120 likes | 232 Views
Session 2 The actual implementation of the EU Framework agreement in the different countries/sectors Stefan Clauwaert ETUC NETLEX Coordinator/ETUI-REHS Senior Researcher. ETUC Project Final Conference Prague 21-22 September 2006. ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement. Sources:
E N D
Session 2 The actual implementation of the EU Framework agreement in the different countries/sectors Stefan Clauwaert ETUC NETLEX Coordinator/ETUI-REHS SeniorResearcher ETUC Project Final Conference Prague 21-22 September 2006
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Sources: • Implementation fiches of affiliates • Joint implementation report SDC 28/06/2006 • Reports 3 regional meetings project • Riga/ Budapest/Brussels • Other input by affiliates
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • General: • Only few countries described the “practices and procedures specific to management and labour and member states” (Art. 139 §2) • Collective bargaining: BE, FR, ES, SW • Law: CZ (as basis for more favourable CA) • Tripartite Council: LT • No real specific procedure but changes to law most logic: EE • Problem in identifying the “specific procedure”: SK • Is nevertheless crucial information!!!
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Implementation via Collective Bargaining: National level • BE: interprof CA n° 72 of 30/3/1999 (extended by RD of 21/6/1999) • ES: EU text annexed to ANC 2005 (recommendation for lower level CB- no results yet) • SE: national CA for local/regions authorities (04/2005) • FR: negotiations on “penabilité au travail” – include WRS – negotiations failed • Initiatives started/foreseen: • BG: proposal to national council “Conditions at work” to elaborate “Common strategy/decision/proposal” • SLO: via national tripartite council – Working group Oct 2005- draft CA prepared by ZSSS – refused by employers • RO: start negotiations on National CA 2007 – September 2007 • CY: invitations send to employers – no reaction so far • FI: negotiations started February 2006 – no final result yet • Iceland: started and end result was hoped to be reached by end June 2006 – result?
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Implementation via Collective Bargaining: sectoral/regional level • DK: CA for state sector authorities (spring 2005) • DK: CA for local and regional authorities (spring 2005) – further negotiations foreseen to start in October 2007 • ES: No real results yet as follow up to ANC 2005; several CA’s dealing with WRS but not really “triggered by EU agreement”: • National wide sectoral CA telemarketing (2004-2006) • National wide sectoral CA chemical sector (2004-2006) • Provincial CA for hotel sector in Tenerife (2005-2008) • Provincial CA for casinos in Allicante (2006-2009) • MT: foreseen for next CB round as current CA’s are valid until 2007
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Implementation via Collective Bargaining: enterprise level • DE: most likely level; as H&S aspects are tradionally not settle via CA’s on higher levels • AT: main objective is to get it implemented on this level • ES: Codorniu – Sant Sadurni; but not directly triggered by EU agreement
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Implementation via Legislation: • Existing: • BG: Act on Health and Safety Working Conditions 1997 • MT: Act XXVII of 2000 • PT: Constitution, Penal Code, Labour Code (art. 18 & 24) • NO: Working Environment Act covers “most” aspects of EU agreement; considered as satisfactory basis
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Implementation via Legislation: • New legislation: • CZ: new Labour Code of 21/04/2006 via Law 262/0226 Coll., Chapter I article 102 (in force as from 1/1/2007) • SK: partial implementation via • New Law OHS nr 124/2006 Z.z. • New Health Law nr 126/2006 Z.z. • Partially also via amendments to Labour Code • SLO: proposals for amendments by ZSSS to regulate criteria for OHS services licences for risk assessments on WRS – no reaction yet • EE: proposed amendments to Occupational H&S Act – adding WRS to list of health risk factors – refuses under pretext that it was already covered
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Implementation via Legislation: • Needed: BE for public sector • Hoped for: • PT: use revision of national list of occupational health illnesses to add WRS • RO: amendments to H & S law • Problem: • SW: Swedish Work Environment Authority uses EU agreement as argument for not issuing new provisions on social and psychological conditions at work – Serious set back for trade unions
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Other forms/instruments of implementation: • BE: as national CA was not really used in practice; brochure of National Labour Council on how to use in practice • SLO: proposal to national economic council to translate Copenhagen Questionnaire into Slovenian • MT: joint interprofessional Declaration of Commitment • NL: update of national Declaration on WRS in line with EU agreement • SW: joint interprofessional agreements both for private (16/6/2005) and public sector (spring 2006) including translation of EU agreement and recommendations to lower CB levels to use it as guideline
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • Other forms/instruments of implementation (continued): • IRE: changes foreseen to Code of Practice • LV: interprofessional agreement LBAS/LDDK prescribing next steps in implementation • UK: interprofessional guide by CBI, CEEP UK, Forum of Private Business and TUC in cooperation with governmental agencies such as Health and Safety Executive and DTI • AT: • joint interprofessional guidelines – near adoption • These will also be signed up to by Austrian Chamber of Agriculture to make them applicable in concerned sector • EU sectoral social dialogue: • Electricity: Joint Declaration Eurelectric/EPSU/EMCEF (15/12/2004) • Construction: Joint Statement FIEC/EFBWW (10/06/2006) • Cleaning: at SDC of October 2004 commitment to do annual review on implementation
ETUC Project Implementation WRS agreement • BUT…: problems identified • BE: no real minutes of EU social dialogue negotiations available as well as no joint interpretation guide • Several countries: no real interest by employers; are afraid of the costs! • SLO: • Fear of employers that WRS will be put on list of occupational illnesses – damage claims by workers • No OHS services with adequate know how on WRS • Several countries: most companies are SME’s • Several countries: no decently functioning SD mechanisms