natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This perception is, however, changed with the Laval ruling, in which the court states that article 3(7) in the Posting Directive “ cannot be interpreted as allowing the host Member State to make the provision of services in its territory conditional on the observance of terms and conditions of employment which go beyond the mandatory rules for minimum protection ”.
This perception is, however, changed with the Laval ruling, in which the court states that article 3(7) in the Posting Directive “ cannot be interpreted as allowing the host Member State to make the provision of services in its territory conditional on the observance of terms and conditions of employment which go beyond the mandatory rules for minimum protection ”.
The ruling furthermore states that the PWD lays down the degree of protection that the host member state “ is entitled to require those undertakings to observe ” (our emphasis) (Para.
The ruling furthermore states that the PWD lays down the degree of protection that the host member state “ is entitled to require those undertakings to observe ” (our emphasis) (Para.
80), and continues in the next paragraph “ the level of protection which must be guaranteed to workers posted to the territory of the host Member State is limited, in principle, to that provided for in Article 3(1), first subparagraph, (a) to (g) of Directive 96/71 ”.
80), and continues in the next paragraph “ the level of protection which must be guaranteed to workers posted to the territory of the host Member State is limited, in principle, to that provided for in Article 3(1), first subparagraph, (a) to (g) of Directive 96/71 ”.
What the host member state can impose on a visiting company is thus limited to the core of the PWD, and nothing beyond that.
What the host member state can impose on a visiting company is thus limited to the core of the PWD, and nothing beyond that.
In other words, what we thought was a minimum directive has become a maximum directive.
In other words, what we thought was a minimum directive has become a maximum directive.
In the reasoning of this ruling, the court has, for practical purposes, abolished article 3(7) allowing more favourable terms and conditions.
In the reasoning of this ruling, the court has, for practical purposes, abolished article 3(7) allowing more favourable terms and conditions.
Thus, national wage agreements can be undercut for posted workers.
Thus, national wage agreements can be undercut for posted workers.
This interpretation is further developed and explained in the Rüffert case.
This interpretation is further developed and explained in the Rüffert case.
The ECJ states in paragraph 32 that the normal wage in Niedersachsen " cannot be considered to be a term and condition of employment which is more favourable to workers within the meaning of Article 3(7) of Directive 96/71. "
The ECJ states in paragraph 32 that the normal wage in Niedersachsen " cannot be considered to be a term and condition of employment which is more favourable to workers within the meaning of Article 3(7) of Directive 96/71. "
The Court continues to say that " such an interpretation would amount to depriving the directive of its effectiveness (see Laval un Partneri, paragraph 80). "
The Court continues to say that " such an interpretation would amount to depriving the directive of its effectiveness (see Laval un Partneri , paragraph 80). "
In other word the directive could not be interpreted in the way it is written since it would go against the purpose of the directive which according to the court is to bring about the freedom to provide services and not the protection of workers.
In other word the directive could not be interpreted in the way it is written since it would go against the purpose of the directive which according to the court is to bring about the freedom to provide services and not the protection of workers.
The balance between the free movement of services and the fundamental right to strike
The balance between the free movement of services and the fundamental right to strike
The ECJ in the Viking and Laval cases introduces a horizontal direct effect of article 43 and 49 which can be used by employers and service providers to challenge collective agreements and industrial actions with a cross-border effect.
The ECJ in the Viking and Laval cases introduces a horizontal direct effect of article 43 and 49 which can be used by employers and service providers to challenge collective agreements and industrial actions with a cross-border effect.
The autonomy for collective bargaining from competition rules is thereby not extended to the field of free movement.
The autonomy for collective bargaining from competition rules is thereby not extended to the field of free movement.
This brings about risks: Industrial relations in the Member States could be put under legal scrutiny; uncertainty in industrial relations; a “flood” of cases to the ECJ.
This brings about risks: Industrial relations in the Member States could be put under legal scrutiny; uncertainty in industrial relations; a “flood” of cases to the ECJ.
Any company in a transnational dispute has the opportunity to use this judgement against union actions, alleging that it was" disproportional”.
Any company in a transnational dispute has the opportunity to use this judgement against union actions, alleging that it was" disproportional”.
