Trinczek, Rainer

The revision of the working time [1] directive, originally adopted as Council Directive 93/104/EC [2] in 1993 and subsequently consolidated in Directive 2003/88/EC [3], can be described as having a long history of failed attempts. In the latest episode in this process, the European Parliament [4] disapproved a compromise reached by the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO [5]) on 9 June 2008 (*EU0807049I* [6]). In its plenary session on 17 December 2008, the European Parliament rejected the EPSCO compromise by a large majority of 421 to 273 votes in a second reading of the central issues of the compromise, notably the opt-out clause and on-call time. [1] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/working-time [2] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31993L0104:EN:HTML [3] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=32003L0088&model=guichett [4] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/european-parliament [5] http://www.consilium.europa.eu/cms3_fo/showPage.asp?id=411&lang=en [6] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/articles/political-agreement-reached-on-working-time-and-temporary-work-directives

Since 2001, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC [1]) and its research institute the European Trade Union Institute for Research [2], Education [3] and Health and Safety [4] (ETUI-REHS [5]) have produced an annual report entitled /Benchmarking working Europe/. The study is usually published before the EU spring summit and the Tripartite Social Summit [6]. In the introduction to the 2008 edition [7], the report sets out its aim: to establish ‘what progress – or lack of it – has taken place in selected areas of importance to trade unions and of crucial significance for a social Europe’. [1] http://www.etuc.org [2] http://www.etui-rehs.org/research [3] http://www.etuc.org/etuco [4] http://tutb.etuc.org [5] http://www.etui-rehs.org/ [6] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/tripartite-social-summit [7] http://www.etui-rehs.org/research/Publications/Regular-publications/Benchmarking-Working-Europe/Benchmarking-Working-Europe-2008

In 2000, the Council of the European Union [1] adopted the so-called Lisbon Strategy [2], which seeks to make the EU ‘the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion, and respect for the environment by 2010’. In 2004, the Council and the European Commission [3] conducted a mid-term review of the Lisbon process. A group of high-level experts, led by the former Dutch Prime Minister, Wim Kok, was asked to prepare a report on the state of the Lisbon process. The resulting Kok report (512Kb PDF) [4], which was published in November 2004, concluded that little progress had been made in the previous first five years and recommended that the EU place a greater emphasis on growth and employment (EU0412205F [5]). [1] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/council-of-the-european-union [2] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/lisbon-strategy [3] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/european-commission [4] http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/2004-1866-EN-complet.pdf [5] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/articles/kok-group-issues-report-on-lisbon-strategy

At the core of the Lisbon Strategy [1] is the aim to make the European Union the most competitive economic region of the world. The transition to an innovative knowledge-based economy is likely to have considerable effects on the demand side of the labour market, particularly with regard to the qualifications needed. Even today, the mismatch between qualifications offered and those demanded by employers is one of the major labour market problems. Pressure to tackle this problem will increase in the light of globalisation, accelerated by technological change and the shrinking workforce because of demographic change. [1] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/lisbon-strategy

Data from recent Eurostat publications show that, despite some convergence in employment patterns between women and men, considerable gender differences remain in relation to work. Women have caught up in educational qualifications and increased their employment rate, but family responsibilities are still the main reason for women’s above average inactivity rate. Women also continue to be more concentrated in certain economic sectors. Moreover, a gender-based entrepreneurial gap remains and women remain underrepresented in labour market policy interventions.

Although the EU is an economically well-off region in comparison with the rest of the world, the EU Member States are still faced with the problem of income poverty. Recent Eurostat statistics show that 16% of the EU25 population was at risk of poverty in 2003. The data indicate that employment is the main factor in offsetting the risk of income poverty. However, the phenomenon of in-work poverty is also prevalent in the EU.

Data from recent Eurostat publications show that, despite some convergence in employment patterns between women and men, considerable gender differences remain in relation to work. Women have caught up in educational qualifications and increased their employment rate, but family responsibilities are still the main reason for women’s above average inactivity rate. Women also continue to be more concentrated in certain economic sectors. Moreover, a gender-based entrepreneurial gap remains and women remain underrepresented in labour market policy interventions.

In the European Union, there is a long history of failure to agree on a directive on temporary agency work [1] and on a necessary reform of the working time [2] directive. Traditionally, the UK government took the role as the ‘leader of the opposition’ against such initiatives. However, in the summer of 2007, the UK government seemed to soften its position, particularly on certain issues concerning a possible temporary agency work directive. The UK Minister of State for Employment Relations and Postal Affairs, Pat McFadden, appearing in front of the European Scrutiny Committee [3] within the UK parliament, made a comment that – under certain circumstances – he ‘would be very optimistic’ that an agreement could be reached under the Portuguese EU Presidency in the second half of 2007. [1] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/temporary-agency-work [2] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/working-time [3] http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/european_scrutiny.cfm

In 2005, the Lisbon Strategy [1] was re-launched and organised around three-year cycles. One of the instruments to be used to implement the strategy involves a set of integrated – but legally non-binding – guidelines for the economic policies of the EU and its Member States, with the employment guidelines [2] being an essential part of these. All of the guidelines expire at the end of each three-year cycle, and need to be renewed for the next cycle. As the first three-year cycle covered the period 2005–2007, new guidelines now have to be agreed for the period 2008–2010. Before the Council of the European Union [3] can finally adopt employment guidelines, the European Parliament [4], as well as other institutions such as the Employment Committee (EMCO [5]) and the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC [6]), has to be consulted. [1] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/lisbon-strategy [2] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/employment-guidelines [3] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/council-of-the-european-union [4] www.eurofound.europa.eu/ef/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/european-parliament [5] http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/employment_strategy/emco_en.htm [6] http://www.eesc.europa.eu/index_en.asp

Although the EU is an economically well-off region in comparison with the rest of the world, the EU Member States are still faced with the problem of income poverty. Recent Eurostat statistics show that 16% of the EU25 population was at risk of poverty in 2003. The data indicate that employment is the main factor in offsetting the risk of income poverty. However, the phenomenon of in-work poverty is also prevalent in the EU.