BETA


Events

2016/12/21
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2016/09/15
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2016/09/15
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2016/09/15
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 475 votes to 63 with 74 abstentions a resolution on the application of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘Employment Equality Directive’).

Prohibit discrimination: Parliament welcomed the fact that almost all Member States have included the general principle of equal treatment on specific grounds of discrimination in their constitutions. However, it regretted that only a few Member States have systematically ensured that all existing legal texts are in line with the principle of equal treatment .

regretting the increase in experiences of discrimination and harassment , Members called on the Commission to include a specific focus on all types of discrimination when monitoring the implementation of Directive 2000/78/EC , and to speed up the adoption of the EU horizontal anti-discrimination directive proposed by the Commission in 2008, which was voted for by Parliament.

Members noted that non-discrimination in the field of occupation and employment is only effective if discrimination is comprehensively combated in all areas of life through, for example, community support, legislation and coordination tools such as strategies and frameworks at both Member State and EU levels, including the possibility of introducing positive action measures.

Religion and belief : studies showed that the most discriminated religious groups in the area of employment include Jews, Sikhs and Muslims (and especially women). Members recommended the adoption of European frameworks for national strategies to combat anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

Given the increasingly xenophobic and Islamophobic context, Members considered that the consistent application of anti-discrimination legislation should be viewed as an important element in radicalisation prevention strategies. Whilst acknowledging the role played by the European Court of Human Rights’ through its decisions in the interpretation of the Directive in its entirety, Members expressed regret regarding the low number of cases referred to courts , which contrasts with the high number of discrimination occurrences that emerge from victimisation surveys but are not pursued in justice. Parliament called upon Member States to recognise the fundamental right to freedom of conscience. It insisted that religious freedom is an important principle that should be respected by employers, underlining, however, that the implementation of this principle is a question of subsidiarity.

Disability: Members encouraged Member States to interpret EU law in such a way as to provide a basis for a concept of disability in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). They stressed the importance of:

protecting disabled workers , including those with a terminal illness, from any form of discrimination in the workplace ensuring that socially responsible public procurement might be used as an instrument to integrate people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups into the labour market; using structural funds , in particular the European Social Fund, to adapt workplaces and to provide necessary assistance for persons with disabilities at work; implementing an all-encompassing framework for measures enabling access to quality employment for persons with disabilities.

Members encouraged Member States to: (i) develop and implement an all-encompassing framework for measures enabling access to quality employment for persons with disabilities, including the possibility of using, for example, fines imposed for failure to comply with anti-discrimination legislation; (ii) provide ongoing support to employers that hire persons with disabilities; (iii) combat prejudice against persons with disabilities, especially persons with psychosocial or intellectual disabilities.

Age: underlining the important contributions that older workers make to society and the competitiveness of companies, Parliament stressed the need to:

promote access to employment and integration into the labour market of all workers regardless of their age, and to apply measures in order to protect all workers in the workplace study the increasing problem of unemployment among people over the age of 50 and to develop effective tools in order to reintegrate older workers into the labour market and protect them against unfair dismissal; upscale digital skills among the working population to help older people and workers with disabilities remain longer in the labour market; promote free high-quality public services that provide proper and necessary care and assistance for children, the sick and the elderly.

Members welcomed the Commission's initiative on work-life balance . They recommended that the initiative fully include measures to support informal carers and grandparents of working age, as well as young parents.

Sexual orientation : Members recalled that the scope of protection from discrimination available to trans people remains uncertain in many Member States. They called for measures to implement effectively national legislation transposing the Gender Equality Directive (recast). They also regretted the general under-reporting of all forms of discrimination against LGBTI people and highlighted the role of national LGBTI organisations as key partners in raising awareness.

In general terms, Parliament recommended , inter alia:

developing harmonised and homogeneous statistics designed to fill in all gaps in the collection of gender equality data; strengthening the role of the national equality bodies, ensuring their impartiality, developing their activities and enhancing their capacities, including through the provision of adequate funding; displaying greater commitment in implementing the principle of equality between women and men in employment policies; enhancing the reconciliation of work and private life by concrete measures, such as urgently proposing new legislative proposals on the Maternity Leave Directive so as to guarantee the right for women to return to work after pregnancy and maternity leave and parental leave; improving complaint mechanisms at national level by strengthening national equality bodies; paying close attention to the rules applicable to sanctions and redress in the Member States; ensuring adequate training is provided for employees of national, regional and local authorities, law enforcement bodies and labour inspectorates; involving social partners (trade unions and employers) and civil society, including equality bodies, in the effective application of equality in employment and occupation.

Documents
2016/09/15
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2016/07/05
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Marian HARKIN (ADLE, IE) on the activities, impact and added value of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund between 2007 and 2014.

The Committee on Budgets, exercising its prerogative as associated committees in accordance with Article 54 of the Rules of Procedure, also gave its opinion on the report.

