REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation in 2017-2018 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and of Directive 2002/15/EC on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities (30th report from the Commission on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport)
Date: 2021-09-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, application of EU law, arrangement of working time, drivers, driving period, rest period, road safety, road transport, social legislation, transport statistics

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 30.9.2021  COM(2021) 610 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation in 2017-2018 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and of Directive 2002/15/EC on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities  (30th report from the Commission on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport) {SWD(2021) 278 final}  
 
 
Introduction 

This report gives an overview of the implementation of the EU social rules in road transport 
in the Member States for the period of 1 January 2017 until 31 December 2018. It highlights 
the key challenges in enforcement and application of the relevant legal provisions, which are 
set out in the following four legislative acts:   

1) Regulation (EC) No 561/20061 (also known as the Driving Time Regulation) establishing 
the minimum requirements on daily and weekly driving times, breaks and daily and weekly 
rest periods; 

2)  Directive  2002/15/EC2  (also  known  as  the  Road  Transport  Working  Time  Directive) 
laying  down  the  rules  on  the  organisation  of  the  working  time  of  mobile  workers.  It 
establishes the  requirements on maximum weekly working times, minimum breaks in work 
and night time work. It applies to drivers within the scope of the Driving Time Regulation;                                                                                                                                                                                                                

3) Directive 2006/22/EC3 (also known as the Enforcement Directive) establishing minimum 
levels  of  roadside  checks  and  controls  at  the  premises  of  transport  undertakings  to  verify 
compliance with the provisions of the Driving Time Regulation; 

4) Regulation (EU) No  165/20144  (also known as the  Tachograph  Regulation) setting the 
requirements  on  the  installation  and  use  of  tachographs  in  vehicles  within  the  scope  of  the 
Driving Time Regulation. 

This report, based on Article 17 of the Driving Time Regulation and Article 13 of the Road 
Transport  Working  Time  Directive5,  comprises  quantitative  and  qualitative  data  on  checks 
carried out by the Member States’ control authorities at the roadside and at the premises of 
undertakings, as well as on offences detected.  

1  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  March  2006  on  the 
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) 
No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 (OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, 
p. 1). 
2 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 (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 35). 
3  Directive  2006/22/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  March  2006  on  minimum 
conditions  for  the  implementation  of  Council  Regulations  (EEC)  No  3820/85  and  (EEC)  No  3821/85 
concerning  social  legislation  relating  to  road  transport  activities  and  repealing  Council  Directive  88/599/EEC 
(OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 35). 
4  Regulation  (EU)  No  165/2014  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  4  February  2014  on 
tachographs in road transport, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road 
transport  and  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006 of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the 
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 1). 
5  Article  17  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  requires  Member  States  to  communicate  every  two  years  the 
necessary information to enable the Commission to draw up a report on the application of that Regulation and 
the  developments  in  the  fields  in  question.  Article  13  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  provides  that  Member  States 
should report to the Commission on the implementation of the Directive, indicating the views of the two sides of 
the industry. The reports on Directive 2002/15/EC and Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 can be presented in one 
single document as both legislative acts cover the same two-year reporting period and establish complementary 
rules for professional drivers. 

1 

 
 
                                                           
The report is structured into three sections: Section I provides the analysis of the national data 
on checks and offences in the implementation of Directive 2006/22/EC and Regulation (EC) 
No  561/2006  whereas  Section  II  gives  a  descriptive  outline  of  the  implementation  by  the 
Member  States  of  Directive  2002/15/EC.  Section  III  draws  the  main  conclusions  of  this 
report.  A  Commission  Staff  Working  document  complements  the  Commission  report  with 
supplementary  information  on  penalties,  cooperation  between  Member  States,  comments 
from enforcement authorities, and more detailed statistics. 

Data submission 

The  national  reports  on  the  implementation  of  the  provisions  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  and 
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 must be submitted by 30 September of the year following the 
end  of  the  two-year  period  concerned,  by  means  of  the  revised  standard  reporting  form 
established by the Commission Implementing Decision of 30 March 20176. The deadline for 
submitting reports covering years 2017-2018 expired on 30 September 2019. 

