EUROPEAN COMMISSIONEMPL/00070/14 - EN
AdvC 02/13Minutes of the 44th meeting of the Advisory Committee
SECRETARIAT – 24.10.2013
Orig. EN
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FOR THE COORDINATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS
Minutes of the 44th meeting of the Advisory Committee
24 October 2013
A.Agenda
B.Approval of Minutes
C.Communications and Questions
I. Presentation by the Commission on the current state of play of the Revision of Regulations (EC) No 883/2004 and 987/2009 in relation to unemployment benefits and long-term healthcare
II.External dimension of social security coordination
III.Rulings of the Court of Justice concerning the free movement of workers and the coordination of social security systems (mid-2012 to mid-2013)
IV.Report on the activities of the Administrative Commission
V.Presentation by the Secretariat of the findings of the Task Force on Highly Mobile Workers
VI.Information point from the Commission on the draft Directive on the portability of Supplementary Pensions
VII.Patients' rights in cross-border healthcare
a) Directive 2011/24/EU
b) European Health Insurance Card
VIII. Other business
A.Agenda
The Chair, Mr Jackie MORIN, Head of Unit for Free Movement of Workers, Coordination of Social Security Schemes, in the Commission's Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, presented the draft agenda contained in note AdvC 01/13.
The European Trade Union Confederation representative (ETUC) askedfor an update on the progress made on the draft Directive on the Portability of Supplementary Pensions. She also questioned why interpretation had not been available for the pre-meeting of trades Unions Representatives. There followed a general discussion about the preparation of the meeting and the need to make notes presented at the meeting available in advance.
The Chair agreed to look into the question of interpretation and explained that it was not always possible to provide notes in advance of the meeting as many of the topics for discussion were works in progress. He agreed to see if a representative of the Commission was available to address the request to inform the meeting about the Directive on the Portability of Supplementary Pensions later in the day.
The Chair concluded that the agenda as set out in note Adv C 01/13 was adopted with the addition of the requested question under point V.
B.Approval of Minutes
There were no comments from the Members of the Advisory Committee on the minutes of the 43rdmeeting.
The Chair concluded that the minutes of the 43rd meeting of the Advisory Committee on 19October 2012 contained in note 02/12 (BG, CS, DA, DE, EL, EN, ES-REV, ET, FI, FR, HU, IT, LT, LV, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, SV) were approved.
C.Communications and Questions
The Chair presented a brief overview of the work of the European Commission and the Working Party on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004.It focusses on two strands.The first will collect technical amendments with the input of the Advisory Committee on migrant workers.The second is a more substantial change to the unemployment chapter of the Regulation.The European Commission is currently writing an Impact Assessment of the proposed changes, which will be published next year.
It was explained that the Commission is also undertaking an inter-service consultation on highly mobile workers, looking at the difficulties they face in a European, rather than a national professional context.
It was explained that a draft directive is being prepared on the user of rights in Regulation (EC) No 492/2011.At a national level action is needed to enable the full exercise of rights for migrant workers.Among the proposals is a new ability for associations representing migrant workers to launch legal actions on their behalf, along with the creating of a new information and advice service for these workers.The European Council and Parliament are also looking at these proposals.
At the start of 2013 the European Parliament asked the Commission to pilot networking for migrant workers organisation across Europe.The Commission launched a call to identify these networks and invited proposals for a grant of Euro 500,000 to build these, but no responses were received.The call has been extended until the end of November.
On October 2nd the Commission adopted a Communication on the social dimension of the Economic and Monetary Union.This called for a chapter on improving mobility and introducing structural adjustments.This builds on an extra aspect of the Employment package on the role of mobility in improving European cohesion.
BUSINESS EUROPE, on behalf of employers, commented that a lot of the work above focused on migrant workers, which falls under the remit of the other Advisory Committee but has strong links to this one.They asked if there was not a case to join the two Advisory Committees, or at least hold their meetings side-by-side.
The Chair agreed that social security coordination is a subsidiary element of the free movement of workers, and promised to look into this.
I.Presentation by the Commission on the current state of play of the Revision of Regulations (EC) No 883/2004 and 987/2009 in relation to unemployment benefits and long-term healthcare
The Secretariat introduced the reasons for the proposed revisions.
