natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Furthermore, although RATP would be the actual beneficiary of the notified reform, the French authorities consider that trade between Member States is not affected by the reform, nor is competition jeopardised, in so far as RATP's activities are restricted to a single market (the urban public transport market in Ile-de-France) which is not yet open to competition and also in so far as the reform has had no impact on the activities of RATP subsidiaries or the markets in which those are active.
Poleg tega, čeprav naj bi bil dejanski upravičenec priglašene reforme RATP, francoski organi menijo, da ta reforma ne more vplivati na trgovino med državami članicami niti izkrivljati konkurence, ker RATP deluje samo na enem trgu, in sicer trgu mestnega javnega prevoza v regiji Ile-de-France, ki še ni odprt za konkurenco, in ker reforma ne vpliva na dejavnosti hčerinskih družb družbe RATP ali na trge, na katerih te družbe delujejo.
Affiliation of basic entitlements
Naslonitev osnovnih dajatev
According to the French authorities, affiliation of the CRP-RATP to the general scheme does not constitute State aid benefiting RATP, given that the latter has not been advantaged.
Francoski organi menijo, da naslonitev CRP-RATP na splošni sistem ne vsebuje elementov državne pomoči za RATP, ker ne daje prednosti RATP.
Firstly, the French authorities believe that, as the Commission itself indicated in point 69 of the decision to initiate the procedure, ‘the second stage of the reform, i.e. the provision of cash payments and the transfer of the financing of basic rights from the CRP-RATP to CNAV and AGIRC-ARRCO no longer affect RATP's economic situation’.
Najprej, francoski organi menijo, kot je že Komisija ugotovila v točki 69 odločbe o sprožitvi postopka, da „druga faza reforme, to je plačevanje doplačil in prenos financiranja osnovnih dajatev s CRP-RATP na CNAV in AGIRC/ARRCO, ne vpliva več na gospodarski položaj RATP“.
The French authorities also feel that RATP's obligations corresponding to basic rights were not costs that would normally have put a strain on its budget within the meaning of Community case law.
Poleg tega francoski organi menijo, da obveznosti RATP, ki ustrezajo osnovnim dajatvam, niso stroški, ki bi morali običajno bremeniti njegov proračun v smislu sodne prakse Skupnosti.
In their view, the financial resources of French companies are normally burdened by payments in full discharge of liabilities made to statutory pension funds but not by the obligation to pay pensions for current employees and retired persons, as was the case with RATP, whose head office included a department responsible for pensioners until the time of the notified reform.
Po njihovem mnenju so finančna sredstva francoskih podjetij namreč običajno obremenjena z odvezujočimi prispevki, ki se plačujejo v pokojninske sklade splošnega prava, ne pa z obveznostjo izplačila pokojnin zaposlenim in upokojencem, kot je bilo v primeru RATP, ki je imel do priglašene reforme svojo službo za pokojnine.
Consequently, since they are accompanied by payments in full discharge of liabilities at the same level as under statutory arrangements, the affiliation of the CRP-RATP to the general scheme and the provision of cash payments by the State to the general scheme has not meant that RATP avoided paying costs that would normally have placed a burden on its financial resources.
Zato, ker naslonitev CRP-RATP na splošni sistem in državno plačevanje doplačil v splošni sistem spremlja plačilo odvezujočega prispevka v višini splošne dajatve, le-ta ne povzročita, da bi se RATP izognil stroškom, ki bi običajno bremenili finančna sredstva podjetja.
Lastly, according to the French authorities, given that the special scheme was imposed by the State when RATP was set up in 1948, it would not be normal for the company to have to meet the cost of the cash payments paid in exchange for affiliation of the CRP-RATP to the general scheme.
Nazadnje, francoski organi menijo, da bi bilo neobičajno, če bi moralo podjetje nositi stroške doplačil v zameno za naslonitev CRP-RATP na splošni sistem, ker je posebni sistem določila vlada, ko je leta 1948 ustanovila RATP.
Financing of special rights
Financiranje posebnih dajatev
Firstly, the French authorities believe that the case-law according to which costs resulting from collective agreements constitute, by their nature, a cost which normally places a burden on a company's budgets, and that the company has voluntarily accepted this agreement or that it was extended to this company on the basis of regulations or law [25], does not apply in this particular case in so far as the RATP staff pension scheme was not established on the basis of a collective agreement.
