WRITTEN QUESTION E-1561/03 by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission. Implementation of Anti-Discrimination at Work Directive.
Date: 2003-05-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, EU employment policy, application of EU law, discrimination based on disability, equal treatment, integration of people with disabilities, labour law, national implementing measure

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/203

Any new factor arising from this information will be examined to determine whether initiatives should be
taken at Community level.

(1) OJ C 205 E, 29.8.2002.
(2) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001.

(2003/C 268 E/228)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1507/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 May 2003)

Subject: Bankruptcy of Grundig AG and how to safeguard jobs in Portugal

The media have reported that Grundig AG filed for bankruptcy at the district court of Nuremberg,
Germany, on 14 April 2003.

Grundig currently controls the ‘Car InterMedia System’ (CIS) in Braga, Portugal, which employs around
700 workers, produces car radios and accounts for about 30 % of the production of Fehst Componentes
Lda, which has more than 300 employees. All this demonstrates the viability and self-sufficiency of CIS.

Grundig has a substantial impact on employment and regional development in the Braga area, hence our
concern at the decisions taken in Germany. It should be borne in mind that there are no alternative jobs
and that the relocation of other multinationals in the north of the country has helped to aggravate the
unemployment situation.

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. what Community support the Grundig Group has received, in particular the Car InterMedia System,

and what the terms of this support are;

2. what steps will be taken to safeguard the activity of CIS in Braga and the jobs it provides directly or
indirectly, bearing in mind that Portugal currently has the highest rate of unemployment in the
European Union?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2003)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2003/C 268 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1561/03

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(8 May 2003)

Subject: Implementation of Anti-Discrimination at Work Directive

Could the Commission indicate how many, if any, Member States have applied or plan to apply to avail
themselves of the extra three year period to implement the provisions in the areas of disability and age
discrimination of the Anti-Discrimination at Work Directive (cid:1) Directive 2000/78/EC (1) (cid:1) adopted by the
Council in November 2000, which has to be implemented by the end of 2003 at the latest, and if so,
could it outline what reasons, if any, have been given to justify these delays?

(1) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16.

C 268 E/204

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2003)

Article 18 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for
equal treatment in employment and occupation states: ‘In order to take account of particular conditions,
Member States, may, if necessary have an additional period of 3 years from 2 December 2003, that is to
say a total of 6 years, to implement the provisions of this Directive on age and disability discrimination. In
that event they shall inform the Commission forthwith. Any Member State which chooses to use this
additional period shall report annually to the Commission on the steps it is taking to tackle age and
disability discrimination and on the progress it is making towards implementation. The Commission shall
report annually to the Council.’

The decision on whether to use the additional three year period available for the provisions relating to
disability and age is one for Member States under the conditions set up by that provision. One Member
State has indicated that it wishes to avail itself of the additional period. Some other Member States have
indicated informally that they are considering this. None of the Member States has formally indicated its
reasons so far.

(2003/C 268 E/230)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1593/03

by Daniel Ducarme (ELDR) to the Commission

(5 May 2003)

Subject: Equivalence of advanced vocational qualifications in beauty care and cosmetics

The Commission of the European Communities issued a call for tenders for the promotion of initiatives in
the field of mutual recognition of vocational qualifications in 1994. In the June of that year, the Union
Nationale des esthéticiennes de Belgique (UNEB), along with its partners from the other Member States,
submitted an application for a project entitled ‘equivalence of advanced vocational qualifications in beauty
care and cosmetics’ the aim of which was to guarantee the free movement of beauticians within the
Community.

The application was successful, and an agreement was signed between the Commission (DG XXII) and the
UNEB (Agreement No 94-20-SKR-0125-00).

A review meeting was held in November 1995 at which the partners adopted a common training
programme. The final report was submitted in December 1995.

The UNEB has heard nothing since then.

Can the Commission indicate what progress has been made on this issue?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2003)

In 1994 the Commission published a call for proposals (1) for the promotion of initiatives on the mutual
recognition of vocational qualifications. Around 40 projects were selected, including that submitted by the
Union nationale des esthéticiennes de Belgique (UNEB) and partners in several Member States, relating to
the equivalence of advanced vocational qualifications in beauty care and cosmetics (agreement No 94-20-
SKR-0125-00). All projects, including that submitted by the UNEB, were completed between 1994 and
1995.

Since 1995 the Commission has continued to support efforts to promote occupational mobility and the
creation of a European area of qualifications, while respecting the Member States’ responsibility for the
organisation and content of their education and training systems. In particular, the ‘Leonardo da Vinci’
programme has provided support for innovative action in this field through transnational partnerships.