Postupak : 2012/2292(INI)
Faze dokumenta na plenarnoj sjednici
Odabrani dokument : A7-0258/2013

Podneseni tekstovi :

A7-0258/2013

Rasprave :

PV 12/09/2013 - 9
CRE 12/09/2013 - 9

Glasovanja :

PV 12/09/2013 - 13.19
CRE 12/09/2013 - 13.19

Doneseni tekstovi :

P7_TA(2013)0386

IZVJEŠĆE     
PDF 189kWORD 134k
15.7.2013
PE 508.017v02-00 A7-0258/2013

o prekograničnom kolektivnom pregovaranju i transnacionalnom socijalnom dijalogu

(2012/2292(INI))

Odbor za zapošljavanje i socijalna pitanja

Izvjestitelj: Thomas Händel

PRIJEDLOG REZOLUCIJE EUROPSKOG PARLAMENTA
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 OPINION of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality
 REZULTAT KONAČNOG GLASOVANJA U ODBORU

PRIJEDLOG REZOLUCIJE EUROPSKOG PARLAMENTA

o prekograničnom kolektivnom pregovaranju i transnacionalnom socijalnom dijalogu

(2012/2292(INI))

Europski parlament,

–   uzimajući u obzir    članak 3. stavak 3. i članak 6. stavak 3. Ugovora o Europskoj uniji (UEU),

–   uzimajući u obzir članke 9., 151., 152., 154., 155. i 156. Ugovora o funkcioniranju Europske unije (UFEU),

–   uzimajući u obzir članke 12. i 28., članak 52. stavak 3. i članak 53. Povelje Europske unije o temeljnim pravima te njezinu preambulu i relevantna objašnjenja,

–   uzimajući u obzir članak 11. Europske konvencije o ljudskim pravima,

–   uzimajući u obzir članke 5. i 6. (revidirane) Europske socijalne povelje,

–   uzimajući u obzir Odluku Komisije 98/500/EZ od 20. svibnja 1998. o osnivanju odborâ za sektorski dijalog između socijalnih partnera na europskoj razini,

–   uzimajući u obzir Direktivu Vijeća 2001/23/EZ od 12. ožujka 2001. o usklađivanju zakonodavstava država članica u odnosu na zaštitu prava zaposlenika kod prijenosa poduzeća, pogona ili dijelova poduzeća ili pogona,

–   uzimajući u obzir Direktivu Vijeća 2001/86/EZ od 8. listopada 2001. o dopuni Statuta Europskoga društva u pogledu sudjelovanja radnika i Direktivu Vijeća 2003/72/EZ od 22. srpnja 2003. o dopuni Statuta Europske zadruge u odnosu na sudjelovanje zaposlenika,

–   uzimajući u obzir Direktivu 2002/14/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 11. ožujka 2002. o uspostavljanju općeg okvira za obavješćivanje i savjetovanje s radnicima u Europskoj zajednici,

–   uzimajući u obzir Direktivu 2009/38/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 6. svibnja 2009. o osnivanju Europskog radničkog vijeća ili uvođenju postupka koji obuhvaća poduzeća i skupine poduzeća na razini Zajednice radi obavješćivanja i savjetovanja radnika,

–   uzimajući u obzir Zaključke Vijeća (EPSCO) 17423/11 usvojene 1. prosinca 2011.,

–   uzimajući u obzir radni dokument osoblja Komisije od 10. rujna 2012. naslovljen „Transnacionalni sporazumi među društvima: ostvarivanje potencijala za socijalni dijalog” (SWD(2012)0264),

–   uzimajući u obzir Komunikaciju Komisije od 18. travnja 2012. pod nazivom „Oporavak koji donosi veliki broj radnih mjesta” (COM(2012)0173),

–   uzimajući u obzir izvješće stručne skupine Komisije od 31. siječnja 2012. o trnasnacionalnim sporazumima među društvima,