Prvič, francoski organi menijo, da sodne prakse, po kateri so stroški, ki izhajajo iz kolektivne pogodbe, po naravi stroški, ki običajno bremenijo proračun podjetja, ne glede na to, ali je podjetje to pogodbo sprejelo prostovoljno ali pa je bila njena uporaba razširjena na to podjetje z zakoni ali drugimi predpisi [25], ni mogoče uporabiti v obravnavanem primeru, ker pokojninski sistem za uslužbence RATP ne izhaja iz kolektivne pogodbe.
Secondly, according to the French authorities, the existence of special rights does not constitute any advantage for RATP.
Drugič, francoski organi menijo, da obstoj posebnih dajatev nikakor ni prednost za RATP.
The fact that RATP continues to recruit staff in posts governed by service regulations who enjoy special rights does not prove that the existence of special rights places the organisation at an economic advantage.
Dejstvo, da RATP še naprej zaposluje uslužbence, za katere veljajo kadrovski predpisi in ki so upravičeni do posebnih dajatev, naj ne bi dokazovalo, da je obstoj posebnih dajatev gospodarska prednost za RATP.
Thirdly, the French authorities maintain that the public financing of special rights constitutes the strict compensation for abnormal expenses borne by RATP.
Tretjič, francoski organi trdijo, da je javno financiranje posebnih dajatev strogo nadomestilo neobičajnih stroškov, ki bremenijo RATP.
In their view, the conclusion that the financing of special pension rights does not constitute State aid is the result of principles which have emerged from Community case law since the Community was established, the Combus [26] and Enirisorse [27] rulings being merely the most recent examples of this.
Francoski organi menijo, da ugotovitev, da financiranje posebnih pokojninskih dajatev ni državna pomoč, izhaja iz načel, določenih v sodni praksi Skupnosti od začetka Skupnosti, v kateri sta sodbi Combus [26] in Enirisorse [27] le najnovejša primera.
Compatibility of the reform notified with the single market
Združljivost priglašene reforme s skupnim trgom
If the Commission feels that the reform in question contained elements of State aid, the French authorities take the view that the reform is in any case compatible with the common market.
Če bi Komisija menila, da priglašena reforma vsebuje elemente državne pomoči, francoski organi menijo, da bi bila ta reforma v vsakem primeru združljiva s skupnim trgom.
The French authorities maintain their view that the reform notified complies with the theory of stranded costs and is pro-competitive.
Francoski organi vztrajajo pri stališču, da je priglašena reforma skladna s teorijo nasedlih stroškov in konkurenčno usmerjena.
The authorities also feel that the new financing of pension rights starting in 2006 is necessary and proportionate in order to ensure competition within the market.
Francoski organi poleg tega menijo, da je novo financiranje pokojninskih dajatev od leta 2006 potrebno in sorazmerno za dosego konkurenčnega delovanja trga.
The French authorities believe the reform notified is necessary in order to prepare for the Ile-de-France urban transport sector opening up to competition, as provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007.
Francoski organi menijo, da je priglašena reforma potrebna, ker je predhodni pogoj za odprtje sektorja mestnega prevoza v regiji Ile-de-France za konkurenco, kot je določeno v Uredbi (ES) št. 1370/2007.
It will prevent distortions of competition between public and private operators and also ensure the permanent removal of the barrier to entry formed by the means of financing pensions within RATP.
Po eni strani bo omogočila preprečevanje izkrivljanja konkurence med javnimi in zasebnimi gospodarskimi subjekti, po drugi strani pa dokončno odpravo ovire za vstop, ki jo pomeni način financiranja pokojnin RATP.
As regards the proportionate nature of the reform, in their letter dated 23 April 2008 the French authorities informed the Commission of the reform of the RATP special pension scheme instigated by the French government, a reform which brings the RATP special pension scheme into line with statutory rules.
Francoski organi so v zvezi s sorazmernostjo priglašene reforme v dopisu z dne 23. aprila 2008 Komisijo obvestili o reformi posebnega pokojninskega sistema RATP, ki jo je začela francoska vlada in s katero se posebni pokojninski sistem RATP usklajuje s pravili, ki obstajajo v splošnem pravu.
OBSERVATIONS OF INTERESTED PARTIES FOLLOWING THE OPENING OF THE PROCEDURE
PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANI PO SPROŽITVI POSTOPKA
In a letter dated 13 February 2008 the RATP branch of the SUD trade union expressed its opposition to the plans notified by the French authorities, stating that the sole objective of the latter was to transform RATP into a large international group driven by the desire to make profit.