The verdict says that the right to strike is a fundamental right but not so fundamental as the EU's free movement provisions.
The verdict says that the right to strike is a fundamental right but not so fundamental as the EU's free movement provisions.
This could lead to wage competition and make it difficult for trade unions to ensure equal treatment.
This could lead to wage competition and make it difficult for trade unions to ensure equal treatment.
Since these verdicts have proven that the current legislation is not sufficient enough to provide a balance between the freedom to provide services and the workers rights, we need to take immediate action to ensure that necessary changes in European legislation are made in order to counter the possible detrimental social, economical and political effects of the ECJ judgements.
Since these verdicts have proven that the current legislation is not sufficient enough to provide a balance between the freedom to provide services and the workers rights, we need to take immediate action to ensure that necessary changes in European legislation are made in order to counter the possible detrimental social, economical and political effects of the ECJ judgements.
These changes should be considered;
These changes should be considered;
· Review the PWD.
· Review the PWD.
· Summarize the social clauses of the Monti directive and the Service directive in a social clause in primary law or in an inter-institutional agreement.
· Summarize the social clauses of the Monti directive and the Service directive in a social clause in primary law or in an inter-institutional agreement.
· Immediately adopt the Temporary Agency Directive in which it is clarified that the same rules should immediately apply to temporary agency workers as if they were employed directly by the enterprise.
· Immediately adopt the Temporary Agency Directive in which it is clarified that the same rules should immediately apply to temporary agency workers as if they were employed directly by the enterprise.
· Adopt measures to combat letterbox-companies , undertakings not engaged in any genuine and meaningful business in the country of origin but created, sometimes even directly by the main contractor in the host country, for the sole purpose of offering ‘services’ to the host country in order to avoid the full application of host country rules and regulations especially with regard to wages and working conditions.
· Adopt measures to combat letterbox-companies, undertakings not engaged in any genuine and meaningful business in the country of origin but created, sometimes even directly by the main contractor in the host country, for the sole purpose of offering ‘services’ to the host country in order to avoid the full application of host country rules and regulations especially with regard to wages and working conditions.
СТАНОВИЩЕ на комисията по правни въпроси
OPINION of the Committee on Legal Affairs (*)
(*) Процедура с асоциирани комисии – член 47 от правилника
(*) Associated committees – Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure
Комисията по правни въпроси приканва водещата комисия по заетост и социални въпроси да включи в предложението за резолюция, което ще приеме, следните предложения:
The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
А. като има предвид, че Договорът за създаване на Европейската общност признава основните права, предвидени в Хартата на основните права на Европейския съюз, както и в конституциите на държавите-членки и в различни международни договори и конвенции, като основна отправна точка за правото и практиката на ЕС,
A. whereas the Treaty establishing the European Community acknowledges the fundamental rights laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as in the Member States' constitutions and in different international treaties and conventions, as fundamental references for EU law and practice,
Б. като има предвид, че Договорът за създаване на Европейската общност установява редица принципи; като има предвид, че една от основните дейности на Общността е вътрешен пазар, който се характеризира с премахването на пречките пред свободното движение на стоки, хора, услуги и капитали между държавите-членки, както и политика в социалната област,
B. whereas the Treaty establishing the European Community lays down a number of principles; whereas one of the main activities of the Community is an internal market characterised by the abolition, as between Member States, of obstacles to the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital, as well as a policy in the social sphere,
В. като има предвид, че един от тези принципи е признаването на основни конституционни права на гражданите, включващи правото на създаване на профсъюзи, правото на стачка и правото на договаряне на колективни трудови договори,
C. whereas one of those principles is the recognition of citizens' basic constitutional rights, including the right to form trade unions, the right to strike and the right to negotiate collective agreements,
Д. като има предвид, че съгласно член 39 от Договора за създаване на Европейската общност, свободното движение на работници налага премахването на всякаква дискриминация, основаваща се на гражданство между работниците от държавите-членки, що се отнася до заетост, възнаграждение и други условия на труд,
E. whereas, according to Article 39 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, freedom of movement for workers entails the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment,
