Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75 establishing a European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop)’ (COM(2003) 854 final – 2003/0334 (CNS))
Date: 2004-03-31
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Cedefop, vocational training

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/53

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Regu-
lation amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75 establishing a European Centre for the Development
of Vocational Training (Cedefop)’

(COM(2003) 854 final – 2003/0334 (CNS))

(2004/C 112/16)

On 16 February 2004 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 Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 3 March 2004. The rapporteur was Mr Greif.

At its 407th plenary session (meeting of 31 March 2004) the European Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 99 votes to one, with six abstentions:

1. Gist of the Commission proposal

1.1 On 8 January 2004,
the European Commission
submitted a proposal for the amendment of Regulation (EEC)
No. 337/75 establishing a European Centre for the Develop-
ment of Vocational Training (Cedefop). This text (1) proposes
changing the rules governing the centre. It also sets out the
reasons for these changes and provides background informa-
tion.

— the European Parliament's request to the Commission to
put forward appropriate proposals for the rationalisation of
Community agency boards in the light of enlargement. (4)

This Commission text is a response to the European
Its main proposals for Cedefop are as

1.4
Parliament's request.
follows:

1.2
The regulation is being amended to take account of
upcoming EU enlargement and to adapt the centre's operating
future requirements. This
and working practices
applies in particular to the roles played by the centre's main
constituent bodies – the Management Board (to be known in
future as the Governing Board), the Bureau and the director.

to meet

— to rationalise the Management Board's working methods by
shifting away from administrative duties and moving more
towards strategic tasks (including decisions on medium-
term priorities,
the annual work programme and the
budget);

In its justification for the proposed amendments, the

1.3
Commission refers to:

— agency practices in recent years;

— the findings of an external evaluation of the centre's internal
efficiency and external effectiveness, including the working
methods of its constituent bodies, taking particular account
of enlargement; (2)

— the action plan adopted by the agency's Management Board
as a follow-up to this evaluation and relating largely to its
future operating arrangements (particularly size, composi-
tion, working methods and cost-effectiveness);

— a joint opinion from the boards of Cedefop, Eurofound and
EU-OSHA (3) – the three Community agencies that have a
tripartite administrative structure (governments, employers,
employees);
this opinion, a response to the evaluation
report, addresses the agencies' functioning and governance;

(1) COM(2003) 854 final – 2003/0334 (CNS)
(2) The full report of this external evaluation of Cedefop, the Commis-
sion's response to it and the action plan adopted by the Manage-
ment Board in the wake of the evaluation may be accessed at:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/programmes/evaluation/evalua-
tion_en.html

(3) Cedefop – the European Agency for the Development of Vocational
Training (Thessaloniki); Eurofound – the European Foundation for
the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Dublin); and
EU-OSHA –the European Agency for Health and Safety at Work
(Bilbao)

— to stem the enlargement-related cost increases that would
accrue if the rules remained unchanged, largely as a result
of the rise in the number of board members from 48 to 78
(including a proposal to cut the number of board meetings
to one a year);

— to maintain a feature that is generally considered, not least
by the external evaluator, to be a key factor in the centre's
success – namely tripartite representation of all Member
States on the Management Board (governments, employers
and employees) – while at the same time formalising the
rules on the role and activities of the groups represented on
the Management Board (governments,
employers and
employees).

1.5 Other main changes proposed by the Commission to the
agency's rules include:

— formalising the procedure for adopting medium-term prio-

rities;

— more detailed provisions for the management and govern-
ance of the centre, particularly as regards the director's role
and remit;

(4) See point 28 of EP paper A5-0079/2003, in connection with the

European Parliament discharge procedure

C 112/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

— changes in the executive remit of the Management Board
and the Bureau, and in the tripartite membership of these
bodies, and their relations with the centre's director;

— formalisation of the group structure and specification of
group activities, among other things, by bringing in a coor-
dinator for each of the three groups on the Management
Board (representatives of governments, employers and
employees);

— introduction of a target for the balanced representation of

men and women in the agency bodies;

— establishment of a specific remit for cooperation with the

European Training Foundation (ETF) in Turin.

2. General comments

2.1
A common feature of Cedefop, the Dublin-based Euro-
pean Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working
Conditions and the European Agency for Health and Safety at
Work in Bilbao is that the social partners play a major role in
their administration and to date make up almost two-thirds of
board members. This reflects the key importance of national
social partners in most Member States in the fields of social
policy, worker protection and vocational training. Naturally,
therefore, they must play a major part in sound, responsible
policy-making in these areas at European level as well.

Cedefop is the first of these three Community agencies
2.2
with a tripartite administrative structure to be subject to the
changes called for the European Parliament. The other two
agencies
to be similarly
revamped shortly. The changes proposed to the functioning
and governance of the Thessaloniki centre will thus also be a
point of reference for the other two Community agencies.

(Eurofound and EU-OSHA) are

In Committee's view, that makes it all the more impor-
2.3
tant to examine the proposals carefully, particularly in relation
to maintaining social partners' scope to become involved in,
and exert an influence on, the centre's operation, management
and administration – a practice with a proven track record.
Any change to the role and composition of these Community
agencies' main bodies may impact on the scope for involve-
ment and participation of
the groups represented on the
management Board.