Sindikat SUD pri RATP je v dopisu z dne 13. februarja 2008 izrazil nestrinjanje s projektom, ki so ga priglasili francoski organi, ker je njegov edini cilj preoblikovati RATP v veliko mednarodno skupino, ki jo zanima samo dobiček.
In its letter the RATP branch of the SUD trade union drew the Commission's attention to the fact that, in its view, the staff of RATP did not have the status of employees under private law subject to the Labour Code.
Ta sindikat je v tem dopisu Komisijo opozoril, da po njegovem mnenju uslužbenci RATP nimajo statusa zaposlenih oseb po zasebnem pravu, za katere velja delovni zakonik.
The RATP branch of the SUD trade union also claimed that the reform of the RATP retirement scheme should have been developed by a joint committee since the scheme is subject to collective bargaining between the social partners.
Sindikat SUD pri RATP sicer trdi, da bi reformo pokojninskega sistema RATP morala pripraviti mešana paritetna komisija, ker je predmet kolektivnih pogajanj med socialnimi partnerji.
COMMENTS OF FRANCE ON THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE INTERESTED PARTIES
KOMENTARJI FRANCIJE O PRIPOMBAH ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANI
With regard to the legal regime applicable to RATP staff, the French authorities state in their letter of 3 April 2008 that the provisions of the labour code are intended to apply to RATP staff in posts governed by service regulations, except if the labour code or case law expressly states that these provisions should not apply to such staff.
Kar zadeva pravno ureditev, ki velja za uslužbence RATP, francoski organi v dopisu z dne 3. aprila 2008 opozarjajo, da se morajo določbe delovnega zakonika uporabljati za uslužbence RATP, za katere veljajo kadrovski predpisi, razen če je v delovnem zakoniku ali sodni praksi izrecno izključeno, da se te določbe uporabljajo za te uslužbence.
According to France, the existence of such exceptions is not sufficient to consider RATP staff as being subject to contracts of employment under public law.
Po mnenju Francije obstoj takih izjem ne pomeni, da naj bi bili uslužbenci RATP v delovnem razmerju javnega prava.
France also indicates that Decree No 60-1362 of 19 December 1960, which delegates competence to the RATP joint committee for matters relating to the status of personnel, does not refer to the retirement scheme.
Francija poleg tega trdi, da odlok št. 60-1362 z dne 19. decembra 1960, ki mešani paritetni komisiji RATP podeljuje pristojnost na področju kadrovskih predpisov, ne omenja pokojninskega sistema.
According to the French authorities, the RATP pension scheme is not the result of collective bargaining; it was imposed on RATP by the State by means of administrative procedures.
Po mnenju francoskih organov pokojninski sistem RATP ni rezultat kolektivnih pogajanj, temveč ga je država naložila RATP po upravni poti.
SCOPE OF THE PRESENT DECISION
OBSEG TE ODLOČBE
The present decision relates to the compatibility of the new pension financing scheme with Community regulations on State aid.
Ta odločba se nanaša na združljivost novega sistema financiranja pokojnin s pravili Skupnosti o državni pomoči.
The opening of the procedure on 10 October 2007 and, in particular, the comments of the French authorities have enabled the Commission to clarify the terms of implementation of the reform notified and, subsequently, to identify three measures which may include State aid components.
Odločba o sprožitvi postopka z dne 10. oktobra 2007 in zlasti komentarji francoskih organov so Komisiji omogočili, da je natančneje določila podrobna pravila za izvajanje priglašene reforme in posledično opredelila tri ukrepe, ki lahko vsebujejo elemente državne pomoči.
Firstly, on 1 January 2006 the CRP-RATP became the sole legal debtor for the retirement pensions of staff in posts governed by service regulations; prior to then, RATP had been the debtor.
Prvič, CRP-RATP je 1. januarja 2006 namesto RATP postal edini pravni zavezanec za izplačila pokojnin zaposlenim, za katere veljajo kadrovski predpisi.
Secondly, since 1 January 2006, the State has been paying a subsidy to the CRP-RATP in order to balance its accounts.
Drugič, država od 1. januarja 2006 CRP-RATP nakazuje subvencije za izravnavo računov.
This public subsidy covers the demographic deficit and the additional cost of the RATP special scheme.
Te javne subvencije pokrivajo demografski primanjkljaj in dodatne stroške posebnega sistema RATP.
Thirdly, the reform notified provides for the possibility for the CRP-RATP to affiliate the basic pension rights of the special scheme to statutory schemes.
