Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the consequences of the exclusion of self employed drivers from the scope of the Directive 2002/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities
Date: 2007-05-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, arrangement of working time, drivers, report, restriction on competition, road safety, road transport, self-employed person, social security

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 23.5.2007 
COM(2007) 266 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

on the consequences of the exclusion of self employed drivers from the scope of the 
Directive 2002/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 
on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport 
activities  

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT 

on the consequences of the exclusion of self employed drivers from the scope of the 
Directive 2002/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 
on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport 
activities  

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Directive  2002/15/EC1  establishes  minimum  requirements  in  relation  to  the  organisation  of 
working  time  in  order  to  improve  the  health  and  safety  protection  of  persons  performing 
mobile road transport activities, to improve road safety and to align conditions of competition. 
The  Directive  came  into  force  on  23  March  2002  and  Member  States  have  had  three  years 
until  23  March  2005  to  implement  the  Directive’s  provisions  in  relation  to  mobile  workers. 
Article  2(1)  of  the  Directive  indicates  that  the  Directive’s  provisions  shall  apply  from  23 
March 2009 to self employed drivers once the Commission presents a report to the Council 
and the European Parliament and a consequent legislative proposal based on the report.  

As part of the final conciliation agreement reached between the European Parliament and the 
Council  on  this  Directive,  it  was  concluded  that  at  the  latest,  two  years  before  this  date, 
namely 23 March 2007, the Commission should present a report to the European Parliament 
and the Council, which would analyse the consequences of the exclusion of the self employed 
drivers from the scope  of  the  Directive in respect of road safety, conditions  of competition, 
the structure of the profession as well as social aspects. The report should take into account 
the circumstances in each Member State relating to the structure of the transport industry and 
to the  working environment of  the road transport  profession. On the basis of the  report, the 
Commission should submit a proposal either (a) to set out the modalities for inclusion of self-
employed drivers which undertake purely national transport activities and for whom particular 
situations  pertain;  or  (b)  not  to  include  self  employed  drivers  within  the  scope  of  the 
Directive.  

Article 7(2) of the Directive also required the Commission to assess the consequences of the 
Directive’s night work provisions and report on them by the 23 March 2007 in the context of 
the  ongoing  biennial  report  which  it  is  obliged  to  provide  on  the  implementation  of  the 
Directive.  

This report therefore fulfils several objectives: it serves to provide an overview of the current 
state  of  implementation  of  the  Directive  by  the  Member  States;  it  addresses  the  potential 
consequences of the exclusion of self-employed drivers from the scope of the Directive; and it 
assesses the consequences of the Directive’s night time provisions.  

The  Commission  retained  consultants  in  December  2005  to  consider  the  above  three 
objectives, drawing up reports on each Member State and through a thorough examination of 
relevant  studies  and  data,  face-to-face  interviews  with  representatives  of  both  sides  of 

1 OJEU L 80 of 23.3.2002, p. 35 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
industry, national administrations and Commission Directorates General concerned, as well as 
feedback  from  several  meetings  with  industry  on  the  preliminary  results  obtained,  to  come 
forward  with  their  considered  conclusions  on  the  exclusion  of  the  self-employed  driver  and 
the  consequences  of  night 
is  available  at 
time  provision.  The 
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road/studies/index_en.htm 

report 

final 

2. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE BY MEMBER STATES 

A majority of Member States did not manage to transpose the Directive within the three year 
transitional period provided. The Commission was obliged to open infringements proceedings 
against  eleven  Member  States  in  May  2005.  Since  then,  the  number  of  Member  States  not 
communicating  all  their  transposing  measures  has  reduced  to  four.  This  has  meant  that  the 
impact  of  the  Directive  in  certain  Member  States  can  only  be  estimated.  In  terms  of  those 
Member States that have forwarded their national transposing measures, the Commission has 
since opened correspondence with them to ensure the definitions and limits accurately reflect 
the Directive’s provisions. Therefore the Commission is not yet in a position to issue its first 
biennial report, due in March 2007. 

3. 

CONSEQUENCES OF THE EXCLUSION OF SELF-EMPLOYED DRIVERS 

3.1. 