Е. като има предвид, че правото на предприемане на колективни действия и на сключване на колективни трудови договори е основно право, което представлява неразделна част от общите принципи на правото на Общността; като има предвид, че в тази връзка Съдът на Европейските общности не следва да се осланя на изявление на Съвета и Комисията от 24 септември 1996 г., което не е било прието от Европейския парламент в качеството му на съзаконодател, с цел да се ограничи тълкуването на концепциите за „разпоредби, свързани с обществения ред” и „национални разпоредби с основна важност за политическия ред” само до задължителни правила, предвидени в законодателството,
F. whereas the right to take collective action and to conclude collective agreements is a fundamental right which forms an integral part of the general principles of Community law; whereas in that context the Court of Justice should not rely on a statement of the Council and the Commission dated 24 September 1996 that has not been adopted by the European Parliament as co-legislator in order to restrict the interpretation of the concepts of "public policy provisions" and "national provisions crucial to political order" merely to mandatory rules laid down in legislation,
Ж. като има предвид, че член 3, параграф 1, буква а) от Директивата за услугите ясно посочва, че тази директива не цели да замени Директива 96/71/ЕО (ДКР)
G. whereas Article 3(1)(a) of the Services Directive clearly indicates that that Directive is not intended to replace Directive 96/71/EC (the PWD)
З. като има предвид, че ограничения върху основните свободи са допустими по силата на Договора за ЕО, ако с тях се преследват законни цели, съвместими с Договора, ако се основават на императивни съображения от обществен интерес, ако са подходящи за постигане на преследваните цели и не надхвърлят необходимото за постигането на тези цели; като има предвид, че, същевременно, съгласно член 52 от Хартата на основните права ограничения на упражняването на правата и свободите, признати от Хартата, могат да бъдат налагани, само ако са пропорционални и необходими и ако действително отговарят на признати от Съюза цели от общ интерес или на необходимостта да се защитят правата и свободите на други хора,
H. whereas restrictions on fundamental freedoms are possible under the EC Treaty, if they pursue legitimate aims compatible with the Treaty, are justified by an overriding reason of public interest, are suitable to attain the objectives pursued and do not go beyond what is necessary to attain them; whereas at the same time, according to Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, any limitations on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by that Charter may be made only if they are proportional and necessary and if they genuinely meet objectives of general interest recognised by the Union or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others,
И. като има предвид, че ролята на Съда на Европейските общности е да тълкува правото на Общността с оглед на основните права и свободи и да осигурява спазването на законността при тълкуването и прилагането на Договора за ЕО,
I. whereas it is the role of the Court of Justice to interpret Community law in the light of fundamental rights and freedoms and to ensure that in the interpretation and application of the EC Treaty the law is observed,
Й. като има предвид, че от компетентността на националните съдилища е да установят за всеки отделен случай дали са изпълнени критериите по отношение на съвместимостта на ограничаването на основните свободи с правото на Общността,
J. whereas it is up to the national courts to ascertain, on a case-by-case basis, whether the criteria for regarding the restriction of fundamental freedoms as compatible with Community law are fulfilled,
К. като има предвид, че единното прилагане и изпълнение на разпоредбите на ДКР са от съществено значение, за да се гарантират нейните цели и по-специално спазването на договореностите относно колективните трудови договори, съществуващи в държавите-членки,
K. whereas uniform application and enforcement of the provisions of the PWD are essential in order to ensure its objectives, and in particular respect for collective bargaining arrangements existing in the Member States,
Л. като има предвид, че беше отбелязано наличието на различаващи се становища и тълкувания в рамките на Съда на Европейските общности и между Съда и неговите генерални адвокати по отношение на различните дела, свързани с ДКР, в частност по отношение на Дело C-341/05 Lava l
L. whereas it has been noted that differing views and interpretations existed within the Court of Justice and between the Court and its Advocates-General in the various cases relating to the PWD, in particular in Case C-341/05 Laval
Решение на Съда на Европейските общности от 18 декември 2007 г. по Дело С-341/05 Laval un Partneri Ltd [2007] ECR I‑11767 (Дело Laval ). и Дело C-346/06 Rüffert
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 18 December 2007 in Case C-341/05 Laval un Partneri Ltd [2007] ECR I‑11767 (the Laval case). and Case C-346/06 Rüffert
Решение на Съда на Европейските общности от 3 април 2008 г. по Дело C-346/06 Rüffert, все още непубликувано в ECR (вж. ОВ C 128, 24.5.2008 г., стр. 9). ; като има предвид, че когато тези становища и тълкувания се различават, може да съществуват основания за изясняване в светлината на баланса между основните права и свободи,
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 3 April 2008 in Case C-346/06 Rüffert , not yet published in the ECR (see OJ C 128, 24.5.2008, p.