It was explained that demographic changes in Europe, in particular an increasingly ageing population, mean that long-term care benefits have become an increasingly important topic for the Commission.In addition, long-term care benefit schemes have developed in Member States in very different ways, and therefore the Commission needs to consider how they should be co-ordinated to protect equal rights for cross-border long-term care users.Currently this is done under the sickness benefit chapter of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004, but the character of long-term care benefits is different to that of sickness benefit and therefore this is no longer sufficient.The European Court of Justice ruled that if anti-overlap provisions did not exist for long-term care benefits, they should be co-ordinated under the sickness chapter of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004. This presents difficulties as long-term care benefits can include sickness, family, pension and social assistance benefits.Moreover the sickness chapter maintains a distinction between sickness benefits in kind and in cash, which does not easily fit with the character of long-term care benefits.There is therefore a strong case for a new chapter on long-term care benefits, along with a common European definition of these benefits and a list of benefits for each Member State that fall under the coordination regulations.
As regards unemployment benefits, the Council declared in 2011 that they would be revised after the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 885/2012.Currently a compromise position exists – the Member State of residence, not the Member State of last activity, pays unemployment benefits to frontier workers and is then reimbursed.However difficulties with this process exits; it is slow, and a lot of data needs to be exchanged between Member States.The Commission is currently exploring options pertaining to the time-period of export of unemployment benefits and whether this should be extended, as well as improving the uniformity of application of aggregation periods between Member States.This is not currently uniform, especially with regard to periods of insurance in one Member State that are not recognised under the national laws of another Member State (e.g. voluntary insurance).
The overall aim of this work is to improve protection for those exercising the right to free movement, and to help vulnerable EU citizens access long-term care benefits if they reside in a different Member State.The Commission also aims to simplify and reduce the administrative burden of the process for coordinating these benefits.The Commission aims to present a legislative proposal in Spring 2014.
The Working Party of the Administrative Commission met on October 16th.Delegations expressed strong support for the proposals on long-term care benefits, but were divided over the proposals for coordination of unemployment benefits – in particular whether the Member State of last activity of the Member State of residence should be responsible for paying benefits.There was strong support for better cooperation and control mechanisms between Member States for the coordination of unemployment benefits, and general support for revisions to aggregation regulations so that periods of employment provide cover in both the Member State of residence and of last activity.
The Commission will now include these opinions in the Impact Assessment of the proposed measures, due to be published in 2014 as an annexe to the legislative proposal.
ETUC commented that the Trade Union representatives are anxious to see the outcome of the public consultation on the proposed measures that took place in late 2012-early 2013.She noted that in this work the Commission should take into account the experience of cross-border workers – the ETUC have found that these workers are often the first to lose their jobs during an economic downturn and can then be refused unemployment benefits in their Member State of residence.The ETUC's research has found this to be a persistent and spreading problem.She also noted that the current Regulations do not cater sufficiently for certain groups of mobile workers, like apprentices.She also expressed the ETUC's surprise at questions in the public consultation on whether the current regime was abused by migrant workers, given that the document was aimed at finding out how the rights of migrant worker can be improved.The Chair responded that as the Commission is exploring extending exportability of unemployment rights, it was appropriate to make sure that those people who in a different Member State who might benefit are actively looking for work, as this is a key element of trust between the public institutions of Member States.
BUSINESS EUROPE commented on the need to balance the work of the Commission in this area with costs to Member States and businesses.They commented that in their view unemployment benefits should be time-limited for those seeking employment in another Member State, and deciding the specific time period left as a national competence.They also noted that Council discussions about unemployment benefits are likely to be controversial, and perhaps it would be best to focus simply on improving the cooperation and control mechanisms.
ETUC commented that the pressing need in this work is to focus on defending and improving the rights of workers.In particular, if a mobile worker has been employed and paid contributions in another Member State to that in which they are resident, it seems right that the Member State of last activity should pay their unemployment benefits.
BUSINESS EUROPE asked if it would be possible to see the Impact Assessment prior to its publication.The Secretariat responded that due to the European Commission's internal governance procedures, this will not be possible as the Impact Assessment can only be shared publicly once it has been fully approved by the Commission's governance structures.
The Chair laid out the two main aspects of the revision that the Commission is exploring.The first is who pays unemployment benefits to a cross-border worker.Currently it is the Member State of residence, rather than last activity, which pays (with partial reimbursement).If this changed there will be cost and rights impacts; often benefit levels are higher in the Member State of last activity than in the Member State of residence.Additionally, the Commission will be taking a close look at the administrative burden of current procedure and exploring ways to improve this.The chair noted that the Commission is only looking at the period for which existing rights are exported, and not at changing the rights of workers at a national level.The Secretariat also promised to provide an overview of the results of the public consultation.