Members noted with satisfaction the finding from the Commission's report on the EGF's activities in 2013 and 2014 and welcomed the extension of the funding period from one to two years. The report noted that the EGF interventions should be directed to investments that contribute to growth, jobs, education, skills and workers’ geographical mobility and should be coordinated with existing EU programmes, especially in the regions and sectors already suffering from the adverse effects of globalisation or restructuring of the economy. It noted that the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI) can act as follow-up measures in the EGF areas of support by stimulating investment.

Members considered that the functioning of the EGF has been improved by the reforms to the regulation and that the reduced appropriations earmarked for the EGF in the annual budget have been sufficient to provide the necessary assistance and support that is both vital and necessary for people who have lost their jobs and that the Commission should make improvements to the EGF database.

The Commission is invited to fully anticipate the effects of trade policy decisions on the EU labour market, also considering the evidence based information of these effects that have been highlighted by the EGF application. The EGF suffers from a serious lack of awareness on the part of some Member States, social partners and companies. Thus, Members called on the Commission to step up its communication efforts in this area.

The report emphasised that the EGF cannot under any circumstances act a substitute to a serious policy to prevent and pre-empt restructurings. It stressed the importance of a true industrial policy at EU level to bring sustainable and inclusive growth. It called on the Commission to carry out sector-specific studies on the impact of globalisation and, on the basis of the findings, make proposals to encourage companies to anticipate changes in their industries and to prepare their workers before making them redundant.

Beneficiaries of the EGF : Members welcomed the conclusions in the Court of Auditors’ report that nearly all EGF-eligible workers were able to benefit from personalised and well-coordinated measures tailored to their individual needs and that nearly 50 % of workers who received financial assistance are now back in employment. They believe that the involvement of targeted beneficiaries or their representatives, the social partners, local employment agencies and other relevant stakeholders in the initial assessment and application is essential in order to ensure positive outcomes for beneficiaries.

The report welcomed the emphasis in the new regulation on older and younger workers and the inclusion of NEETs in certain applications. The Commission is called upon to include in its mid-term evaluation of the EGF a specific qualitative and quantitative assessment of the EGF support to young persons not in employment, education or training (NEETs), especially in view of the implementation of the Youth Guarantee and the necessary synergies between national budgets, the ESF and the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI).

The Commission is also called upon to ensure that in all EGF applications women and men are treated equally.

Cost effectiveness and added value of the EGF : the report called on the Commission and the Member States to use the scope for implementing the EGF budget more flexibly and effectively , with the focus on outcomes, impact and value added. They considered that the application procedure should be made faster and invited the Commission to assess thoroughly the reasons for the low implementation rates and to propose measures to address the existing bottlenecks and ensure optimal use of the fund. The co-funding rate of 60 % should not be increased.

Members regretted 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. They also regretted the diminished funding for the EGF and considered that EGF and ESF measures should be used to complement each other.

Impact on SMEs : concerned that the EGF has had a very limited impact on SMEs, Members called on the Commission to further reorient the EGF towards SMEs which are key players in the European economy. They stipulated that there should be more use of the derogation from the eligibility threshold, particularly to benefit SMEs and to take the 'Think Small First' principle into account in the planning and application stages.

Data requirements : the report recommended Member States to:

set quantitative re-integration objectives and systematically differentiate between EGF, ESF and other national measures specifically designed for workers affected by mass redundancies; distinguish between the two main types of EGF measures, i.e. active labour market measures and income support paid to workers,; provide more detailed information on the measures accessed by individual participants in order to allow a more accurate cost-benefit analysis of different measures.

The Commission is called on to provide information on the type and quality of jobs found by people who have been re-integrated into the labour market and on the medium term trend as regards the rate of integration achieved through EGF interventions.

Documents
2016/06/21
   EP - Vote in committee
2016/05/25
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/04/28
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/04/27
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/04/25
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/04/25
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/04/20
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/03/02
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2015/11/30
   EP - VALLI Marco (EFDD) appointed as rapporteur in CONT
2015/11/30
   EP - JONGERIUS Agnes (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in INTA
2015/11/09
   EP - BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in FEMM
2015/10/29
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2015/10/29
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2015/10/28
   EP - HARKIN Marian (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in EMPL
2015/09/17
   EP - DEUTSCH Tamás (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in REGI
2015/09/15
   EP - DENANOT Jean-Paul (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG
2015/07/22
   EC - Non-legislative basic document published
Details

PURPOSE: to present a report on the activities of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) in 2013 and 2014.

CONTENT: the EGF, which was set up by Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, was designed to reconcile the overall long-term benefits of open trade for growth and employment with the short-term adverse effects which globalisation may have, particularly on the employment of the most vulnerable and lowest-skilled workers.

The EGF is intended to provide support to workers made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns. It co-finances active labour market policy measures taken by the Member States to help redundant workers reposition themselves on the labour market and find new jobs.