8. приветства в тази връзка препоръката на Комисията от 3 април 2008 г.
Welcomes in that respect the Commission’s Recommendation of 3 April 2008
Все още непубликувани в ОВ. относно разширяване на административното сътрудничество в контекста на командироването на работници в рамките на предоставянето на услуги;
Not yet published in the OJ. on enhanced administrative cooperation in the context of the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services;
Vicente Miguel Garcés Ramón, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Georgios Papastamkos, Gabriele Stauner, Jacques Toubon, Ieke van den Burg
Vicente Miguel Garcés Ramón, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Georgios Papastamkos, Gabriele Stauner, Jacques Toubon, Ieke van den Burg
относно предизвикателствата по отношение на колективните трудови споразумения в ЕС
on Challenges to collective agreements in the EU
A. като има предвид, че правото на колективни действия е признато като основно право на общите принципи на правото на Общността, и като има предвид, че това право е утвърдено от Съда на Европейските общности,
A. whereas the right to take collective action is recognized as fundamental right in the general principles of Community law, and whereas this right has been confirmed by the European Court of Justice,
1. подчертава необходимостта от запазване на баланса между свободата на предоставяне на услуги и свободата на установяване и гарантирането на регулаторна рамка за закрила на работниците;
Underlines the need to maintain the balance between the freedom to provide services and the freedom of establishment and guaranteeing a regulatory framework for the protection of workers;
Gabriela Creţu, Mia De Vits, Janelly Fourtou, Martí Grau i Segú, Małgorzata Handzlik, Malcolm Harbour, Anna Hedh, Eija-Riitta Korhola, Kurt Lechner, Lasse Lehtinen, Toine Manders, Catiuscia Marini, Николай Младенов, Catherine Neris, Bill Newton Dunn, Zita Pleštinská, Giovanni Rivera, Zuzana Roithová, Heide Rühle, Leopold Józef Rutowicz, Salvador Domingo Sanz Palacio, Christel Schaldemose, Andreas Schwab, Eva-Britt Svensson, Jacques Toubon, Barbara Weiler, Marian Zlotea
Gabriela Creţu, Mia De Vits, Janelly Fourtou, Martí Grau i Segú, Małgorzata Handzlik, Malcolm Harbour, Anna Hedh, Eija-Riitta Korhola, Kurt Lechner, Lasse Lehtinen, Toine Manders, Catiuscia Marini, Nickolay Mladenov, Catherine Neris, Bill Newton Dunn, Zita Pleštinská, Giovanni Rivera, Zuzana Roithová, Heide Rühle, Leopold Józef Rutowicz, Salvador Domingo Sanz Palacio, Christel Schaldemose, Andreas Schwab, Eva-Britt Svensson, Jacques Toubon, Barbara Weiler, Marian Zlotea
Emmanouil Angelakas, André Brie, Colm Burke, Giovanna Corda, Jan Cremers, Benoît Hamon, Joel Hasse Ferreira, Filip Kaczmarek, Manuel Medina Ortega, José Ribeiro e Castro, Olle Schmidt
Emmanouil Angelakas, André Brie, Colm Burke, Giovanna Corda, Jan Cremers, Benoît Hamon, Joel Hasse Ferreira, Filip Kaczmarek, Manuel Medina Ortega, José Ribeiro e Castro, Olle Schmidt
Jan Andersson, Edit Bauer, Iles Braghetto, Philip Bushill-Matthews, Alejandro Cercas, Ole Christensen, Luigi Cocilovo, Jean Louis Cottigny, Jan Cremers, Proinsias De Rossa, Harlem Désir, Harald Ettl, Ilda Figueiredo, Joel Hasse Ferreira, Stephen Hughes, Ona Juknevičienė, Jean Lambert, Raymond Langendries, Bernard Lehideux, Elizabeth Lynne, Thomas Mann, Maria Matsouka, Mary Lou McDonald, Elisabeth Morin, Siiri Oviir, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, Jacek Protasiewicz, Bilyana Ilieva Raeva, Elisabeth Schroedter, José Albino Silva Peneda, Kathy Sinnott, Gabriele Stauner, Ewa Tomaszewska, Gabriele Zimmer