Introduction 

The  final  text  of  the  Directive  is  a  delicate  compromise,  testifying  to  the  difficult 
conciliation agreement between the European Parliament and Council. The inclusion 
of  self-employed  drivers  by  23  March  2009  following  the  fulfilment  of  the  above 
mentioned conditionalities represented a shift from the Council common position2 of 
temporary exclusion pending a further possible proposal for inclusion at a later stage 
from the Commission. Two Member States, Spain and Finland, subsequently sought 
unsuccessfully  before  the  Court  of  Justice  to  annul  the  Directive3,  primarily  to 
permanently  exclude  self-employed  drivers  from  the  scope  of  the  Directive.  In  its 
original  proposal4and  throughout  the  debate  on  the  proposed  Directive,  the 
Commission advocated inclusion of the self employed, for several reasons:  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

to  be  consistent  with  the  scope  of  the  Regulation5  on  driving  time  and  rest 
period rules, which makes no such distinction between drivers; 

to  avoid  the  potential  fragmentation  of  a  highly  competitive  industry  through 
the re-designation of employees as self-employed drivers (so called ‘false self 
employed’) 

to  ensure  that  the  aims  of  fair  competition,  improved  road  safety  and  better 
working  conditions  were  applied  through  the  Directive  to  the  whole  road 
transport sector. 

2 OJEU C 142 of 15.5.2001, p. 24 
3 C-184/02,Kingdom of Spain & C-223/02, Republic of Finland, (joined cases) 24.9.2004 rec. p. I-7789 
4 OJEU C 43, 17.2.1999, p. 4 
5 OJEU L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 1 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
However  the  original  proposal  of  the  Commission  was  built  on  a  less  extensive 
definition of working time in the case of self-employed drivers. 

In the light of the conclusions set out in the consultants’ report, the Commission is 
bound  to  reflect  on  the  impact  of  the  inclusion  of  the  self-employed  within  the 
Directive and how its original objectives can best be met. 

3.2. 

Road Safety 

At  first  sight,  the  link  between  fatigue  from  working  excessive  hours  and  an 
increased  danger  to  road  safety  from  professional  drivers  appears  self-evident. 
Nevertheless, as a large number of Member States have only recently implemented 
the  Directive,  it  is  too  early  to  obtain  data  on  the  impact  of  the  new  rules  on  road 
safety.  Moreover  the  Commission’s  database,  which  relies  on  the  statistics 
transmitted from national administrations, cannot distinguish between self-employed 
drivers  and  mobile  workers.  It  is  also  often  difficult  to  ascertain  the  reason  for  a 
particular accident, as fatigue can result not only from excessive working hours but 
from other factors. 

This  said,  the  extensive  research  literature  on  the  subject,  as  well  as  the 
comprehensive report produced for the Commission6, shows that excessive working 
hours,  which  for  goods  transport  drivers  encompasses  a  significant  element  of 
physical work (loading and unloading), is a major contributory factor to fatigue and 
hence to falling asleep at the wheel. Fatigue and its consequences for road safety can 
affect a driver, whether he be self-employed or a mobile worker. 

The  consultants’  report  confirmed  that  self-employed  drivers  work  longer  than 
mobile road transport workers and that both categories worked more than workers in 
other  sectors.  Should  the  self-employed  driver  be  excluded  from  the  working  time 
rules,  only  his  driving  time,  breaks  and  rest  periods  would  be  regulated  at 
Community  level  under  Regulation  (EEC)  3820/85,  soon  to  be  superseded  on  11 
April 2007 by Regulation (EC) 561/2006. There will no longer be a limit on ‘other 
work’, which he will still have to record on the tachograph under Regulation (EEC) 
3821/85.  Various  studies7  have  identified  that  for  professional  drivers,  driving 
represents  on  average  66%  of  their  entire  work,  availability  12%,  leaving  21%  of 
their time devoted to ‘other work’, such as loading/unloading. Exclusion of the self-
employed  would  therefore  entail  not  applying  a  global  weekly  time  limit  on  such 
activities. However for self-employed drivers, this time limit would only encompass 
part of their working routine, as neither ‘availability’ nor any general administrative 
work  is  included  unless  it  is  linked  to  the  specific  transport  operation  (see  Article 
3(a)(2)  of  Directive  2002/15/EC).  This  absence  however  will  be  mitigated  in  the 
future by several new rules brought in by the new Regulation (EC) 561/2006. It will 
introduce a new weekly driving time limit of 56 hours – up until now, theoretically, 
drivers could legally drive up to 74 hours in one week - as well as require all drivers 
to take at least a full 45-hour weekly rest every two weeks.  

