Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Better promoting the mobility of young people in Europe: practicalities and timetable
Date: 2008-05-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: access to information, education, free movement of persons, geographical mobility, student mobility, vocational training, young person, youth policy

C 224/100

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Better promoting the mobility of
young people in Europe: practicalities and timetable

(2008/C 224/23)

In a letter dated 25 October 2007, Mr Jouyet, French Minister of State with responsibility for European
affairs, asked the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing
the European Community, to draw up an exploratory opinion on:

Better promoting the mobility of young people in Europe: practicalities and timetable.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, which was responsible for preparing the
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 May 2008 The rapporteur was Mr Rodríguez
García-Caro.

At its 445th plenary session, held on 28 and 29 May 2008 (meeting of 29 May), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 117 votes to four with one abstention.

1. Conclusions

1.1
The European Economic and Social Committee welcomes
the interest and support shown by the future French presidency
of the Council towards the mobility of young Europeans. In
December 2000, a resolution was adopted by the European
Council of Nice listing 42 measures to boost and encourage the
mobility of young people. Some years later, with France's new
presidency, there is once again a clear interest in solving the
problems affecting the mobility of Europe's younger citizens.

The EESC believes that the main problem faced by the
1.2
EU in terms of young people's cross-border mobility is the clear
lack of solutions to the problems that have already been
described on numerous occasions, and the difficulty in applying
the measures adopted to solve these problems. The list of
problems identified is as long as the catalogue of measures that
must be adopted to resolve them. Therefore, the EESC considers
that the issue is not to look for further barriers to mobility and
list actions to promote it but, rather, to address the basic ques-
tion of what has been achieved, what remains to be achieved,
and how can the results be assessed?

Thus, the EESC considers that there is no need to set up
1.3
further expert or high-level groups which are likely to revisit
issues that have already been addressed in the past. What is
necessary, in the EESC's opinion, is to set up a working group
representing the different Commission DGs with responsibilities
in the area of mobility, which would conduct an analysis of the
situation and address the following points in a methodical
manner:

— identify as yet unsolved problems which have been defined
and are in the process of being resolved by means of legisla-
tion;

— identify problems which have been defined but for which

there are no pending solutions;

— identify measures which have been proposed but not taken
into account, or not implemented by the Member States.

1.4
Likewise, the situation of young people should be metho-
dically defined, dividing them into different target groups with
comparable circumstances and subject to similar issues. This
would make it possible to find out what affects different groups
of young people and thus selectively adopt specific measures
targeted at these groups, with a view to improving effectiveness
and efficiency, and avoiding ‘one-size-fits-all’ decisions.

1.5

The target groups for this analysis should include:

— university students;

— young people who have finished their university education
or vocational training and are starting work for the first
time;

— students on work-linked training schemes;

— artists;

— young volunteers;

— determine the obstacles that have already been identified

— young entrepreneurs;

and described previously;

— young people without financial means;

— identify effective measures approved at EU level in order to
overcome these (regulations, directives, decisions, resolu-
tions, recommendations, etc.);

— young couples trying to reconcile family life and work or

education;

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/101

— young people in situations of social exclusion;

— young people looking for work and in their first years of

employment.

1.6
The EESC considers that what is needed is not so much
to continue to identify obstacles and solutions but, rather, to
implement the right measures in a reasonably short time so that
all that has already been said about mobility can be legitimised
as solutions to the mobility problems faced by young people in
Europe.

1.7
By involving all stakeholders in making mobility a reality
for young people and taking a more proactive approach to the
different EU policies in the field, it could be possible to bring
about a fundamental change to the status quo.

2.2.2
Initially, the free movement of workers was, as one of
the four basic freedoms of the European Economic Community
along with free movement of goods, capital and services, the
basis for the mobility of EU nationals. In order to guarantee the
free movement of workers, significant advances in Community
legislation were made (particularly with regard to social services)
which also affected the movement of family members within
the EU. Subsequently, as Community programmes were imple-
mented in the fields of education, training and research, many
other obstacles to cross-border mobility began to emerge.