To respond more effectively to the global financial and economic crisis, the rules governing the EGF were amended first by Regulation (EC) No 546/20092 and, since January 2014, by Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013 .

Overview: the report notes that the e Fund has undergone a remarkable development since its beginnings in 2007. It covers a wide variety of sectors and economic activities and more and more Member States have benefited from its support. In 2013 and 2014, the Commission received 30 applications for contributions from the EGF, totalling EUR 109 million . These were submitted by 10 Member States (Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain). The applications, which requested a total of EUR 108 733 976 from the EGF, targeted 28 390 workers made redundant as a result of structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation or the economic and financial crisis.

EGF applications were submitted for the first time for 10 sectors . The sectors concerned were: food products, slaughterhouses, chemicals, glass, manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products, jewellery, transport/warehouse, air transport, food and beverage services, programming and broadcasting, repair and installation of machinery and equipment, and information and communication.

The budgetary authority took 28 decisions targeting 27 610 redundant workers in 13 Member States, to make use of the EGF in 2013 and 2014, amounting to a total of EUR 114.4 million from the EGF’s 2013-2014 budget.

Results from the EGF: the final reports presented by the 13 Member States showed that at the end of the EGF implementation period, 7 656 workers, or 44.9 % of the 18 848 workers who received EGF assistance, had found new jobs or were self-employed . The Commission considers this a good result, particularly as the workers supported by EGF co-funded measures are usually among those facing the greatest difficulties on the labour market.

The support packages which the 13 Member States provided to workers made redundant included a wide range of personalised job search, outplacement and (re)qualification measures. The highest amounts were spent on two categories of measures:

training and retraining (about EUR 56.5 million, or 32 % of the total personalised services for all 34 cases) and financial allowances paid to the workers while they were pursuing active labour market policy measures (about EUR 68.5 million, or 38.8 % of the total personalised services for all 34 cases).

Individual guidance and promotion of entrepreneurship were other frequently used measures.

The ex-post evaluation published in May 201411 indicates that the EGF made a positive contribution to addressing significant social and labour market problems resulting from large-scale redundancy procedures.

Trends: with the increasing number of EGF cases, the Commission possesses more data to identify trends in applications and to gain an overview of the direction of the Fund’s activities.

A total of EUR 561.1 million has been so far requested on behalf of 122 121 workers (this is the number of targeted workers estimated by the Member States). The report gives a detailed breakdown of data regarding the 134 applications made by Member States between 2007 and 2014.

The Commission stresses in particular:

the trends so far show an increasing number of sectors for which EGF applications have been submitted, with 10 new sectors added in this reporting period ; Member States have gained experience in selecting the most suitable measures , directing their assistance to redundant workers in an efficient manner, and making use of the EGF to test new approaches; Member States are increasingly using the option of reallocating funds between measures during project implementation in order to make best use of the approved contribution.

The new EGF Regulation (2014-2020) : the report recalls that failure to achieve a qualified majority in Council meant that the EGF’s temporary ‘crisis derogation’ could not be extended beyond the end of 2011. This limited the possibilities for EU assistance to workers in 2012 and 2013, even though many were still seriously affected by the crisis.

However, the economic and financial crisis criterion was reintroduced by the new EGF Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013. The new Regulation also expanded the categories of eligible workers to include self-employed workers and workers on temporary contracts and -by derogation until the end of 2017 - young people 12 not in employment, education or training (NEETs). These changes broaden the scope for EGF support. The new streamlined adoption timeline means that measures to help workers should be implemented more quickly.

The Commission considers that if the EGF is used to its full potential , in a way that complements other available instruments and in consultation with the major stakeholders, workers eligible for EGF support can be helped in a tailored and personalised manner . This will improve their labour market opportunities in the medium and longer term as markets continue to recover from the crisis.

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0227/2016 - Marian Harkin - § 13 #

2016/09/15 Outcome: +: 525, -: 72, 0: 13
IT FR DE ES PL RO BE PT AT HU CZ SE NL IE BG LT HR DK EL SK LU SI EE MT LV FI CY GB
Total
67
63
81
44
40
28
19
18
18
14
19
15
18
10
13
9
9
9
9
13
6
6
5
5
6
8
3
54
icon: PPE PPE
173

Netherlands PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Latvia PPE

2

Finland PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
154

Czechia S&D

3

Netherlands S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

For (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
57

Romania ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

2

Croatia ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

1

Finland ALDE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom ALDE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
43

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
42

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: ENF ENF
32

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

2

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

France EFDD

1

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: NI NI
8

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
64

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

Against (1)

3

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Finland ECR

2

A8-0227/2016 - Marian Harkin - § 18 #

2016/09/15 Outcome: +: 579, -: 10, 0: 9
DE IT FR GB ES PL RO BE AT CZ PT NL BG SK HU SE IE LT HR DK FI LU LV SI EL EE MT CY
Total
79
67
59
53
43
40
27
18
18
18
18
19
13
13
13
15
10
9
9
9
8
6
6
6
8
5
5
3
icon: PPE PPE
172

