Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2013)857 - Quality Framework for Traineeships - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2013)857 - Quality Framework for Traineeships. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2013)857  |
| date | 04-12-2013 |
Over the past two decades, traineeships have become an important entry point into the labour market for young people. Fostering the employability and productivity of young people is key to bringing them onto the labour market. However, although traineeships increasingly represent a standard feature in our labour markets, their spread has been accompanied by growing concerns as to learning content and working conditions. If traineeships are really to facilitate access to employment, they must offer quality learning content and adequate working conditions, and should not be a cheap substitute for regular jobs.
In December 2012, the Commission presented the Youth Employment Package[1] including the launching of the second stage consultation of social partners on a Quality Framework for Traineeships[2] (QFT), following repeated calls by the European Parliament[3] and the European Council i. The Commission's consultations[5] on the matter along with other studies and surveys, identified a range of problems currently affecting traineeships in the EU. The issues concern two areas in particular:
· insufficient learning content (i.e. trainees are asked to do menial tasks); and
· inadequate working conditions (long working hours, unsatisfactory coverage for health and safety or occupational risks, little or no remuneration/compensation, unclear legal situation, extended duration, etc.).
In addition, stakeholders highlighted the issue that a large proportion of unpaid or low‑paid traineeships may create an equal access problem[6] and also leads to a tendency to replace paid workers with trainees[7]. Also, trainees are sometimes not told clearly whether they will receive remuneration or compensation, or informed about key working conditions such as health and accident insurance or holiday entitlements.
More transparency regarding the learning content and working conditions of the traineeship will lead to a more efficient functioning of the labour market. The 2013 Eurobarometer on traineeships suggests that transparency regarding working conditions in traineeship vacancy notices and advertisements might be improved.
Member States regulatory frameworks in general and the strictness of the regulation in particular varies widely both amongst the different types of traineeships and across Member States. In some Member States no legal definition of traineeships exists. While the current fragmentation of regulation and the absence of quality criteria in general use is remarkable, a common understanding of what a traineeship is and of its minimum standards can help shape Member States’ policies and regulatory approaches. Finally, evidence shows that the number of transnational traineeships is very low[8], despite very high mobility rates among students, e.g. in the Erasmus programme. This appears to be an important missed opportunity in terms of reducing youth unemployment through mobility: transnational traineeships could be a key factor in helping young people take up employment in another Member State. A Europe-wide QFT would help address the low number of transnational traineeships. It would help address one key obstacle for cross border mobility, lack of information, in an area of great regulatory fragmentation. The development of a QFT is also essential for the extension of EURES to traineeships, as requested by the European Council in its June 2012 conclusions[9].
In response to very high youth unemployment in several Member States and following up on earlier commitments, the Commission proposed a Recommendation on Establishing a Youth Guarantee[10], which the Council adopted on 22 April 2013[11]. This calls on Member States to ensure that all young people up to the age of 25 years receive a good‑quality offer of employment, continued education, an apprenticeship or a traineeship within four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education. Quality requirements for traineeships are essential for effective implementation of the Recommendation.
Against this background, the current proposal for a Council Recommendation seeks to ensure that traineeships efficiently ease education‑to‑work transitions and thus increase young people’s employability. The proposal sets out guidelines that can ensure high‑quality learning content and adequate working conditions. It also outlines how the Commission will support Member States’ action through the EU funding framework, the exchange of good practices, and monitoring. It covers so-called ‘open-market’ traineeships, i.e. traineeships agreed between trainee and a traineeship provider (business, non-profit or government) without the involvement of a third party, generally conducted after completion of studies and/or as part of a job search. The proposed Recommendation does not address traineeships forming part of academic and or vocational curricula, neither the one which form part of mandatory professional training (e. g. medicine, architecture etc).
The proposal is accompanied by an impact assessment which presents the outcomes of stakeholder consultations, looks in more detail at the problems regarding traineeships, discusses legal and subsidiarity issues, and provides an analysis of possible options to respond to the problem.
Contents
- RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
- LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
- BUDGETARY IMPLICATION
- Public consultation
- Consultation with social partners
- Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
- Eurobarometer survey on traineeships
- Impact assessment
- Legal basis
- Subsidiarity
- Proportionality
- 5. OPTIONAL ELEMENTS
The Commission consulted a wide range of stakeholders on the problems regarding traineeships and on possible solutions.
