Committee on Employment and Social Affairs Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Live capture
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
EMPL European Parliament
Follow its sittingsIgnacio Doreste Hernández
So we were expecting concrete action on that. We understand that the European competences on enforcement can be limited, but perhaps by providing the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health an enhanced advisory role on how to to enhance the labour inspectorate, this could be partially improved. Then looking ahead, since this hearing is meant to to serve for the upcoming strategic framework, which is going to to start as from 2028, we believe that it should tackle ambitiously psychosocial risk and musculoskeletal disorders.
The same applying to the exposure of workers against extreme weather events. There is also a need, I mean there is very good narrative in the strategic framework when it comes to gender and this should be maintained in the new one, we believe. So there is a need to have a gender sensitive but ambitious approach with a strong focus on eradicating gender-based violence and harassment, any kind of gender-based violence, so also including digital harassment and other forms of violence against women workers.
It is very important that there is a strong narrative on enforcement, as was previously said. It is not only about the number of labor inspectors, but also the power and independence that a labor inspector should have in order to undertake deterrent investigations at company level.
And I wanted to conclude by saying that we hope that by the time that we have a new strategic framework, the European Commission together with the co-legislator had already finished the the work of the Quality Jobs Act, where we expect that there is going to be strong legislative provisions on occupational safety and health issues, and therefore the strategic framework is going to be a political tool in order to set into motion the legislative elements of the Quality Jobs Act on this topic. Thank you very much.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much for this presentation.
Our next speaker is Mr. Clemens Erzrod, who is chair of the Health and Safety Working Group at BusinessEurope, who will be with us remotely. So you have the floor for the next seven minutes.
Clemens Itserodt
Yes, thank you very much, Chair, honorable members of the European Parliament, representative of the Commission, distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. I'm joining you remotely from sunny Copenhagen, so please for the interpreters also let me know if I'm going through clearly or need to speak quicker or slower or something like that. But first of all, thank you very much for the opportunity to address this committee. As the chair of the BusinessEurope Working Group on Health and Safety, I am delighted that both BusinessEurope and its member federations have been closely engaged throughout the current strategic framework cycle, and we welcome this hearing as a timely and important moment to draw lessons and indeed look forward.
So to take stock on the current framework, in our view, the strategic framework from 2021 to 2027 was adopted at a moment of acute disruption. We all remember the global pandemic, the accelerating digital transition, and the rapidly changing world of work. And against that backdrop, we believe that the framework has delivered real value. The 2023 tripartite stocktaking summit in Stockholm also confirmed the effectiveness of the framework in identifying the key objectives and actions needed to make workplaces fit for the challenges of our time.
And then maybe just to highlight that that assessment is actually being deepened right now. The Advisory Committee on Safety and Health at Work, the tripartite body that brings together governments, workers and employers to advise the Commission, has been working on lessons learned and on future impulses for what comes next. In the first conclusions adopted last December, the conclusion is clear and aligns very closely with the Stockholm summit. Indeed, that the framework directive is and must remain the foundation. It is concluded that with its risk-based approach, it is broad enough to cover all risks, it's flexible enough to accommodate diverse national traditions, and it's resilient enough to have served European workers for over three decades.
So it is in the words of the committee, a gold standard for workers' protection. I would again underline that this is work in progress. The committee is now preparing a follow-up in which we expand on our priorities for the next framework because there is a shared recognition that the framework has been helpful and has improved occupational safety and health in Europe. And in fact, I spent the morning in a tripartite meeting on this next step. So the question is not whether we want to continue, but how to build on what works.
And turning to the to the work ahead, I want to focus on three priorities that we in BusinessEurope consider essential.
I'll try to be concrete because of course seven minutes demands clarity and not comprehensiveness. So first of all, we need to recognize that Europe's strategic situation has changed fundamentally. So the Critical Raw Materials Act, the Industrial Accelerator Act, defense investments, these are not peripheral to OSH policy.
The next framework must ensure that OSH initiatives support rather than inadvertently contradict these strategic priorities. A concrete example is when setting binding occupational exposure limit values, the impact assessment must account for critical materials and supply chain security because we should not find ourselves in a position where OSH regulation, either through poor sequencing or maybe insufficient analysis, becomes a barrier to the industries that we have decided, that we in Europe have decided are essential for our independence. And so the second is competitiveness and better processes.