–   uzimajući u obzir revidirani radni dokument stručne skupine Komisije od 31. siječnja 2012. o trnasnacionalnim sporazumima među društvima,

–   uzimajući u obzir Zelenu knjigu Komisije od 17. siječnja 2012. naslovljenu „Restrukturiranje i predviđanje promjena: koje su pouke iz nedavnih iskustava?” (COM(2012)0007) i njezin popratni radni dokument osoblja od 17. siječnja 2012. naslovljen „Restrukturiranje u Europi 2011.” (SEC(2012)0059),

–   uzimajući u obzir Komunikaciju Komisije od 27. listopada 2010. naslovljenu „Cjelovita industrijska politika za doba globalizacije koja na centralno mjesto stavlja konkurentnost i održivost” (COM(2010)0614),

–   uzimajući u obzir istraživanje Komisije od 2. srpnja 2008. naslovljeno „Analiza transnacionalnih tekstova dogovorenih na korporativnoj razini” (EMPL F2 EP/bp 2008 (D) 14511),

–   uzimajući u obzir radni dokument osoblja Komisije iz 2008. naslovljen „Uloga transnacionalnih sporazuma među društvima u kontekstu sve veće međunarodne integracije” (SEC(2008)2155),

–   uzimajući u obzir izvješće Komisije iz veljače 2006. naslovljeno „Transnacionalno kolektivno pregovaranje: prošlost, sadašnjost i budućnost”,

–   uzimajući u obzir Komunikaciju Komisije od 9. veljače 2005. o Socijalnoj agendi (COM(2005)0033),

–   uzimajući u obzir konvencije Međunarodne organizacije rada o odredbama o radu (u javnoj nabavi) (br. 94) i o kolektivnom pregovaranju (br. 154),

–   uzimajući u obzir pravnu doktrinu koju su razvila nadzorna tijela Međunarodne organizacije rada,

–   uzimajući u obzir Tripartitnu deklaraciju MOR-a o načelima koja se odnose na multinacionalna društva i socijalnu politiku (1977.),

–   uzimajući u obzir Deklaraciju MOR-a od 10. lipnja 2008. o socijalnoj pravdi u cilju pravedne globalizacije,

–   uzimajući u obzir Deklaraciju MOR-a od 18. lipnja 1998. o temeljnim načelima i pravima pri radu,

–   uzimajući u obzir konvencije MOR-a kojima se uspostavljaju jedinstveni središnji standardi rada s obzirom na (među ostalim) slobodu udruživanja i pravo na kolektivno pregovaranje (br. 87, 1948. i br. 98, 1949.) i nediskriminaciju pri zapošljavanju (br. 100, 1951. i br. 111, 1958.),

–   uzimajući u obzir svoju studiju o „Provođenju temeljnih prava radnika” koju je naručio Odbor za zapošljavanje i socijalna pitanja (rujan 2012.),

–   uzimajući u obzir svoju studiju o „Prekograničnom kolektivnom pregovaranju i transnacionalnom socijalnom dijalogu” koju je naručio Odbor za zapošljavanje i socijalna pitanja (lipanj 2011.),

–   uzimajući u obzir svoju Rezoluciju od 15. siječnja 2013. s preporukama Komisiji o informiranju radnika i savjetovanju s njima te predviđanju restrukturiranja i upravljanju njime(1),

–   uzimajući u obzir članak 48. Poslovnika,

–   uzimajući u obzir izvješće Odbora za zapošljavanje i socijalna pitanja i mišljenje Odbora za prava žena i jednakost spolova (A7-0258/2013),

A. budući da su, kako tvrdi Komisija(2), u 2012. bila 244 europska transnacionalna sporazuma među društvima; budući da to pokazuje da radni odnosi u transnacionalnim društvima u Europi postaju sve više integrirani;

B.  budući da sve više novih transnacionalnih sporazuma među društvima sadrži sporazume o postupcima rješavanja sporova, kako su preporučile i organizacije poslodavaca i organizacije zaposlenika;

