WRITTEN QUESTION E-0390/03 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Job experience schemes and labour rights.
Date: 2003-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, humanisation of work, labour law, national implementing measure, occupational health, occupational safety, social rights, vocational training

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/181

This company received substantial amounts from both national and Community funds in connection with
the establishment of this factory in 1988 and its operations in Castelo de Paiva, on the understanding that
it would continue its activities up to at least 2007.

It appears from numerous sources that the company C & J Clark is an ‘old hand’ at this kind of financial
opportunism: it is claimed that it has on several other occasions received Community funds aiding its
operations at different plants in a number of EU Member States, only to close many of those plants at a
later date, with adverse social and economic consequences for the Member States and regions where it had
operated.

In addition, it has also been stated that those direct or indirect Community aids were granted despite the
fact that this multinational was resorting to subcontracting on a large scale. It has been claimed,
in
particular, that, while the Clarks group sells 40 million pairs of shoes every year (with an estimated annual
turnover of EUR 1,5 billion), a good 7 million pairs out of that total come from orders placed by the
group with other firms under subcontracting arrangements.

Is the Commission aware of the existence of subcontracting practices (i.e. the farming-out of footwear
production to other firms) on the part of the group Clarks or C & J Clark, despite it being in receipt of
financial aid? Even if subcontracting of this nature is theoretically legal, does the Commission not believe
that it should be prohibited in cases involving financial
incentives or support originating directly or
indirectly in Community funds?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2003)

The Commission has no knowledge of any subcontracting practices on the part of the Clarks group or
C & J Clark, to which the Honourable Member refers in his question.

It is up to the Member State to ensure compliance with the agreements it concludes with undertakings, in
accordance with the national and Community legislation in force.

(2003/C 192 E/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0390/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Job experience schemes and labour rights

(13 February 2003)

Greek workers involved in job experience schemes co-funded by the European Union are being deprived of
basic labour rights and social security rights, such as annual and parental leave, both during the training
period and more particularly when they are actually working. As a result, there has been a case of a school
caretaker in Greece going to work with her baby and working normally a mere three days after giving
birth.

Given that Article 3 of Council Directive 89/391/EEC (1) of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures
to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work defines ‘worker’ as ‘any person
employed by an employer, including trainees and apprentices but excluding domestic servants’ and that the
provisions of Directive 93/104/EC (2) concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time are
currently in force, will the Commission say what measures it intends to take to ensure that all workers
involved in job experience schemes enjoy all the labour and social rights to which they are entitled?

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993, p. 18.

C 192 E/182

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2003)

The Directives mentioned by the Honourable Member have been transposed into Greek law. Consequently,
in the situations referred to in the written question, it is the responsibility of the national authorities to
ensure that national and/or Community provisions for protecting the health and safety of workers are
upheld and to take action against any infringements.

It is only in cases where a consistent administrative practice can be established that the Commission could,
if necessary, act against a Member State on the basis of incorrect application of Community law.

(2003/C 192 E/221)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0392/03

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(13 February 2003)

Subject: Situation of Mr Tohti Tunyaz, an ethnic Uighur sentenced to 11 years in prison

Mr Tohti Tunyaz, an ethnic Uighur from the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR), while visiting
XUAR as a postgraduate student at the Tokyo University School of Humanities (Japan) specialising in the
history of Chinese Government policy towards minority groups, was arrested on 6 February 1998 for
obtaining and copying part of a 50-year-old document, which he obtained with the help of an official
librarian.

On 10 November 1998, Mr Tunyaz was officially charged by the Chinese authorities with ‘stealing state
secrets for foreign persons’ and ‘inciting national disunity’. The latter charge was based on an allegedly
published book in Japan in 1998 entitled ‘The Inside Story of the Silk Road’, advocating, according to the
Chinese government, ethnic separation, which according to scholars in Tokyo was not written by
Mr Tunyaz.

Mr Tunyaz was convicted by the Urumqi Intermediate People’s Court on 10 March 1999, and following an
appeal, was sentenced by China’s Supreme Court on 15 February 2000 to 11 years in prison with an
additional two years’ deprivation of political rights.

Mr Tohti Tunyaz is currently serving his 11-year sentence in Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region Prison
No 3 in the provincial capital of Urumqi. It is reported that he has exhausted his appeals and will therefore
remain incarcerated until his sentence expires on 31 March 2009.

Has the Commission undertaken any initiative concerning the case of Mr Tohti Tunyaz? Does the
Commission intend to enforce in any way the December 2001 Declaration of the United Nations Working
Group on Arbitrary Detention granting Mr Tunyaz ‘arbitrarily detained’ status? More generally, what
initiatives does the Commission intend to take in order to create the conditions for a political dialogue on
the future status of East Turkistan between the Chinese authorities and the representatives of the East
Turkistan opposition movements?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2003)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for the information provided on the case of Mr Tohti
Tunyaz.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s concern about the human rights situation of the Uighur
minority in Xinjiang.

Human rights issues,
including freedom of religion and respect for the fundamental rights of ethnic
minorities are systematically raised during the EU’s regular political contacts, and in particular during its
Human Rights Dialogue with the Chinese authorities. In the context of the preparations for the next round