And I'm happy to see that William from EU-OSHA is also here because ESENER 2024 data makes a striking finding. The single biggest barrier to OSH compliance as reported by companies by quite a significant margin is the complexity of legal obligations. And this is of course not an argument for lower ambitions on worker protection. It's an argument for smarter regulation. And I think also the Draghi report on European competitiveness puts hard numbers to this problem that more than 60% of EU companies see regulation as an obstacle to investment.
And here's the point I think is quite important to stress at this time.
When a company's resources are consumed by administrative complexity, that is investment which is not flowing into safer equipment, better working conditions, training, or indeed innovation on the shop floor. So excessive burdens is not only a question of slower growth, it crowds out the investment in OSH and in health that we want to see. So reducing burdens...
Clemens Itserodt
Of course. I will, I will slow down a bit. So the point is that excessive burdens is not only slowing growth, it's also crowding out the investments that we really want to see in occupational safety and health and in health in general.
So reducing administrative burdens is not a concession against workers, it is in their direct interest. Of course we note that the Commission has rightly responded with a target to cut administrative burdens by 25% and by 35% for SMEs, and we believe that OSH policy should pull in the same direction. Again, a concrete example. So REACH requires a safety data sheet that must list applicable exposure limits.
But that same limit is already being established under our OSH directives, either the CMRD or the CAD directive. So we have the same parameter living in two regulatory worlds at once, and this increases the risk of divergence and of course of legal uncertainty for the employer. Where an exposure limit in OSH exists, it should be the single authoritative reference. And more broadly, we also believe the next strategic framework should set clear objectives and not prescribe every technical detail in future regulation.
It would leave room for the social partners to deliver those objectives through collective agreement at a national level or a sectoral level. And this may come as a surprise coming from a Danish employer representative, but perhaps the minimum wage directive could offer a model for inspiration. Because of course, under certain conditions, it lets national social partners decide the best way to reach a common European goal. If applied to OSH, this could have three strengths. It respects different national traditions.
It draws on the expertise of those closest to the workplace. And it builds ownership to the rules. So where genuine social dialogue produces a joint solution, it should be counted as meeting an obligation.
And then finally, we also believe there is a need for a stronger evidence base. Good policy requires good data, and here we agree with the trade unions that we have a weakness, as the advisory committee's own stocktaking exercise also confirms. We know that occupational disease statistics, for instance, remain fragmented across Member States, and this limits our ability and capacity to assess what is actually working. Also, exposure data to hazardous chemicals or to heat or to psychosocial risks is incomplete, and it's often based solely on self-reported and unreliable questionnaires.
So we also urge closer interdisciplinary coordination between OSH research and public health research. So to summarize, we believe that the framework has indeed been very effective and that the framework directive remains the indispensable foundation as confirmed in the tripartite committee. For what comes next, our priorities are very clear. We need to align OSH with Europe's new strategic realities.
Design for outcomes rather than paper, and we need to build the evidence base that serious policy requires. And of course, we look forward to working constructively both with the advisory committee and with this committee to shape a future framework that is both ambitious for workers' protection and fit for the challenges of 2027 and beyond. Thank you very much for the floor.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much for your contribution. And we now move on into the future. So we'll hear a number of contributions with regard to how best shape occupational safety and health for the upcoming years and the new world of work. And as first speaker, I would like to give the Commission the opportunity to present the state of play of its efforts on a strategic framework on health and safety at work post-2027. So Mr. Olsson, Deputy Director-General for Jobs, Skills and Social Policy, the floor is yours for the next seven minutes.
Stefan Olsson
Thank you very much, Chair, and very pleased to be here, honorable members, OSH colleagues and stakeholders. Over the past decades, the EU and its member states and the social partners and all actors have developed one of the most robust occupational safety and health frameworks in the world.
But there is so much more to do that we've already heard from from the social partners and we will hear further on in this hearing. We we see that we still have a cost of of non-OSH if we can phrase it like this of over 3% of GDP which would be if we take it in in euros over 600 billion euros. So it means that investing in OSH really pays off and it's something that we all we all know and I think everybody in this room shares.
Every day, nine workers across the EU fall victim to accidents at work. Thousands still lose their lives because of diseases. And at the same time, we have all these changes in the labor market, in the economy, robotization, AI, digitalization. So clearly, a strategic framework has an important role to play. In my experience, I mean, the strategic framework, its added value, it's really that it brings together all the aspects.