C. budući da ne postoji pravni okvir za te sporazume bilo na međunarodnoj bilo na europskoj razini; budući da treba razmotriti je li to razlog za činjenicu da se sklapa manje takvih sporazuma;

D. budući da svaka država članica EU-a ima vlastiti sustav industrijskih odnosa koji se temelji na različitim povijesnim događanjima i tradicijama, što treba poštovati i ne zahtijeva usklađivanje;

E.  budući da su se prekogranična partnerstva između socijalnih partnera pokazala dobrom praksom za promicanje slobode kretanja radnika i radničkih prava preko granica; budući da je potpora EU-a za takva prekogranična partnerstva od presudne važnosti;

F.  budući da se u sklopu europskog dijaloga promiču očuvanje i rast zapošljavanja, poboljšanja u uvjetima rada i time veće blagostanje za zaposlenike transnacionalnih poduzeća preko inovativnih sredstava uz očuvanje autonomije kolektivnog pregovaranja;

G. budući da EU priznaje slobodu udruživanja i pravo na kolektivno pregovaranje kao temeljna prava;

H. budući da poduzeća sve više djeluju na europskoj razini dok se predstavništva radnika pretežno organiziraju na nacionalnim linijama; budući da ta asimetrija ima negativan učinak na predstavljanje interesa radnika i stavlja ih u opasnost od međusobnog suprotstavljanja te od prisiljenosti da pristaju na niže plaće, lošije uvjete rada ili druga negativna usklađenja;

1.  primjećuje da se ova rezolucija odnosi na transnacionalne sporazume među društvima; primjećuje da se transnacionalni sporazumi među društvima sklapaju između europskih udruženja sindikata s jedne strane i pojedinačnih društava i/ili udruženja poslodavaca s druge strane, obično na sektorskoj razini, i da se rezolucija ne odnosi na međunarodne okvirne sporazume koje međunarodna udruženja sindikata potpisuju s poduzećima; ističe potrebu da se ojača europski i transnacionalni socijalni dijalog te prekogranično kolektivno pregovaranje;

2.  predlaže da Komisija razmotri koliko bi bio potreban i koristan fakultativni europski pravni okvir za te europske transnacionalne sporazume među društvima kako bi se pružila veća pravna sigurnost, veća transparentnost te predvidljivi i provodljivi pravni učinci za sporazume nakon okvirnih odredbi; predlaže da treba promicati prakse povezane s europskim transnacionalnim sporazumima među društvima kojima se priznaje ugovorna autonomija ugovornih strana te predlaže da se odredbe uvrste u sporazume koji se odnose na rješavanje sporova;

Fakultativni pravni okvir za europske transnacionalne sporazume među društvima

3.  naglašava autonomiju socijalnih partnera iz koje proizlazi da oni mogu započinjati pregovore i sklapati sporazume na svim razinama;

4.  naglašava da se transnacionalni sporazumi među društvima međusobno razlikuju, primjerice kad je riječ o razmjeru i području primjene te potpisnicima, u skladu sa svrhama, polaznim točkama, potrebama i ciljevima tih strana, da se poduzeća i korporativne kulture znatno međusobno razlikuju i da treba poštovati autonomiju ugovornih strana s obzirom na oblikovanje različitih vrsta transnacionalnih sporazuma među društvima;

5.  predlaže da socijalni partneri razmjene iskustva na području transnacionalnih sporazuma među društvima;

6.  naglašava da Komisija svoje razmatranje o fakultativnom pravnom okviru treba zasnovati na dobrovoljnoj primjeni koja bi trebala biti neobavezna za uključene socijalne partnere i društva te skupine društava i temeljiti se na fleksibilnosti i upućivanju na nacionalnu razinu kako bi se transancionalnom sporazumu među društvima mogao pripisati pravni učinak; izričito naglašava autonomiju socijalnih partnera i strana u kolektivnim sporazumima;