6  Le  lien  entre  la  durée  de  travail  des  conducteurs  routiers  et  la  sécurité  routière  au  sein  de  l’Union 
européenne,Universität-Gesamthochschule Kassel, Institut für Arbeitswissenschaft, June 1997 

7 Ibid, p. 170, Table 8.21  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Other factors contributing to fatigue – stress, health problems and a lack of support - 
were more prevalent amongst the self-employed. A reduction in working time could 
undoubtedly help reduce fatigue. However, this could lead to higher levels of stress, 
as the self employed driver tries to achieve more in less time in order to maintain his 
profitability,  which  in  turn  could  lead  to  greater  fatigue  and  accidents.  The 
consultants  point  out  that  attention  to  other  factors,  such  as  better  enforcement  of 
driving time rules and aspects concerning the working environment could prove to be 
more  effective  road  safety  measures  than  reducing  working  time  for  the  self-
employed.  

Unlike other road safety measures, where active enforcement is considered necessary 
and undertaken either at national level or within a Community regulatory framework, 
it  appears  that  Member  States  do  not  accord  working  time  rules  the  same  level  of 
priority as the enforcement of Community driving time and rest period rules. Despite 
pressure from the Commission and the European Parliament when discussing what is 
now  Directive  2006/22/EC  on  minimum  conditions  for  the  implementation  of 
Council Regulations (EEC) 3820/85 and (EEC) 3821/85 concerning social legislation 
relating to road transport activities and repealing Council Directive 88/599/EEC8 the 
Council  did  not  agree  to  any  minimum  systematic  inspection  requirement  for 
working time rules. For driving times and rest period rules they did agree to a whole 
series of measures to ensure compliance, progressively trebling minimum inspection 
levels,  concentrating  on  premises  inspections  (at  least  50%  of  all  inspections  each 
year),  developing  and  implementing  a  national  enforcement  strategy.  For  working 
time, enforcement is therefore mainly bound to rely on complaints from drivers or on 
investigation following an accident, only the latter presumably applying to the self-
employed. A low level of compliance would reduce any effect on road safety.  

This  said,  the  Commission  continues  to  consider  that  in  terms  of  road  safety  a 
reduction  in  working  time  for  the  sector  could  have  a  positive  effect.  The  research 
literature  tends  to  corroborate  this  view.  Indeed  50%  of  the  employee  and  25%  of 
government stakeholders interviewed by the consultants mentioned that they shared 
this  perception  (see  consultants’  report,  Table  5.3).  In  terms  specifically  of  the 
impact  of  inclusion  a  slightly  higher  percentage  in  each  category  of  stakeholder 
(government, employer and employee) admitted it would have a positive impact on 
road safety.  

The inclusion of the self-employed may have a positive effect on road safety, but it is 
hard to quantify. The Commission is conscious that other factors, such as age, and in 
particular stress, may play an equally important role in promoting fatigue particularly 
amongst the self-employed drivers and recognises that the new driving and rest time 
rules  and  stricter  enforcement  of  such  rules  may  play  an  equally  valid  role  in 
minimising fatigue and stress.  

3.3. 

Conditions of competition and structure of the profession 

The  second  aim  of  the  Directive  and  an  important  reason  for  the  Commission 
initially  proposing  the  inclusion  of  self-employed  drivers  within  the  scope  of  the 
Directive is to prevent distortion of competition and ensure a level playing field for 

8 OJEU L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 35 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
all  road  transport  operators.  The  Commission  feared  that  exclusion  of  the  self-
employed driver would promote fragmentation of the industry, given that it operated 
in  a  highly  competitive  environment.  The  phenomenon  of  an  operator  encouraging 
his  drivers  to  become  nominally  self-employed  but  working  exclusively  for  him, 
known  as  ‘false’  self-employed  drivers,  might  become  more  attractive  and  more 
prevalent.  As  a  result,  such  operators  and  their  in-house  sub-contractors  would 
compete on an unfair basis.  