So often here, as you said, Chair, we're speaking about an individual legislative proposal, like the ongoing CMDR 6.
But the strategic framework brings together legislation, tools, monitoring, like the tools provided by EU-OSHA or the inspections by the the labor inspectorates, and and policies. We recently, I think it was the beginning of this year, we issued the asbestos guidelines, which I think was one of the most clicked on on the whole Europa, on the whole EU website.
And also funding, of course, which where we and and we know the European Parliament is a very active player for the future funding and the current, where we also should use for both competitiveness and social reasons, we should we should invest in OSH also at EU level. So the framework should bring these items together in a way that that is really mutually supportive, because one of the elements alone will not solve the issues. Legislation alone will not, the tools alone will not, unstrategic funding will not. So that that's the that's what what we're working on and that's why we're very glad that you've arranged this this hearing and I'm and we know from the past in preparing the last strategic framework that the the European Parliament was a very important partner in that process.
So what are we doing? Well, we're carrying out every five years a comprehensive overview of all the directives and how they are implemented at national level. For the last period up to 2022, we see now the preliminary results show that overall they are delivering on their objectives.
We'll have a more detailed report published later this year, but that will be of course an important input into the strategy. We also have and starting off with with this hearing today, we will also have a very intense consultation of stakeholders. The advisory committee that was mentioned several times will of course have a the key role to play and will deliver an opinion. Also very importantly, the Senior Labour Inspectors Committee will will make their input. And then we will do an external study that we always do to to get the data and it was referred to by both business and and trade unions how important that is to feed in the data into the process.
So this will feed into our reflections on a new strategic framework for the next period. In parallel, as has been mentioned, of course, we're developing the Quality Jobs Act, which has several elements on health and safety. So but that I think is again, that's the specifics. But here we are talking about how we bring everything together in a strategic framework for the future.
And I think I'll I'll stop stop there to give more time for the other speakers. Thank you.
Li Andersson
All right, thank you very much, Mr. Olsson, for sharing this information with us. And our next speaker is Executive Director of EU-OSHA, Mr. William Cockburn, who is joining us from Bilbao. So, please, William, you have the floor for the next seven minutes.
William Cockburn
Thank you, Chair. It's a real pleasure to to join this committee again and to be able to speak about this very important topic and to build on the the excellent interventions until now. I just want to recall, actually, we start off with going back in time with action programs on safety, health, and hygiene at work in 1978. So the what is now strategic OSH framework is is an incredibly important and and well-established document.
And it's really a recognition of the unacceptable burden of work-related injury and illness. And if we can have the next slide, you can see figures there relating to both the human suffering and the economic costs which the Commission has just just referred to. And if we're looking to the future, we're seeing a likelihood of increased labor shortages, an importance to maintain attractiveness in key sectors, for example, construction, manufacturing, agriculture, health and social care.
And this is going to be all the more important as we go forward to stress the role of occupational safety and health in establishing this attractiveness. The twin green and digital transitions and also demographic change that were identified in the current strategy are likely to continue to be key megatrends, key drivers. And looking at the priorities that we have now in Europe, this is a call for competitiveness, as the speaker for BusinessEurope just mentioned.
And in fact, when looking at the employer's perspective through our survey of the persons responsible or who know most about health and safety at work, we can see both a recognition of the ethical or normative importance of occupational safety and health, as legislation is the main driver of action, but also how important it is for reputation and for productivity at enterprise level.
If we move to the next slide, I just want to stress how the role of the strategic framework plays out over time and particularly over the last strategic frameworks. EU-OSHA has a role in supporting and monitoring the evolution of the strategic framework through the OSH Barometer and the EU-OSHA information system. And we can see that now almost all Member States have got a strategy on occupational safety and health.
That was not the case a number of years ago. There's quite a high degree of alignment on issues, greater levels of collaboration across Member States, across main actors, and that leads to better cooperation, stronger social dialogue, and as we just heard, more resourcing, more funding for occupational safety and health. And this is so important when we're looking to increase research, provide better tools and guidance, awareness raising or strengthening enforcement.
Those key actors that are given tasks in the strategic framework are those who really drive it forward, whether the Commission, the Member States, the social partners, and of course EU-OSHA. On the next slide, I just want to mention some of the areas that EU-OSHA has been and looks forward to continuing to work under the EU-OSHA strategic framework. And the first is on the topic of anticipating and managing change. And here, of course, these three transitions are still highly relevant. At the agency, we've produced foresights identifying future challenges around climate change.