2.2.3
Over the years, numerous documents in various fields
have pointed out the obstacles to mobility, and effective solu-
tions have been proposed, described and sometimes imple-
mented, making it possible to remove the impediments to the
movement and residency of EU citizens outside their countries
of origin.

2. Introduction

2.1 Reason for the exploratory opinion

2.1.1
This document has been drawn up in response to the
request made to the European Economic and Social Committee
by the French Minister of State with responsibility for European
affairs. On 25 October 2007, the Minister of State asked the
Committee to draw up an exploratory opinion on Better
promoting the mobility of young people in Europe: practical-
ities and timetable. The opinion has been requested in the light
of France's presidency of the Council of the European Union in
the second half of 2008.

2.1.2 Meanwhile,
the European Commissioner responsible
for education and training has promoted the creation of a high-
level expert group on improving mobility among Europeans.
The high-level group held its first meeting on 24 January 2008,
and has the aim of identifying the measures that could be intro-
duced to increase exchanges among young people,
improve
assistance for mobility in vocational training and adult educa-
tion, and increase the mobility of young artists, business
managers and volunteers. It intends to complete its work by the
middle of the year, when it will produce a strategic report.

2.2 Mobility in the European Union: more than a right

to free

movement

However,

time has also shown that

2.2.4
identifying the
obstacles and putting forward proposals have not always been
enough to bring down these barriers or definitively eliminate
the problems hindering free movement and mobility. In the
various documents issued by the European institutions,
the
same problems have been reiterated, and corrective measures
have even been proposed despite already having been put
forward — but often not implemented — in the past.

2.2.5
The EESC is aware that it can be tricky to solve certain
problems affecting mobility. However, it has also noted on occa-
sion that
the willingness to solve these problems does not
always match up to the importance for citizens of removing
administrative or legal barriers to mobility.

2.2.6
From a legal point of view, the likelihood of adopted
measures solving mobility problems depends directly on the
form of legislation used. The more recommendations or resolu-
tions are used, the more likely it is that the measures proposed
will not be carried through in all the Member States. While the
Commission must sometimes appeal to the Court of Justice in
order to ensure the content of a directive is transposed to the
law of a Member State, more importantly, simple
national
thus rendering the
recommendations may not be applied,
recommended measures ineffective.

2.2.1 Mobility is a right which is enshrined in Article 18 of
the Treaty establishing the European Community. This right is
further defined with regard to education and training in the
provisions of Articles 149(4) and 150(4) TEC. Therefore, from
this perspective, both the EU and the individual Member States
must take the necessary steps to guarantee this right to mobility,
whether
training, volunteering or simply leisure
purposes.

for work,

the availability of

2.2.7 While it is true that, over time, the legal obstacles have
given way to more practical ones relating to language knowl-
edge,
financial resources making mobility
possible, information and the interest of young people, etc., it is
also true that other aspects which are both legal and practical in
nature, such as the recognition of qualifications, continue to be
an ongoing issue in the EU.

C 224/102

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

2.2.8
On a number of occasions, the EESC has, at the request
of the European institutions and on its own initiative, expressed
its opinion on this important subject which directly affects the
lives of EU citizens. In its opinions, the EESC has identified or
confirmed the existence of all kinds of barriers, and has
supported or proposed various solutions. As the representative
of organised civil society,
the EESC will continue to work
actively to resolve any problems affecting EU citizens when it
comes to exercising the right to mobility in the EU.

3.3.1
following objectives:

These measures were grouped according to the

— adopt a European mobility strategy;

— train people to act as contacts for mobility;

— development of multilingualism;

— make it easier to find information on mobility;

— draw up a mobility chart;

— look into the financing of mobility;

3. Obstacles to mobility in the European Union: analysis

— democratise mobility by making it financially and socially

accessible to all;

3.1
The Green Paper on education, training and research: obstacles
to cross-frontier mobility (1) brings together antecedents, obstacles
and potential solutions for the mobility of persons travelling
within the EU for educational reasons. The EESC issued an
opinion on the subject (2) in which it provided various addi-
tional solutions to those posited by the Green Paper, and in
which it stated that:
‘The more material provisions of the Treaties
have been implemented more effectively than its human aspects. As a
result goods move more easily within the Community than people.
What is needed is a move towards political agreement that paves the
way for a more genuine Citizens' Europe’.

