Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the Employment Policies of the Member States" (COM(2003) 176 final — 2003/0068 (CNS))
Date: 2003-05-14
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU Member State, employment policy, labour market

C 208/58

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.9.2003

2.8. Article 13

To be able to present a well-founded bid as well as
2.8.1.
an opinion on a bid it is necessary for the boards of both the
offeror and the offeree companies to consult with their
employees. Such consultations are necessary not only before
the initial proposals are presented but also during the whole
process of a takeover. We, therefore, propose the following
changed text for Article 13 instead of the text proposed by the
Commission, which in fact only introduces already existing
rules: ‘The board of the offeror and the offeree have to inform
and consult worker representatives, or failing that employees

directly, at all stages of
comprehensive manner.’

the takeover in a detailed and

2.9. Article 17

Replace with the following:

2.9.1.
‘A contact committee
shall be appointed which has as its functions: (a) to facilitate
the harmonised application of this directive through regular
meetings dealing with practical problems arising in connection
with its application; (b) to advise the Commission, if necessary,
on modifications to this directive.’

Brussels, 14 May 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Decision
on guidelines for the Employment Policies of the Member States’

(COM(2003) 176 final — 2003/0068 (CNS))

(2003/C 208/16)

On 22 April 2003, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The European Economic and Social Committee decided to appoint Mr Christóforos Koryfidis as
rapporteur-general for its opinion.

At its 399th plenary session on 14 and 15 May 2003 (meeting of 14 May), the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 87 votes to 4 with 23 abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.3. Meanwhile, the EESC has also drafted an opinion on
the related broad economic policy guidelines for 2003.

1.1.
On 8 April 2003, the European Commission approved
its proposals for the broad economic policy guidelines and its
employment policy guidelines and recommendations simul-
taneously for the first time.

This EESC opinion follows on from its opinion on the
1.2.
European Employment Strategy (EES), which was adopted by
the plenary assembly in March (1).

2. The Commission proposal

( 1) OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.

2.1.
In the Explanatory Memorandum to its proposal, the
Commission specifies the reasons that led to a fundamental
reassessment of the guidelines, defines the new framework for
their development and sets out the priorities.

3.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 208/59

2.1.1.
The reasons given for the review of the guidelines
include the current challenges facing Europe, and more
specifically ‘the acceleration of economic, social and demo-
graphic change, globalisation and the demands of a modern
economy, and the forthcoming EU enlargement’, as well as the
need ‘to better deliver the Lisbon strategy’.

2.3.
Lastly, the Commission presents the guidelines in three
parts (2), stressing the responsibility of the Member States for
applying employment policy, so as to:

— uphold the objectives and priorities;

2.1.2.
is defined and conditioned in the Commission proposal by:

The framework for the development of the guidelines

— mark progress on achieving the specific quantitative

goals;

— secure good governance of employment policies, inter
alia by shaping effective cooperation between the major
stakeholders; and

— the demand for more stable guidelines orientated towards
results and intermediate, medium term goals,
in the
context of the core objectives and the 10-year timetable
decided on in Lisbon;

— ensure the employment guidelines work cohesively with
the broad economic policy guidelines, which must be
applied in full.

— the results of a far-reaching evaluation of the first five

years of the employment strategy;

3. General comments

— the conclusions of the debate and consultations held
to date with all the EU institutions and other major
stakeholders, including civil society;

3.1.
The EESC supports the Commission’s reasoning in the
Explanatory Memorandum to the proposal in question. More
specifically, the EESC’s own views are reflected in the references
to:

— enlargement;

— the medium-term strategy to address the new labour

market challenges;

— the contributions of the European Parliament (1).

— support for the Lisbon objectives;

The 10 key priorities for action, proposed by the
2.1.3.
Commission, are aimed at rising to current and future
challenges and at supporting the three overarching objectives
of full employment, quality and productivity at work and
social cohesion and inclusion.

The Commission proposes EU and national quantitat-
2.2.
ive goals, on the basis of which to measure progress. Some of
the proposed objectives were set by the Council itself or were
included among the previous guidelines, others are new.

— better management, partnership and delivery (govern-

ance) of the related policies;

— the consistency and complementarity that must govern
the relationship between the employment guidelines and
the broad economic policy guidelines.

3.1.1.
The EESC would underline the consistency that must
govern the relationship between the employment guidelines
and the broad economic policy guidelines.
It views this
relationship as being reciprocal and equally weighted, serving
the overarching objectives of the Lisbon strategy, as clearly set
out.

( 1) These are contained in the resolutions of 25.9.2002 and
5.12.2002, and the resolution of February 2003 on the prep-
aration for the Spring European summit.