We've been carrying out research and campaigns on digitalization and the links to psychosocial risks, and looking more horizontally at issues around demographics, ageing, migration. Next slide. We can see the work that we've been doing to support workplace prevention. So here, as we heard from BusinessEurope, we have a comprehensive set of legislation on occupational safety and health, but it's so important that it's actually implemented and there's a high level of compliance.
And part of that is enforcement and inspection, and part of that is making available important guidelines and support and online tools. Our online interactive risk assessment tool now numbers over 600,000 risk assessments in the 18 participating countries. And next slide. Important in terms of Vision Zero to contribute to a positive occupational safety and health culture through awareness raising and through campaigning. And here I would refer to our network of national focal points with national institutes and also national level social partners contributing to this work.
And if we go to the next slide, some thoughts on the challenges and the priorities for the future. And I would refer back to what I started saying, the link between occupational safety and health and Europe's competitiveness. And these three transitions, digital, green, and demographic, are still as relevant as they were when the current strategy started. I would add, however, that the level of uncertainty around digital is still incredibly high. We don't know to what extent there will be job losses.
We don't know to what extent new technology will raise new risks or raise new opportunities to improve work-related safety and health.
With the green transition and climate-related OSH risks, we're continuing our work. In that sense, perhaps it's more predictable. We know that the climate-related events that drive occupational safety and health risks will increase over time. And I would say that demographic change is another area where there is still quite a high level of uncertainty. We know from Eurostat's figures that the next 10 years are those of the highest decrease of the population traditionally of the working age, 16 to 64.
What they recognize they don't know is how that will play out within different Member States and within regions. Migration will be affected, intra-European and outside of Europe will be affected by aging, so there's a high degree of uncertainty there. I think these areas, these transitions are still highly relevant. It's essential to support compliance, as I was saying, so to continue raising awareness, providing support and guidance, and making sure we have effective enforcement. And as in previous strategies, we have to focus still on micro and SMEs.
Again here, the digital solutions may allow us to provide better support for those enterprises that we know are often resource-poor in very challenging situations.
Psychosocial risks, mental health, musculoskeletal disorders continue to be the biggest cause of working days lost, and that has been on an increasing trend. 30% of workers report stress, depression or anxiety, or joint, muscle, bone problems related to work. So this has to continue to be a priority.
New forms of employment, non-standard employment, is another area that needs to be focused on. As we heard from ETUC, too many workers are not covered by the OSH framework, by the OSH legislation. And as we've also heard, policy coordination across many areas, whether it's products legislation, environmental, public health, it needs to be coordinated because there are many areas that impact on OSH and OSH impacts on many other areas. And finally, just to stress again from our perspective, the importance of good, reliable, comparative data for monitoring progress, better setting objectives, targeting, and allowing us to learn. And the agency will continue to contribute with its surveys and its research along these lines.
Next slide is just my conclusion to say that EU-OSHA stands ready to contribute across all areas and to continue contributing to the work of this committee. And with that, I hand back to you, Chair. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And as next speaker I would like to give the floor to Joaquim Pintado Nunes, ILO's chief of the Occupational Safety and Health and Working Environment branch. And he will also be joining us remotely.
Mr. Pintado Nunes, you have the floor for the next seven minutes, please.
Joaquim Pintado Nunes
Thank you, Chair, and honorable members of the European Parliament. Thank you for inviting the International Labour Organization to this hearing and, you know, speaking to you from Geneva. So I'd like to say that the current EU strategic framework and the ILO global strategy on safety and health at work 2024-2030 are highly aligned and maintaining this convergence after 2027 would be of high value as this would help to strengthen coherence between European action and the global efforts to realize the fundamental right to a safe and healthy working environment as recognized by the International Labour Conference back in 2022.
We also welcome the growing number of ratifications of the two fundamental OSH conventions, Convention number 155 and Convention number 187. Convention 155 is now ratified by 19 EU member states. Convention 187 has been ratified by 17 member states. Of course that we strongly encourage universal ratification given their status as fundamental conventions. So I will focus my intervention on four key highlights.
The first one would be that, as already expressed by other speakers before me, occupational diseases are the defining challenge of the next decade or decades. So we know that Europe, the EU in particular, has largely succeeded in reducing fatal occupational injuries, but diseases are still a challenge to address, now accounting for more than 98% of work-related fatalities in the EU according to estimates. And almost half of these fatalities are linked to cancer, and circulatory and respiratory diseases are also causes of concern.