In response to a public consultation between April and July 2012, trade unions, NGOs, youth organisations, educational institutions and most individual respondents generally supported a Commission initiative. While generally supportive of the initiative, employer organisations, chambers of commerce and Member States often referred to the need to keep the framework sufficiently flexible to take into account the diversity of national practices.
Most respondents agreed with the Commission’s analysis (a written traineeship agreement, clear objectives and learning content[12], limited duration, adequate social security coverage etc.). Businesses and some employers’ organisations argued that remuneration and social protection issues did not fall under EU competence.
A two‑stage social partner consultation on the QFT initiative took place between October 2012 and February 2013. The social partners restated the positions they had taken in the public consultation, with the trade union side arguing for a stronger initiative and the employers’ side concerned about flexibility and the burden on business. However, they did not launch negotiations on a possible agreement under Article 154 TFEU.
On 11 June 2013, ETUC, BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME and CEEP presented a Framework of Actions on Youth Employment (FoA), resulting from social dialogue negotiations taking note of the Commission’s intention to propose a Council Recommendation on the European Quality Framework on Traineeships. Social partners envisage taking further joint actions towards the Council and the European Parliament based on an upcoming Commission proposal for a Council Recommendation on a European QFT.
Between March and June 2013, an SME test was conducted to investigate from an employer perspective the quality of traineeships provided by SMEs and gauge the compliance costs of potential measures within a QFT. In total, 914 SMEs replied to the survey. The test highlighted the importance of traineeships for creating jobs in SMEs, with a majority of those questioned (71.9 %) seeing traineeships as a way to select and train future employees. It also confirmed that an overwhelming majority of SMEs (9 out of 10) would have no problems with the proposed quality elements.
In May 2013, a Eurobarometer survey was conducted in the EU-27 and Croatia to quantify concerns about the quality of traineeships. The results of this first ever EU-wide representative survey on the topic included:
· confirmation of how widespread traineeships are: 46 % of the 18‑35 year‑olds surveyed had completed at least one;
· one in three traineeships was deemed unsatisfactory, in terms either of working conditions (25 % of all traineeships), learning content (18 %) or both;
· a key factor in the rarity of transnational traineeships (9 %of all traineeships) is lack of information: 38 % of those who would have been interested cited insufficient information on traineeship regulations in other Member States.
An econometric analysis based on the Eurobarometer results found a significant correlation between the quality of traineeships and ‘employment outcome’. In other words, those that had completed a substandard traineeship were significantly less likely to find a job afterwards.
The second stage of the social partner consultation was accompanied by an analytical document[13] on the problems regarding the quality of traineeships, which sets out possible policy responses.
This document was expanded in 2013 to form a fully-fledged impact assessment (IA)[14] with previously unavailable data on the number and quality of traineeships, and new evidence of the correlation between quality and employment prospects. The IA identifies and analyses policy options for increasing the share of quality traineeships, notably by issuing ‘best practice’ standards and discouraging employers from offering substandard traineeships. It also analyses new proposals on transparency to make it easier for young people to screen traineeships for quality.
The IA examines four options in addition to the baseline scenario:
· setting up an information website;
· establishing voluntary quality labels;
· proposing a Council Recommendation; and
· proposing a Directive.
It concludes that the most effective, efficient and proportionate option would be a Commission proposal for a Council Recommendation on a QFT to be transposed by Member States in national practice and/or the national legal system.
It would recommend Member States to ensure that the conclusion of a written traineeship agreement is made compulsory. The agreement would include information on the learning objectives of the traineeship, the working conditions, whether remuneration/compensation is provided, the rights and obligations under applicable EU and national law, as well as the duration of the traineeship.
Also, additional transparency requirements would generate incentives for quality traineeships and/or disincentives for substandard traineeships.
According to the preferred option, traineeship vacancy notices would have to indicate whether the traineeship is paid or not and, if the traineeship is paid, the level of remuneration/compensation. Furthermore, traineeship providers would be asked to disclose the share of trainees that were offered an employment contract after the end of their traineeship.