In terms of the structure of the profession, one of the distinguishing features of the 
road transport sector is the fragmentation present in the industry. Within the Union, 
95%  of  the  road  haulage  companies  are  micro-enterprises  with  less  than  10 
employees (small firms or one-man operations). Only 1% comprises companies with 
more than 50 employees.  

In  the  absence  of  concrete  data  on  the  effect  of  the  application  of  the  Directive’s 
provisions to mobile workers, the consultants have looked at trends within ‘clusters’ 
of Member States, namely those groups of Member States where the structure of the 
road  transport  sector  appears  to  be  similar.  Four  Member  State  clusters  were 
designated: South/Mediterranean (ES, FR,  GR,  IT,  PT)  –  many  self-employed,  few 
large  companies, growth  in consolidation noted; Middle/Western (AT, BE, DE, IE, 
LU, NL, UK) – few self-employed, many large companies, growth in consolidation 
observed;  Northern  (DK,  SE,  FI)  –  few  self-employed,  few  large  companies, 
increasing fragmentation detected; and New Member States (BU, CY, CZ, EE, LT, 
LV,  HU,  MT,  PL,  RO,  SL,  SK)  –  many  self-employed,  few  large  companies, 
increasing fragmentation noted. The consultants considered that exclusion of the self-
employed would encourage a continuation of the current trend towards fragmentation 
in the latter two clusters while provoking a small increase in self-employed drivers in 
the  former  two  clusters.  Moreover  no  significant  impact  on  competition  within  the 
industry was expected from a continued exclusion of the self-employed. They would 
retain their current role as low-cost subcontractors in the Member State cluster where 
large companies predominate, or compete on an equal basis with other self-employed 
drivers in those Member State clusters where they make up the majority of the road 
transport sector. 

The  circumstances  of  individual  Member  States  concerning  the  structure  of  the 
transport  industry  are  set  out  in  full  in  chapter  6.2  as  well  as  in  annex  3  of  the 
consultants’ report. 

By contrast, inclusion will result in an increase in the cost burden and a reduction in 
working  time,  so  the  competitive  advantage  of  the  self-employed  within  the  road 
freight  industry  will  be  substantially  reduced.  The  larger  firms  would  then  be  in  a 
more competitive position as they could cope with reduced hours through efficiency 
measures. This could then strengthen the consolidation process within the industry.  

The lack of any significant change in the conditions of competition, were exclusion 
of the self-employed to remain in place, however still leaves the issue of the ‘false’ 
self-employed. It is this issue that could also lead to an artificial fragmentation within 
the structure of the profession, should the Directive not be applied to self-employed 
drivers. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
The Commission considers that working time rules should be applied to ‘false’ self-
employed  drivers.  It  notes  that  many  Member  States  have  not  correctly  transposed 
the particular distinction made between "mobile worker" and "self-employed driver", 
which the Directive introduces in Articles 3(d) and (e) respectively. A self-employed 
driver  is  closely  defined:  he  has  a  Community  licence/professional  transport 
authorisation, is entitled to work for himself, is not tied to an employer by a contract 
or any other type of working hierarchical relationship, is free to organise his working 
activities,  generates  income  from  the  profits  made,  may  cooperate  with  other  self-
employed  drivers  and  has  commercial  relations  with  several  customers.  Otherwise, 
the driver is considered a mobile worker. The Commission intends to focus efforts on 
the correct application of the definition of mobile workers in the Directive.  

The  Commission  also  considers  that  addressing  this  issue  will  minimise  artificial 
fragmentation within the industry. It also notes that other constraints, such as stricter 
criteria  for  admission  to  the  occupation  of  road  transport  operator  may  provide  a 
counterbalance  to  any  potential  fragmentation  pressure  that  exclusion  of  this 
category of driver could produce9. 

3.4. 

Social Aspects 

The Commission recognises by the term ‘social aspects’ not only health and safety 
and  working  conditions  of  mobile  workers  and  self-employed  drivers,  but  also 
remuneration and the work-life balance. Taken together, all these aspects contribute 
to an image of the profession, one which to date has proved insufficiently attractive 
to counteract the continuing shortage of professional drivers throughout the Union.  