2.4
The Committee thus feels that EU enlargement must not
be used as an opportunity to weaken social partners' role
within the agencies on grounds of cost-effectiveness or a desire
to streamline operations. On the contrary, the rules must be
framed in such a way that the specific involvement of the
social partners – which must be retained – can be tailored to
meet new future requirements.

centre and the guidelines for its governance and management,
it is vital to fully maintain the tripartite management structure
and, thus, the involvement, on equal terms, of the social part-
ners from all Member States. That is a key factor in the success
of the centre's work, and it is the only way to ensure that all
the relevant stakeholders remain on board and that the centre's
work continues to take account of the wide variety of schemes
and concepts in the field of vocational training.

it

is

important

2.6 However
to safeguard management
bodies' ability to operate effectively, and however understand-
able the need to contain the costs of the projected impact of
EU enlargement on the composition of the Management Board,
the Committee feels it is vital to ensure that, in terms of the
interests represented on the centre's management bodies, the
revised rules do not make Cedefop any less representative or
any less able to exert influence, and do not have an adverse
impact on the breadth and depth of policy-forming or on
continuity of stakeholder involvement.

2.7 With these premises in mind, the Committee welcomes
most of the changes proposed by the Commission, subject to a
number of specific comments and reservations about some of
the points as detailed below. It hopes these will be taken on
board in the ongoing work of revising the Cedefop regulation.

3. Specific comments

the Management Board, arrangements

3.1
Formalising good practice: Many of the Commission's
proposed amendments seek to enshrine the centre's current,
successful practices. This applies in particular to the work of
for
the Bureau of
bringing in the social partners at national and European level,
cooperation with other Community bodies and coordination of
the activities of the groups represented on the centre's manage-
ment bodies. The Committee is pleased that these good – and
hitherto largely informal – practices are now being placed on a
formalised footing.
It hopes that that will make the centre
more transparent, more effective and more accountable, and
that it will safeguard and strengthen its tripartite structure.

3.2
Role of the European social partners: The Committee is
also pleased that the proposed new regulation gives the Euro-
pean social partners an important role in Cedefop management
through the explicit introduction of group coordinators and
their right to attend meetings of the Management Board and
Bureau. (1) The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)
and the Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of
Europe (UNICE) are key players in this connection. To under-
score this important role, the Committee proposes amending
Article 4(5) of the draft regulation so that coordinators also
enjoy voting rights on the Management Board and the Bureau,
and, as a logical follow-on, are also involved in the appoint-
ment of the centre's managers (director, deputy director).

2.5
that,

The Committee agrees with the Commission therefore
in all the proposals to revise the composition of the

(1) Article 4(5) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/55

3.3
Cooperation with institutes and authorities: Against the
backdrop of the Lisbon strategy, and bearing in mind the
importance of initial and further training and lifelong learning,
the Committee also welcomes the proposal to formalise coop-
eration between Cedefop and the European Training Founda-
tion in Turin. (1) The Committee hopes that
that will not
simply mean closer cooperation between two vocational
training agencies, each with its own distinctive remit, but that a
boost will also be given to cooperation and enhanced coordina-
tion with other European institutes and authorities involved in
initial and further training, such as the Commission's EURY-
DICE service for general and higher education.

3.4
Fewer meetings of the Management Board: The Commis-
sion's key proposal for reconciling the need to increase the
number of seats on the Management Board in the wake of
enlargement with the need for cost neutrality is to cut the
number of routine board meetings from two to just one per
year. (2) One reason given by the Commission for this proposal
is the Management Board's new, more strategic role, which,
among other things, involves transferring administrative tasks
from it to the Bureau and the directors.

The Committee signals its misgivings about such a move as it
feels that scheduling just one routine board meeting a year
from now on could negatively impact the breadth of dialogue
between board members. It is also clear that, by cutting the
number of meetings, most board members – who will not have
a seat on the future eight-strong Bureau – may find it difficult
to continually swap information and stay in touch with each
other between the annual meetings.

To dispel these misgivings and guarantee the requisite breadth
and depth of opinion-forming, the Committee proposes two
courses of action:

— to add the words ‘at least’ in the first sentence of Article
the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No.
‘The chairman shall convene the

4(6) of
337/75 so that it reads:
Governing Board at least once a year’;

— to insert a provision into Article 4(10) making it possible to
convene meetings of an enlarged Bureau of the Governing
Board as and when required.

3.5
Safeguarding continuity of stakeholder involvement: To
enable all board members to continue their involvement in the
centre's work, the Committee feels that additional measures are
needed to offset stakeholders' diminished physical presence (as

a result of less frequent meetings) and the reduced flow of
information, and at
the same time to secure the requisite
breadth and depth of opinion-forming. It is particularly impor-
tant in this regard to ensure internal coordination within the
groups (governments, employees, employers) and to provide
the group coordinators, who play a key role on this front, both
with adequate scope for action (e.g. the facility to convene
separate group meetings and the right to request meetings of
an enlarged Bureau) and with the requisite resources.