ETUC asked whether it would be possible to provide a means to educate the committee members of the rights and responsibilities of mobile workers.They stressed the importance of this to avoid situation such as those where two workers on the same salary are made redundant from a company in one Member State, but, as one is a cross-border worker resident in a different Member State and the other is not, the cross-border worker receives less unemployment benefit.
The Chair noted input from the delegates that the Impact Assessment should not simply examine costs, but also administrative difficulties in the current system, and promised to share the Impact Assessment documents with the Committee members at around the time they are adopted.
II.External dimension of social security coordination
The Secretariat first outlined the recent developments as regards the agreements with EFTA/EEA countries and with Switzerland. The Secretariat recalled the key dates related to the entry into force of the Regulations 1408/71 and 574/72, Regulations 883/2004 and 987/2009 as well as Regulation 465/2012 between the EU on the other side and EEA or CH on the other.
A summary was given of thenewest developments between EU and Switzerland highlightingthat the4th adaptation of Annex II, incorporating inter alia the provisions of the Regulation 465/2012, was ongoing and an interservice consultation on the EU side and consultation within the Federal Council on the CH side were planned. There was still a need to adopt the extension of the Annex II to Croatia, on which the negotiations were finalised in July 2013 as well as to commence the negotiation of the inclusion oft Council Regulation (EU) No 517/2013 of 13 May 2013 adapting certain regulations and decisions by reason of the accession of the Republic of Croatia (OJ L 158, 10.06.2013, p. 1) into the Agreement.
Finally, the Secretariat gave an overview of the Court of Justice judgment of 26 September 2013 in the case C-431/11 (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Ireland, intervener v. Council of the European Union European Commission, intervener). In which the Court of Justice followed the Council and the Commission and rejected the action brought by the United Kingdom. The Court of Justice considered that the contested Council Decision 2011/407/EU of 6 June 2011 aiming at the extention of EEA Agreement to Regulations 883/2004 and 987/2009 to the EU, has been validly adopted on the basis of Article 48 TFEU, account being taken of the aims of the decision and the objectives and content of the EEA Agreement.
Within the broader context of the external dimension of social security coordination, the Secretariat recalled that at the previous meeting of the Advisory Committee, the main messages of the Commission's Communication on this issue[1] were presented. The Secretariat reported, therefore, on the follow up that was given to this Communication in terms of specific actions. The Communication recognises the Member States’ competence in concluding bilateral agreements on social security but it also highlights the challenges it entails for workers and businesses. The Commission’s response to the challenges presented is the call for enhanced cooperation between the Member States and increased transparency about the rules, as well as a focus on the implementation of the obligations arising from the Association Agreements. As regards cooperation, theCommunication concluded that a mechanism is needed at EU level to strengthen cooperation between Member States and that the Commission would set up a results-orientated working group of experts from the Member States — meeting on an annual basis — in order to facilitate such cooperation. This exchange was organised by the Commission and the first forum of the External Dimension of EU Social Security Coordination took place on 14 March 2013. This initiative was appreciated by the Member States as they could share their experience concerning negotiating and implementing bilateral agreements with some third countries. The next forum is planned for 11 March 2014. Also on 14 March 2013 in the afternoon a conference was organised jointly with the European Economic and Social Committee to promote the messages of the Communication. The representatives of the Member States, of the social partners as well of some third countries were present at the conference.
In its Communication, the Commission also madea commitment to gather and publish information about the bilateral agreements andlegislation and other measures at a national level concerning the payment of pensions inthird countries. It would increase transparency concerning the existing agreements and planned negotiations which, in turn, would be beneficial for business and migrants. This information is currently gathered by the Missoc network and will be shared with the Member States. The Commission will reflect on how this information can be published and integrated in the Commission’s website.
The Secretariat finally outlined the state of play of process working towards the adoption of Association Council decisions with respect to Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Israel, FYROM, Montenegro, Albania, San Marino and Turkey. The Secretariat explained that following the adoption of the EU position in two packages of 2010 and of 2012, the Commission has started the discussions with the third countries concerned in order to present them the EU position (text and the purpose of annex entries) and discussed with them the possible annex entries to the draft Association Council Decisions. As a result of these discussions, the revised text of the draft Decisions in respect of Israel, Morocco and Montenegro are finalised and the draft Decisions in respect of FYROM and San Marino are currently being finalised. As regards other countries, the first exchange has taken place but the associated country has not yet sent its proposals for annex entries. Therefore, the intention of the Commission is to present a first package of revised Commission proposals for Decisions with regard to these countries that are ready (three to five) in the first quarter of 2014.