The circumstances in each Member State relating to the working environment of the 
road  transport  profession  are  set  out  in  full  in  paragraphs  2.4.3  and  2.4.4  of  the 
consultants’ report as well as in its annex 4. 

In  terms  of  income,  the  consultants  have  noted  that  for  those  clusters  of  Member 
States  where  small  companies  or  self-employed  drivers  form  a  large  proportion  of 
the  sector,  income  is  considered  to  be  in  the  high  bracket  –  this  reflects  the  long 
hours  that  such  drivers  normally  are  expected  to  work.  For  the  Middle/Western 
cluster  of  Member  States,  where  a  relatively  small  percentage  of  self-employed 
drivers  serve  mainly  larger  transport  companies  as  subcontractors,  a  lower  income 
bracket  is  the  norm.  Exclusion  of  the  self-employed  allows  them  to  maintain  their 
income  level,  as  well  as  their  competitive  position  within  the  sector.  While  the 
Directive  does  not  address  the  issue  of  profitability  it  is  evident  that  this  is  a  key 
aspect for the future viability of the self-employed driver. Applying the Directive’s 
provisions will have an inevitable impact in this area, rendering the profession less 
financially attractive.  

The consultants confirmed that inclusion would reduce the physical workload to be 
undertaken  by  self-employed  drivers.  For  the  psycho-social  work  profile  in  the 
sector,  they  considered  the  impact  of  inclusion  mixed,  noting  that  work  demands 
would  have  to  be  managed  within  a  shorter  timeframe,  leading  to  a  loss  in  job 

9 See Summary of contributions received by the Commission in response to the consultation paper “Revision of 
the Community legislation on access to the road transport  market and admission to the occupation of 
road transport operator’. Web site: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road/consultations 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
control. From their survey it is also clear that in comparison with other workers, self-
employed drivers currently report more work-related health problems, wish to work 
less extra hours and are less satisfied with the fit between work and family life. Yet a 
reduction in working time would also lead to a reduction in income.  

The  Commission  notes  that  from  the  consultants’  survey  the  profile  of  the  self-
employed driver is a young entrepreneur. Given the continuing chronic shortage of 
drivers within the sector, such drivers have the choice of becoming a mobile worker 
or  a  self-employed  driver.  The  latter  offers  them  the  possibility  of  increased  job 
control and higher income, with the need to invest more time and energy to make it 
profitable.  

Thus,  while  continued  exclusion  may  be  preferable  for  economic  reasons,  the 
possible social impacts of exclusion or inclusion are less obvious. Exclusion may not 
help  to  mitigate  health  and  safety  problems;  on  the  other  hand  inclusion  may 
generate  additional  stress  and  administrative  workload  for  the  self-employed  while 
reducing their income. 

3.5. 

Conclusions 

The  Commission  has  taken  note  of  the  results  of  the  consultants’  extensive  survey 
and  study  as  well  as  the  views  expressed  in  subsequent  meetings  with  Member 
States, and the social partners during September 2006 when the initial findings of the 
survey were presented.  

While the Commission recognises that limiting working time for the self-employed 
may  bring  a  certain  improvement  in  road  safety,  this  improvement  is  difficult  to 
quantify  in  relation  to  other  factors  contributing  to  fatigue.  Difficulties  with 
inspections cited by governments in the consultants’ survey and the consistent line of 
a  majority  of  Member  States  during  the  three  year  debate  on  enforcement  through 
Directive 2006/22/EC to exclude a systematic enforcement of the working time rules 
from  its  scope  may  in  practice  render  the  Directive’s  provisions  ineffective, 
particularly concerning self-employed drivers.  

In  a  largely  fragmented  sector,  it  appears  that  exclusion  of  the  self-employed  will 
tend to reinforce the current trends within the structure of the profession and allow 
self-employed  drivers  to  maintain  their  competitive  position  within  the  industry. 
Addressing the issue of ‘false’ self-employed drivers should counteract any artificial 
fragmentation. 

In terms of social impact, the Commission acknowledges that the balance of overall 
disadvantages  and  advantages  of  exclusion  or  inclusion  is  mixed.  An  increase  of 
working  hours  for  self-employed  drivers,  made  possible  by  exclusion  from  the 
Directive might be considered not desirable in itself in terms of improving the health 
and  safety  of  drivers.  But  inclusion  might  impose  greater  emotional  stress  and 
financial  difficulty  for  the  self-employed,  be  difficult  to  enforce  and  therefore 
ineffective.  