3.6
Composition of the Bureau: The Committee feels that
the Commission's beefed-up role in the future eight-member
Bureau of the Management Board is significant. (The Bureau is
to comprise two representatives from each of the Cedefop
groups and two representatives from the Commission. (3)) The
Committee would have expected the Commission to set out its
reasons for such a change in the balance of interests repre-
sented on this management body. The Committee considers
effective tripartite representation on the Bureau,
too, to be
essential for the centre's functioning. It hopes therefore that the
Commission's beefed-up role in the Cedefop executive will
boost expert input and does not expect any change in the
balance of voting as a result.

In this connection, the Committee recalls the proposal set out
in the Cedefop Management Board's 2001 action plan to estab-
lish an enlarged Bureau made up of a small number of perma-
nent members and a number of rotating members in order to
strike a balance between efficiency and the need for broad
opinion-forming among board members. The Committee
suggests resurrecting that proposal and introducing an explicit
provision into Article 4(10) of the draft regulation – in addition
to the suggested facility to call additional meetings – allowing
the
the chairman to convene enlarged Bureau meetings at
request of Bureau members.

Role of the director and position of a deputy director:
3.7
Broadly speaking, the revised regulation tasks the director to be
the centre's legal representative,
to be responsible for the
centre's management and to implement the decisions of the
Management Board and the Bureau. (4) The Committee has its
reservations as to whether, given the aim of boosting internal
efficiency, this very brief definition of the director's role and
responsibilities provides the clear, razor-sharp division of tasks
between director, Management Board and Bureau that Cedefop
needs for its future work.

(1) Article 3(2) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75
(2) Article 4(6) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75

(3) Article 4(8) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75
(4) Article 7(1) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75

C 112/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

On the subject of the director's role, the Committee also feels
that, in the course of reviewing the Cedefop regulation, serious
consideration should be given to reintroducing the post of
deputy director into the rules. That would re-establish an
arrangement that had worked well for more than two decades
until
the rules were changes when Cedefop headquarters
moved from Berlin to Thessaloniki in 1995. This arrangement
was also instrumental in securing the ready involvement of the
social partners in key staff decisions. Moreover, it would bring
Cedefop back into line with the good practice and rules of the
Dublin-based Eurofound – a move firmly backed by the
Committee. The Committee therefore proposes that Article 6
of the regulation be amended in line with the relevant provi-
sions of the Eurofound regulation (1).

In addition, the Committee feels that the regulation should
explicitly state that the director's employment contracts must
also be signed by the chair of the Management Board. That
must also apply to the resuscitated post of deputy director.
Otherwise, the deputy director's appointment would ultimately
be contingent on the director's say – something that is hardly
consistent with the normal practice of taking account of the
full breadth of interests on the Governing Board.

3.8
Adoption of medium-term priorities: In Article 8(1) of
the proposed regulation, the Commission lays down who is to
be responsible for determining the centre's strategic direction.
This involves the adoption, by the Management Board, of
medium-term priorities and the annual work programmes on
the basis of a draft submitted by the director. That
too
enshrines a practice which has existed de facto since the

Brussels, 31 March 2004.

mid–1990s. The Committee welcomes the shift to a more stra-
tegic role for the Management which this move represents. It
again expresses its misgivings, however, about whether the
broad spectrum of opinion and sound decision-making
required if the Management Body is to play this role, will be
obtainable now that its meetings are being cut to one a year.
One solution might be to include provision for enlarged
Bureau meetings, as already called for in points 3.4 and 3.6
above.

Although it fully understands the need to ‘take into account the
priority needs indicated by the Community institutions’, (2) the
Committee would nonetheless point out that Cedefop's work
must continue not only to benefit Community bodies and
Member State governments in policy consultations, but also in
the first instance, to be of use to stakeholders involved in voca-
tional training at national level, particularly the social partners
in the Member States.

3.9
Equal opportunities: Finally, the Committee is pleased
that the target of securing a balanced representation of men
and women in the centre's constituent bodies has been expli-
citly included in the rules. (3) This is a practical step towards
implementing Article 3 of the Treaty establishing the European
Communities. The Committee feels that Member State govern-
ments and social partner organisations are thereby called upon
to take gender into account when making appointments. The
Committee expects
such considerations will also be
reflected in the staffing policy of the centre itself, particularly in
staff decisions at managerial level.

that

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

(1) Cf. Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No. 1365/75 of the Council of 26
May 1975 on the creation of a European Foundation for the
Improvement of Living and Working Conditions:
‘1. The director
and deputy director of the Foundation shall be appointed by the
Commission from a list of candidates submitted by the Administra-
tive Board. 2. The director and the deputy director shall be chosen
on the grounds of their competence and their independence shall be
beyond doubt. 3. The director and the deputy director shall be
appointed for a maximum period of five years. Their term of office
shall be renewable.’

(2) Article 8(1) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75
(3) Article 4(2) of the proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No. 337/75