The legal bases for this initiative are Articles 153, 166 and 292 TFEU. According to Article 292 TFEU, the Council can adopt recommendations on the basis of a Commission proposal in the areas of EU competence.
According to Article 153 TFEU, the Union shall support and complement Member States' activities in the field of, inter alia, working conditions, social security and social protection of workers, and also the integration of persons excluded from the labour market and the combating of social exclusion. In accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice, traineeships which are remunerated fall under Article 153.
In order to cover also traineeships which are not remunerated, Article 166 TFEU has been added as additional legal basis. According to this provision, the Union shall implement a vocational training policy which shall support and supplement the action of the Member States, while fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content and organisation of vocational training.
Therefore, depending on whether the traineeship is remunerated or not, Article 153 or 166 TFEU will apply respectively.
The provisions of Article 153 TFEU do not apply to pay, by virtue of Article 153 para. 5 TFEU. However, the latter provision does not stand in the way of addressing problems regarding transparency of pay, by recommending that the written traineeship agreement clarifies whether or not remuneration would be applicable.
An analogy may be made with other EU instruments such as Directive 91/533/EEC, on an employer's obligation to inform an employee of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship. That Directive provides at Article 2 that:
'1. An employer shall be obliged to notify an employee … of the essential aspects of the contract or employment relationship.
2. The information referred to …. shall cover at least the following:
(h) the initial basic amount, the other component elements and the frequency of payment of the remuneration to which the employee is entitled …'[15]
Similarly, the Proposal for a Directive on conditions of entry and residence of third country nationals in the framework of an intra-corporate transfer[16] addresses the issue of remuneration as an element of an assignment letter from the employer, or of a contract.
Training forms a central objective in the EU's employment and educational policies. It is also an integral part of the freedom of movement of persons under Article 45 TFEU – a fundamental freedom protected by the Treaty. Given the transnational dimension of traineeships, actions of individual Member States alone will not achieve the objectives of the proposed initiative - to comprehensively improve the quality of traineeships undertaken in the EU.
Finally, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union also contains a number of rights and freedoms which may be relevant to future measures concerning traineeships, in particular Article 21 (Non-discrimination), Article 29 (Right of access to placement services), Article 31 (Fair and just working conditions) and Article 32 (Prohibition of child labour and protection of young people at work).
The subsidiarity principle applies insofar as the proposal does not fall under the exclusive competence of the Union.
In the case of traineeships, an EU-wide solution presents several advantages:
The quality guidelines adopted or proposed by different bodies in different Member States broadly point to similar elements that are supposed to be key for enhancing the quality of traineeships. This suggests that defining quality standards for traineeships should not fundamentally differ according to national practices or local circumstances.
An EU-wide solution would have benefits in terms of trainees’ mobility. Young people would find it easier to accept a traineeship in another country if the existence of standard practices or rules gave them a clear understanding of what they can expect.
Experience shows that, owing to coordination problems, the process of defining internationally accepted quality standards can be faster if supranational institutions adopt a coordinating and supporting role.
Member States could independently adopt measures to improve the quality of traineeships. I in practice, however, they have repeatedly called upon the Commission to adopt a QFT (see among others the Conclusions of three recent European Councils: December 2012, February 2013 and June 2013).
In a situation of diverging regulatory frameworks it helps to have a common understanding of what a traineeship is and of its minimum standards. This will help shape Member States’ regulatory approaches, since the proposed standards are to be operationalized through the specific regulatory approach of Member States. In this way, the EU could concretely support Member States in implementing the Europe 2020 employment guideline 8, in particular ‘enacting schemes to help young people and in particular those not in employment, education or training find initial employment, job experience, or further education and training opportunities, including apprenticeships, and should intervene rapidly when young people become unemployed.’ This would address one key obstacle for cross border mobility, lack of information, in an area of great regulatory fragmentation, and the Recommendation would help to underpin the support provided by Erasmus+[17] and further development of EURES[18].
The Council Recommendation instrument allows strict respect of the proportionality principle: Member States that have already introduced in their legislation or national practice the proposed safeguards and quality elements will not need to act. Member States shall also be free to assess whether it is opportune to go beyond the QFT proposed here, notably to encompass also the issue of minimum remuneration, which the QFT does not touch.
Not relevant.
Not relevant.