BETA

29 Amendments of Monika VANA related to 2015/2284(INI)

Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas women are disproportionately hit by the crises and by austerity policies;
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Underlines that EGF assistance made a positive contribution to addressing significant social and labour market problems, increasing social cohesion, enabling people to re-enter employment and thereby contribute to the household income or remain active in the job search and avoid negative unemployment traps; notes, moreover, that re-employment prevents labour drain and forced mobility; stresses, however, that EGF assistance should also contribute to the creation of sustainable and decent jobs; special attention should be paid to young women;
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the variation in the gender profile of the beneficiaries of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF), where the average share of female beneficiaries is 33 %, and that of males 67 %, depends on the sector and whether it is traditionally male or female dominated1 ; _________________ 1 Ex-post evaluation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) - Final Report, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion - European Commission, August 2015.
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Calls on the Commission to take into account women's particular situation, which has even aggravated since the beginning of the crisis, and to ensure therefore, as far as possible, that EGF assistance benefits women and men equally;
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission and the Council to consider strengtheningkeep the provisions in the current EGF Regulation on allowances for carers in order to allow for bettefor support for women with care duties2 ; however, these measures must not substitute Member States' obligations; _________________ 2 Article 7, point 1(b) of the Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014- 2020) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 855.
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to assess in its reviews to what extent the design of the coordinated package of personalised services anticipated future labour market perspectives and required skills and were compatible with the shift towards a resource-efficient and sustainable economy;
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the average rate of self- employment for all EGF cases is 5 %, and calls on the Commission to establish measures as part of the EGF with a view to promoting and fostering entrepreneurship, and in particular encouraging female and social entrepreneurship;.
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that EGF assistance made a positive contribution to addressing significant social and labour market problems, increasing social cohesion, enabling people to re-enter employment and thereby contribute to family earnings or remain active in the job search and avoid negative unemployment traps; notes, moreover, that re-employment prevents labour drain and forced mobility.deleted
2016/03/30
Committee: FEMM
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the Court of Auditors recommends the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission consider limiting EU funding to measures likely to provide EU added value, rather than funding already existing national workers' income support schemes;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the scope for implementing the EGF budget more flexibly, and therefore more effectively; reminds, however, that these measures must not substitute Member States’ obligations;
2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas between 2007 and 2014 the manufacturing sector accounted for the largest number of applications; in particular the automotive industry, which concerned 29 000 out of 122 121 workers (23% of the total covered by the submitted applications).
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that nearly 50% of workers who received financial assistance under applications dealt with in 2013-2014 are now back in employment; emphasises, however, that the EGF should provide funding for sectors likely to face problems in the future; stresses, however, that EGF assistance should also contribute to the creation of sustainable and decent jobs; special attention should be paid to young women; as women are disproportionately hit by the crises and by austerity policies;
2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. StressNotes the need for greashort-term coordination withharacter of the ESGF and the ERDF, and proposes that applications for EGF funding should be submitted by the authorities that manage the Structural Funds in each Member State;; underlines that EGF interventions should be complementary to existing EU and national programmes and strategies; stresses the need for greater coordination and synergies in particular with ESIF,
2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the functioning of the EGF has been improved by reforms to the regulation; regrets that it still has not reached all Member States;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls the importance of safeguards that prevent the relocation of enterprises benefitting from EU funding which might lead to triggering the need for additional support schemes due to redundancies;
2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to better anticipate the effects of trade policy decisions on the EU labour market; strongly opposes any initiative to consider the EGF, in its current form and with its current budget, as an intervention tool for jobs lost in the European Union as a result of mistaken trade strategies decided at EU level, including future trade agreements or those already in place;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to assess in its reviews to what extent the design of the coordinated package of personalised services anticipated future labour market perspectives and required skills and were compatible with the shift towards a resource-efficient and sustainable economy
2016/04/01
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that some Member States have preferred to use the ESF rather than the EGF because of higher ESF co- financing rates, swifter implementation of ESF measures, the lack of EGF pre- financing and the lengthy EGF approval procedure; believes however that the increased co-financing rate and the more timely application and approval process contained in the new regulation have helped address some of these concerns; regrets that EGF support still has not reached redundant workers in all Member States and calls on Member States to provide this opportunity in case of mass redundancies;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Notes the conclusion of the Court of Auditors with regard to the lengthy EGF approval procedure; expects that the more timely procedure introduced in the current regulation has improved the situation; strongly recommends that all Member States start implementing the measures as soon as possible after the redundancies or when their applications are sent to the Commission, and is pleased that many Member States already do so;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls the importance of safeguards that prevent the relocation of enterprises benefitting from EU funding which might lead to triggering the need for additional support schemes due to redundancies;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the conclusion in the Court of Auditors report that nearly all EGF-eligible workers were offered personalised and well-coordinated measures; believes that the involvement of the targeted beneficiaries or their representatives, the social partners and other relevant stakeholders in the initial assessment and application is essential in order to ensure positive outcomes for beneficiaries; calls on the Commission to assess in its reviews to what extent the design of the coordinated package of personalised services anticipated future labour market perspectives and required skills and was compatible with the shift towards a resource-efficient and sustainable economy;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on Member States to make further efforts so that workers receive the opportunity to be trained to future oriented sectors;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the average share of beneficiaries aged 55 or over was 15 % and of beneficiaries aged 15-24 was 5 %; welcomes therefore the emphasis in the new regulation on older and younger workers and the inclusion of NEETs in certain applications; notes that the average share of female beneficiaries was 33%; Calls therefore on the Commission to take into account women's particular situation, which has even aggravated since the beginning of the crisis, and to ensure therefore, as far as possible, that EGF assistance benefits women and men equally;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the conclusion from the Court of Auditors that the EGF delivered EU added value when used to co-finance services for redundant workers or allowances not ordinarily existing under Member States' unemployment benefit systems; It deplores the fact that in some cases it is unclear whether EGF measures replaced obligations of Member States, especially with regard to unemployment benefits;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to thoroughly assess all cases to ensure that they comply with Article 7.2 of the regulation that excludes that actions supported by the EGF substitute passive social protection measures; Suggests that in a future review, rules are made even clearer by specifying in art 7.2.b that actions which are the responsibility of enterprises and Member States are not eligible for a financial contribution from the EGF;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. RStrongly regrets the fact that according to the Court of Auditors "one third of EGF funding compensates national workers' income support schemes with no EU added value", when replacing national schemes; notes the restriction in the current regulation where such costallowances are capped at 35 % and believes that this cap should be lowered;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Is satisfied with the conclusion that, generally, Member States effectively coordinated the EGF with ESF and national labour market measures and that no instances of overlap or double-funding of individuals was detected during the Court of Auditors audit;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Is concernedNotes that the Court of Auditors report concludes that no quantitative re- integration objectives were set and that existing data is not adequate to assess the effectiveness of the measures in re- integrating workers into employment; recommends therefore that the Member States set quantitative re-integration objectives and systematically differentiate between EGF, ESF and other national measures specifically designed for workers affected by mass redundancies; the Member States should furthermore distinguish between the two main types of EGF measures, i.e. active labour market measures and income support paid to workers, as well as providing more detailed information on the measures accessed by individual participants in order to allow a more accurate cost-benefit analysis of different measures;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Recommends that more regular peer reviews, cross-national exchanges or partnering of new EGF cases with previous EGF cases, where possible, be implemented in order to exchange good practices and implementing experiences; recommends therefore to create a platform of best practices, which is easily accessible and supports a better exchange, including examples of good combination of different EU funds in view of offering integrated solutions to regions with polluting industries;
2016/04/27
Committee: EMPL