7.  smatra da europska radnička vijeća trebaju biti u potpunosti uključena u pregovore s europskim udruženjima sindikata po potrebi, osobito jer mogu prepoznati potrebu/mogućnost za transnacionalni sporazum među društvima, pokrenuti proces i utrti put za pregovore te pomagati pri jamčenju transparentnosti i prenošenju informacija o sporazumima uključenim radnicima; pozdravlja činjenicu da su neka europska udruženja sindikata osmislila pravila postupanja za uključenje europskih radničkih vijeća;

8.  uvjeren je da je obuhvaćanje najpovoljnije klauzule i klauzule o nesmanjivanju dostignute zaštite potrebno kako bi se izbjegla opasnost od toga da europski transnacionalni sporazum među društvima dovede do izbjegavanja nacionalnih kolektivnih sporazuma ili nacionalnih sporazuma među društvima ili do njihova narušavanja;

9.  preporučuje uvođenje zamjenskih postupaka rješavanja sporova; smatra da treba dogovoriti prvi zajednički mehanizam ad hoc na razini poduzeća, primjerice poticanje potpisnica da se na doborovoljnoj bazi dogovore o klauzulama za rješavanje sporova kako bi se dostigla razrješenja sukoba između ugovornih strana; predlaže da se te klauzule mogu zasnivati na zamjenskim predlošcima rješavanja sporova koje dogovore i osiguraju socijalni partneri EU-a na sektorskoj razini; priznaje da mnogi transnacionalni sporazumi među društvima već sklopljeni na europskoj razini već sadrže radne postupke za izvansudska rješavanja sporova te potiče socijalne partnere da intenzivnije razmjenjuju stajališta o tom pitanju i utvrde metode za njihovo daljnje razvijanje i/ili usavršavanje;

10. predlaže Komisiji da preporuči socijalnim partnerima da uzimaju u obzir sljedeće kriterije u vezi s europskim transnacionalnim sporazumima među društvima: postupak opunomoćivanja, tj. pojašnjenje legitimnosti i prepoznatljivosti pregovaračkih strana između kojih se sporazumi sklapaju, mjesto i vrijeme sklapanja ugovora, njegovo sadržajno i zemljopisno područje primjene, najpovoljniju klauzulu i klauzulu o nesmanjivanju dostignute zaštite, razdoblje valjanosti, preduvjete za otkazivanje sporazuma i postupke rješavanja sporova, teme pokrivene sporazumom i druge službene zahtjeve;

11. pozdravlja aktivnosti koje Komisija čini dostupnima za razmjene iskustava socijalnih partnera i stručnjaka kako bi ih podržala, primjerice prikupljanje primjera, uspostavljanje baza podataka i provođenje studija;

12. podsjeća u tom kontekstu na pozitivna iskustva prekograničnih partnerstava između socijalnih partnera i poziva Komisiju i države članice da jamče potporu EU-a takvim partnerstvima u budućnosti;

13. potiče europske socijalne partnere da se u cijelosti koriste mogućnošću sporazuma EU-a kako je predviđeno u članku 155. UFEU-a na osnovi punog poštovanja njihove autonomije;

14. poziva na povećanje uloge europskih socijalnih partnera pri oblikovanju europske politike; posebice poziva socijalne partnere da sudjeluju u sastavljanju godišnjeg istraživanja o rastu i da preuzmu veću ulogu u praćenju napretka koji ostvaruju države članice;

15. naglašava potrebu da se potiče, podupire i povećava predstavljanje i sudjelovanje žena na različitim razinama struktura socijalnog dijaloga i kolektivnog pregovaranja i da se rodna odrednica usmjerava u središte pozornosti na relevantnim forumima kako bi se iskazala stajališta žena i kako bi se pitanja jednakosti spolova uvrstila u kolektivno pregovaranje; ističe da socijalni dijalog i kolektivno pregovaranje nesumnjivo imaju velik potencijal kao pokretači promidžbe jednakosti spolova na radnom mjestu;

16. nalaže svojem predsjedniku da ovu Rezoluciju proslijedi Vijeću i Komisiji te           Europskom gospodarskom i socijalnom odboru, socijalnim partnerima EU-a i nacionalnim parlamentima.

