2016/2211(BUD) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Agrees with the Commission that the conditions set out in Article 4(1)(a) of the EGF Regulation are met and that, therefore, Finland is entitled to a financial contribution of EUR 5 364 000 under that Regulation, representing 60 % of the total cost of EUR 8 940 000;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Emphasises the importance of the ICT sector to employment in the regions of Helsinki-Uusimaa, Etelä-Suomi and Länsi-Suomi and the potential for the redundant workers to contribute to the industry if they receive sufficient support through further education, training and plans to take up entrepreneurship;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the fact that the Finnish authorities started providing the personalised services to the affected workers on 11 September 2015, well ahead of the application for the EGF support for the proposed coordinated package, since these actions are eligible for co-funding from the EGF;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Welcomes the high percentage (close to 80 %) of the overall package being used for personalised services;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes that the pay subsidy mentioned in paragraph 7 is between 30 and 50 % of the worker’s payroll costs and will be given for a period of 6 to 24 months; calls on Member States to pay strict attention when using pay subsidies to ensure that redundant workers hired with a subsidy are not replacing, in whole or in part, a position held previously by another employee at the company concerned; is pleased the Finnish authorities have given assurances that this is the case;

Amendment 14 #

7 b. Notes that the income support measures amount to 16,64 % of the overall package of personalised measures, well below the 35 % limit set by the EGF Regulation and that these actions are conditional on the active participation of the targeted beneficiaries in job-search or training activities;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Invites the Commission to evaluate and provide information about the impact of these income support measures over a period of several years, to ensure that they are supporting high-quality employment and not being used to subsidise short- term, low-cost contracts;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Notes that the Microsoft case will cooperate with Labour Mobility in Europe 2014–2020, which is a national EURES service development project; notes that international recruitment events will be organised regionally in cooperation with EGF and EURES services; welcomes such measures and the fact that the Finnish authorities are encouraging the redundant workers to fully benefit from their right to free movement;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Notes that a national package of measures entitled "Models between the recruiting company and the retrenching company" has been launched within the European Social Fund; notes that this package of measures will produce results that may be useful for the implementation of projects under this EGF application; welcomes the efforts of the Finnish authorities to search for synergies with other actions funded by national or Union funds;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9 c. Recalls that, in line with Article 7 of the EGF Regulation, the design of the coordinated package of personalised services should anticipate future labour market perspectives and required skills and should be compatible with the shift towards a resource-efficient and sustainable economy.

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Stress~~Notes that the Finnish authorities have confirmed that the ~~eligible~~proposed actions dowill not receive ~~assistance~~financial support from other Union funds or financial instruments, that any double financing will be prevented and that such actions are complementary to actions funded by the Structural Funds; reiterates its call to the Commission to present an annual comparative evaluation of those data to ensure full respect of the existing regulations and that no duplication of Union-funded services can occur;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that Finland submitted the application for a financial contribution from the EGF on 11 March 2016, and that following additional information provided by Finland, its assessment was finalised by the Commission on 29 July 2016, thereby respecting the deadline of 12 weeks from receipt of the completed application;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. ~~Reiterates that assistance~~Welcomes Finland’s assurance that a financial contribution from the EGF ~~must~~will not replace actions which are the responsibility of companies by virtue of national law or collective agreements nor measures for restructuring companies or sectors; notes that Finland has confirmed that the EGF contribution will indeed not replace themthe enterprise concerned is required to take by virtue of national law or pursuant to collective agreements;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Notes that it is foreseeable that Finland submits, in the near future, two further related applications for redundant workers in the ICT sector;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that Finland submitted the application for a financial contribution from the EGF on 11 March 2016, and that following additional information provided by Finland, its assessment was finalised by the Commission on 29 July 2016 who concluded that the conditions for awarding a financial contribution from the EGF had been met;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the main reason behind the redundancies at Microsoft is the declining market share of its phones using the Microsoft Windows operating system from over 50 % in 2009 to 0,6 % in the second quarter of 2016;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recalls that the Union share in global ICT sector employment has decreased in recent years, and that ICT plays a key role in Finnish economy, with 6,7 % of employees working in the ICT sector in 2014, the highest percentage amongst all Member States; considers that the redundancies in Microsoft are linked with the trend that affects the entire Finnish electronics industry since the decline of Nokia in its country of origin and for which four previous applications were presented; concludes that those events are directly linked to structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Recalls that the software industry is highly international and that competition within the sector is global, meaning all market players can compete for the same customers and the location and cultural background of personnel has limited significance;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Recognises that this application continues a series of cases revolving around the decline of Nokia in Finland and that two further related applications for workers being made redundant in the ICT sector are expected to follow;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that redundancies are concentrated in NUTS 2 regions Helsinki- Uusimaa (FI1B), Etelä-Suomi (FI1C) and Länsi-Suomi, (FI197) and concern workers with highly varying competencies, 89% of them between 30 and 54 years of age; is concerned about the already difficult unemployment situation of highly skilled and educated people whose employment prospects would otherwise be traditionally good, especially women, who face a greater challenge in finding employment, taking into consideration that they represent almost half of the targeted beneficiaries;

Amendment 9 #