Some of

3.2
the obstacles described therein have been
removed, others are still being resolved, while others still remain
just as problematic as ever,
if not more so. These obstacles
relate to issues such as the right to residence, recognition of
qualifications, the lack of portability of scholarships, tax systems
in each Member State, social protection, etc. In addition to these
legal problems are obstacles concerning linguistic and cultural
difficulties, the lack of available information on the place of
destination, daily life at the destination, etc. These are problems
which, in many cases, are still encountered today.

On 14 December 2000, the Nice Council adopted a reso-
3.3
lution on the Action Plan for Mobility (3). The resolution
follows on from the conclusions of the European Council held
in Lisbon in March 2000, which recognised the urgent need to
overcome the mobility obstacles faced by citizens within the EU
in order to create a true European area of knowledge. The reso-
lution listed 42 measures designed to overcome the obstacles to
mobility.

(1) COM(96) 462 final.
(2) See the EESC opinion of 29.2.1997 on the Green Paper on education,
training and research — the obstacles to transnational mobility, rappor-
teur: Mr Rodríguez García-Caro (OJ C 133, 28.4.1997), point 3.1.2.

(3) OJ C 371 of 23.12.2000.

— introduce new forms of mobility;

— improve reception facilities for people;

— simplify the mobility calendar;

— provide a proper status for people opting for mobility;

— develop the system of
diplomas and training;

recognition and equivalence of

— recognise the experience acquired;

— gain more from periods of mobility.

3.3.2
include the following:

The measures defined as priorities by the resolution

— development of multilingualism;

— establishment of a portal giving access to the different

sources of information on mobility;

— recognition of periods of mobility, especially in diploma

courses;

— training of mobility organisers able to provide advice and

guidance and draft mobility projects;

— definition and adoption of a mobility quality charter;

— drawing up of an inventory of existing mobility circuits and

good practices in exchanges;

— creation of

linkage between mobility funding from the

various stakeholders.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/103

The first

3.4
recommendation adopted by the European
Parliament and the Council with a view to facilitating Com-
munity action to promote mobility was Recommendation No
2001/613/EC on mobility within the Community for students,
persons undergoing training, volunteers,
teachers and trai-
ners (4). The EESC issued an opinion (5)on this recommendation,
in which it observed that: ‘Virtually unimpeded mobility is a prere-
quisite for achieving European integration — a Citizens' Europe —
and for strengthening international competitiveness’.

3.6
Although the European institutions have made numerous
efforts to solve the problems identified in the Green Paper as
making mobility difficult for young people, teachers, trainers
and researchers, and despite the good intentions of the Action
Plan for Mobility, a number of these problems persist today.

Nonetheless, some examples of legal solutions to existing

3.7
problems can be cited. For instance:

3.4.1

The recommendation calls on Member States to:

3.7.1

Legislative acts adopted:

— remove the legal and administrative obstacles to mobility;

— Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union
and their family members to move and reside freely within
the territory of the Member States (7);

— reduce linguistic and cultural obstacles by encouraging the

learning of at least two languages;

— promote the various arrangements for financial support, by

facilitating the portability of scholarships;

— promote a European qualification area;

— promote access to any useful information.

3.4.2 Moreover, a series of specific measures are proposed
for students, persons undergoing training, young volunteers,
teachers and trainers.

In its own-initiative opinion (6) on the White paper: youth
3.5
policy, the EESC stated, with regard to mobility, that:
‘Currently
this right remains theoretical for most young people. The reasons can
be found in the lack of opportunities and resources, lack of recognition
of the value of mobility as such and the skills acquired through mobi-
lity, uneven distribution of opportunities, social and cultural resistance
legal and administrative barriers. Particular
to the idea of mobility,
attention should therefore be paid to administrative obstacles, which
exist in the Member States in regard to social security (unemployment
insurance in particular), taxation, residence rights and the recognition
of skills acquired both formally as well as through means of non-
formal and informal education’.