(1)

Usvojeni tekstovi, P7_TA(2013)0005.

(2)

Transnacionalni sporazumi među društvima: ostvarivanje potencijala za socijalni dijalog, radni dokument osoblja Komisije, 10.9.2012. SWD(2012) 264 završna verzija, str. 2.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Various business strategies – concentration on the core business, the use of ‘assembly platforms’ outside the business, the use of low-wage countries, low-price policies and the attainment of market access with simultaneous adaptation of goods and services to meet customers’ wishes at ever shorter notice – are bringing about major and rapid changes in the businesses manufacturing the products or providing the services. This is resulting in constant fluctuations in orders, organisational changes and restructurings, which have an impact on employees. Businesses generally extend their production systems and business structures to all the companies belonging to the undertaking.

Because of the increasing transnationalisation of the management of groups of companies, there is a growing need for cross-border labour relations systems to solve problems(1).

However, for employees, the scope of labour-law and employment-law systems does not as a rule extend beyond national borders. In many businesses, therefore, the social partners have reached agreements to deal with these upheavals. This process of transnationalisation must not be pursued at the cost of the structurally more vulnerable employees or even result in pure wage dumping and social dumping.

Efficient undertakings with good work and high employment rates are the goal, which will only be attainable by means of a social dialogue of high quality based on legal provisions.

Arrangements in the shadow of the law

However, agreements between representatives of employees and employers are very diverse: from the name they are given (agreement, declaration, code of conduct, company agreement, collective agreement) to the contracting parties, a huge multiplicity of forms exists. The more agreements there are, the greater the need to define the individual forms(2). So long as there are no binding definitions, however, there will remain scope for different understandings arising from differing systems of industrial relations.

It is astonishing that, in view of the absence of legal provisions and considering the various different rules and the mass of associated problems(3), so many European transnational agreements have been concluded at all.

Whereas the Commission(4) has entered in its database some 215 documents from 138 undertakings, covering more than 10 million employees, BUSINESSEUROPE(5) refers only to 100 undertakings based in Europe which have concluded such agreements.

The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) has registered around 220 documents of various types (agreements, protocols, declarations) concluded by 138 undertakings(6). They apply to more than 10 million employees worldwide, although around 85% of them are classified as European agreements because of their geographical scope.

This growing number of agreements demonstrates the increasing transnationalisation of industrial relations in Europe. In addition to economic reasons (see above), the arrangements in this field which were originally agreed in Europe have driven the development of legal provisions, for example the Directives on European works councils(7), the involvement of employees in a European company (SE)(8), the posting of workers(9) and informing and consulting employees(10). Negotiating processes at the level of European works councils have contributed to a horizontal and vertical Europeanisation of company industrial relations due to cross-border interaction(11).

Collective agreements and European transnational company agreements

European transnational company agreements are generally not national collective agreements in the traditional sense, concluded at national level between trade unions and employers or the latter’s federations, acting within a national legal framework which also incorporates collective measures. The matters covered by traditional collective agreements include, for instance, wages and (in most Member States) working hours.

It may be difficult to demarcate the two fields in individual cases. That is partly because in each EU Member State there is a different system of relations between the social partners, i.e. a system which determines how employers, employees and the State regulate industrial relations.

It is not currently possible to say that European collective agreements exist, even if individual models for coordination in the same field exist, such as the Doorn Group(12). However, this coordination takes place between trade unions, and only a few sectors are affected.