Tretjič, priglašena reforma predvideva možnost, da CRP-RATP osnovne pokojninske dajatve iz posebnega sistema nasloni na sisteme splošnega prava.
The State undertakes to make balancing payments in order to comply with the principle of the strict financial neutrality of the affiliation in place of the CRP-RATP.
Država bo namesto CRP-RATP prevzela plačilo doplačil, namenjenih za upoštevanje načela finančne nevtralnosti naslonitve.
ASSESSMENT OF THE FIRST MEASURE: CREATION OF THE CRP-RATP
PRESOJA PRVEGA UKREPA: USTANOVITEV CRP-RATP
The Commission observes that, on 1 January 2006, the CRP-RATP became the sole legal debtor for the retirement pensions of staff in posts governed by service regulations; prior to then, RATP had been the debtor.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je CRP-RATP 1. januarja 2006 namesto RATP postal edini pravni zavezanec za izplačilo pokojnin zaposlenim, za katere veljajo kadrovski predpisi.
The Commission observes that, simultaneously, the contribution paid by RATP to the CRP-RATP for pensions became a contribution in full discharge of its obligations.
Komisija ugotavlja, da je hkrati prispevek, ki ga RATP plačuje CRP-RATP za pokojnine, postal odvezujoč.
The Commission notes that, under the system in place before 1 January 2006, RATP was legally liable for the pension commitments under the special scheme.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so RATP v sistemu, ki je veljal pred 1. januarjem 2006, pravno zavezovale pokojninske obveznosti posebnega sistema.
In this respect, the financing system for the special scheme for RATP staff differed from the provisions under statutory law: RATP was the guarantor of the financial equilibrium of the scheme in question; the ‘employer’ contribution paid by RATP to the special scheme did not constitute full discharge of its obligations.
Zato je sistem financiranja posebnega sistema za uslužbence RATP odstopal od splošnega prava: RATP je zagotavljal finančno ravnovesje zadevnega sistema, ker prispevek delodajalca, ki ga je RATP plačeval v posebni sistem, ni bil odvezujoč.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that the main effect of the provisions foreseen by the reform notified has been to transform the ‘employer’ contribution paid by RATP for the pensions of its staff into a contribution discharging it from its obligations, thus relieving it of its historical obligation to ensure the financial equilibrium of the special scheme.
Komisija zato sklepa, da je bil glavni učinek določb, predvidenih s priglašeno reformo, ta, da bo prispevek delodajalca, ki ga RATP plačuje za pokojnine svojih uslužbencev, postal odvezujoč, s čimer bo RATP oproščen obveznosti zagotavljanja ravnovesja posebnega sistema.
In other words, the reform notified has transferred responsibility for the financial equilibrium of the special scheme in question from RATP to the CRP-RATP and, ultimately, the State.
Povedano drugače, s priglašeno reformo je bila odgovornost za finančno ravnovesje zadevnega posebnega sistema RATP prenesena na CRP-RATP in in fine na državo.
The Commission further observes that, in the absence of the reform notified, the obligation to ensure the financial equilibrium of the regime which had been incumbent upon RATP would have given rise to the entering of a commitment in respect of the State, which would have been provisioned in the accounts upon the transition to the IFRS standards (International Financial Reporting Standards), applicable at RATP since 30 June 2007 [28].
Komisija poleg tega ugotavlja, da bi se v primeru, da reforma ne bi bila priglašena, obveznost finančnega ravnovesja posebnega sistema, ki je bila naložena RATP, kazala z vpisom obveznosti do države, ki bi bila oblikovana z rezervacijami v računih ob prehodu na standarde IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standard, mednarodni standardi računovodskega poročanja), ki se za RATP uporabljajo od 30. junija 2007 [28].
The Commission would like to emphasise at this stage that the question raised by the creation of the CRP-RATP is identical to the question which arose in conjunction with the reform of the financing arrangements for the pensions of civil servants working for La Poste [29].
Komisija želi v tej fazi poudariti, da je vprašanje, ki se je pojavilo z ustanovitvijo CRP-RATP, enako vprašanju, ki se postavlja v okviru reforme financiranja pokojnin državnih uslužbencev, zaposlenih pri La Poste [29].
Consequently, the Commission will assess whether the measure under assessment includes State aid components by means of the same procedure as was adopted for the aforementioned decision.