All Member States have submitted their national data, though many not timely. The quality 
of the data continues to improve as regards Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. All Member States 
provided the requested breakdown of detailed statistics on controls of compliance carried out 
at  the  roadside  and  at  the  premises.  However,  some  did  not  provide  data  sorted  by  the 
requested categories, e.g. data sorted by type of tachograph7 and type of offences8.  

As regards the information on the implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC, not all Member 
States  have  submitted  the  required  information9  and  only  some  Member  States  provided 
statistical data on controls and their outcomes10. The lack of quantitative data from Member 
States  makes  an  assessment  difficult.  Therefore,  the  Commission  insists  that  extensive 
qualitative  and  quantitative  data  about  the  implementation  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  and  its 
enforcement is provided for the next reporting period in order to satisfy the requirements set 
out in Article 13 of Directive 2002/15/EC and Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. 

I. Overview of enforcement activities for Directive 2006/22/EC and Regulation (EC) No 
561/2006 

1.  Checks 

Article  2  of  Directive  2006/22/EC  requires  Member  States  to  organise  a  system  of 
appropriate  and  regular  checks  at  the  roadside  and  at  the  premises  of  undertakings  that  are 
subject to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. These checks should cover a large 
and  representative  sample  of  mobile  workers,  drivers,  transport  undertakings,  and  vehicles 
each  year.  This  Article  also  establishes  that  the  minimum  number  of  checks  shall  cover  at 

6 C(2017) 1927 final  
7 This is the case for Spain and Poland, who created additional categories for registering vehicles by type of 
tachograph.  
8 Latvia did not provide this categorisation for offences at premises 
9 No reports were received from Belgium, Croatia, and Czech Republic 
10 Quantitative data was provided by Austria, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, Poland, 
Romania, and Spain 

2 

 
 
                                                           
least 3% of days worked by drivers11 of vehicles falling within the scope of Regulation (EC) 
No 561/2006. 

The national data shows that the total number of working days12 checked in the EU dropped 
by  around  5%,  meaning  a  decrease  from  around  131.7  million  (in  2015-2016)  to  125.7 
million  working  days  checked  in  the  current  reporting  period.  This  decrease  is  however 
smaller compared to the drop by 13% between the previous reporting periods 2013-2014 and 
2015-2016.  Nevertheless,  looking  at  the  national  figures  the  decrease  of  working  days 
checked seems to result mainly from the lower number of working days checked reported by 
France13.  Despite  the  decrease  in  numbers,  France  not  only  complies  with  the  requirement, 
but is among the Member States checking most working days.  

As illustrated in Figure 1 below, the EU average of working days checked is 5.4% (6.3% 
in 2015-2016), which is substantially higher than required under the Directive14.  

Figure 1: Percentage of working days checked per Member State 

Percentage of working days checked per Member State

%
1
,
0
1

%
6
,
9

%
7
,
4

%
4
,
4

%
9
,
3

%
0
,
5

%
7
,
3

%
4
,
1

%
9
,
2

%
4
,
9

%
2
,
9

%
0
,
7

%
7
,
0

%
9
,
9

%
0
,
% 3
8
,
0

%
2
,
0

%
3
,
9

%
3
,
9

%
2
,
% 6
7
,
3

%
3
,
4

%
5
,
1

%
2
,
4

%
5
,
3

%
0
,
5

%
3
,
4

%
4
% 5
,
3
,
3

10,0%
8,0%
6,0%
4,0%
2,0%
0,0%

% of working
 days checked

3%

Most of the Member States checked more working days than the minimum required by the 
Directive.  Nevertheless,  six  Member  States  have  not  met  the  threshold  of  3%,  namely 
Denmark,  the  Netherlands,  Finland,  Ireland,  Greece,  and  Lithuania.  This  is  an  increase 
compared to three Member States in 2015-2016. Denmark was close to the threshold (2.9%), 
and  while  Greece  increased  its  enforcement  efforts  (improved  from  0.1%  in  2015-2016  to 
0.7%  in  the  current  period),  it  remains  well  below  the  threshold.  The  Netherlands  have  a 
system of "monitoring based on trust", which indirectly covers more working days and would 

11 This figure is based on the number of  working days for two years and the number of registered vehicles in 
scope of the Regulation during that period for each Member State. 
12  The  term  ‘working  days’  is  used  interchangeably  with  the  term  ‘days  worked’  by  a  driver  in  the  relevant 
legislation: Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, Directive 2006/22/EC and Decision (EU) 2017/1013; 
13 France reported around 4 million less working days checked compared to the last report due to the reduction 
in checks carried out by the security forces of the Ministry of the Interior and less checks due to the impact of 
social movements (yellow vests) in the last quarter of 2018. 
14  Especially  in  Austria,  Latvia,  Bulgaria,  France,  Romania,  Portugal  and  Germany  who  accounted  for  1/3  of 
working days checked. 

3 

 
 
 
                                                           
allow them to fulfil the minimum threshold for working days checked. Finland and Lithuania 
reported incomplete sets of data. 

Article 2 of Directive 2006/22/EC also sets out the ratio of the working days to be checked at 
the roadside and at the premises, namely 30% and 50% respectively. The calculation of this 
proportion is based on the number of checks actually performed by enforcement authorities 
and  not  on  the  minimum  number  of  working  days  to  be  checked.  Looking  at  the  Member 
States  who  have  met  the  threshold,  only  eight  Member  States  have  the  required  balanced 
share between premises and roadside checks. 

On average, 73% of the working days checked have been done at the roadside whereas 
27% were checked through inspections at the premises. This is stable with a 1% increase 
in checks at the premises compared to the last report. In most Member States a large share of 
checks were performed at the roadside. Ireland and Finland reported a low number of checks 
at the roadside. Finland did not report data from the national police and their roadside checks, 
which may explain the low number of roadside checks and high proportion of checks at the 
premises. For details on the national share of roadside and premises checks see Figure 2.  

Figure 2: Share of roadside and premises checks based on working days checked per Member State 

Share of roadside and premises checks based on working days checked per Member State

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

%
6
1

%
7
1

%
4
8

%
3
8

%
2
4

%
8
5

%
5
5

%
5
4

%
8
% 3
9
5

%
4
5

%
3
6

%
2
% 6
1
4

%
6
4

%
7
3

%
5
1

%
3
2

%
6
3

%
2
4

%
5
8

%
7
7

%
4
6

%
8
5

%
0

%
0
0
1

%
9
1

%
1
8

%
0
6

%
0
4

%
8
6

%
3
6

%
2
3

%
7
3

%
0
9

%
0
1

%
8
9

%
2

%
1
2

%
9
7

%
2
% 2
9
3

%
8
% 7
1
6

%
7
1

%
3
8

%
8
% 3
7
5

%
2
% 6
3
4

%
5
3

%
3
% 2
6
3

%
7
2

%
5
6

%
7
% 7
4
6

%
3
7

% at roadside

% at premises

1.1 Roadside checks 

In  total,  4,982,439  vehicles  and  5,395,009  drivers  were  checked  at  the  roadside  throughout 
the  EU.  The  difference  between  these  two  numbers  may  be  explained  by  multi-manning 
driving, i.e. where there are at least two drivers in the vehicle to do the driving. Differences 
between  the  number  of  drivers  and  vehicles  are  mainly  present  in  reports  from  Belgium, 
Germany, Latvia, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Lithuania and Poland. 

Compared  to  the  report  for  2015-2016,  the  reported  number  of  vehicles  checked 
decreased  by  39%,  which  is  a  decrease  of  3,180,264  vehicles.  This  is  mainly  due  to 

4 

 
 
 
significant decreases in the numbers reported by Germany (-54% or 1,580,987) and Finland15 
(-99% or 1,081,158). This is similar to the increases reported by the same two Member States 
in 2015-2016. 

The  number  of  drivers  checked  decreased  by  8%  compared  to  2015-2016,  which  is  less 
significant than the 22% decrease in the last reporting period. This is mainly due to decreases 
reported in France (-19% or 157,780), Bulgaria (-48% or 142,147), Poland (-13% or 77,666), 
and accumulative effects of smaller decreases in several other Member States16.  

Based  on  the  country  of  registration  of  the  vehicle,  58%  of  the  checked  vehicles  were 
national vehicles, 33% were from other EU Member States and 9% were vehicles registered 
in  non-EU  countries17.  Overall,  most  of  the  vehicles  checked  at  the  roadside  (90%  of  the 
total) were carriers of goods, whereas only 10% were carriers of passengers.  

In 2017-2018, 75% of the vehicles checked at the roadside were equipped with a digital 
tachograph. Hence, there are no grounds for raising the threshold of checks from 3% to 4%, 
as this should be done when 90% of checked vehicles are equipped with digital tachographs 
according to Article 2(3) of Directive 2006/22/EC. 

1.2 Checks at the premises 

In 2017-2018 period, 104,104 transport undertakings were checked, which is a 29% decrease 
compared  to  146,967  undertakings  checked  in  2015-2016.  Controllers  at  premises  checked 
around 33.7 million working days, which represents a slight decrease of 3% compared to 34.8 
million  in  the  previous  report.  Overall,  Member  States’  control  authorities  checked  at  the 
premises the records of 641,033 drivers, which is 3% fewer compared to 5,846,011 in 2015-
2016. 

2.  Offences 

All Member States provided data on offences detected, but not all18 provided details on the 
types of infringements. The total number of offences reported was around 3.41 million, 
which is stable compared to the last report (3.46 million). 

The  number  of  offences  detected  at  the  premises  remained  stable  with  1%  increase,  while 
offences detected at the roadside decreased by 3%. The share of roadside offences detected 
remained stable at the level of 57% of total offences detected (58 % in the last report). 

The share of types of infringements in the overall number of detected infringements remained 
similar  as  in  the  previous  reporting  period,  with  some  slight  changes.  Figure  3  below 
illustrates the EU average share of infringements by the type of provision infringed, detected 
at both roadside and premises in 2017-2018. Once again, the number of offences regarding 

15 Finland did not report data from the national police. 
16    Hungary, Italy,  Spain,  Lithuania, Denmark,  Austria,  Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland,  Latvia,  Netherlands, Sweden 
and United Kingdom. 
17 Data provided by Finland were not included due to the submission of incomplete data.  
18 Latvia did not provide types of offences at premises checks. 

5 

 
 
                                                           
breaks  slightly  decreased  from  21%  to  17%,  whereas  offences  of  the  driving  time  records 
rose from 24% to 27%. Offences for rest periods constitute 23% (24% in the last report), 
recording equipment19 represent 12% (11% in the last report) and the lack/availability of 
records for other work constitute 6% (7% in the last report) of all detected infringements. 
These developments are presented in Figure 4 below. 

The average offence rate, which is calculated based on 100 working days checked at premises 
and  roadside  checks,  marginally  increased  from  2.6  in  2015-2016  to  2.7  in  the  current 
reporting  period.  The  detection  rate  at  premises  remains  twice  as  high  as  the  detection 
rate  at  the  roadside,  which  illustrates  that  checks  at  the  premises  are  much  more 
efficient than ad hoc roadside controls.  

Figure 3: Categories of infringements at roadside and premises 2017-2018 

Categories of infringements at roadside and premises 2017-18

12%

6%

17%

27%

23%

14%

Breaks

Rest periods

Driving time

Driving time records

recording equipment

lack of records

Figure 4: Categories of infringements at roadside and premises over the last 10 years 

19 Offences regarding recording equipment relate to the incorrect functioning and misuse or manipulation of the 
recording equipment.  

6 

 
 
 
                                                           
l

a
t
o
t

f
o
e
r
a
h
s
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

2007-2008

2009-2010

2011-2012

2013-2014

2015-2016

2017-2018

breaks

rest periods

driving time

driving time records

recording equipment

lack/availability of
records for other work

30%

25%

20%

14%

10%

1%

29%

23%

18%

15%

5%

8%

26%

24%

19%

17%

8%

6%

23%

25%

16%

17%

10%

8%

21%

24%

13%

24%

11%

7%

17%

23%

14%

27%

12%

6%

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.1 Offences detected at the roadside 

Around 1.94 million offences were detected at the roadside in 2017-2018, which is 3% less 
compared to around 2 million offences in 2015-2016. The EU average of offences detected at 
the  roadside  slightly  decreased  from  2.17  to  2.11  per  100  working  days  checked.  On  average, 
55% of offences were found to be committed by domestic drivers, which corresponds to the 58% 
share of domestic vehicles among all vehicles stopped for controls. 

2.2 Offences detected at the premises 

Offences detected  at  the premises were around 1.46  million, which is 1% less than in the 
last  reporting  period.  The  average  offence  detection  rate  per  100  working  days  checked 
increased  from  4.19  to  4.35,  which  represents  an  increase  of  4%  compared  to  2015-2016.  The 
increase in the offence rate (despite a decrease in offences detected) is explained by a decline in 
the number of working days checked.   

The average offence rate detected at premises per undertaking decreased from 37 in 2015-2016 
to 14 offences per undertaking, following a spike in the offence rate in the last report20. This is 
mainly explained by large decreases in offence detection rates in Latvia (from an offence rate per 
undertaking at 552.96 to 340.75). 

2.3 Number of enforcement officers and equipment to analyse tachographs 

In the current reporting  period, 61,558 control officers were involved in  checks throughout the 
EU, which confirms a stable situation in the number of officers.  

21,786 control officers were trained to analyse the digital tachograph records (the 9% decrease 
from the last reporting period). The units of equipment provided to control officers to analyse the 
tachograph records also decreased by 5.5%. Member States did not indicate any reasons for this 
decrease.  

3.  Interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 by the Court of Justice of the European 

Union 

The  Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union  provided  interpretation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 
561/2006  by  means  of  the  rulings  in  Case  C-231/18  NK  and  Joined  Cases  C-203/18  and 
C-374/18.  The  cases  related  to  interpretations  of  the  exceptions  provided  for  in  Article  13(1) 
with reference to the terms “local markets” and “universal services”. 

In  Case  C-231/18  NK,  the  Court  ruled  that  the  term  ‘local  markets’  in  Article  13(1)(p)  of 
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 must be interpreted as referring neither to the transaction carried 
out between a livestock wholesaler and a farmer nor to the livestock wholesaler himself, so that 

20 It almost tripled from 12.77 to 36.57 from 2015-16 to 2017-18. 

8 

 
 
                                                           
the exception provided for in that provision cannot be extended to include vehicles transporting 
live animals directly from farms to local slaughterhouses.  

In Joined Cases C-203/18 and C-374/18, the Court ruled that Article 13(1)(d) of Regulation (EC) 
No 561/2006 must be interpreted as meaning that the exception, which it lays down, covers only 
vehicles  or  combinations  of  vehicles  that  are  used  exclusively,  during  a  particular  transport 
operation, for the purpose of delivering items as part of the universal postal service. 

4.  Cooperation between Member States 

According to Article 5 of Directive 2006/22/EC, Member States are obliged to undertake no less 
than six concerted roadside checks per year with at least one other Member State. Eight Member 
States21 did not provide information on the exact number of concerted checks, while three did not 
report at all whether they have undertaken concerted checks22. Out of the 17 Member States that 
did  provide  adequate  information  on  checks,  12  Member  States23  met  the  required  number  of 
concerted checks per  year. Based on this, both Member States providing numbers and Member 
States  who  met  the  required  number  of  concerted  checks  decreased  compared  to  2015-2016, 
where  24  Member  States  provided  information,  out  of  which  15  Member  States  met  the 
threshold.  

Cooperation between Member States concerns mostly neighbouring Member States. Also, as for 
the  last  reporting  period,  most  of  the  Member  States  indicated  that  the  cooperation  took  place 
within the framework of Euro Contrôle Route (ECR).  

The  cooperation  between  Member  States  based  on  concerted  checks,  joint  training 
initiatives or exchanges of experience and information, plays a crucial role in achieving the 
objectives  of  the  social  legislation  in  the  road  transport  sector  i.e.  improved  working 
conditions,  fair  competition  and  improved  road  safety.  The  first  Mobility  Package24,  which 
was  adopted  in  July  2020  and  has  entered  into  force  at  the  time  of  writing  this  report,  shall 
promote and reinforce the cooperation and mutual assistance between Member States and ensure 
more effective and consistent enforcement of the rules in force. In addition, the European Labour 
Authority (ELA)  was established in 201925  with  an overarching objective  to  ensure fair labour 
mobility  in  the  internal  market.  One  of  ELA’s  main  tasks  consists  in  supporting  cooperation 
between  Member  States  in  the  cross-border  enforcement  and  facilitating  joint  inspections 
including in the area of EU social rules in the road transport sector.  

21 Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and Slovakia. 
22 Croatia, Cyprus, and Greece. 
23  Austria,  Czech  Republic,  Germany,  Hungary,  Ireland,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Netherlands  Poland,  Romania, 
Spain, and United Kingdom. 
24 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2020:249:FULL&from=FR 
25  Regulation  (EU)  2019/1149  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20  June  2019  establishing  a 
European Labour Authority, amending Regulations (EC) No 883/2004, (EU) No 492/2011, and (EU) 2016/589 and 
repealing Decision (EU) 2016/344 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 21). 

9 

 
 
                                                           
 
II. Overview of the implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC 

According  to  Article  13  of  Directive  2002/15/EC,  Member  States  are  obliged  to  report  on  its 
implementation and indicate the views of employees and employers at national level every two 
years. 

1.  The scope of Directive 2002/15/EC  

The  Directive  establishes  rules  governing,  inter  alia,  adequate  breaks  during  the  working  period,  the 
maximum weekly working time and night work. Its provisions supplement the rules on driving 
times,  breaks  and  rest  periods  established  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006.  As  this  Directive 
lays  down  certain  provisions  concerning  hours  of  work  that  are  specific  to  the  road  transport 
sector, it is regarded as  a lex specialis to  the general Directive  2003/88/EC26 on working time, 
which establishes basic requirements for the organisation of the working time of workers in all 
sectors. 

2.  Implementation aspects in Member States   

Only  Lithuania27  indicated  that  national  provisions  implementing  Directive  2002/15/EC  were 
amended  in  2017-2018.  They  amended  the  provisions  governing  working  and  rest  time, 
including  the  terms  used,  e.g.  maximum  working  time  of  mobile  workers,  rest  periods,  night 
work, the recording of working time and worker information28.  

Several  Member  States  and  social  partners  reported  some  implementation  issues.  Slovakian 
authorities  and  the  Confederation  of  Trade  Unions  reported  a  lack  of  knowledge  of  the 
legislation  on  working  time  among  drivers  and  operators.  This  opinion  was  shared  by  the 
Swedish  authorities,  which  reported  that  insufficient  knowledge  was  particularly  prevalent 
among employers and self-employed. 

Several authorities also reported a need for further clarification of some definitions in Directive 
2002/15/EC. In Italy, social partners called for further clarification on the definitions of ‘working 
time’  and  ‘time  devoted  to  all  road  transport  activities’  in  the  directive.  The  Portuguese 
authorities  shared  similar  concerns,  and  in  particular  called  for  clarification  of  ‘periods  of 
availability’.  The  German  authorities  reported  difficulties  assessing  what  counts  as  ‘working 
time’, specifically when controlling digital data. 

A lack of human resources was also reported by Slovenian trade unions and by social partners in 
Germany.  The  Luxembourgish  authorities  as  well  as  some  German  Ländern  also  reported  that 

26  Directive  2003/88/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  4  November  2003  concerning  certain 
aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p.9). 
27 Amendments to the provisions of Government Resolution No 496 of 21 June 2017 on the implementation of the 
Lithuanian Labour Code regulating the terms used within arrangements governing work and rest time. 
28 Government Resolution No 496 of 21 June 2017 on the implementation of the Lithuanian Labour Code by means 
of Resolution No 587 of 14 May 2003. 

10 

 
 
                                                           
their  activities  were  undermined  by  insufficient  enforcement  personnel.  Finally,  some  national 
authorities  reported  difficulties  in  controlling  the  working  time  of  drivers  involved  in  different 
types of carriage activities29 or conducting transport operations for several employers30.  

Feedback  from  France  and  Sweden  underlined  the  importance  of  increasing  the  frequency  of 
checks monitoring of the implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC to uphold Union labour law 
standards. 

Over  the  past  three  years,  France  re-organised  its  labour  inspection  system,  creating  sectoral 
transport  inspection  units  staffed  with  officers  trained  to  understand  the  specific  nature  of  the 
activities  in  the  road  transport  sector.  These  organisational  changes  led  to  both  qualitative  and 
quantitative improvement of the checks. 

From the perspective of the Swedish authorities, it was observed that an increase in the number 
of  inspections  led  to  greater  awareness  of  the  rules.  Sweden  aims  to  improve  communication 
with the industry and raise awareness of the negative impacts of night work in an overall effort to 
improve knowledge of the legislation on working time among employers and self-employed. 

In spite of these shared observations, it remains difficult to identify trends and outstanding issues 
at the Union-level due to the significant number of incomplete submissions by Member States. 

3.  Interpretation of Directive 2002/15/EC  

A  few  Member  States  reported  judicial  interpretation  by  national  courts  interpreting  certain 
provisions of Directive 2002/15/EC in 2017-2018. Sweden indicated that they were waiting for a 
ruling in a case related to the possibility of carrying out a collective agreement derogating from 
parts  of  the  national  legal  act  transposing  Directive  2002/15/EC.  Estonia  reported  that  legal 
disputes concerning the  implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC had been settled by  courts of 
first instance. In Slovenia, doubts regarding the hierarchy of legal acts on the issue of whether or 
not  lunch  breaks  should  be  counted  as  working  time  were  interpreted.  Greece  ruled  that  the 
provisions  of  Directive  2002/15/EC,  which  stipulate  that  break  and  rest  periods  are  not 
considered working time, do not prevent the enactment of national regulations to better regulate 
these periods. Spain had a number of court cases related to collective agreements, holiday pay, 
travelling  time,  and  carriage  of  passengers  with  one  particular  case  regarding  the  event  of  a 
change  in  the  working  day  and  the  impact  on  the  structure  of  the  driver’s  wage  in  passenger 
transport. 

4.  Offences against working time rules 

Several Member States31 indicated that behaviour correction was made possible within a defined 
period to avoid an imposition of a penalty. The enforcement authorities will only proceed with 

29 Cyprus 
30 Slovenia 

11 

 
 
                                                           
their sanctions in cases where the deficiency failed to be addressed. In this regard, the Swedish 
industry reported that the absence of direct sanction was appreciated,  as it gives the employers 
and  self-employed  a  chance  to  implement  new  ways  of  working,  using  new  technologies  or 
changing procedures to improve legal compliance. 

Only nine Member States32 provided quantitative data on the offences detected. This number is 
stable  compared  to  the  previous  reporting  period  where  eight  Member  States33  provided  this 
information. Several of the reporting Member States were the same as in the current report. The 
insufficient number of contributions does not allow for EU-wide conclusions to be drawn. 

 Stakeholders' views on implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC 

As  required  by  Article  13  of  Directive  2002/15/EC,  twelve  Member  States34  clearly  indicated 
that  two  sides  of  industry  had  been  consulted  for  the  purpose  of  this  reporting  exercise.  This 
number  is  slightly  higher  compared  to  the  last  report  (10  Member  States),  but  still  shows  that 
more  than  a  half  of  Member  States  do  not  involve  social  partners  in  reporting  on  the 
implementation  of  the  working  time  rules.  Some  Member  States  indicated  that  social  partners 
were not consulted, as there was no new development since the last report.   

 In five out of the twelve Member States35, the views of social partners were not reflected in a 
separate  section  or  paragraph,  and  in  three  of  these,  it  was  indicated  that there  was  no  distinct 
feedback from social partners36. The feedback was rather incorporated throughout the document, 
indistinctly from the views of national authorities or only mentioning that social partners had no 
comments.  However,  feedback  from  social  partners  was  distinguished  and  highlighted  in  a 
separate section in the reports from seven Member States37.  

Opinions  from  social  partners  cannot  be  further  analysed,  as  they  do  not  constitute  a 
representative sample.  

III. Conclusions  

The  general  outcome  of  the  analysis  on  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of  the  EU  road 
transport social rules show that overall enforcement and compliance levels in 2017-2018 remain 
stable compared to 2015-2016.  

