4 Working time: inland waterway transport
| Committee's assessment
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision | Not cleared from scrutiny; further information requested
|
| Document details | Draft Council Directive about a social partners agreement on working time in inland waterway transport
|
| Legal base | Article 155(2) TFEU; —; QMV
|
| Department | Transport
|
| Document numbers | (36216), 11688/14 + ADDs 1-3, COM(14) 452
|
Summary and Committee's conclusions
4.1 The Working Time Directive lays down common minimum standards,
but allows for more specific rules to be made for particular sectors.
The Commission has proposed this draft Directive to implement
a European Social Partners' Agreement between the European Barge
Union, the European Skippers Organisation and the European Transport
Workers Federation on specific working time rules for mobile workers
in inland waterway transport.
4.2 We have twice considered this proposal. We have
recognised the need for adequate working time rules for mobile
workers in inland waterway transport. But we have shared the Government's
view of the inappropriateness of this proposal for the UK and
have been concerned about a seemingly precipitate push to agree
the proposal. On the second occasion, in October, we heard about
the Government's impact assessment and consultations and about
developments in negotiations on the draft Directive, which seemed
so far only marginally helpful. We noted that delay in the timetabling
of negotiations would enable the Government to continue working
with other Member States seeking greater clarity on the intended
application and scope of the proposal from the social partners.
So we kept the document under scrutiny, pending a further report
from the Government on developments.
4.3 The Government tells us now that it is likely
that the Presidency will achieve a political agreement on the
proposal at a Council on 11 December, that the UK's concerns have
not been met and that the Government expects to vote against the
draft Directive.
4.4 It is very disappointing that the UK's reasonable
needs are not likely to be met. So we endorse the Government's
expected vote against the proposal. We are keeping the document
under scrutiny, pending a report on the outcome of the 11 December
Council.
Full details of
the documents: Draft Council Directive
implementing the European Agreement concluded by the European
Barge Union (EBU), the European Skippers Organisation (ESO) and
the European Transport Workers' Federation (ETF) concerning certain
aspects of the organisation of working time in inland waterway
transport: (36216), 11688/14 + ADDs 1-3, COM(14) 452.
Background
4.5 The Working Time Directive lays down common minimum
standards, but allows for more specific rules to be made for particular
sectors. Article 155 TFEU provides for the possibility of a European
Social Partners' Agreement (SPA) between management and labour
being implemented by Council decision on a proposal from the Commission.
4.6 The European Barge Union, the European Skippers
Organisation and the European Transport Workers Federation, the
sectoral social partners, have concluded an SPA on specific working
time rules for mobile workers in inland waterway transport. In
response to a request from these organisations the Commission
has proposed this draft Directive to implement the SPA.
4.7 When we first considered this proposal, in September,
we recognised the need for adequate working time rules for mobile
workers in inland waterway transport. But we shared the Government's
view of the inappropriateness of this proposal for the UK and
were concerned about a seemingly precipitate push to agree the
proposal. Therefore we asked the Government to press the Presidency
to allow sufficient time for the necessary consideration of the
issues, rather than dealing with the matter at a Council on 16
October. We said we would consider this matter again when we had
more information from the Government about its consultations and
impact assessment.
4.8 In October the Government told us of its impact
assessment and consultations and about developments in negotiations
on the draft Directive, which seemed so far only marginally helpful.
We noted that it had been agreed to delay consideration of the
proposal by the Council beyond 16 October to allow time for more
discussion. As this would enable the Government to continue working
with other Member States seeking greater clarity on the intended
application and scope of the proposal from the social partners,
we kept the document under scrutiny, pending a further report
from the Government on developments.
The Minister's letter of 27 November 2014
4.9 The Minister of State, Department for Transport
(Mr John Hayes) writes now to advise us of further developments,
including the Presidency's intention to seek a political agreement
on the proposal at the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer
Affairs Council (EPSCO) on 11 December.
4.10 The Minister says that:
· "as
a result of the concerns Member States continued to raise at the
Social Questions Working Group (SQWG) meeting on 3 October, the
proposal was withdrawn from the agenda for the EPSCO on 16 October,
as it was clear that there was insufficient support for a political
agreement to be reached;
· "in
response to pressure from Member States, the Presidency wrote
to the social partners who negotiated the agreement, seeking to
resolve some of the concerns which had been raised by the SQWG,
including questions relating to the intended scope;
· "however,
as the questions asked by the Presidency did not fully reflect
the points which had been made by the SQWG, the answers received
have not allayed Member States' concerns;
· "the
proposal was discussed at a further SQWG on 18 November, but without
any progress being made, as Member States did not feel that the
consultation with the social partners had taken the proposal any
further forward; and
· "despite
this, it is likely that the Presidency will be able to achieve
a political agreement at EPSCO on 11 December."
4.11 Reminding us that in October he had told us
about the Government's consultations, the Minister says that:
· "since
then, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency has continued to discuss
the proposals with the Nautilus International (the trans-national
trade union), the Commercial Boat Operators' Association and the
Passenger Boat Association (PBA);
· "there
was also discussion of the proposal at the Domestic Passenger
Ship Steering Group meeting, which includes non-PBA members;
· "these
meetings confirmed that, while the majority of operators will
be able to comply with the proposed maximum working time and minimum
rest periods and the rules on working days and rest days and limits
on night work, concerns remain about the administrative burdens
of health assessment and record keeping;
· "concern
also remains about the inability of those operating on the tidal
Trent to comply with the requirement for six hours uninterrupted
rest in each 24 hour period, which has not been addressed by the
Commission or the Presidency; and
· "Nautilus
International has indicated its support for the UK's need for
flexibility to deal with the unresolved issues."
4.12 On the Government's position the Minister tells
us that:
· "it
will continue to stress the distinct characteristics of different
national waterways and the need for flexibility to deal with this;
· "this
would be in keeping with the nature of a Directive, as defined
in Article 288 TFEU: "A directive shall be binding, as to
the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it
is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the
choice of form and methods";
· "however,
in the light of earlier discussions with the Commission and the
Presidency, and given the late stage now reached, it is very unlikely
that any explicit provision to this effect will be forthcoming;
· "the
Government will not agree to measures likely to adversely affect
the industry;
· "neither
should it support a one size fits all approach;
· "the
Government needs to consider the peculiarities of the circumstances,
and, although it acknowledges the objective of the social partners
in bringing forward this proposal, it is against the UK national
interest to support it; and
· "the
Government expects, therefore, to vote against the Directive and
table a minute statement explaining its reasoning, including concerns
about the handling of this dossier."
Previous Committee Reports
Ninth Report HC 219-ix (2014-15), chapter 11 (3 September
2014) and Fifteenth Report HC 219-xv (2014-15), chapter 5 (22
October 2014).
| 
