Employers' Group voices its strong disagreement on revision of the European Works Councils

The Employers' Group of the European Economic and Social Committee strongly voiced its disagreement with the EESC opinion adopted today on the revision of the European Works Council (EWCs) and proposed a counter-opinion.

"The position of European employers on the revision of the European Works Councils is well known. We do not consider that this is either the time, nor the way, to carry out a 'maximalist' revision of the directive, whose implementation can be improved with other types of action," said Stefano Mallia, President of the EESC Employers' Group.

The Employers' Group has always been a strong supporter of social dialogue at all levels of companies and other organisations.

A well-functioning social dialogue and meaningful involvement of workers, respecting the autonomy of social partners and taking into consideration specific circumstances of Member States’ labour market systems and company-specific needs, is the best way to anticipate and manage change at work-place level and thus face the challenges driven by economic, environmental and social transformations in the world of work. EWCs are valuable tools for information and consultation of workers.

However, the revision of the EWCs, proposed by the Commission, following a request by the European Parliament in its own own-initiative resolution, risks being rather harmful to the well-functioning EWCs.

The revision has been repeatedly called for by the European trade unions, while the employers' organisations have considered revision unnecessary.

The EESC Employers' Group is concerned that the European Commission's proposal was issued following a weak impact assessment and competitiveness test that did not sufficiently take into account the real evidence from companies on the functioning of the EWCs.

"A number of proposals in the review could transform valuable instruments of consultation and dialogue into spaces of confrontation which would delay business decision-making," said Mariya Mincheva, member of the EESC Employers' Group, presenting the counter-opinion.

"We fear that the review will generate the opposite effect to the desired one: that it will discourage the creation of more Works Councils – as well as complicating those that were already functioning well, especially the older ones," Mincheva added. "This review creates uncertainty and cannot be considered in isolation: we must take into account the cumulative effect of legislation that makes Europe less and less attractive for investment."

The counter opinion proposed by EESC Employers' Group members, which has obtained 104 votes in favour, 125 against with 11 abstentions, will be appended to the EESC opinion to present a diverging view.

The counter opinion underlines for instance the following points of concern in the Commission's proposal:

• The new, very broad definition of transnationality, which could lead to overlaps with national social dialogue and information and consultation processes, among others;
• The obligation to renegotiate pre-existing agreements on the unilateral initiative of the workers, creating situations of legal uncertainty;
• Its impact on the confidentiality of information to which an increasing number of people would have to be given access.
• The bureaucratization of information and consultation processes.

Presenting the counter-opinion, Mariya Mincheva, explained that the new proposals not only increase costs for companies, but also make procedures more complex, with a rather prescriptive and punitive approach which risks reducing and damaging social dialogue at company level.

The EESC opinion gathered 128 votes in favour, 101 against and 12 abstentions.

For more information, please contact Daniela Vincenti, Employers' Group Communication Advisor +32 497 412095