Sweden PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Finland PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Latvia PPE

2

Greece PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
149

Czechia S&D

3

Netherlands S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

For (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ECR ECR
62

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1
2

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
56

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Romania ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

1

Finland ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
41

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Belgium Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Hungary Verts/ALE

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
42

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Germany EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: ENF ENF
32

Germany ENF

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

For (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

2
icon: NI NI
7

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

France NI

2

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

For (1)

1

A8-0227/2016 - Marian Harkin - § 22 #

2016/09/15 Outcome: +: 537, -: 40, 0: 21
DE IT ES PL RO GB FR BE PT AT CZ NL BG HU SK SE IE LT HR DK FI LU LV SI EE EL MT CY
Total
76
67
43
40
28
52
62
19
18
18
19
19
14
14
12
15
10
9
9
9
8
6
6
6
5
5
5
3
icon: PPE PPE
171

Lithuania PPE

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Finland PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Latvia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
149

Czechia S&D

3

Netherlands S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

For (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Greece S&D

1

Malta S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ECR ECR
62

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Slovakia ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1
2

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

For (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
58

Romania ALDE

3

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

1

Finland ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
41

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
41

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Hungary Verts/ALE

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1
icon: NI NI
7

Germany NI

1

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

France NI

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

2
icon: ENF ENF
32

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

France EFDD

Against (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2

A8-0227/2016 - Marian Harkin - Considérant R #

2016/09/15 Outcome: -: 279, +: 255, 0: 30
IT ES PT RO GB SE IE FI CY DK LU AT LV LT EL MT HR EE BE SK HU SI CZ PL NL DE BG FR
Total
61
43
18
27
49
15
10
8
1
9
6
17
5
8
1
4
9
5
18
13
13
5
19
39
19
72
13
56
icon: S&D S&D
131

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

For (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Malta S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Czechia S&D

3

Netherlands S&D

For (1)

1

Bulgaria S&D

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
39

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
39

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
32

Sweden EFDD

2

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

1
icon: NI NI
7

Hungary NI

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

France NI

2
icon: ECR ECR
58

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Denmark ECR

Abstain (1)

3

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2
icon: ENF ENF
30

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1

Austria ENF

Abstain (1)

3

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

2

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
58

Romania ALDE

For (1)

3

United Kingdom ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Finland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1
4

Croatia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3
icon: PPE PPE
169

Sweden PPE

2

Finland PPE

Against (1)

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

For (1)

Against (2)

3

Latvia PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Greece PPE

1

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1
3
4

Netherlands PPE

3

A8-0227/2016 - Marian Harkin - Résolution #

2016/09/15 Outcome: +: 447, -: 73, 0: 19
IT DE FR ES PL RO PT CZ AT HU IE BG LT BE HR SK LU LV EE SI NL FI DK MT SE CY GB
Total
55
69
50
42
37
28
18
19
17
13
10
13
8
18
9
12
6
5
5
5
19
6
9
3
14
1
47
icon: PPE PPE
158

Lithuania PPE

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Latvia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Sweden PPE

2
icon: S&D S&D
124

Czechia S&D

3

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

For (1)

1

Denmark S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
38

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

4
icon: ALDE ALDE
55

Romania ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

2

Croatia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Finland ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
39

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

For (1)

3

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: ENF ENF
29

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

2

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
7

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
32

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: ECR ECR
56

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Abstain (1)

3

Netherlands ECR

2

Finland ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

3
AmendmentsDossier
340 2015/2284(INI)
2016/01/21 REGI 48 amendments...
source: 575.212
2016/03/30 INTA 53 amendments...
source: 580.502
2016/04/01 BUDG 70 amendments...
source: 580.511
2016/04/06 CONT 6 amendments...
source: 580.590
2016/04/27 EMPL 163 amendments...
source: 582.101

