9 Amendments of Jutta STEINRUCK related to 2011/2006(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned, howeverof the opinion, that greater harmonisation may have a negapositive impact on Member States' competitiveness and, therefore, on potential employment opportunities; disparities between national insolvency and restructuring laws create obstacles, competitive advantages and/or disadvantages or difficulties for companies with cross-border activities or ownership within the EU; harmonisation of insolvency regimes will further promote a level playing field, remove obstacles to a successful restructuring of insolvent companies and preserve employment;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that Directive 2008/94/EC has met its objective ofis ensuring a minimum degree of protection for employees in the event of insolvency, whilst maintaining adequate flexibility for Member States; however, is very concerned about the low ceilings and very short time limits set by Member States under the possibility offered by Articles 4(2) and 4(3), which gives as a result a large number of workers with unpaid wages exceeding the limits set by national law; stresses that the wording of Articles 4(2) and 4(3) in particular is very vague and leaves a considerable amount of discretion to Member States to significantly water down their obligations under the Directive; considers that a revision of these provisions should be envisaged;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Takes the view that an information centre on cross-border insolvency proceedings should be established that will maintain an electronic insolvency register with information on the opening of proceedings and the basic features of insolvency procedure law, in order to facilitate the enforcement of claims;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Is of the opinion, that the scope of application of the Directive 2008/94/EC, in particular the understanding of ‘outstanding claim’ is too wide as a number of Member States apply a narrow definition of remuneration (e.g.: excluding severance pay, bonuses, reimbursement arrangements, etc.) that can result in the non-fulfilment of considerable claims;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Takes the view that exemptions from the scope of Directive 2008/94/EC on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer should be avoided as far as possible;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)