(2) These three parts address respectively a) the three over-arching
objectives for the strategy, b) the 10 key priorities for structural
reform, and c) the need to improve the delivery and governance
of the process. All three elements of the guidelines deserve to be
reflected in National Employment Plans and monitored at EU
level.

C 208/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.9.2003

3.1.1.1.
In the above context, the EESC would stress the
need for the Member States to view the package of proposals
for economic and employment policy as a single binding
framework for pursuing the Lisbon objectives.

Furthermore, the EESC believes that the synchron-
3.1.1.2.
isation of the guidelines and their three-year time frame are
important for the future of the European Employment Strategy
(EES) and its effectiveness, in the framework of the Lisbon
Strategy and the new situation created by the enlargement of
the Union to 25 members.

3.2.1.
In the context of the above position and its general
agreement with the three overarching objectives of the Lisbon
strategy for employment (3), the EESC also agrees with the
approach, content and individual objectives listed by the
Commission in the first chapter (the key priorities) of its
proposal.

3.2.1.1. More specifically, the EESC agrees:

— with the Commission’s instruction to the Member States
to ‘set corresponding national targets consistent with the
outcome expected at EU level’;

3.1.1.3.
assessment (1) that:

Nevertheless, the EESC would also refer to its

— with the Commission’s analysis of the transition to a
knowledge-based economy, with a view to improving
quality and productivity at work;

— the Lisbon strategy is in trouble;

— without strong and sustainable economic growth it will
be difficult to achieve the other objectives agreed on in
Lisbon;

— the economic situation has worsened in the last two

years;

— current international tensions are not favourable to an

economic upturn.

3.1.1.4.
The above factors make implementation of the
guidelines difficult. For this reason, the Member States and the
EU must use all the ways and means at their disposal, including
the Structural Funds, to shore up these efforts.

3.1.1.5.
The new employment guidelines are a major
challenge for the new Member States of the Union too. In
addition to all the other problems, it will be the first time the
guidelines policy has been formally applied in these countries.
This means that the Commission has a particular responsibility
to support the efforts of the new Member States to meet the
probable expectations of the Union.

In its opinion on the new European Employment
3.2.
Strategy, the EESC states that the ‘new EES, which includes
concrete intermediate targets, may help to achieve the Lisbon
objectives inasmuch as it will be accompanied by firm
and integrated guidelines. The effectiveness of these will be
monitored systematically’ (2).

— with the strengthening of social cohesion and integration,
by means of employment policies intended to ‘contribute
notably to achieving a substantial reduction by 2010 in
the proportion of working poor in all Member States’.
The EESC also stresses the need for the guidelines to be
tied to quantitative targets, not only at national level, but
also at regional and local
levels. Also, more emphasis
should be placed on implementation, results and evalu-
ation (for every specific action), and the guidelines should
be complemented by recommendations in every case.

3.3.
The EESC notes that immigration is not treated as a
specific and separate priority, but is mentioned in the context
of other priorities. It nevertheless continues to stress the need
for the EU to develop a single immigration policy, in order to
manage immigration flows, not least from the point of view
of employment policies.

4. Specific comments

In relation to the ‘priorities for action’,

4.1.
identifies and proposes the following:

the EESC

4.1.1.

P r i o r i t y N o 1 : A c t i v e a n d p r e v e n t i v e
m e a s u r e s
a n d
i n a c t i v e

u n e m p l o y e d

t h e

f o r

In its last opinion on the new EES, the EESC stated
4.1.1.1.
that:
‘There should be a guideline devoted to enhancing
preventive and active measures for the long-term unemployed,
the inactive, the disabled, women, young people and ethnic

( 1) OJ C 95, 23.4.2003.
( 2) OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.

(3) Full employment, quality and productivity at work, social cohesion

and inclusion.

3.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 208/61

minorities with the aim of removing the obstacles preventing
them from entering and staying in the labour market and in
viable jobs. In that connection, particular importance is also
attached to identifying jobseekers’ requirements at an early
stage and the appropriate provision of support and reinte-
gration schemes (1)’.

4.1.1.2.
the EESC
On the basis of its above position,
wonders whether it would not be preferable for all measures
aimed at removing barriers to access to the labour market —
including discrimination against workers from third countries
and regional disparities — to be placed within one guideline,
possibly at national level, with the involvement of the social
partners, organised civil society in general and the local and
regional authorities.

4.1.1.2.1.
The Committee would note that a single guideline
for removing barriers to the labour market shifts the perspec-
tive from which employment is approached so as to provide a
clearer and more realistic overall picture of the prospects. In
this way, the whole thrust of the policy becomes preventive,
concerning everyone and taking on a social dynamic over
time, with all that implies for the medium and long-term
handling of the problem.