In view of the different systems governing relations between social partners, a harmonised European system of collective agreements is hardly conceivable. In most Member States, autonomy of collective bargaining is laid down by law, in the Constitution or as a fundamental right. In addition, in the medium term a European system of collective agreements would be difficult to arrange from the point of view of national economies. It will primarily be up to the European social partners to find a framework for transnational negotiations on terms of employment in the medium term.

However, cross-border negotiations on terms of employment are already being held, for which the granting of the right to collective measures needs to be laid down clearly at European level too, as called for in the Andersson Report(13). The Viking and Laval cases require a solution, which has not been reached by means of the proposal for the Monti II Regulation(14). In the light of the study commissioned by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, which clearly indicates how in some EU Member States the exercise of collective rights is being hampered or impaired(15), there is a greater need for this.

European transnational company agreements are not European collective agreements in the traditional sense, but the substance is changing(16). Whereas originally the emphasis was more on information, provision is now increasingly being made for further training measures, occupational safety, health, transfers and dealing with restructuring measures(17). The two regulatory levels could therefore become more interlocked in future.

Mandates and representativeness for European transnational company agreements

One issue which is certainly important and difficult for the European social partners is the mandating procedure and representativeness(18) of those who conduct negotiations and sign an agreement. This should be clear, transparent and comprehensible. Most European trade union federations have already drawn up guidelines for internal use(19).

It is true that European works councils and employees’ representatives in European companies (SE) often begin the talks which later result in agreements. However, only European trade union federations can conclude European transnational company agreements. Only they can be given a democratic mandate by national trade unions and only they represent the recognised national trade unions.

This makes it possible to guarantee autonomy of collective bargaining in the national context despite the interlocking of the two spheres which has already been described. It also means that both negotiations and implementation are more binding. This is because in most countries the trade unions are also directly involved at national level, and they ensure that European and national provisions are compatible.

Extrajudicial dispute settlement

Different arrangements for extrajudicial dispute settlement exist in each Member State as part of the systems of relations between social partners. This has the advantage that negotiating partners themselves are involved in devising solutions, and that decisions are not taken by third parties. Therefore mediation is a particularly good option here, because the participants themselves work out a solution while a fair procedure is guaranteed. Experiences in other fields should be considered for purposes of comparison in this context and/or examples should be gathered, e.g. mediation, procedures involving arbitration bodies in the Works Constitution Act (Germany).

Regulatory alternatives

So far, there are no provisions concerning European transnational agreements. The subject falls under international private law, but Brussels I and Rome I do not provide for any collective agreements.

Even an agreement concluded in an area not subject to regulation would then be fully enforceable at law. Such a radical development would be too extreme and would take insufficient account of the autonomy of the social partners and disregard the social dialogue.

Nor would a directive or a regulation which was not of an optional nature be the right solution, as they would be bindingly applicable.

Agreeing that the national legal order of a Member State applies is not a solution, as this legal order would be alien and inapplicable for all parts of an undertaking located in a different country. Moreover, it would not take into account the originally European transnational character of these agreements and the transnationalisation of industrial relations at European level.

(1)

Müller, Thorsten/ Platzer, Hans-Wolfgang, Rüb, Stefan, `Transnationale Unternehmensvereinbarungen und die Vereinbarungspolitik Europäischer Betriebsräte, Düsseldorf 2013, p. 94

(2)

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/transnationalcompanyagreement.htm

(3)

Commission staff working document, `Transnational company agreements: realising the potential of social dialogue, SWD (2012) 264 final.

(4)

These are both international and European agreements: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1141

(5)

http://www.businesseurope.eu/Content/Default.asp?PageID=568&DocID=31047

(6)

http://www.etuc.org/IMG/pdf/EN-ETUC-Position-on-TCA-2.pdf

(7)

Directive 94/45/EC as last amended by Directive 2009/38/EC

(8)

2001/86/EC.

(9)

96/71/EC.

(10)

2002/14/EC.