(4) OJ L 215 of 9.8.2001.
(5) See the EESC opinion of 27.04.2000 on the Proposal for a recommen-
dation of the European Parliament and of the Council on mobility
within the Community for students, persons undergoing training,
young volunteers, teachers and trainers, rapporteur: Ms Hornung-
Draus (OJ C 168, 16.6.2000), point 1.3

(6) See the EESC opinion of 29.11.2000 on ‘White Paper: Youth Policy’,

rapporteur: Ms Hassett (OJ C 116, 20.4.2001).

— Regulation

Regulation
883/2004, on the coordination of social security systems (8);

successor,

1408/71

and

its

— Decision No 2241/2004/EC on a single Community frame-
work for the transparency of qualifications and competences
(Europass) (9);

— Directive No 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional

qualifications (10);

— Recommendation 2006/961/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council on transnational mobility within the
Community for education and training purposes: European
Quality Charter for Mobility (11);

— Recommendation 3662/07 of the European Parliament and
of the Council on the establishment of the European Qualifi-
cations Framework for lifelong learning (12).

3.7.2 Measures on which work is in progress:

— European credit

system for vocational

education and

training;

— Recognition of competences acquired through voluntary

activities (13);

— Framework strategy for multilingualism (14).

(7) OJ L 158 of 30.4.2004.
(8) OJ L 166 of 30.4.2004.
(9) OJ L 390 of 31.12.2004.
(10) OJ L 255 of 30.9.2005.
(11) OJ L 394 of 30.12.2006.
(12) PE-CONS 3662/07.
(13) See the EESC opinion of 13.12.2006 on ‘Voluntary activity: its role in
European society and its impact’, rapporteur: Ms Koller, Co-rappor-
teur: Ms zu Eulenburg (OJ C 325, 30.12.2006).

(14) See the EESC opinion of 26.10.2006 on ‘Communication from the
Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions —
A new framework strategy for multilingualism’, rapporteur: Ms Le
Nouail-Marlière (OJ C 324, 30.12.2006).

C 224/104

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

3.8
The Committee has expressed its views on these issues in
various opinions, stating its position on a number of aspects
which directly affect the mobility of EU citizens in general, and
young people in particular. In concrete terms, there is a deci-
sion-making process underway which is designed to resolve
problems relating to the mobility of young Europeans, but
leaves certain important aspects poorly defined with regard to
the stated aim of promoting and facilitating mobility.

3.9
Lastly, it is important to bear in mind that certain instru-
ments are available to the public, which could be promoted and
their operation improved. One noteworthy example is the Euro-
pean Job Mobility Portal (EURES). Its databases should be easier
to access and regularly updated; the information they contain
should be monitored, as it can sometimes be too concise; and,
it should be visible to the public as a portal and
above all,
network.

In this context, perhaps the EU institutions should ask
3.10
how much Europe's young people actually know about the
different initiatives that exist to encourage their mobility. Who
knows what Europass, Youthpass or
the European Quality
Charter is? Do Member States disseminate their knowledge suffi-
ciently? Apart from Erasmus, what other mobility schemes do
Europe's young people know about? The EESC believes that
promoting knowledge of the multiple resources at our disposal
is another way to remove obstacles to mobility.

4. Cross-border mobility of young Europeans: position of

the European Economic and Social Committee

4.1
The EESC believes that the main obstacle to mobility for
young Europeans is the lack of solutions to the problems so
often raised, and the inability to carry out the measures so often
proposed as solutions.

4.2
The EESC believes that it is more important to gear
efforts towards effectively implementing proposed measures
than to set up further groups of experts who identify the self-
same, previously described obstacles as are already being
resolved.

