EUROPEAN COMMISSIONEMPL/ /15 - EN
AdvC 02/15Minutes of the 46thmeeting of the Advisory Committee
SECRETARIAT – 23.10.2015
Orig. EN
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FOR THE COORDINATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEMS
Minutes of the 46thmeeting of the Advisory Committee
23 October 2015
A.Agenda
B.Approval of Minutes...... 2
C.Communications and Questions...... 2
I. Labour Mobility Package 2015...... 3
II.Report on the activities of the Administrative Commission...... 5
III.Rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the coordination of social security systems (mid-2014 to mid-2015) 6
IV.European Agenda on Migration...... 6
V.External dimensions of social security coordination...... 7
VI.Electronic Exchange of Social Security Information project – new developments...9
VII.Commission Report on the operation of Directive 2011/24/EU on the application of patients' rights in cross-border healthcare 10
VIII. Communication activities by the Commission...... 10
IX. Other business...... 10
A.Agenda
The Chair, Mr Jordi CURELL GOTOR, Director of Directorate B Employment and Social Legislation, Social Dialogue, in the Commission's Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion (DG EMPL), presented the draft agenda (note AdvC 01/15).
The OGBL/Confédération Syndical Indépendante du Luxembourg requested to add a point of discussion on the cooperation between social security institutions in the context of coordination of social security systems, under item IX, other business.
The OGBL also raised the issue of the language regime. Even if the number of the EU official languages increased, the languages used for interpretation were reduced.
The Chair concluded that the agenda as set out in note AdvC 01/15 was adopted with the addition of the issueproposed bythe OGBL.
B.Approval of Minutes
The OGBL mentioned that it cannot comment on the minutes as it had not received it.
There were no other comments from the Members of the Advisory Committee on the minutes of the 45thmeeting.
The Chairreminded participants that all documents related to the work of the Advisory Committee are transferred to participants via CircABC. He concluded that the minutes of the 45thmeeting of the Advisory Committee on 23October 2014 contained in note AdvC 02/14 (BG, CS, DA, DE, EL, EN, ES, ET, FI, FR, HR, HU, IT, LT, LV, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, SV) were approved and that a copy of the minutes would be transferred by e-mail to the OGBL.
C.Communications and Questions
The Chairreminded participants that the mandate of the members of the Advisory Committee expired on 19 October 2015. So, as not all Member States designated their members, the Chair explained the procedure for the nomination of members and kindly invited delegations which did not follow it to do so as soon as possible. In order to be designated as member of the Advisory Committee, the national institutions have to send to the Council the information through their Permanent Representation. The Council issues then a Decision designating the members of the Committee.
The Chair also informed participants that Ms Antonella SCHULTE-BRAUCKS, the Head of Unit B4, Free Movement of Workers and Social Security Coordination retired. She would be replaced by Ms MariaLuisa CABRAL. A new colleague, Maria Luiza VAN DE WESTELAKEN, joined the social security coordination team.
The Secretariat introduced the FreSsco network(Free Movement of Workers and Social Security Coordination) and the Network of Experts on Statistics.
FreSsco is a network of independent legal experts from all EU Member States. Since last year, FreSsco issued three analytical reports (Analytical report on the relationship between social security and tax law, Analytical report on the notion of the restriction of the free movement of workers, and Analytical report on procedures related to the granting of Portable Document A1) and one comparative report on the situation of frontier workers under EU law on free movement of workers. All the reports are available at the following link:
In 2014-2015, the Network of Experts on Statistics had finalised, or was finalising, several reports on the use of Portable Documents A1, S2 and U2 or of EHIC and on reimbursement of healthcare. The reports of the Network of Experts on Statistics are available at the following link:
I.Labour Mobility Package 2015
The Secretariat presented the state of play of the upcoming labour mobility package (the presentation isavailable on CircABC).
The Chair invited the participants to comment or ask questions.
DGB Rechtsschutz GmbH noted that very little information had been provided about the content of the labour mobility package either in this meeting or at the consultation event on 10 June and wondered if more information could be provided. They stressed that stakeholders should be provided with more detailed information in advance to facilitate internal consultation with their members in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 154 of Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). They expressed concern about the quality of the public consultation and the fact there was no adequate space to provide a detailed response. They expressed hope that the Commission would be taking steps to ensure ongoing social dialogue and transparency.
The Trade Union Congress (TUC) thanked the Secretariat for the presentation noting it was useful for the discussion to be presented in the broader context of freedom of movement, noting the contribution of mobile workers to the economy. They expressed concerns about the ongoing references to fraud and abuse noting that there was very limited evidence that EU mobile workers perpetrated fraud and that there was a risk in the current highly politicised debate that the myth of welfare tourism may be used to restrict rights for mobile workers to social security benefits in a manner which is fuelling the narrative in the United Kingdom of the need to restrict mobile citizens' rights to social security. In the view of the TUC, this is a politicisation of a problem that does not exist, by contrast more efforts need to be invested in protecting mobile citizens from exploitation and social dumping and to address under-utilisation of the skills of mobile workers. They queried why the Labour Mobility Package was placing so much emphasis on social security coordination and not on other elements necessary to ensure effective and efficient functioning of the internal labour market.