— small enterprises are usually labour-intensive, creating
more jobs than large enterprises, which tend to be more
capital-intensive;

— an increase in the number of small and medium-sized
enterprises in the EU on its own is not an adequate
indicator of policy success;

— it is necessary to ensure that there is an increase in the
number of small businesses and that people are not being
forced to opt for independent entrepreneurial activity
because the traditional labour market does not provide
any opportunity or prospect of paid employment (3);

— businesses in the traditional sectors still contribute to job
creation and should therefore be included in European
and national policies in support of enterprises;

— there is a need to improve quality in the creation of
enterprises by providing appropriate training and support
services for prospective entrepreneurs.

4.1.2.

P r i o r i t y N o
s h i p a n d p r o m o t e j o b c r e a t i o n

2 : F o s t e r

e n t r e p r e n e u r -

4.1.2.1.
The EESC agrees, in the context of its own positions
on the subject (2), with the Commission proposals, and would
point out in particular the need, within education, to cultivate
entrepreneurship and a business environment that is compat-
ible with traditional European social standards in a systematic
and integrated manner.

4.1.2.1.1.
the EESC would point out that:

On the subject of entrepreneurship in particular,

— it is entrepreneurial activity, including that of people who
aim to provide social assistance and/or services of general
interest, which really creates jobs;

4.1.3.

P r i o r i t y N o
p r o m o t e a d a p t a b i l i t y i n w o r k

3 : A d d r e s s

c h a n g e

a n d

In the context of its relevant recommendations (1),
4.1.3.1.
the EESC agrees with the Commission proposals. It would
nevertheless stress the role of the social partners in developing
this priority. They must be allowed to participate dynamically
and actively at all levels (European, national and local), from
the policy design stage to implementation and evaluation.

the proposal

To achieve this,

the social
4.1.3.2.
partners should cooperate on a tripartite basis in relation to
growth and employment should be implemented immediately,
and the subsequent European Commission proposal on hold-
ing a tripartite social summit before each spring European
Council meeting should be formalised.

that

( 1) OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.
( 2) ‘Another guideline should be devoted to the creation of favourable
conditions for developing businesses and reinforcing entrepre-
neurship, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, as
well as partnerships (cooperatives, associations, mutual societies),
the prime objective of which would be to create more high-quality
and durable jobs.’ (OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.)

(3) OJ C 368, 20.12.1999 (Appendix).

C 208/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.9.2003

4.1.4.

P r i o r i t y N o 4 : M o r e a n d b e t t e r i n v e s t -
m e n t
i n h u m a n c a p i t a l a n d s t r a t e g i e s
f o r l i f e l o n g l e a r n i n g

4.1.4.1.
The EESC attaches particular importance to the
question of investment in human capital. ‘It considers lifelong
learning to be a guideline of prime importance and strongly
emphasises the need to substantially increase the relevant
investment using public and private resources. At the same
time, it highlights the need to find and develop a more flexible
and productive way of using the funds available, emphasising
the role and contribution of the Structural Funds and particu-
larly of the European Social Fund for this purpose’ (1).

4.1.4.2.
As the EESC attributes particular importance to the
institution of lifelong learning, it believes that the aim of
increasing the participation rate of adults in education and
training by 2010 to 15 %, as an EU average, and at least 10 %
in each Member State does not correspond to the level needed
to meet the major demands of the knowledge-based society (1).

4.1.5.

P r i o r i t y N o 5 : I n c r e a s e l a b o u r s u p p l y
a n d p r o m o t e a c t i v e a g i n g

4.1.5.1.
The EESC would also ‘stress the need to marry
active ageing policies with consideration for difficult work
situations and the current state of the economy, which is
leading to company restructuring on a major scale, all too
often resulting in redundancy for older workers. Ambitious
social programmes must ensure that
redundancies are
accompanied by back-to-work or retraining measures while
also leaving open current opportunities for early retirement’ (1).

Education and above all

4.1.5.2.
lifelong learning can
operate as catalysts for using the human resources that are
familiar with the knowledge-based society among women,
older workers and disadvantaged people.

4.1.6.

P r i o r i t y N o 6 : G e n d e r e q u a l i t y

4.1.6.1.
The EESC agrees with the Commission’s proposals,
while pointing out that the problem of gender equality with
regard to employment is one of removing the barriers blocking
access to the labour market and at the same time a wage policy
issue.

4.1.6.2. More specifically, the EESC agrees with the efforts
to connect work and family life by providing services for
children and other dependants. Provided this is accompanied
by measures to remove barriers to access to the labour market
and to reduce the gender pay gap, this move should make a
decisive contribution to achieving the 2010 objectives (2).

4.1.7.

