally suggest a situation of non-application of the national legislation
transposing Community directives, the Commission may make use of the procedures provided for by the
EC Treaty,
in particular those based on Article 226 (initiation of infringement proceedings against a
Member State which has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty).

2.
The Commission is currently examining all the facts which have been transmitted to it in the context
of complaint 00/4404. On the basis of the results of this examination, the Commission will take the
appropriate measures and, if necessary, continue its contacts with the Greek authorities and/or the plaintiff
with a view to completing its analysis of this specific case.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.

(2003/C 52 E/238)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2785/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 October 2002)

Subject: Federal Mogul factory closure (cid:1) lack of notification of workforce

The Federal Mogul Company, currently based in Bridgwater, south-west England, employs 370 people. On
20 August 2002 the company announced (cid:1) without prior notification to the workforce (cid:1) that the factory
would be closing. The company intend to transfer the work to Poland and Turkey.

C 52 E/216

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2003

Will the Commission confirm that this failure to consult (cid:1) either with trade unions on site or with the
workforce (cid:1) is a clear breach of Community law?

Will the Commission also indicate if it will now be taking the appropriate legal steps?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2002)

The Commission would like to make the point that several Community directives lay down procedures for
informing and consulting workers’
representatives which may apply in the event of closures of
undertakings. These include in particular Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (1) and Council
Directive 94/45/EC of 22 September 1994 on the establishment of a European works council or a
procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the
purposes of informing and consulting employees (2). Recently, Directive 2002/14/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and
consulting employees in the European Community (3) has been adopted in order
to supplement
Community legislation in this area, but the deadline for transposal into national
law by the Member
States is not until 23 March 2005.

The first two directives mentioned above have been incorporated into the national law of the Member
States. It is the task of the competent national authorities to assess whether they have been applied
correctly and effectively in each individual case.

(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998.
(2) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994.
(3) OJ L 80, 23.3.2002.

(2003/C 52 E/239)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2798/02

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 October 2002)

Subject: Public procurement: price renegotiation

Could the Commission confirm that a utility, subject to the procurements rules set forth in Directive 93/
38/EEC (1) may not renegotiate prices or other fundamental aspects of a tender with only one bidder, after
it has terminated the competitive stage of the relevant procurement process, regardless of whether it is
employing the negotiated procedure or otherwise?

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 84.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2002)

A distinction must, first of all, be made between open and restricted procedures, on the one hand, and
negotiated procedures, on the other. In respect of the former two procedures, no real negotiations may
take place as this was explained in a joint Commission and Council declaration which was published
together with the first Utilities Directive, Council Directive 90/531/EEC of 17 September 1990 on the
procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications
sectors (1). The declaration reads as follows:
‘The Council and the Commission state that in open and
restricted procedures all negotiation with candidates or tenderers on fundamental aspects of contracts,
variations in which are likely to distort competition, and in particular on prices, shall be ruled out;
however, discussions with candidates or tenderers may be held but only for the purpose of clarifying or
supplementing the content of their tenders or the requirements of the contracting entities and provided
this does not involve discrimination.’