(11)

Rüb, Stefan/ Platzer, Hans-Wolfgang/ Müller, Thorsten `Transnationale Unternehmensvereinbarungen-Zur Neuordnung der Arbeitsbeziehungen in Europa`, Berlin 2011 , p. 245.

(12)

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/doorngroup.htm

(13)

Andersson Report (2008/2085(INI)) 30.9.2008 (A6-0370/2008).

(14)

Monti II, Council Regulation on the exercise of the right to take collective action within the context of the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services (COM(2012) 130 final, Brussels, 21.3.2012.

(15)

European Parliament study on Enforcement of Fundamental Workers’ Rights, commissioned by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, September 2012.

(16)

EUROACTA 02/2012: European Action on Transnational Company Agreements: a stepping stone towards a real internationalisation of industrial relations?

(17)

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?jsp?catId=978&langId=en

(18)

Communication from the Commission — Partnership for change in an enlarged Europe — enhancing the contribution of European social dialogue, COM(2004) 557.

(19)

e.g. IndustriAll, ETUC.


OPINION of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (3.6.2013)

for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

on cross-border collective bargaining and transnational social dialogue

(2012/2292(INI))

Rapporteur: Antigoni Papadopoulou

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality calls on the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:

A. whereas the EU is currently facing the worst economic and financial crisis since the great depression of the 1930s;

B.  whereas the effects of the economic crisis are particularly serious for women, who are affected both directly and indirectly, notably with regard to the difference between the employment rates of men and women;

C. whereas the persistent under-representation of women at all levels of decision-making and in the arena of social dialogue is firmly related to their under-representation within governments, unions and employers’ organisations, the last consistently being the least likely to have women’s representation, and whereas this under-representation can translate into a lack of clear coherent policy regarding gender issues;

1.  Points out that tripartite social dialogue and collective bargaining have undoubtedly great potential as vehicles for promoting gender equality, stresses the importance of collective bargaining between management and labour in order to improve the work-life balance and address and combat the gender pay gap and the glass ceiling;

2.  Points out that patterns of representation at different levels (local, sectoral, cross-industry, national, cross-national and international) are not well documented; stresses that data on women’s representation in relation to age, sexuality, ability, class, ethnicity, citizenship status, and race are virtually non-existent; underlines the importance of disaggregating data,

3.  Urges the Member States to guarantee that women can exercise their rights in all areas of society without discrimination, and highlights women’s right to take part in political life and in shaping and implementing major policy issues, specifically by holding public office and by being elected to trade union and worker representation bodies;

4.  Regrets that women’s specific needs are overlooked in the various stages of collective bargaining, despite the fact that women are the breadwinners in most single-parent families significantly affected by the crisis; underlines that without a shift in the culture of bargaining (who is negotiating and how – which highlights leadership style), there may be little change in what is negotiated; stresses that struggles around diversity, equality, inclusive representation and the democratisation of leadership inside institutions need to be linked to the collective bargaining and social dialogue agenda;

5.  Highlights that collective bargaining represents a valuable complement to legislation and decision-making processes in promoting gender equality and is a key mechanism for gender mainstreaming in employment;

6.  Stresses the need to solicit the views of women, which generally also reflect the interests of children and elderly persons in their care, and to ensure that they are represented in negotiating teams, and calls as well for gender impact assessments of collective agreements;

7.  Stresses the need to increase the representation and participation of women in social dialogue and collective bargaining structures and to have the gender dimension mainstreamed in the relevant fora;

8.  Calls on the unions to explicitly support and train women to participate in negotiating teams, including in the European Work Council;

9.  Emphasises that unions should raise awareness of the benefits of unionisation and carry out special campaigns to encourage women to participate;

10. Calls on unions to ensure that the organisation of trade union life (meetings, travels, activities) responds to the work-life balance needs of both men and women;