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0/associated
Old
True
New
 
committees/1
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
rapporteur
name: JONGERIUS Agnes date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
rapporteur
name: BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija date: 2015-11-09T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
rapporteur
name: VALLI Marco date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
rapporteur
name: DEUTSCH Tamás date: 2015-09-17T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/4
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
opinion
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
rapporteur
name: VALLI Marco date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
committees/5
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
rapporteur
name: DEUTSCH Tamás date: 2015-09-17T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
rapporteur
name: JONGERIUS Agnes date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/6
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
rapporteur
name: BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija date: 2015-11-09T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
opinion
False
docs/4/docs/0/url
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-AM-582101_EN.html
events/6/docs
  • url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-8-2016-09-15-TOC_EN.html title: Debate in Parliament
committees/0/shadows/3
name
BOYLAN Lynn
group
European United Left - Nordic Green Left
abbr
GUE/NGL
docs/0
date
2016-03-02T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.543 title: PE578.543
type
Committee draft report
body
EP
docs/0
date
2015-07-22T00:00:00
docs
summary
type
Follow-up document
body
EC
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.543
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-PR-578543_EN.html
docs/1
date
2016-03-02T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.543 title: PE578.543
type
Committee draft report
body
EP
docs/1
date
2016-04-20T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE572.895&secondRef=02 title: PE572.895
committee
REGI
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE572.895&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/REGI-AD-572895_EN.html
docs/2
date
2016-04-20T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE572.895&secondRef=02 title: PE572.895
committee
REGI
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/2
date
2016-04-25T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.053&secondRef=02 title: PE577.053
committee
INTA
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.053&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/INTA-AD-577053_EN.html
docs/3
date
2016-04-25T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.053&secondRef=02 title: PE577.053
committee
INTA
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/3
date
2016-04-25T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.082&secondRef=02 title: PE577.082
committee
FEMM
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.082&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/FEMM-AD-577082_EN.html
docs/4
date
2016-04-25T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.082&secondRef=02 title: PE577.082
committee
FEMM
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/4
date
2016-04-27T00:00:00
docs
title: PE582.101
type
Amendments tabled in committee
body
EP
docs/5
date
2016-04-27T00:00:00
docs
title: PE582.101
type
Amendments tabled in committee
body
EP
docs/5
date
2016-04-28T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE573.206&secondRef=03 title: PE573.206
committee
CONT
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/5/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.101
docs/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE573.206&secondRef=03
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CONT-AD-573206_EN.html
docs/6
date
2016-04-28T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE573.206&secondRef=03 title: PE573.206
committee
CONT
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/6
date
2016-05-25T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.509&secondRef=02 title: PE578.509
committee
BUDG
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
docs/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.509&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/BUDG-AD-578509_EN.html
docs/7
date
2016-05-25T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.509&secondRef=02 title: PE578.509
committee
BUDG
type
Committee opinion
body
EP
events/0
date
2015-07-22T00:00:00
type
Non-legislative basic document published
body
EC
docs
summary
events/0
date
2015-07-22T00:00:00
type
Non-legislative basic document published
body
EC
docs
summary
events/1/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/3/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/4
date
2016-07-05T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0227_EN.html title: A8-0227/2016
summary
events/4
date
2016-07-05T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0227_EN.html title: A8-0227/2016
summary
events/6/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160915&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
events/7
date
2016-09-15T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0361_EN.html title: T8-0361/2016
summary
events/7
date
2016-09-15T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0361_EN.html title: T8-0361/2016
summary
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
rapporteur
name: HARKIN Marian date: 2015-10-28T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2015-10-28T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: HARKIN Marian group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
rapporteur
name: JONGERIUS Agnes date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
date
2015-11-30T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: JONGERIUS Agnes group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
rapporteur
name: DENANOT Jean-Paul date: 2015-09-15T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2015-09-15T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DENANOT Jean-Paul group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
rapporteur
name: VALLI Marco date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
date
2015-11-30T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VALLI Marco group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
committees/5
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
rapporteur
name: DEUTSCH Tamás date: 2015-09-17T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/5
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2015-09-17T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DEUTSCH Tamás group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/6
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
rapporteur
name: BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija date: 2015-11-09T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/6
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
date
2015-11-09T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
docs/0
date
2015-07-22T00:00:00
docs
summary
type
Follow-up document
body
EC
docs/7
date
2016-12-21T00:00:00
docs
url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=27457&j=0&l=en title: SP(2016)876
type
Commission response to text adopted in plenary
docs/8
date
2016-12-21T00:00:00
docs
url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=27457&j=0&l=en title: SP(2016)876
type
Commission response to text adopted in plenary
docs/8/body
EC
events/0
date
2015-07-22T00:00:00
type
