COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Subsidiarity Grid Accompanying the documents Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving and enforcing working conditions of trainees and combating employment relationships disguised as traineeships and Proposal for a Council Recommendation on a reinforced Quality Framework for Traineeships and replacing the Council Recommendation of 10 March 2014 on a Quality Framework for Traineeships
Date: 2024-03-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, European Commission
Subjects: EU employment policy, integration into employment, labour market, school-working life relations, traineeship, working conditions, young person, young worker, youth employment, youth unemployment

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 20.3.2024  SWD(2024) 66 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Subsidiarity Grid Accompanying the documents Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving and enforcing working conditions of trainees and combating employment relationships disguised as traineeships  and Proposal for a Council Recommendation on a reinforced Quality Framework for Traineeships and replacing the Council Recommendation of 10 March 2014 on a Quality Framework for Traineeships {COM(2024) 132 final} - {COM(2024) 133 final} - {SEC(2024) 97 final} - {SWD(2024) 67 final} - {SWD(2024) 68 final}  
 
 
Subsidiarity Grid 

1.  Can the Union act? What is the legal basis and competence of the Unions’ intended action? 

1.1 Which article(s) of the Treaty are used to support the legislative proposal or policy initiative? 

The proposed directive is based on Article 153 (2)(b), in conjunction with Article 153 (1)(b), which 
allows  the  Union  to  adopt  directives  setting  minimum  requirements  with  respect  to  working 
conditions. 

The proposed Council Recommendation is based on Article 292 TFEU, in conjunction with Articles 
153, 165 and 166 TFEU. Article 153 TFEU allows the Union to support and complement Member 
States' activities in the field of, inter alia, working conditions, social security and social protection of 
workers, the integration of persons excluded from the labour market and the combating of social 
exclusion. Article 165 TFEU allows the Union to contribute to the development of quality education 
by  encouraging  cooperation  between  Member  States  and,  if  necessary,  by  supporting  and 
supplementing their action. Article 166 TFEU provides the legal basis for the Union to implement a 
vocational training policy which shall support and supplement the action of the Member States. 

1.2 Is the Union competence represented by this Treaty article exclusive, shared or supporting in 
nature? 

In the case of social policy and in particular working conditions (Article 153(1)(b) TFEU), the Union’s 
competence is shared with the Member States. For the area of education and training (Articles 165 
and 166 TFEU), the Union has supporting competences.  

Subsidiarity does not apply for policy areas where the Union has exclusive competence as defined in 
Article 3 TFEU1. It is the specific legal basis which determines whether the proposal falls under the 
subsidiarity  control  mechanism.  Article  4  TFEU2  sets  out  the  areas  where  competence  is  shared 
between the Union and the Member States. Article 6 TFEU3 sets out the areas for which the Unions 
has competence only to support the actions of the Member States. 

2.  Subsidiarity Principle: Why should the EU act? 

2.1 Does the proposal fulfil the procedural requirements of Protocol No. 24: 

-  Has there been a wide consultation before proposing the act? 
- 

Is there a detailed statement with qualitative and, where possible, quantitative indicators 
allowing an appraisal of whether the action can best be achieved at Union level? 

A two-stage Treaty-based consultation of the European Social Partners under Article 154 TFEU was 
carried out by the Commission. The first stage (11 July – 15 September 2023) sought their views on 
the need for and possible direction of EU action to address the challenges, while the second stage 
(28 September – 9 November 2023) consulted them on the possible content of the EU action. 

Various  stakeholder  consultation  activities  were  carried  out  to  collect  factual  evidence  and 
stakeholder views on possible problems and necessary measures to improve the use and quality of, 
and the access to traineeships in the EU.  

1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12008E003&from=EN  
2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12008E004&from=EN  
3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12008E006:EN:HTML  
4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12016E/PRO/02&from=EN  

1 

 
 
 
 
 
As part of the dedicated Flash Eurobarometer 523, between 15 and 24 March 2023, 26,334 people 
between 18 and 35 years from all EU Member States were surveyed online about their perceptions 
on integration into the labour market, with a particular focus on traineeships. The Commission also 
conducted a dedicated “SME Panel” survey. 170 responses were received between 12 October 2023 
and 9 November 2023.  

