WRITTEN QUESTION P-3515/02 by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Implications of the Simap judgment of 3 October 2000 (Case C-303/98) for Directive 2000/34/EC (the Working Time Directive) and the working practices of the Rotterdam Professional Fire Service.
Date: 2002-12-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, application of EU law, infringement procedure (EU), judgment of the Court (EU), labour law, organisation of work, working time

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/217

individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (3) and Council Directive
89/654/EEC of 30 November 1989 concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the
workplace (first individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (4). The
national authorities are responsible for monitoring the application of the Directives.

Whether or not Rome City Council has submitted plans for bringing the buildings into compliance with
the rules applicable to health and safety at work is therefore a matter for the Member State concerned.

The Commission is not in possession of any studies carried out at Community level on bringing buildings
into compliance with Community rules in this field.

Council Directive 83/477/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos
at work is intended to protect all workers who might be exposed to asbestos, including teachers. Since the
including pupils, they of
effects of this protection cover everyone present in the buildings concerned,
course benefit from the same protection.

(1) OJ L 263, 24.9.1983.
(2) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
(3) OJ L 245, 26.8.1992.
(4) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989.

(2003/C 110 E/242)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3515/02

by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 December 2002)

Subject: Implications of the Simap judgment of 3 October 2000 (Case C-303/98) for Directive 2000/34/EC
(the Working Time Directive) and the working practices of the Rotterdam Professional Fire Service

No doubt the Commission is aware of the assertions made by the Court of Justice in Luxembourg in the
Simap judgment of 3 October 2000 (Case C-303/98). No doubt the Commission has taken steps to point
out to the Member States the implications of the Simap judgment, read in conjunction with Directive
2000/34/EC (1), which lays down that time on call and on stand-by are to be interpreted as working time
within the meaning of the Directive and therefore count in the calculation of the maximum working week
of 48 hours.

Is the Commission aware that, in many sectors in the Netherlands, a good two years after the ruling, no
action has been taken on the Court’s judgment and that the Netherlands Government has not taken the
measures required to terminate this breach of Community law, for example in the case of the professional
fire service, where working weeks of between 54 and 60 hours are not uncommon?

If the Commission is aware of these circumstances, has it brought infringement proceedings against the
Netherlands, or will it do so, and when? If the Commission is not so aware, will it investigate the matter?

Will the Commission indicate what it deems a reasonable period following the Court’s ruling within which
a Member State, in compliance with Community law, should guarantee the rights of workers ‘established’
by the judgment?

(1) OJ L 195, 1.8.2000, p. 41.

Response given by Mrs. Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(23 December 2002)

The Court of Justice, in its judgment of 3 October 2000 in the Case C-303/98 (SIMAP), held that the time
spent on call by doctors in primary health care teams must be regarded in its entirety as working time, and
where appropriate as overtime, within the meaning of Directive 93/104/EC (1) if they are required to be at
the health centre.

C 110 E/218

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.5.2003

Although a Court judgment in a case referred for a preliminary ruling in principle only directly applies to
disputes referred to national courts, the interpretation given of a provision in Community law clarifies the
meaning and scope of this rule as it should be or should have been understood and applied from the
moment of its entry into force. The result is that judgments in preliminary rulings therefore have, de facto,
an erga omnes effect which should be applied to similar, comparable or analogous situations or legal
relationships. Therefore, the concept of working time should henceforth be interpreted in compliance with
this judgment of the Court.

In this context, the Member States should be reminded of their responsibility to bring into force the laws,
is also their
regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the directives.
responsibility to monitor adequately the application of national provisions transposing the directives.

It

The Commission has decided to publish an invitation to tender for a study of the scope and consequences
of the SIMAP case for the Member States. Once the results and conclusion of this study are available, the
Commission will decide on measures for proposal. The Commission also intends to consider this matter in
a communication scheduled for the end of 2003 concerning Directive 93/104/EC. This communication
will be adopted pursuant to Articles 18(1) and 17(4) of the directive.

(1) Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working

time, OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.

(2003/C 110 E/243)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3523/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 December 2002)

Subject:

‘Hidden’ deficit in Greece in 2001

According to the annual report of the State Audit Department of the Hellenic Republic for the financial
year 2001, Greece appears to have an additional deficit in the order of Drs 1,5 trillion, which was never
entered in the budget and represents almost 3,9 % of GDP for 2001. If added to the 1,2 % acknowledged
by the government, this deficit exceeds 5,2 %.

indicators? How do they affect Greece’s
What impact do these revelations have on Greece’s financial
obligations under the Stability Pact? What are the precise figures for the deficits and government debt in
Greece following the latest interventions by Eurostat in collaboration with the Greek Government?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2002)

The Commission (Eurostat) is aware of the existence of the annual report of the Court of Auditors of the
Greek Republic for the financial year 2001, but has not examined its content.

However, it is likely that the Court of Auditors has focused its attention on the main aggregates of the
public sector from the point of view of the public accounts. This should not be relevant in the content of
the Stability Pact, which is based on the calculation of the main aggregates following the concepts and
criteria of national accounts (ESA 95).

Courts of Auditors of Member States usually scrutinise state accounts and check whether the accounting of
state operations adheres to the public accounting rules which are specific for each country. The aggregates
that are relevant at Community level in the context of the Excessive Deficit Procedure and the Stability and
Growth Pact in contrast follow the operation system of national and regional accounts in all countries.