WRITTEN QUESTION P-1088/04 by Arlene McCarthy (PSE) to the Commission. Possible breach of the European Works Council Directive with respect to redundancies announced by FLS Aerospace.
Date: 2004-04-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Works Council, United Kingdom, air transport, application of EU law, collective dismissal, competence of the Member States, competition law, transport company, worker information

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/941

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

At present, the Commission has no power to intervene in individual cases concerning the removal of
1.
asylum seekers from the Netherlands. The two proposals for directives that would be relevant have not yet
been adopted by the Council (the directive on minimum standards for asylum procedures and the directive
on the qualification as a refugee or as a person otherwise in need of international protection). Given that
this proposed Community legislation is not yet adopted or in force, the Commission cannot examine
whether the principle of non-refoulement would be at stake in the individual cases.

2.
The Commission would like to refer the right Honourable Member to the reply to question
No E-0618/04 from Ms Karamanou (1). Moreover, the Commission would like to stress that if a person
considers that his or her fundamental rights have been or are being violated, he or she can appeal to the
European Court of Human Rights after exhaustion of national remedies.

The Commission suggested the term ‘removal’

3.
instance in its
Communication on a community return policy on illegal residents (2). It must be emphasised, however,
that there is no legally binding terminology in this context.

‘deportation’

instead of

for

(1) See page 822.
(2) COM(2002) 564 final.

(2004/C 84 E/1039)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1084/04

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(1 April 2004)

Subject: Possible breach of the European Works Council Directive in respect to redundancies announced by

FLS Aerospace

Will the Commission investigate and comment whether there has been a breach of the European Works
Council Directive (94/45/EC (1)) with respect to the announcement of up to 421 redundancies by FLS
Aerospace at Stansted and Manchester in the United Kingdom on 16 January 2004, without apparent prior
reference to their Works Council? Given the fact that EasyJet are reported to be subsidised by GBP 16 400
to fly their aeroplanes to Dublin for maintenance instead, and given the apparent link to the subsequent
acquisition of FLS Aerospace by SR Technics of Switzerland, could the Commission also investigate and
comment on any possible breaches of European competition law?

(1) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994, p. 64.

(2004/C 84 E/1040)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1088/04

by Arlene McCarthy (PSE) to the Commission

(5 April 2004)

Subject: Possible breach of the European Works Council Directive with respect to redundancies announced

by FLS Aerospace

Will the Commission investigate and comment as to whether there has been a breach of the European
Works Council Directive (94/45/EC (1)) with respect to the announcement of up to 421 redundancies by
FLS Aerospace at Stansted and Manchester in the United Kingdom on 16 January 2004, without apparent
prior reference to the relevant Works Council? Given the fact that easyJet are reported to be subsidised by

C 84 E/942

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

GBP 16 400 to fly their aeroplanes to Dublin for maintenance instead, and given the apparent link to the
subsequent acquisition of FLS Aerospace by SR Technics of Switzerland, could the Commission also
investigate and comment on any possible breaches of European competition law?

(1) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994, p. 64.

Joint answer
to Written Questions P-1084/04 and P-1088/04
given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 2004)

The Commission understands that there is an agreement between management and employee represen-
tatives in FLS Industries which the parties regard as being an agreement as envisaged in Article 13 of the
European Works Councils Directive (1). It is for the parties to the agreement themselves to assess whether
the announcement of the redundancies referred to by the Honourable Members are in breach of any
requirement
the agreement provides for a
mechanism to settle any disputes or controversies regarding its operation.

in that agreement. The Commission understands that

The Honourable Members will be aware that, regardless of the situation under the agreement referred to
above, the Directive on Collective Redundancies (2) provides that an employer contemplating collective
redundancies shall begin consultations with workers’ representatives in good time with a view to reaching
agreement. The consultations shall cover ways of avoiding the redundancies or reducing the numbers
affected and mitigating the consequences.

The transposition and application of the above-mentioned Directive are the responsibility of each Member
State. It is a matter for the competent national authorities, in the first place, to ensure correct application
of directives and to make provision in national legislation for administrative and judicial appeal. It is the
to use the means that it considers
task of the Commission,
appropriate, including those set out in Article 226 of the EC Treaty, to ensure, where necessary, that the
above-mentioned provisions are complied with. The Commission has no information to indicate that this
Directive has been infringed.

in its role as guardian of the Treaty,

(1) Council Directive 94/45/EC of 22 September 1994 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a
procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of
informing and consulting employees, OJ L 254, 30.9.1994.

(2) Council Directive 98/59/ of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to

collective redundancies, OJ L 225, 12.8.1998.

(2004/C 84 E/1041)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1085/04

by Paul Lannoye (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 April 2004)

Subject: Evaluation of plant health products under Directive 91/414/EEC

The evaluation of plant health products under Directive 91/414/EEC (1) is confined to that of the active
substances forming part of their composition.

Research carried out by a team headed by Gilles-Eric Séralini at the University of Caen has proved beyond
all doubt that the product Roundup® inhibits the action of aromatase, while for glyphosate, an active
substance forming part of the composition of that herbicide, the effect is visibly weaker, Research by the
same team on the viability of placenta cells has shown that Roundup® is toxic in small doses and that its
toxicity is approximately five times that of glyphosate.