11. Calls on unions to promote and enhance gender sensitivity among their members and among employers;

12. Calls on the Member States to ensure equal representation and participation of women and men in social dialogue institutions, resulting in greater attention to gender issues;

13. Calls on the EU and the Member States to promote gender sensitivity among social partners;

14. Highlights the importance of developing the agenda on gender equality bargaining as well as a clear strategy on gender issues;

15. Stresses that gender equality issues, like the gender pay gap, gender segregation in the labour market, reconciliation of work and family responsibilities, promoting career development and combating violence and sexual harassment at work must be integrated into the social dialogue agenda, so that the interests of both women and men are taken into account;

16. Calls on unions to integrate the gender perspective in the collective bargaining agenda;

17. Urges the Member States to implement the Framework of Actions on Gender Equality (2005);

18. Calls on the Member States to give particular attention to small and medium-sized enterprises, which invariably encounter greater difficulties in promoting equal opportunities and in absorbing the costs of absences for maternity or parental leave;

19. Urges the Member States to guarantee the right to equal employment opportunities as regards access to jobs, vocational training and promotion and as regards the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’;

20. Calls on the Member States to bestow an annual Gender Equality Prize on enterprises promoting gender equality at the workplace through their methods of staff organisation and administration;

21. Urges the Member States to give effective recognition to maternity and paternity as an outstanding social function, guaranteeing the rights to leave that are enshrined in the legislation;

22. Calls on the Commission to ensure gender mainstreaming in legislative measures to promote social dialogue and collective bargaining.

REZULTAT KONAČNOG GLASOVANJA U ODBORU

Datum usvajanja

29.5.2013

 

 

 

Rezultat konačnog glasovanja

+:

–:

0:

27

1

1

Zastupnici nazočni na konačnom glasovanju

Regina Bastos, Edit Bauer, Marije Cornelissen, Edite Estrela, Iratxe García Pérez, Mikael Gustafsson, Mary Honeyball, Lívia Járóka, Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio, Constance Le Grip, Astrid Lulling, Barbara Matera, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier, Krisztina Morvai, Norica Nicolai, Siiri Oviir, Antonyia Parvanova, Joanna Senyszyn, Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska, Marc Tarabella, Anna Záborská

Zamjenici nazočni na konačnom glasovanju

Roberta Angelilli, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Nicole Kiil-Nielsen, Katarína Neveďalová, Chrysoula Paliadeli, Antigoni Papadopoulou, Angelika Werthmann

Zamjenici nazočni na konačnom glasovanju prema čl. 187. st. 2.

Martina Anderson


REZULTAT KONAČNOG GLASOVANJA U ODBORU

Datum usvajanja

20.6.2013

 

 

 

Rezultat konačnog glasovanja

+:

–:

0:

31

6

3

Zastupnici nazočni na konačnom glasovanju

Regina Bastos, Edit Bauer, Phil Bennion, Pervenche Berès, Philippe Boulland, Milan Cabrnoch, David Casa, Alejandro Cercas, Ole Christensen, Derek Roland Clark, Marije Cornelissen, Emer Costello, Frédéric Daerden, Karima Delli, Sari Essayah, Thomas Händel, Marian Harkin, Nadja Hirsch, Stephen Hughes, Danuta Jazłowiecka, Martin Kastler, Ádám Kósa, Jean Lambert, Verónica Lope Fontagné, Olle Ludvigsson, Thomas Mann, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier, Csaba Őry, Licia Ronzulli, Elisabeth Schroedter, Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska, Jutta Steinruck, Traian Ungureanu, Inês Cristina Zuber

Zamjenici nazočni na konačnom glasovanju

Georges Bach, Jürgen Creutzmann, Sergio Gutiérrez Prieto, Evelyn Regner, Birgit Sippel

Zamjenici nazočni na konačnom glasovanju prema čl. 187. st. 2.

Ricardo Cortés Lastra, Jürgen Klute, Marita Ulvskog

Pravna obavijest - Politika zaštite privatnosti