Additional consultation activities were organised by an external contractor in the context of a study 
supporting  the  preparation  of  the  Impact  Assessment  (targeted  online  survey  with  national 
stakeholders  to  gather  information  on  current  practices  and  targeted  interviews  with  EU-level 
stakeholders).  Annex  2  of  the  Impact  Assessment  provides  the  outcomes  of  the  stakeholder 
consultation (Synopsis report).  

The European Parliament called for improvements in its 2023 resolution on quality traineeships in 
the EU (2020/2005(INL)). The resolution calls on the Commission to update and strengthen the 2014 
Council  Recommendation  on  a  Quality  Framework  for  Traineeships  and  turn  it  into  a  stronger 
legislative instrument and contains 2 annexes with proposals for legislative action. The Commission 
has  also  taken  into  account  opinions  by  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the 
Committee of the Regions and the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe.    

As part of the Commission's 2023 evaluation of the 2014 Quality Framework for Traineeships (QFT), 
a public consultation was held. The evaluation also entailed targeted consultations of national and 
regional  authorities  responsible  for  education,  training  and  employment  policies,  social  and 
economic partners, education and training providers, academic experts working on labour market 
issues,  organisations  representing  young  people,  young  (former,  current  and  potential  future) 
trainees, as well as other relevant stakeholders at European, national and regional level. 

2.2 Does  the  explanatory  memorandum  (and  any  impact  assessment)  accompanying  the 
Commission’s proposal contain an adequate justification regarding the conformity with the 
principle of subsidiarity? 

The 2014 QFT has helped Member States, in particular those with less developed traineeship systems 
to implement policy and legislative changes. However, significant challenges in the use and quality 
of, and access to traineeships occur in all Member States. An EU initiative can help to coordinate and 
focus Member States’ efforts on measures which can address the specific problems identified across 
all types of traineeships. While fully respecting the specificities of national systems, the  initiative 
would support Member States’ upward regulatory convergence in terms of quality and access of 
traineeships and lead to better enforcement of existing labour rights, contributing to a level-playing 
field for trainees and traineeship providers in the EU. EU action would also improve the transparency 
and  mutual  understanding  of traineeship systems  across the  EU.  This would  also  have  a  positive 
impact on cross-border mobility of trainees in the EU. The identified challenges must therefore be 
tackled  at  EU  level.  However,  given  the  diversity  of  national  systems  and  rules  on  work-based 
learning and the diversity in types of traineeships and given the need to respect the principles of 
subsidiarity  and  proportionality,  Member  States  will  be  able  to  adapt  the  measures  to  the 
specificities of their national systems, in particular when it comes to regulatory enforcement and the 
independence of labour inspectorates, (vocational) education and training and (access to) regulated 
professions. 

2.3 Based on the answers to the questions below, can the objectives of the proposed action be 

achieved sufficiently by the Member States acting alone (necessity for EU action)? 

The  objectives  of  the  proposed  initiative  cannot  be  sufficiently  achieved  by  the  Member  States 
acting alone. Given the common challenges and need to better use the potential of traineeships to 

2 

 
 
 
provide a genuine learning and work experience resulting, an EU initiative can help to coordinate 
and focus Member States’ efforts on measures which can address the specific problems identified 
across all types of traineeships.    

(a)  Are there significant/appreciable transnational/cross-border aspects to the problems being 

tackled? Have these been quantified? 

It is estimated that the prevalence of cross-border traineeships has increased between 2013 and 
2023 from 9%  to 21%.    The  Commission evaluation of the 2014 QFT showed the  importance  for 
trainees  of  reduced  regulatory  fragmentation,  common  quality  requirements  and  transparent 
information  about  applicable  rules  to  further  facilitate  their  cross-border  mobility  in  the  Single 
Market. 

(b)  Would national action or the absence of the EU level action conflict with core objectives of 

the Treaty5 or significantly damage the interests of other Member States? 