7 :

i n t e -
P r i o r i t y N o
t h e d i s c r i m i -
g r a t i o n o f a n d c o m b a t
n a t i o n a g a i n s t p e o p l e a t a d i s a d v a n -
t a g e i n t h e l a b o u r m a r k e t

P r o m o t e

t h e

4.1.7.1.
Once more, the EESC agrees with the Commission’s
specific proposals, while pointing out again however that it
would prefer there to be a single guideline for removing the
barriers to access to the labour market, as proposed above at
point 4.1.1.2. It thinks that fixing quantitative targets for
disadvantaged people is a very good idea. These targets may
be of decisive importance in the comparative evaluation
process that must follow.

4.1.7.2.
The term ‘at a disadvantage’, however, covers many
groups of people facing various employment situations. A
more precise approach is needed to terms and concepts
relating to particular people with special needs and their
employment. Many of these people and possibly some other
categories of people are not even applying for jobs. This of
course must not mean they are excluded from obtaining further
education or professional experience under the employment
action plans.

4.1.7.3.
The EESC would propose that quantitative targets
be set for these disadvantaged people, who owing to their
situation are considered to be inactive.

4.1.8.

P r i o r i t y N o 8 : M a k e w o r k p a y t h r o u g h
i n c e n t i v e s t o p r o m o t e w o r k a t t r a c t -
i v e n e s s

The EESC agrees with the Commission’s proposal
4.1.8.1.
on this matter, while highlighting the qualitative aspect of jobs
as a factor in keeping people in active employment. In the
above context, it is important that the national action plans
for employment also be designed to take account of this
dimension.

( 1) OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.

(2) The 2010 objectives are: elimination of gender gaps in unemploy-

ment and a halving of the gender pay gap.

3.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 208/63

4.1.9.

P r i o r i t y N o 9 : T r a n s f o r m u n d e c l a r e d
w o r k i n t o r e g u l a r e m p l o y m e n t

4.1.9.1.
The EESC’s position in its opinion on the new EES
is clear and consistent with that of the Commission (1). More
specifically, the EESC agrees with the plan to create a system
that will reveal the full extent of the problem, and make it
possible to monitor progress made towards solving it, based
on improved statistical data.

4.1.10.

N o

o c c u -
P r i o r i t y
p a t i o n a l a n d g e o g r a p h i c a l m o b i l i t y
a n d i m p r o v e j o b m a t c h i n g

P r o m o t e

1 0 :

4.1.10.1.
The EESC recognises the importance of mobility
in the EU in the area of employment, and supports all the
Commission’s proposals in this respect. It would however
highlight in particular the importance of the proposed measure
for jobseekers to be able to consult all job vacancies advertised
through Member State employment services by 2005.

In relation to ‘better governance, partnership and

4.2.
delivery’, the EESC would make the following points:

The EESC recognises the need to improve the govern-
4.2.1.
ance and application of the EES within the national employ-
ment action plans, and agrees with the Commission’s proposal
that ‘with due respect to national traditions and practices,
close involvement of relevant parliamentary bodies in the
implementation of
It
nevertheless reiterates and recommends to the Member States
that the national parliaments should play a strong role in the
national action plans. In this connection it refers to its proposal

the guidelines should be ensured’.

( 1) OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.

Brussels, 14 May 2003.

that
the national action plans should be ‘discussed and
approved by national parliaments in the context of annual
national employment policy budgets’ in line with national
practice (1).

4.2.2.
The EESC agrees that ‘all main stakeholders, including
civil society, should play their full part of [sic] the European
Employment Strategy’. It also agrees with the Commission’s
view that ‘participation of regional and local actors in the
development and implementation the Guidelines should be
supported notably through local partnerships, the dissemi-
nation of information and consultation’.

4.2.2.1.
By the same token, and in accordance with its
previous opinion, the EESC would insist on the need for the
Member States to tie the guidelines to quantitative targets, not
only at national, but also at regional and local levels. In the
above context, the Member States are called upon to pay
greater attention to the implementation, results and evaluation
of each specific action they take, which in all cases must be
accompanied by recommendations.

4.2.3.
Statistics are a basic precondition for the effective
development of an integrated guideline policy. The EESC
would reiterate the importance of statistics and calls on the
Commission to make a concerted effort to do all it can to
promote the prompt provision of reliable statistics, based on
comparable and reliable indicators for all the Member States.

4.2.4.
For the guidelines to be effective, there must be
cooperation and synergy between administrations and the
social partners, and civil society at regional and local level with
regard to implementation. In this context, the role of the social
partners and organised civil society more generally at local and
regional level needs strengthening, both at the stage of framing
policies and deciding on objectives, and in implementing and
evaluating each specific action.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH