Activities of Małgorzata HANDZLIK related to 2008/2085(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Challenges to collective agreements in the EU (debate)
Amendments (22)
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out, taking into account ECJ rulings, that imposing working conditions on workers posted by services providers from other Member States who are forced, the application of which is not required or allowed by Directive 96/71/EC, or to force service providers to enter into negotiations on posted workers'such working conditions other than required by the Directive 96/71/EC maywith trade unions, leads to thean unjustified restriction ton the freedom to provide services; therefore collective actions must not aimed at service providers from other Member States should be undertaken in foreseeable wayimposing working conditions which go beyond Directive 96/71/EC and which are not sufficiently precise and accessible;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that uniform application and enforcement of its provisions are sufficient to secure the attainment of its objectives and respect for- to facilitate the provision of services while guaranteeing the appropriate protection of workers temporarily posted abroad - and to fully respect collective bargaining arrangements existing in the Member States to which workers are posted set by Directive 96/71/EC;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that the freedom to provide services is a cornerstone of the European project; however, this has to be balanced against fundamental rights and the possibility for governments and trade unions to ensure non-discrimination and equal treatmenttherefore the fundamental right to take collective action must be reconciled with this freedom;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the freedom to provide services is not superior to the fundamental right for trade unions to take industrial action; especially, since this is a constitutional right in several Member Stat, but at the same time it points out that the right to take collective actions should not lead to the restrictions to the freedom to provide services;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points outStresses that recital 22 in the PWD states that provisions laid down in the PWD should have no effect on the right to take industrial actthe directive is without prejudice to the law of the Member States concerning collective action to defend the interests of trades and professions;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines the importance of not allowing the verdicts to negatively effect labour market models that already today are able to combine a high degree of flexibility on the labour market with a high level of security and, instead, of further promoting this approachlabour market models that already today combine flexibility with security;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that the intention of the legislator in the PWD and Service Directive is not reflected in the ECJ verdicts, which, instead of protecting workers, is inviting unfair competition between companies; companies that sign and follow collective agreements will have a competitive disadvantage to companies that refuse to do soECJ rulings do not change the level of protection of posted workers provided by the Directive 96/71/EC; moreover they should not be regarded as an invitation to the unfair competition, especially by companies or social partners;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. RegretNotes that all conditions imposed on foreign employersin many cases foreign employers guarantee workers conditions which go above minimum levels a fore seen as obstacles to free movementby the Directive of Posting of Workers, if employees do not already receive more favourable conditions in the country of origin;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. QuestionRecognizes 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 194 #
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, creating an explicit invitation to unfair competition on wages and working conditions driving them downwards, which is in clear contradiction to the sPoints out that the freedom to provide services is indispensable part of market economy, which may be undermined by unfair competition; recalls that Posting of Workers Directive with its provisions setting out terms and conditions of employment guaranteed to workers posted to the host Member Stateds aims 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 fair competition between different undertakings is necessary to accomplish Single Market within European Union;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. EmphasisRecognizes 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 EUmay raise certain concerns especially among trade union workers but strongly emphasises that their rights, as stipulated by existing collective bargaining arrangements, are maintained and not threatened; it calls on those actively involved in the public debate not to use further unnecessary and counterproductive rhetoric, which may only harm the achievements of European integration;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 249 #
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 order to counter the possible detrimental social, economical and political effects of the ECJ judgementsUnderlines that the ECJ rulings are indispensable for the correct, effective and uniform application of Community legislation and prevent divergent interpretations of EU law, therefore such rulings should not be regarded as the invitation to the change of law;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Stresses there is no need to revise the provisions of Directive 96/71/EC on the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Therefore calls on the Commission to review the PWD and consider the following issues: - a new legal basis for the PWD to better protect workers; workers posted within the framework of services should be regarded as using the right of freedom of movement of workers and not the free movement of services; - a possibility in the Directive for Member States to refer in law or collective agreements to the 'habitual wages' applicable in the place of work in the host country as defined in the ILO 94 and not only ‘minimum’ rates of pay; - a limit to the period of time during which workers can be considered as being 'posted' to a Member State other than the Member State of their ordinary place of work in the framework of services; after that period the rules on free movement of workers should apply, i.e. host country rules with regard to wages and working conditions have full application; - an even clearer expression that the Directive and other EU legislation do not prohibit Member States and trade unions from demanding more favourable conditions for the worker; and - the recognition of a wider range of methods of organizing labour markets than: - ensure that the PWD is correctly and uniformly implemented and applied in all Member States; - intensify work with Member States with a view to enhance administrative cooperation between competent national authorities of different Member States; - take appropriate actions against Member States that do not apply Community law in the area of posting of workers as interpreted by those cEurrently covered by Article 3(8)opean Court of Justice;
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that Parliament, the Council and the Commission should adopt measures to combat letterbox-companies, undertakingsmisuses, especially those performed by "letterbox-companies" which in fact may not be engaged in any genuine and meaningfuleffective business in the country of origin butestablishment but are 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 ofdoing business in the host country, in order to evade host country rules and regulations especially with regard to wages and working conditions;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25