The  EU  Treaties  promote  well-being,  employment  and  improved  living  and  working  conditions. 
While the absence of EU level action might not significantly damage the interests of other Member 
States, only EU action can ensure a consistent approach to improving the use and quality of, and 
access to traineeships and to contributing to better labour market outcomes of traineeships. A level 
playing  field  for  trainees  and  traineeship  providers  and  the  enforcement  of  existing  rights  is 
increasingly  relevant  to  both  social  inclusion  and  business  competitiveness,  given  the  skills 
mismatches, labour shortages and the significant increase of cross-border traineeships in the EU. 

(c)  To  what  extent  do  Member  States  have  the  ability  or  possibility  to  enact  appropriate 

measures? 

In accordance with the Treaty legal base of this initiative, Member States have broad discretion in 
setting and enforcing the rules on use, quality and access of traineeships. However, an EU initiative 
can  help  to  coordinate  and  focus  Member  States’  efforts  to  improve  implementation.  The 
assessment  in  the  Commission  evaluation  and  the  supporting  impact  assessment  pointed  to 
persistent  and  considerable  gaps  in  conformity  between  national  and  regional  regulatory 
frameworks and revealed significant potential to further improve the 2014 QFT implementation in 
national legislation.   

(d)  How  does  the  problem  and  its  causes  (e.g.  negative  externalities,  spill-over  effects)  vary 

across the national, regional and local levels of the EU? 

The problem and its causes generally do not vary substantially within Member States, while there 
are some divergences between Member States in particular regarding the prevalence of trainees, 
how  developed or fragmented their regulatory framework for traineeships and the enforcement 
mechanisms  are.  For  the  Member  States  that  already  have  effective  measures  to  tackle  the 
identified problems, the direct impact of the EU initiative might be smaller, but they would benefit 
from the coherent and better coordinated approach across the EU. 

(e)  Is the problem widespread across the EU or limited to a few Member States? 

Significant challenges in the use and quality of, and access to traineeships occur in all Member States, 
albeit to a different extent per Member State and per traineeship type. Importantly, the estimates 
about the prevalence of (paid) traineeships in the EU suggest that DE, ES, FR, IT and PL account for 

5 https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en  

3 

 
 
 
more than 80% of paid trainees, whereas seven other Member States (BE, DK, IE, EL, HR, AT, FI) also 
have total numbers of over 10 000 paid trainees per year on average.   

(f)  Are Member States overstretched in achieving the objectives of the planned measure? 

The proposed measures are proportionate. They impose few administrative burdens on Member 
States  while  bringing  substantial  social  benefits  when  fully  implemented  (e.g.  increased  fiscal 
revenues, improved quality of traineeships, including better working conditions and more adequate 
access to social protection for trainees). In assessing the policy options, due consideration was given 
to the need to afford sufficient discretion to Member States in implementing the measures into their 
respective national systems, in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality 
and the Treaty legal base for social policy measures. 

(g)  How  do  the  views/preferred  courses  of  action  of  national,  regional  and  local  authorities 

differ across the EU? 

In the preparation of this initiative the views of authorities were gathered in an online survey (60 
responses  from  national  public  authorities)  and  during  the  public  consultation  under  the  2023 
evaluation of the 2014 QFT (public authorities represented 85 out of 259 respondents). The public 
authorities expressed the highest support for the 2014 QFT and its added value in improving the 
quality of traineeships across the EU, while they have heterogeneous views on how to address the 
identified challenges. 

2.4 Based on the answer to the questions below, can the objectives of the proposed action be 
better achieved at Union level by reason of scale or effects of that action (EU added value)? 

The main added value of EU action is to create a consistent common framework of principles and 
minimum  standards  across  all  Member  States  to  improve  the  use  and  quality  of,  and  access  to 
traineeships to contribute to better labour market outcomes of traineeships and to foster cross-
border mobility of trainees. It should trigger upward social convergence and enhance the coherence 
of the Single Market, by supporting Member States in ensuring a level playing field, the enforcement 
of applicable rules  and a consistent  and fair level of protection of trainees  in the  EU. It will also 
enlarge  the  pool  of  (future)  workers  with  relevant  skills,  contributing  to  supporting  the 
competitiveness of businesses and fostering social inclusion. 

(a)  Are there clear benefits from EU level action?  

The  initiative  would  support  Member  States’  upward  regulatory  convergence  and  better 
enforcement  of  existing  labour  rights,  contributing  to  a  level  playing  field  for  trainees  and 
traineeship  providers  in  the  EU.  Such  a  level  playing  field  is  increasingly  relevant  to  both  social 
inclusion and business competitiveness, given existing skills mismatches, labour shortages in the EU 
and the significant increase of cross-border traineeships within the EU. 

(b)  Are there economies of scale? Can the objectives be met more efficiently at EU level (larger 

benefits per unit cost)? Will the functioning of the internal market be improved? 

EU action can yield advantages by ensuring a level playing field across various economic operators 
investing  in  and  benefitting  from  traineeships  (including  cross-border  traineeships),  as  well  as 
helping mitigate issues related to skills mismatch, one of the drivers of labour shortages in the EU 
internal market. 

(c)  What  are  the  benefits  in  replacing  different  national  policies  and  rules  with  a  more 

homogenous policy approach? 

4 

 
 
The EU initiative would support Member States in ensuring a level playing field, the enforcement of 
applicable rules and a consistent and fair level of protection of trainees in the EU. It will also enlarge 
the pool of (future) workers with relevant skills, contributing to supporting the competitiveness of 
businesses and fostering social inclusion. However, given the diversity of national systems and rules 
on  work-based  learning  and  the  diversity  in  types  of  traineeships,  the  initiative  allows  Member 
States to adapt the measures proposed, including those in the directive, to the specificities of their 
national systems, in particular when it comes to regulatory enforcement and the independence of 
labour inspectorates, (vocational) education and training and (access to) regulated professions.  

(d)  Do the benefits of EU-level action outweigh the loss of competence of the Member States 
and the local and regional authorities (beyond the costs and benefits of acting at national, 
regional and local levels)? 

The initiative will not lead to loss of competences of the Member States. It consists of a directive 
focused on the enforcement of existing rights and an update of the 2014 Council Recommendation, 
leaving a lot of possibilities to Member States to adjust the measures to the national specificities.  

(e)  Will there be improved legal clarity for those having to implement the legislation? 

The  proposed  directive  will  improve  legal  clarity  on  the  minimum  measures  to  put  in  place  to 
improve  and  enforce  working  conditions  of  trainees  and  to  combat  employment  relationships 
disguised as traineeships.  

3.  Proportionality: How the EU should act 

3.1  Does  the  explanatory  memorandum  (and  any  impact  assessment)  accompanying  the 
Commission’s proposal contain an adequate justification regarding the proportionality of the 
proposal  and  a  statement  allowing  appraisal  of  the  compliance  of  the  proposal  with  the 
principle of proportionality? 

This proposal sets minimum requirements, thus ensuring that the degree of intervention will be kept 
to the minimum necessary in order to reach the objectives of the proposal. Member States which 
already have more favourable provisions in place than those put forward in this proposal will not 
have  to  change  or  lower  them.  Member  States  may  also  decide  to  go  beyond  the  minimum 
standards  set  out.  The  costs  linked  to  this  proposal  are  reasonable  and  justified  in  light  of  the 
objective of strengthening the enforcement of working conditions of trainees. 

The  principle  of  proportionality  is  respected  considering  the  size  and  nature  of  the  identified 
problems. For instance, employers must provide authorities with information on traineeships upon 
request only. The impact assessment accompanying this initiative assessed and compared the policy 
options as to their proportionality relative to the baseline. The preferred option leaves room for 
Member States to define the method and form of intervention to achieve the objectives. Thus, it 
does not go beyond what is necessary to address the problems identified and achieve the specific 
objectives.  

3.2 Based  on  the  answers  to  the  questions  below  and  information  available  from  any  impact 
assessment,  the  explanatory  memorandum  or  other  sources,  is  the  proposed  action  an 
appropriate way to achieve the intended objectives? 

The proposed initiative is appropriate to achieve the objectives of improving the use and quality of, 
and  access  to  traineeships  across  the  EU,  so  that  they  provide  a  genuine  learning  and  work 
experience facilitating education-to-work and job-to-job transitions by improving and strengthening 

5 

 
 
the enforcement of working conditions of trainees who are considered as workers under EU law, 
and by providing recommendations to improve the quality of traineeships covering all trainees in 
the EU. The proposed legislative measures are limited to the aspects that Member States cannot 
achieve satisfactorily on their own and, while costs can be anticipated for traineeship providers and 
national authorities, these are reasonable and justified in light of the objectives. Furthermore, the 
proposed binding measures leave enough flexibility for Member States for implementation.  

(a)  Is the initiative limited to those aspects that Member States cannot achieve satisfactorily on 

their own, and where the Union can do better? 

Yes, the initiative is limited to the aspects that Member States cannot achieve satisfactorily on their 
own and where the Union can do better. The Commission evaluation of the 2014 QFT: 1) revealed 
significant  potential  to  further  improve  its  implementation  in  national  legislation,  2)  pointed  to 
missing elements to improve the quality (in particular regarding remuneration and access to social 
protection) of, and access to traineeships, and 3) highlighted the need to strengthen the practical 
implementation and enforcement of the 2014 QFT’s principles in Member States’ labour markets. 
While  Member  States  could  adopt  measures  at  national  level,  the  EU  initiative  will  help  to 
coordinate and focus Member States’ efforts. EU action can contribute to establishing a consistent 
level of minimum protection for trainees across the EU, benefitting also the increasing number of 
trainees and traineeship providers operating in a cross-border context. 

(b)  Is  the  form  of  Union  action  (choice  of  instrument)  justified,  as  simple  as  possible,  and 
coherent with the satisfactory achievement of, and ensuring compliance with the objectives 
pursued  (e.g.  choice  between  regulation,  (framework)  directive,  recommendation,  or 
alternative regulatory methods such as co-legislation, etc.)?  

The relevant legal basis allows for the adoption of binding (minimum) requirements only in the form 
of Directives and only for trainees considered as workers. Including all trainees, also unpaid, in the 
personal scope of a legislative initiative was therefore not possible given that “pay” constitutes an 
essential element of the definition of a “worker” in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the 
European  Union  (CJEU).  To  address  the  problematic  uses  of  traineeships  and  poor-quality 
traineeships, both binding and non-binding options were considered. Regarding addressing unequal 
access to quality traineeships only a non-binding option is possible. The preferred package includes 
a  Directive  applying  to  trainees  who  are  workers  under  EU  law  and  an  updated  Council 
Recommendation covering all trainees. 

(c)  Does the Union action leave as much scope for national decision as possible while achieving 
satisfactorily the objectives set? (e.g. is it possible to limit the European action to minimum 
standards or use a less stringent policy instrument or approach?) 

The EU initiative leaves much scope for national decisions.  When it comes to binding rules, these 
are  focused  on  improving  the  enforcement  of  rules  and  prevention  of  unjustified  treatment  of 
trainees  considered  as  workers  while  not  prescribing  to  Member  States  binding  rules  on 
remuneration. This leaves space for Member States to implement them according to their specific 
circumstances in a proportionate way. Sufficient scope for national decisions is also allowed under 
the Council Recommendation, for example with regard to improving access to social protection and 
setting  of  maximum  duration  of  traineeships,  in  view  of  the  uncertainty  on  the  size  of  problem 
across Member States and differences across Member States and by type of traineeships. Thus, the 
initiative does not go beyond what is necessary to address the problems identified and achieve the 
specific objectives.  Member States which already have more favourable provisions in place than 
those put forward in this proposal will not have to change or lower them. Member States may also 
decide to go beyond the minimum standards set out.  