Komisija bo zato v tej zadevi preverila, ali zadevni ukrep vsebuje elemente državne pomoči, pri čemer bo uporabila enak pristop kot v zgoraj navedeni odločbi.
Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty provides: ‘Save as otherwise provided in this Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’.
V členu 87(1) Pogodbe je določeno, da, „Razen če ta Pogodba ne določa drugače, je vsaka pomoč, ki jo dodeli država članica, ali kakršna koli vrsta pomoči iz državnih sredstev, ki izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco z dajanjem prednosti posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga, nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, kolikor prizadene trgovino med državami članicami“.
The classification of a national measure as State aid as provided for in Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty requires the following cumulative conditions to be fulfilled, namely: (1) the measure in question confers a selective economic advantage; (2) that advantage is financed via State resources; (3) that advantage distorts or threatens to distort competition and, lastly, (4) that advantage has an effect on trade between Member States.
Da bi bil nacionalni ukrep opredeljen kot državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe, morajo biti izpolnjeni naslednji kumulativni pogoji, in sicer: 1. zadevni ukrep daje selektivno gospodarsko prednost; 2. ta prednost se financira iz državnih sredstev; 3. ta prednost izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljala konkurenco in, nazadnje, 4) ta prednost prizadene trgovino med državami članicami.
The reasons for considering that the measure in question meets these cumulative conditions and thus constitutes State aid in favour of RATP within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty need to be explained.
Treba je navesti razloge, zaradi katerih se lahko sklepa, da zadevni ukrep izpolnjuje te kumulativne pogoje in je zato državna pomoč za RATP v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
EXISTENCE OF A SELECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE IN FAVOUR OF RATP
OBSTOJ SELEKTIVNE GOSPODARSKE PREDNOSTI ZA RATP
In order to assess whether the measure under assessment incorporates State aid components, it must be established whether this measure confers an economic advantage on RATP by enabling it to avoid having to bear costs which would normally have had to be met out of the undertaking's own financial resources, thereby preventing market forces from having their normal effect [30].
Da bi presodili, ali zadevni ukrep vsebuje elemente državne pomoči, je treba ugotoviti, ali ta ukrep daje gospodarsko prednost RATP, s tem ko mu omogoča, da se izogne stroškom, ki bi običajno morali bremeniti finančna sredstva podjetja, in tako prepreči običajne učinke tržnih sil [30].
It that context, it is settled case law that a normal burden is a normal charge inherent in the day-to-day management or usual activities of an enterprise [31].
V teh okoliščinah iz ustaljene sodne prakse izhaja, da so običajni izdatki običajni stroški vsakodnevnega upravljanja ali tekočih dejavnosti podjetja [31].
The Court also held that an aid consists of a mitigation of the charges which are normally included in the budget of an undertaking, taking account of the nature or general scheme of the system of charges in question, whereas a special charge is, on the contrary, an additional charge over and above those normal charges [32].
Sodišče je še razsodilo, da je pomoč ublažitev stroškov, ki običajno bremenijo proračun podjetij, ob upoštevanju narave in sistematike zadevnih stroškov, medtem ko je posebni strošek nasprotno dodatni strošek glede na običajne stroške [32].
In the light of the case-law of the Court, and in line with past practice [33] the Commission considers that in order to determine whether a charge is ‘normal’ or ‘special’ a reference framework or comparison must be defined, with the objective of identifying companies which are in a legal and factual situation that is comparable in the light of the objective pursued by the measure in question.
Komisija glede na sodno prakso Sodišča in v skladu s svojo prakso odločanja [33] meni, da opredelitev stroška kot „običajnega“ ali „posebnega“ zahteva, da se določi referenčni ali primerjalni okvir, da se opredelijo podjetja, ki bi bila v primerljivem pravnem ali dejanskem položaju glede na cilj, ki se poskuša doseči z zadevnim ukrepom.
In this respect, it has to be recalled that, for application of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, the only question to be determined is whether, under a particular statutory scheme, a State measure is such as to favour ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’ within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty in comparison with other undertakings which are in a legal and factual situation that is comparable in the light of the objective pursued by the measure in question.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da se mora za uporabo člena 87(1) Pogodbe samo ugotoviti, ali državni ukrep v danem pravnem sistemu daje prednost „posameznim podjetjem ali proizvodnji posameznega blaga“ v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe v primerjavi z drugimi podjetji v primerljivem dejanskem ali pravnem položaju glede na cilj, ki se poskuša doseči z zadevnim ukrepom.