Activities of Thomas MANN related to 2008/2085(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Challenges to collective agreements in the EU (debate)
Amendments (13)
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. Whereas according to the PWD the laws of the MS must lay down a nucleus of mandatory rules for minimum protection of posted workers to be observed in the host country without preventing application of terms and conditions of employment more favorable to workers; to protect the fundamental freedoms against protectionist measures, these conditions of employment may not be made mandatory,
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. Whereas the ECJ in both the Laval and Rüffert cases made a completely different interpretation of European legislation than the advocate general, which – regardless of the differing interpretations of the content – is in line with the principles of the rule of law,
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is of the opinion that any EU citizen should have the right to work anywhere in the European Union; therefore regrets that this right is not applied uniformly across the EU; the possibility of working anywhere in the EU is limited by measures taken by some Member States which mean that workers from other EU Member States do not always have full access to these employment markets;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that the intention of the legislator in the PWD and Services Directive is not reflected in the ECJ verdicts, which, instead of protecting workers, is invi and preventing unfair competition between companies has not changed; companies that sign and follow collective agreements will have a competitivemay not be put at a disadvantage toby companies that refuse to do so;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets that all conditions imposed on foreign employers above minimum levels are seen as obstacles to free movement, if employees do not already receive more favourable conditions in the country of origin; otherwise protectionist measures favouring a national employment market could be adopted under the guise of worker protection;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Questions the introduction of a proportionality principle in the Viking case for the right to use collective action against undertakings which, when using the right of establishment or the right to provide services across borders, deliberately undercut terms and conditions of employment; such a proportionality principle is not compatible with the character of this right as a fundamental right; there should be no question about the right of trade unions to use industrial action to uphold equal treatment and secure decent working conditions;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Is of the opinion that the limited legal basis of free movement of the PWD has led the ECJ to interpret the PWD in this way, creatingo the PWD being interpreted as an explicit invitation to unfair competition on wages and working conditions driving them downwards, which is in clear contradiction to the stated aim of the PWD (to ensure a climate of fair competition) and the objective of the EU as established in the Treaty (improvement of living and working conditions); therefore, the legal basis of the PWD must be broadened to include a reference to the free movement of workers;
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that the current situation could lead to a situation where workers in host countries will be pressured by low wage competition; this, in turn, could lead to xenophobia and counterproductive anger against the EU; therefore consistent implementation of the PWD must be ensured in all Member States;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Therefore calls on the Commission to take immediate action to make necessary changes in European legislation in orderaction to counter the possible detrimental social, economical and political effects of the ECJcourt judgements;
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that Parliament, the Council and the Commission should 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, to avoid the full application of host country rules and regulations especially with regard to wages and working conditionsalls on the Commission and the Member States to foster closer cooperation between the Member States, national authorities and the Commission to exchange best practice and with regard to monitoring instruments; this is the effective way to combat misuse;
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Would welcome a move to summarise the existing social clauses that exist in the Monti directive and in the Service ds Directive in a social clause, either through a protocol attached to the Treaty or in an inter- institutional agreement;