6 

 
 
(d)  Does  the  initiative  create  financial  or  administrative  cost  for  the  Union,  national 
governments, regional or local authorities, economic operators or citizens? Are these costs 
commensurate with the objective to be achieved? 

The  initiative  creates  some  costs  for  traineeship  providers  and  national  governments  which  are 
reasonable  and  justified  in  light  of  the  objective  of  strengthening  the  enforcement  of  working 
conditions of trainees and combating employment relationships disguised as traineeships.  

The main costs of the legislative measures for traineeship providers relate to a possible increase in 
labour costs and administrative or judicial procedures and penalties. These would mainly apply to 
traineeship  providers  where  controls  and  inspections  identify  work  relationships  disguised  as 
traineeships  or  non-compliant  traineeships.    Small  costs  could  arise  from  the  inclusion  of 
traineeships in existing controls and inspections and administrative costs from having to provide 
competent authorities (upon request) data and information regarding trainees and their contracts. 

Labour  costs  could  also  arise  for  traineeship  providers  who  are  treating  trainees  unequally 
compared to other/entry-level workers and no grounds for such an unjustifiable treatment can be 
identified. Where such objective grounds can be identified, labour cost could arise to ensure that 
the differentiated treatment should be proportionate to the grounds).  However, it should be noted 
that  for  individual  traineeship  providers  these  costs  could  be  expected  to  be  relatively  small, 
especially for SMEs, in relation to their overall labour cost. This is because trainees represent a small 
fraction of the overall labour force. It is roughly estimated that costs could be around EUR 41 million 
(under  the  minimum  wage  benchmark)  and  EUR  81  million  (under  the  comparable  entry  level 
worker benchmark)6.  

Regarding public administrations, the main costs of the legislative measures would be linked to a 
possible  increase  in  enforcement  costs  to  strengthening  the  capacity  of  competent  inspection 
authorities and adjustment costs to ensure channels to report malpractice. The former costs could 
be roughly estimated to EUR 27,000 (if only training would be provided to existing inspectors) to 
around EUR 1.1 million (if Member States decide to hire and train additional staff in line with the 
ILO recommendations on the optimal number of inspectors per/10,000 employees).  No continuous 
reporting or other administrative requirements are imposed.  

Some  stakeholders  expressed  concerns  that  these  costs  could  reduce  the  offer  of  traineeships, 
especially  paid  traineeships.  The  majority  of  these  potentially  lost  traineeships  are  likely  to  be 
problematic and/or poor-quality traineeships, in line with the aim of the initiative. The effect on the 
reduction of paid traineeships is expected to be small, given the benefits for traineeship providers, 
demographic  trends  and  tight  labour  markets.    The  risk  of  a  reduction  in  the  number  of  paid 
traineeships is expected to be further mitigated due to a fairer competition between law-abiding 
traineeship providers.  

The  costs  of  non-legislative  measures  would  depend  on  the  degree  of  implementation  by  the 
Member States.  

(e)  While respecting the Union law, have special circumstances applying in individual Member 

States been taken into account? 

The  initiative  respects  national  competencies  and  allows  Member  States  to  adapt  the  measures 
taken  to  the  specificities  of  their  national  systems,  in  particular  when  it  comes  to  regulatory 
enforcement and the independence of labour inspectorates, (vocational) education and training and 

6Under the assumption that 22% of paid trainees are not fairly/proportionately remunerated. 

7 

 
 
 
(access to) regulated professions. In particular, the initiative gives Member States enough scope to 
put in place monitoring and enforcement arrangements taking into account national systems and 
prerogatives while it avoids prescriptive rules regarding working conditions. Furthermore, despite 
the proposed single regulatory approach across all types of traineeships, the proposed measures 
have in-built flexibility, where relevant, which allows for a differentiated approach depending on 
the specificities of the various types of traineeships, taking into consideration their objectives and 
characteristics,  as  well  as  specific  national  conditions.  The  principle  of  proportionality  is  also 
respected considering the size and nature of the identified problems. For instance, employers must 
provide authorities with information on traineeships upon request only. 

8