While  there  is  a  continuous  decrease  in  the  number  of  working  days  checked,  the  number  of 
offences  detected  remained  stable  with  a  1%  decrease.  This  may  indicate  greater  efficiency  in 

31 Austria, Estonia, Finland, Sweden and Slovakia. 
32 Austria, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Poland, Romania and Spain.   
33 Austria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Poland. 
34 Cyprus, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden and the United 
Kingdom. 
35 Cyprus, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland and Portugal.  
36 Cyprus, Lithuania and Poland. 
37 Germany, Greece, Italy, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden and United Kingdom.  

12 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                           
detecting  infringements,  but  may  also  be  explained  by  a  slight  increase  in  the  ratio  of  checks 
performed at the premises compared to checks at the roadside. Indeed, the detection rate at the 
premises remains twice as high as the detection rate at the roadside indicating that checks at the 
premises are more efficient than roadside controls.  

Infringement detection rates vary significantly throughout the EU, with a small group of seven 
Member  States  having  reported  the  majority  of  the  offences  detected.  It  is  worth  emphasising 
that some Member States with very low offence detection rates are among those who have the 
highest  percentage  of  working  days  checked.  This  fact,  combined  with  the  trend  of  decreasing 
number of  working days checked  and the  limited enforcement  capacities  (human and  financial 
resources, skills and control equipment) across the Member States, indicate that it is imperative 
to better target checks.  

The  access  to  data,  such  as  risk  rating,  at  the  roadside  has  high  importance  notably  to  enable 
better  target  controls  and  to  reduce  unnecessary  ‘clean’  checks,  i.e.  checks  where  no 
infringements are detected. The access to the risk rating data by roadside inspectors will be made 
obligatory in line with new requirements introduced by Mobility Package I.  

As  regards  concerted  and  joint  checks  among  Member  States,  it  clearly  appears  that  they 
contribute  to  knowledge-sharing,  and  to  harmonised  approach  to  the  understanding  and 
enforcement of EU rules in force. Therefore, the Commission encourages the Member States to 
further strengthen their efforts in improving cooperation, through joint inspections and concerted 
checks, as well as to benefit from the assistance offered by the European Labour Authority. 

The shares of the different types of infringements remain similar to the last reporting period. At 
the  premises,  offences  related  to  driving  time  records  amount  to  almost  half  of  all  detected 
offences  indicating  difficulties  with  storing  the  relevant  data  appropriately  by  undertakings. 
Some  Member  States  introduced  higher  penalty  fees,  while  other  adjusted  their  penalty  levels 
after  the  entry  into  force  of  Commission  Regulation  (EU)  2016/403  on  1  January  2017  with 
regard  to  the  classification  of  serious  infringements.  This  may  deter  the  increasing  trend  in 
offences related to  driving time records, as missing driving  time records  is classified  as a very 
serious infringement. 

As  regards  the  implementation  of  Directive  2002/15/EC,  the  lack  of  detailed  quantitative  and 
qualitative  data  in  many  national  reports  makes  an  in-depth  assessment  difficult.  The 
Commission would like to stress the importance of this reporting exercise and remind that a legal 
action can be launched against Member States failing to comply with the requirement to submit 
the information as required by Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006.  

The Commission is confident that Mobility Package I, which was adopted at the time of writing 
this report, will allow enhanced checks efficiency and cooperation between Member States. An 
implementing  act  to  be  adopted  by  the  Commission  on  a  harmonised  risk  rating  formula  will 
allow enforcers to recognise quickly the profile of the company they intend to check. They will 

13 

 
 
notably know whether a company has a low risk rating (due to low-level of law breaches) or a 
high  risk  rating  (high-level  of  law  breaches).  In  addition,  a  remote  early  detection  of  possible 
manipulation  and misuse, shall give enforcers a  tool to select which vehicles  to  control. All of 
this will decrease the number of unnecessary checks and save resources on both side of enforcers 
and drivers.  

The Commission will continue monitoring of the implementation of social rules in road transport 
with  the  assistance  of  Member  States  and  will  remind  Member  States  that  Article  13(1)  of 
Directive 2002/15/EC requires them to include the views of both sides of industry as part of this 
reporting  exercise.  Member  States  are  encouraged  to  consider  additional  checking  and 
controlling  of  the  rules  in  force  and  notifying  to  the  Commission  the  cases  of  diverging 
interpretations of the EU provisions.  

14