The EU Trade Union Confederationsupported the comments made by the TUC in their written response to the consultation. They agreed that there was insufficient information about the content of the Labour Mobility Package and they continued to have concerns that the fundamental right to fair and free mobility was at risk of dilution and that there were insufficient measures in place to prevent discrimination which was likely to lead to unfair competition between companies. These problems are very well documented and proved, however, by contrast the Commission appears to be preoccupied with welfare tourism where there is no clear evidence of a problem. Mobile workers make a net contribution to the host Member States. Therefore, to the extent a problem exists, it appears to be a lack of control or implementation of the EU and national law by Member States. However, it is not the worker who is at fault and therefore they should not be penalised.
Business Europe explained that it had responded to the public consultation but shared the concerns of the Trade Unions about the lack of information about the content of the Labour Mobility Package. Employers are positive about the benefits of mobility but intra-mobility remains very low and more needs to be done to ensure that freedom of movement can address skill-mismatches to ensure that intra-EU labour mobility is beneficial for both nationals and EU mobile workers and works effectively for both countries of origin and destination. Conditions to promote mobility of skilled and talented workers should be encouraged but it is correct to take action to challenge abuse if the primary motivation of a mobile citizen is not to work but to receive non-contributory welfare benefits. In addition, more should be done to promote effective coordination and control of activation measures associated with unemployment benefits in a cross-border context (including exported unemployment benefits). They expressed hope that EESSI might provide support in this context. Business Europe were interested in extending the qualifying waiting period, before entitlement to aggregation of employment or earning history in another Member State can be taken into account for entitlement to unemployment benefits. They were not in favour of EU action to extend period of export of unemployment benefits. In relation to export of family benefits, they were broadly in favour of maintaining the status quo that the Member State of work is competent for paying family benefits (regardless of where the child resides), although were prepared to consider indexation of exported family benefits (both upwards and downwards) to the living standard of the place where the child resides.
Business Europe enquired how social partners would be kept informed of progress in the Labour Mobility Package, taking into account the fact the Advisory Committee only meets once a year. They also requested further information about the timing of the impact assessment and who would be involved. Finally they asked when further information would be available about the results of the public consultation.
The OGBLexpressed concerns about any radical changes to the social security coordination. They stressed the importance of maintaining the principle of equal treatment for workers compared with other colleagues in the host country in particular in relation to export of family benefits. They also expressed concerns about the situation where migration is driven by poverty which leads citizens to be vulnerable to exploitation and abuse for example in the road transport sector, mobility appears to have become a veil for social dumping and abuse.
The EU Trade Union Confederation emphasised that equal treatment must be respected and any deviation from this concept would only be permissible in the context of abuse, not because members of the worker's family reside in another Member State.
The Secretariat thanked all participants for their comments and questions confirming the positions of the social partners had been noted. In relation to the queries raised, it was explained that the proposals were not based upon Article 153 for TFEU and therefore the consultation obligationsin Article 154 of TFEU do not apply as such. However, the Commission is committed to transparency and engagement with stakeholders to improve the quality of its proposals and therefore has tried to consult with stakeholders as much as possible through targeted events and the public consultation. Very rich contributions have been received which have been very useful and much appreciated. This is a process which will continue even after adoption of the proposal, where there will be an 8 week period for comment.
In accordance with the Commission's Better Regulation Guidelines, the draft impact assessment will be presented to a Regulatory Scrutiny Board in mid-November. This is not a public process although the opinion of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board will be published when the proposal is adopted. It is hoped that the proposal will be adopted before the end of 2015.
In relation to the other comments from participants, the Secretariat clarified that equal treatment is a principle enshrined in Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The Secretariat also noted that the Commission has an obligation to investigate citizens' concerns (even where such concerns are based on misconceptions) when they dominate the debate and risk damaging popular support for fundamental rights. This ensures that the debate is informed by an examination of facts and figures to assist political decision-makers. Overall, the Commission is seeking to ensure a balanced package, which is not just about welfare tourism but is more widely about modernising and simplifying the system of social security coordination. The overall package will also support the internal market through a well-functioning labour mobility that contributes to growth and well-being of citizens through measures concerning for example EURES.
The Secretariat explained that the public consultation which closed on 7 October received over 300 replies from over 25 Member States or EFTA States. The majority of responses were from individuals, but over 100 replies were received from organisations including social partners. The responses from this consultation, together with the results from the public consultation held in 2012-13 will form part of the impact assessment process. The results of the public consultation will be published after the adoption of the Commission's proposal, anticipated by the end of the year.