Non-legislative basic document published
body
EC
docs
summary
events/0
date
2015-07-22T00:00:00
type
Non-legislative basic document published
body
EC
docs
summary
events/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0227&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0227_EN.html
events/7/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0361
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0361_EN.html
commission
  • body: EC dg: Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion commissioner: THYSSEN Marianne
committees
  • type: Responsible Committee body: EP associated: True committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs committee: EMPL date: 2015-10-28T00:00:00 rapporteur: name: HARKIN Marian group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE shadows: name: SÓGOR Csaba group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE name: ULVSKOG Marita group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D name: GERICKE Arne group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR name: BOYLAN Lynn group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL name: VANA Monika group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE name: AGEA Laura group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD name: BIZZOTTO Mara group: Europe of Nations and Freedom abbr: ENF
  • type: Committee Opinion body: EP associated: False committee_full: International Trade committee: INTA date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 rapporteur: name: JONGERIUS Agnes group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
  • type: Committee Opinion body: EP associated: True committee_full: Budgets committee: BUDG date: 2015-09-15T00:00:00 rapporteur: name: DENANOT Jean-Paul group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
  • type: Committee Opinion body: EP associated: False committee_full: Budgetary Control committee: CONT date: 2015-11-30T00:00:00 rapporteur: name: VALLI Marco group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
  • type: Committee Opinion body: EP associated: False committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy committee: ITRE opinion: False
  • type: Committee Opinion body: EP associated: False committee_full: Regional Development committee: REGI date: 2015-09-17T00:00:00 rapporteur: name: DEUTSCH Tamás group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
  • type: Committee Opinion body: EP associated: False committee_full: Womens Rights and Gender Equality committee: FEMM date: 2015-11-09T00:00:00 rapporteur: name: BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
docs
  • date: 2016-03-02T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.543 title: PE578.543 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE572.895&secondRef=02 title: PE572.895 committee: REGI type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.053&secondRef=02 title: PE577.053 committee: INTA type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.082&secondRef=02 title: PE577.082 committee: FEMM type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-27T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.101 title: PE582.101 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-28T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE573.206&secondRef=03 title: PE573.206 committee: CONT type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-05-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.509&secondRef=02 title: PE578.509 committee: BUDG type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-12-21T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=27457&j=0&l=en title: SP(2016)876 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2015-07-22T00:00:00 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2015/0355/COM_COM(2015)0355(ANN)_EN.pdf title: COM(2015)0355 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2015&nu_doc=0355 title: EUR-Lex summary: PURPOSE: to present a report on the activities of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) in 2013 and 2014. CONTENT: the EGF, which was set up by Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, was designed to reconcile the overall long-term benefits of open trade for growth and employment with the short-term adverse effects which globalisation may have, particularly on the employment of the most vulnerable and lowest-skilled workers. The EGF is intended to provide support to workers made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns. It co-finances active labour market policy measures taken by the Member States to help redundant workers reposition themselves on the labour market and find new jobs. To respond more effectively to the global financial and economic crisis, the rules governing the EGF were amended first by Regulation (EC) No 546/20092 and, since January 2014, by Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013 . Overview: the report notes that the e Fund has undergone a remarkable development since its beginnings in 2007. It covers a wide variety of sectors and economic activities and more and more Member States have benefited from its support. In 2013 and 2014, the Commission received 30 applications for contributions from the EGF, totalling EUR 109 million . These were submitted by 10 Member States (Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain). The applications, which requested a total of EUR 108 733 976 from the EGF, targeted 28 390 workers made redundant as a result of structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation or the economic and financial crisis. EGF applications were submitted for the first time for 10 sectors . The sectors concerned were: food products, slaughterhouses, chemicals, glass, manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products, jewellery, transport/warehouse, air transport, food and beverage services, programming and broadcasting, repair and installation of machinery and equipment, and information and communication. The budgetary authority took 28 decisions targeting 27 610 redundant workers in 13 Member States, to make use of the EGF in 2013 and 2014, amounting to a total of EUR 114.4 million from the EGF’s 2013-2014 budget. Results from the EGF: the final reports presented by the 13 Member States showed that at the end of the EGF implementation period, 7 656 workers, or 44.9 % of the 18 848 workers who received EGF assistance, had found new jobs or were self-employed . The Commission considers this a good result, particularly as the workers supported by EGF co-funded measures are usually among those facing the greatest difficulties on the labour market. The support packages which the 13 Member States provided to workers made redundant included a wide range of personalised job search, outplacement and (re)qualification measures. The highest amounts were spent on two categories of measures: training and retraining (about EUR 56.5 million, or 32 % of the total personalised services for all 34 cases) and financial allowances paid to the workers while they were pursuing active labour market policy measures (about EUR 68.5 million, or 38.8 % of the total personalised services for all 34 cases). Individual guidance and promotion of entrepreneurship were other frequently used measures. The ex-post evaluation published in May 201411 indicates that the EGF made a positive contribution to addressing significant social and labour market problems resulting from large-scale redundancy procedures. Trends: with the increasing number of EGF cases, the Commission possesses more data to identify trends in applications and to gain an overview of the direction of the Fund’s activities. A total of EUR 561.1 million