4.3
This is not to say that there is no need to highlight the
real difficulties faced by Europe's young people when they take
part in mobility and exchange activities connected with the life-
long learning (15), Erasmus Mundus (16), Youth in Action (17) and
Culture (18) programmes. However,
the EESC believes that a
preliminary assessment should be conducted, as a priority. It is
necessary to stop and think actively about where we are with

(15) OJ L 327 of 24.11.2006.
(16) OJ L 345 of 31.12.2003.
(17) OJ L 327 of 24.11.2006.
(18) OJ L 372 of 27.12.2006.

regard to this important
Europe so directly.

issue that affects young people in

4.4
The EESC considers it necessary to set up a coordination
group for the different Commission DGs with responsibilities in
the area, with the specific task of conducting an exhaustive
analysis of the situation, with the following basic objectives:

— to determine the obstacles that have already been identified

and described previously;

— identify effective measures approved at EU level in order to
overcome these (regulations, directives, decisions, resolu-
tions, recommendations, etc.);

— to identify as yet unsolved problems which have been
defined and are in the process of being resolved by means
of legislation;

— to identify problems which have been defined but for which

there are no pending solutions;

— to identify measures which have been proposed but not
taken into account, or not implemented by the Member
States.

Once this general analysis has been conducted, the next
4.5
step should be to methodologically define the situation of
young people, dividing them into different target groups with
comparable circumstances and subject to similar issues, as set
out in point 1.5 above.

On the basis of this analysis and bearing in mind that
4.6
the different groups mentioned are
the circumstances of
completely different, it could be possible to gear the action of
the EU institutions and Member States towards more specific,
less generic measures. This could improve the effectiveness of
measures and increase efficiency in resolving mobility problems.

4.7
As the representative of organised civil society and a
consultative body with extensive experience in analysing and
proposing solutions to problems relating to mobility in general
and, more specifically, to the improvement of young people's
situation in the labour market (19), the EESC would be willing to
work with the European Commission towards the abovemen-
tioned goals. The mobility of young employees should be
covered by specific measures, which would be enhanced by
provisions applicable to all citizens regarding the portability of
rights. The EESC's experience and proximity to society make it a
key partner in this field.

(19) See the EESC opinion of 12.3.2008 on ‘Role of the social partners in
improving the situation of young people on the labour market’,
rapporteur: Mr Soares, Co-rapporteur: Ms Päärendson, CES 500/2008.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/105

4.8
Nonetheless, the EESC is aware that measures are being
adopted to overcome specific situations which in the past were
real
legal/administrative obstacles to mobility, and that these
obstacles are diminishing. However, it is important to stress that
significant obstacles do continue to exist: one clear example that
can be cited is the recognition and validation of knowledge and
skills. The European Qualifications Framework could be one
way of overcoming this obstacle, but the difficulties that its
implementation entails have already been highlighted in the
EESC's opinion on the subject (20).

In addition to the above,
always governs

in the spirit of constructive
4.9
criticism that
the
the EESC's opinions,
Committee will always support any initiative designed to elimi-
nate obstacles preventing people from exercising their right to
mobility and to free movement. However, sometimes these
obstacles involve situations which do not fall
into the legal/
administrative sphere: for instance, the lack of resources for
young people who wish to participate in mobility initiatives,
which prevents them from travelling under the abovementioned

programmes;
the language-learning difficulties that pose an
insurmountable barrier to accessing other countries; the uncer-
tainty about what lies ahead in the host country, about which
absolutely nothing may be known. Clearly, these are situations
that do not require major legal agreements but do need every
effort to be made in order to resolve them. Documents such as
the Action Plan for Mobility already include proposed measures
for developing mobility,
financial associations, democratising
mobility by making it financially accessible, improving reception
facilities for people, granting proper status, etc.

4.10
The EESC stresses that what is needed is not so much
to continue to identify obstacles and solutions but, rather, to
implement the right measures in a reasonably short time so that
all that has already been said about mobility can be legitimised.
By involving all stakeholders in making mobility a reality for
young people and taking a more proactive approach to the
different EU policies in the field, it could be possible to bring
about a fundamental change to the status quo.

Brussels, 29 May 2008.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(20) See the EESC opinion of 30.5.2007 on the Proposal for a Recommen-
dation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establish-
ment of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning,
rapporteur: Mr Rodríguez García-Caro (OJ C 175, 27.7.2007).