Further impact assessment prior to the legislative proposal referred to in Article 2.1 
of  the  Directive  would  be  required.  The  impact  assessment  should  also  take  into 
account several new elements arising since the adoption of Directive 2002/15/EC:  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
–  the  new  Regulation  on  driving  times  and  rest  periods,  the  new  enforcement 
Directive and the introduction of the digital tachograph have redressed the balance 
in  terms  of  minimum  daily  and  weekly  rest  periods  to  which  all  drivers  are 
entitled, the strengthened quality and quantity of enforcement activity for driver’s 
hours, and the introduction of a more accurate, tamperproof recording device for 
driver activity.  

– 

the  Commission  envisages  encouraging  active  enforcement  of  enhanced 
operator conditions through a new proposal on admission to the occupation to be 
adopted  in  2007.  This  will  help  address  the  phenomenon  of  the  ‘false’  self-
employed.  

–  the  Commission  intends  to  focus  on  a  correct  and  enforceable  application  by 
Member  States  of 
the  Directive’s  definition  of  mobile  workers  which 
encompasses  false  self-employed  drivers.  This  will  initially  be  through  dialogue 
with  Member  State  authorities  and  the  social  partners,  ensuring  a  correct 
alignment,  but  also  by  identifying  and  promoting  best  practice  in  terms  of 
enforcement,  and  ultimately  by  making  use  of  the  legal  instruments  available 
under the Treaty if it considers this to be appropriate. 

The  Commission  will  also  consider  in  this  impact  assessment  the  continued 
exclusion of the genuine self-employed from the sectoral working time rules while at 
the same time ensuring a rigorous interpretation and implementation of the definition 
of "self-employed drivers" contained in the Directive so that the working time rules 
apply to the "false self-employed".  

4. 

NIGHT WORK RULES 

4.1. 

Introduction 

The introduction of common limitations on working time for night workers has been 
contentious in some Member States, as goods transport often happens at night when 
there  is  less  traffic  on  major  roads.  The  advantage  of  travelling  further  during  the 
night  due  to  a  lack  of  traffic  congestion  is  rendered  less  favourable  by  a  specific 
limitation on night workers’ working hours. Nevertheless it has to be acknowledged 
that during this time the level of traffic accidents is twice that during other periods10 
and that fatigue is a relevant factor. 

4.2. 

Consequences of the Directive’s night work rules 

Those  mobile  workers,  whose  working  hours  fall  within  the  night  time  period 
determined by the Member State or agreed between the social partners, may work up 
to 10 hours in any 24-hour period. The consultants note that in many Member States 
such  rules  on  night  time  limits  already  exist  and  that  therefore  the  impact  of  the 
stipulations of the Directive is limited. However, they also note that from their data it 
is evident that night workers already work long hours and suggest therefore rather the 
promotion  of  a  fatigue  management  programme.  The  issue  of  enforcement  of  the 

10 European Commission CARE database 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
current  limits,  like  enforcement  of  working  time  rules  in  general,  remains  to  be 
studied more closely.  

While it appears that there is no demand to change or further harmonise the current 
night time provisions, the element of enforcement of the rules deserves more detailed 
examination.  

4.3. 

Conclusions 

While  there  appears  to  be  no  demand  to  adjust  the  current  provisions,  the  issue  of 
enforcement is pertinent. The Commission will examine further in consultation with 
the  relevant  Member  State  enforcement  authorities  and  with  the  social  partners 
meeting  at  European  level  how  they  ensure  respect  for  the  night  time  rules  and  in 
what ways compliance can best be achieved.  

OVERALL SUMMARY 

The  Commission  will  now  carry  out  a  formal  impact  assessment  in  view  of  a 
legislative  proposal  modifying  the  Directive  2002/15/EC  as  requested  in  its  Article 
2(1).  

The  Commission  will  consult  Member  States  and  the  social  partners  meeting  at 
European level to examine further arrangements for ensuring respect of working time 
rules. 

EN 

10 

   EN