has been so far requested on behalf of 122 121 workers (this is the number of targeted workers estimated by the Member States). The report gives a detailed breakdown of data regarding the 134 applications made by Member States between 2007 and 2014. The Commission stresses in particular: the trends so far show an increasing number of sectors for which EGF applications have been submitted, with 10 new sectors added in this reporting period ; Member States have gained experience in selecting the most suitable measures , directing their assistance to redundant workers in an efficient manner, and making use of the EGF to test new approaches; Member States are increasingly using the option of reallocating funds between measures during project implementation in order to make best use of the approved contribution. The new EGF Regulation (2014-2020) : the report recalls that failure to achieve a qualified majority in Council meant that the EGF’s temporary ‘crisis derogation’ could not be extended beyond the end of 2011. This limited the possibilities for EU assistance to workers in 2012 and 2013, even though many were still seriously affected by the crisis. However, the economic and financial crisis criterion was reintroduced by the new EGF Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013. The new Regulation also expanded the categories of eligible workers to include self-employed workers and workers on temporary contracts and -by derogation until the end of 2017 - young people 12 not in employment, education or training (NEETs). These changes broaden the scope for EGF support. The new streamlined adoption timeline means that measures to help workers should be implemented more quickly. The Commission considers that if the EGF is used to its full potential , in a way that complements other available instruments and in consultation with the major stakeholders, workers eligible for EGF support can be helped in a tailored and personalised manner . This will improve their labour market opportunities in the medium and longer term as markets continue to recover from the crisis.
  • date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2016-06-21T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2016-07-05T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0227&language=EN title: A8-0227/2016 summary: The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Marian HARKIN (ADLE, IE) on the activities, impact and added value of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund between 2007 and 2014. The Committee on Budgets, exercising its prerogative as associated committees in accordance with Article 54 of the Rules of Procedure, also gave its opinion on the report. Members noted with satisfaction the finding from the Commission's report on the EGF's activities in 2013 and 2014 and welcomed the extension of the funding period from one to two years. The report noted that the EGF interventions should be directed to investments that contribute to growth, jobs, education, skills and workers’ geographical mobility and should be coordinated with existing EU programmes, especially in the regions and sectors already suffering from the adverse effects of globalisation or restructuring of the economy. It noted that the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI) can act as follow-up measures in the EGF areas of support by stimulating investment. Members considered that the functioning of the EGF has been improved by the reforms to the regulation and that the reduced appropriations earmarked for the EGF in the annual budget have been sufficient to provide the necessary assistance and support that is both vital and necessary for people who have lost their jobs and that the Commission should make improvements to the EGF database. The Commission is invited to fully anticipate the effects of trade policy decisions on the EU labour market, also considering the evidence based information of these effects that have been highlighted by the EGF application. The EGF suffers from a serious lack of awareness on the part of some Member States, social partners and companies. Thus, Members called on the Commission to step up its communication efforts in this area. The report emphasised that the EGF cannot under any circumstances act a substitute to a serious policy to prevent and pre-empt restructurings. It stressed the importance of a true industrial policy at EU level to bring sustainable and inclusive growth. It called on the Commission to carry out sector-specific studies on the impact of globalisation and, on the basis of the findings, make proposals to encourage companies to anticipate changes in their industries and to prepare their workers before making them redundant. Beneficiaries of the EGF : Members welcomed the conclusions in the Court of Auditors’ report that nearly all EGF-eligible workers were able to benefit from personalised and well-coordinated measures tailored to their individual needs and that nearly 50 % of workers who received financial assistance are now back in employment. They believe that the involvement of targeted beneficiaries or their representatives, the social partners, local employment agencies and other relevant stakeholders in the initial assessment and application is essential in order to ensure positive outcomes for beneficiaries. The report welcomed the emphasis in the new regulation on older and younger workers and the inclusion of NEETs in certain applications. The Commission is called upon to include in its mid-term evaluation of the EGF a specific qualitative and quantitative assessment of the EGF support to young persons not in employment, education or training (NEETs), especially in view of the implementation of the Youth Guarantee and the necessary synergies between national budgets, the ESF and the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI). The Commission is also called upon to ensure that in all EGF applications women and men are treated equally. Cost effectiveness and added value of the EGF : the report called on the Commission and the Member States to use the scope for implementing the EGF budget more flexibly and effectively , with the focus on outcomes, impact and value added. They considered that the application procedure should be made faster and invited the Commission to assess thoroughly the reasons for the low implementation rates and to propose measures to address the existing bottlenecks and ensure optimal use of the fund. The co-funding rate of 60 % should not be increased. Members regretted 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. They also regretted the diminished funding for the EGF and considered that EGF and ESF measures should be used to complement each other. Impact on SMEs : concerned that the EGF has had a very limited impact on SMEs, Members called on the Commission to further reorient the EGF towards SMEs which are key players in the European economy. They stipulated that there should be more use of the derogation from the eligibility threshold, particularly to benefit SMEs and to take the 'Think Small First' principle into account in the planning and application stages. Data requirements : the report recommended Member States to: set quantitative re-integration objectives and systematically differentiate between EGF, ESF and other national measures specifically designed for workers affected by mass redundancies; distinguish between the two main types of EGF measures, i.e. active labour market measures and income support paid to workers,; provide more detailed information on the measures accessed by individual participants in order to allow a more accurate cost-benefit analysis of different measures. The Commission is called on to provide information on the type and quality of jobs found by people who have been re-integrated into the labour market and on the medium term trend as regards the rate of integration achieved through EGF interventions.
  • date: 2016-09-15T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=27457&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2016-09-15T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160915&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2016-09-15T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0361 title: T8-0361/2016 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 475 votes to 63 with 74 abstentions a resolution on the application of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘Employment Equality Directive’). Prohibit discrimination: Parliament welcomed the fact that almost all Member States have included the general principle of equal treatment on specific grounds of discrimination in their constitutions. However, it regretted that only a few Member States have systematically ensured that all existing legal texts are in line with the principle of equal treatment . regretting the increase in experiences of discrimination and harassment , Members called on the Commission to include a specific focus on all types of discrimination when monitoring the implementation of Directive 2000/78/EC , and to speed up the adoption of the EU horizontal anti-discrimination directive proposed by the Commission in 2008, which was voted for by Parliament. Members noted that non-discrimination in the field of occupation and employment is only effective if discrimination is comprehensively combated in all areas of life through, for example, community support, legislation and coordination tools such as strategies and frameworks at both Member State and EU levels, including the possibility of introducing positive action measures. Religion and belief : studies showed that the most discriminated religious groups in the area of employment include Jews, Sikhs and Muslims (and especially women). Members recommended the adoption of European frameworks for national strategies to combat anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Given the increasingly xenophobic and Islamophobic context, Members considered that the consistent application of anti-discrimination legislation should be viewed as an important element in radicalisation prevention strategies. Whilst acknowledging the role played by the European Court of Human Rights’ through its decisions in the interpretation of the Directive in its entirety, Members expressed regret regarding the low number of cases referred to courts , which contrasts with the high number of discrimination occurrences that emerge from victimisation surveys but are not pursued in justice. Parliament called upon Member States to recognise the fundamental right to freedom of conscience. It insisted that religious freedom is an important principle that should be respected by employers, underlining, however, that the implementation of this principle is a question of subsidiarity. Disability: Members encouraged Member States to interpret EU law in such a way as to provide a basis for a concept of disability in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). They stressed the importance of: protecting disabled workers , including those with a terminal illness, from any form of discrimination in the workplace ensuring that socially responsible public procurement might be used as an instrument to integrate people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups into the labour market; using structural funds , in particular the European Social Fund, to adapt workplaces and to provide necessary assistance for persons with disabilities at work; implementing an all-encompassing framework for measures enabling access to quality employment for persons with disabilities. Members encouraged Member States to: (i) develop and implement an all-encompassing framework for measures enabling access to quality employment for persons with disabilities, including the possibility of using, for example, fines imposed for failure to comply with anti-discrimination legislation; (ii) provide ongoing support to employers that hire persons with disabilities; (iii) combat prejudice against persons with disabilities, especially persons with psychosocial or intellectual disabilities. Age: underlining the important contributions that older workers make to society and the competitiveness of companies, Parliament stressed the need to: promote access to employment and integration into the labour market of all workers regardless of their age, and to apply measures in order to protect all workers in the workplace study the increasing problem of unemployment among people over the age of 50 and to develop effective tools in order to reintegrate older workers into the labour market and protect them against unfair dismissal; upscale digital skills among the working population to help older people and workers with disabilities remain longer in the labour market; promote free high-quality public services that provide proper and necessary care and assistance for children, the sick and the elderly. Members welcomed the Commission's initiative on work-life balance . They recommended that the initiative fully include measures to support informal carers and grandparents of working age, as well as young parents. Sexual orientation : Members recalled that the scope of protection from discrimination available to trans people remains uncertain in many Member States. They called for measures to implement effectively national legislation transposing the Gender Equality Directive (recast). They also regretted the general under-reporting of all forms of discrimination against LGBTI people and highlighted the role of national LGBTI organisations as key partners in raising awareness. In general terms, Parliament recommended , inter alia: developing harmonised and homogeneous statistics designed to fill in all gaps in the collection of gender equality data; strengthening the role of the national equality bodies, ensuring their impartiality, developing their activities and enhancing their capacities, including through the provision of adequate funding; displaying greater commitment in implementing the principle of equality between women and men in employment policies; enhancing the reconciliation of work and private life by concrete measures, such as urgently proposing new legislative proposals on the Maternity Leave Directive so as to guarantee the right for women to return to work after pregnancy and maternity leave and parental leave; improving complaint mechanisms at national level by strengthening national equality bodies; paying close attention to the rules applicable to sanctions and redress in the Member States; ensuring adequate training is provided for employees of national, regional and local authorities, law enforcement bodies and labour inspectorates; involving social partners (trade unions and employers) and civil society, including equality bodies, in the effective application of equality in employment and occupation.
  • date: 2016-09-15T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
procedure
reference
2015/2284(INI)
title
Activities, impact and added value of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund between 2007 and 2014
subject
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subtype
Implementation
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure EP 54
Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
stage_reached
Procedure completed
dossier_of_the_committee
EMPL/8/04357