Jan Andersson, Edit Bauer, Iles Braghetto, Philip Bushill-Matthews, Alejandro Cercas, Ole Christensen, Luigi Cocilovo, Jean Louis Cottigny, Jan Cremers, Proinsias De Rossa, Harlem Désir, Harald Ettl, Ilda Figueiredo, Joel Hasse Ferreira, Stephen Hughes, Ona Juknevičienė, Jean Lambert, Raymond Langendries, Bernard Lehideux, Elizabeth Lynne, Thomas Mann, Maria Matsouka, Mary Lou McDonald, Elisabeth Morin, Siiri Oviir, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, Jacek Protasiewicz, Bilyana Ilieva Raeva, Elisabeth Schroedter, José Albino Silva Peneda, Kathy Sinnott, Gabriele Stauner, Ewa Tomaszewska, Gabriele Zimmer
Gabriela Creţu, Petru Filip, Sepp Kusstatscher, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Csaba Sógor, Anja Weisgerber
Gabriela Creţu, Petru Filip, Sepp Kusstatscher, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Csaba Sógor, Anja Weisgerber
Wolfgang Bulfon, Iratxe García Pérez, Helmut Kuhne, María Isabel Salinas García
Wolfgang Bulfon, Carmen Fraga Estévez, Iratxe García Pérez, Helmut Kuhne, María Isabel Salinas García
PE 407.895v03-00
PE 407.895v03-00
СТАНОВИЩЕ на комисията по граждански свободи, правосъдие и вътрешни работи 34
OPINION of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 31
относно предложението за директива на Европейския парламент и на Съвета относно подпомагане на трансграничния контрол върху безопасността по пътищата
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border enforcement in the field of road safety
– като взе предвид предложението на Комисията до Европейския парламент и до Съвета (COM2008(0151)),
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2008)0151 ),
– като взе предвид член 251, параграф 2 и член 71, параграф 1, буква в) от Договора за ЕО, съгласно които предложението е внесено от Комисията ( C6‑0149/2008 ),
– having regard to Article 251, paragraph 2 and Article 71, paragraph 1(c) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0149/2008 ),
– като взе предвид доклада на комисията по транспорт и туризъм и становището на комисията по граждански свободи, правосъдие и вътрешни работи ( A6‑0371/2008 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0371/2008 ),
(5) Видът на пътнотранспортните нарушения, влизащи в обхвата на системата, следва да отразява тяхната тежест по отношение на заплахата, която създават за безопасността по пътищата, и да обхваща пътнотранспортни нарушения, определени като такива в законовата база на държавите-членки.
(5) The types of road traffic offences to be covered by this system should reflect their seriousness in terms of endangering road safety and should cover offences which are qualified as traffic offences in the laws of all Member States.
Затова е уместно да се приеме разпоредба по отношение на движението с превишена скорост, шофирането в нетрезво състояние, неизползването на обезопасителен колан и преминаването на червена светлина.
It is accordingly appropriate to make provision in relation to speeding, drink-driving, non-use of a seat-belt, and failing to stop at a red traffic light.
Комисията ще продължи да следи развитието в целия ЕС по отношение на други пътнотранспортни нарушения с тежки последствия за безопасността по пътищата като движение под въздействие на упойващи вещества, използване на мобилни телефони по време на движение и управление на МПС без застраховка и ще обмисли , ако е необходимо, предлагането на промяна на директивата , с цел включването им в нейния обхват .
The Commission will continue to monitor developments across the EU in respect of other road traffic offences with serious implications for road safety and if appropriate will consider proposing a revision of the Directive in order to cover them within its scope, such as driving under the influence of drugs, use of mobile phones while driving and uninsured driving.