II.Report on the activities of the Administrative Commission
Mr Claude EWEN, the Chair of the Administrative Commission presented the report on the activities of the Administrative Commission (note AdvC 03/15) in relation to (i) new decisions and recommendations of the Administrative Commission (ii) ongoing strategic discussions including within the Reflection Forum and the Ad-hoc group on Posting Issues; (iii) Miscellaneous Amendments; (iv) monitoring of EESSI and (v) enhanced cooperation between Member States (including in relation to combating fraud and error). In addition, to the matters referred to in this note, Mr Ewen also provided a brief update on the meeting of the International Forum on 8 October 2015 on theinternational dimension of social security coordination with the objective of strengthening cooperation at European level and achieving a more coherent approach to social security coordination with third countries (to be discussed in more detail at item V).
Mr Ewen informed participants of the outcome of the most recent meeting of the Administrative Commission the previous day in which a number of matters had been discussed including developments concerning EESSI and the Commission's Report on the application of Directive 2011/24/EU on Patients' Rights in Cross-Border Healthcare (to be discussed at items VI and VII of the agenda respectively). He also reported on developments in the Conciliation Board, in which the Administrative Commission is able to support Member States to resolve disputes concerning the correct interpretation of the Regulations.
Regarding the Reflection Forum, Mr Ewen informed participants that the next meeting in December would be dedicated to the coordination of family benefits particularly in relation to issues concerning classification and calculation of family benefits.
The OGBL expressed appreciation for the work of the Administrative Commission and its importance in resolving problems facing mobile workers. He raised a concern about the ongoing acceptance of old e-forms under Regulation (EEC)No1408/71, which were not accepted by the Luxembourgish authorities.
Business Europe thanked the Chair for the presentation and explained that they would welcome greater exchange of information with the Administrative Commission perhaps by circulating reports from the Administrative Commission to the social partners throughout the year. In addition, Business Europe referred to the meeting held between Member States in September 2015 concerning the future EU coordination of social security systems.
Mr Ewen confirmed that delegations are trying to work together to promote coordination by acting as the go-between forthe EU and national institutions on the ground. He explained the transitional arrangements for acceptance of old e-forms under the Regulation (EC) no 883/2004 as a pragmatic approach until EESSI is fully implemented.
Mr Ewen explained that although he has highlighted work which he considered to be of general interest to the social partners, much of the work of the Administrative Commission is very technical. For example, approval of nominations to different groups or miscellaneous amendments to reflect changes in national legislation, such work is very important and necessary but is unlikely to be of interest to a wider audience. He emphasised that the Administrative Commission is a body to resolve issues of technical implementation on the ground and not a policy -making body, and that it is the European Commission that has the legislative initiative.
III. Rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the coordination of social security systems (mid-2014 to mid-2015)
The Secretariat presented note AdvC 04/15 which contains an overview of the 20 rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union held in the field of the coordination of social security schemes in the period mid-2014 to mid-2015. Participants were informed of the main findings of the Court in cases C-333/13, Dano and C-67/14, Alimanovic.
No questions were raised on this subject.
IV.European Agenda on Migration
The Chair invited Antoine Savary (DG HOME) to present the European Agenda on Migration.
Mr Savary talked about the main achievements of the Agenda. The power point presentation is available on CircABC.
The Chair invited the participants to comment or ask questions.
The OGBL considered that the broad topic of migration is not directly connected to the activity of this committee.
The Chairexplained that the topic is of great interest and that it is why it was included in the agenda.
V.External dimension of social security coordination
The Chair invited the Secretariat to present the recent developments in the external dimension of social security coordination.
The Secretariatupdated participants on the EU-Switzerland relations on the state of play of discussions with the associated countries and on the Conference on the external dimension of social security coordination held earlier that year.
- Amendment of Annex II to the Agreement with the Swiss Confederation
The Secretariat gave a short overview on the relations between Croatia and the Switzerland on social security coordination. With the accession of Croatia to the EU on 1 July 2013, an agreement was reached between the EU and Switzerland on a third Protocol to the EU-Swiss Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons, extending the agreement to Croatian nationals.
The Protocol was agreed in June 2013, but still has to be signed both by the EU and Switzerland. With the adoption of the referendum on 9 February 2014 on the mass immigration initiative it is not possible to determine when the Protocol will be ratified.
On 30 April this year the Swiss government declared to set up autonomous measures with reference to the negotiated Protocol III. The Annex II area (social security) has not been mentioned in this declaration. Thus, Regulations 883/04 and 987/09 do not apply between Croatia and the Swiss Federation yet. In the social security field the bilateral agreements between these countries still apply for the moment.