This corresponds to some extent to what is happening in other parts of the world. So we see that globally 89% of fatalities related to work are due to diseases. And this is also very much influencing the priorities of the ILO, including within our global strategy that goes up to 2030. For example, the next generation of international labor standards that will be negotiated over the coming years, starting in 2027 up to 2030, are very much related to occupational diseases. For example, in all that regards exposure to chemical hazards and ergonomics.
So the active engagement of the EU and EU member states in these discussions will certainly help to ensure that international standards reflect both scientific evidence and also the practical realities in the EU countries. Support with ratification of the new standards is also of course of relevance to us. The review of the ILO list of occupational diseases that was last reviewed in 2010 is also planned for the near future, although we still have not agreed on a precise date. So my first concrete opinion, suggestion on a post-2027 would be to keep occupational disease prevention as a high priority, special focus on carcinogens, on exposure to hazardous substances and also disease recognition, you know, at the center of this post-2027 framework.
My second key highlight would be, also as other speakers have already said before me, on mental health, AI, and climate change challenges. Our estimates show us that psychosocial risk factors contribute to more than 840,000 deaths annually worldwide, and the economic impact exceeds more than 1% of global GDP. This is already an area of focus in the current EU strategic framework on safety and health at work, and we suggest to keep it as well as a priority.
And of course, the dimension of technology and digitalization deserves certainly attention. Another area of concern relates to weather patterns. According to our research, more than 70% of workers globally are exposed to excessive heat, for example. And Europe in particular has experienced the fastest increase in occupational heat exposure worldwide in the last 20 years.
In 2020 alone, excessive heat contributed to more than 80,000 occupational injuries in the EU. The ILO has recently, well, as a matter of fact, on the 20th of April of this year, adopted tripartite expert guidance on OSH in extreme weather events and changing weather patterns that may be a useful reference for the work ahead. The guidance addresses the OSH effects of events such as heatwaves, coldwaves, heavy precipitation and floods, droughts, wildfires, as well as long-term shifts in terms of temperature and asks governments, in consultation with social partners, to adopt concrete actions to strengthen national frameworks to effectively prevent OSH risks, including through preparedness, response and recovery measures, targeted strategies and programs for sectors, occupations and groups of workers of increased risk of harm, and also adapted OSH management systems taking into account the different realities of...
Joaquim Pintado Nunes
Sure.
So also targeted action taking into account the different realities of public and private sector and also different organization including in terms of size, in terms of their capacity to address the different occupational risks related to extreme weather events or climate change. My third key highlight would be that strong national OSH systems remain the foundation for prevention. The first pillar of the ILO global strategy is the strengthening of national OSH systems including up-to-date and comprehensive not to say universal national OSH policies and strategies, modern legislation, effective labor inspection, extended coverage of occupational health services, reliable reporting and notification of incidents and diseases, robust research and evidence generation and also ensuring social dialogue mechanisms both at the national level but also at the level of the workplaces.
It's also important to ensure that we do have evidence-based and up-to-date profiles, resourced and capable institutions that continue to be critical conditions to address not only the traditional risks but also the emerging and re-emerging ones, notably those related to climate change and related to technology.
Universal access to occupational health services remains one of the largest deficits in national systems, so I believe that this point could also be addressed by the new strategic framework. And finally, data, a specific priority of the ILO over at least the last five years, is to address this deficit, in particular in what concerns statistics on occupational diseases and comparability at the international level. And indeed, the absence of internationally comparable occupational disease data remains one of the greatest obstacles for the adoption of global strategies based on evidence.
This will be addressed by the International Conference of Labour Statisticians in 2028, and I'm happy to inform that almost all of the EU member states participate in the ILO technical working group leading to this meeting in 2028. Eurostat, Eurofound, and EU-OSHA are also very active participants, and again, strengthening data and knowledge will be an ILO priority up to 2030 and further on, of course, and this is something that we also think that should remain a priority within the EU space.
The future framework could also further focus on occupational safety and health in public administration and public services, where we do know that many psychosocial, biological, and ergonomic risks are increasingly evident and that may require different approaches of those that we sometimes adopt for the private sector, namely in terms of legislation, not to speak of enforcement. My fourth and final highlight would be that Europe can help to shape the global OSH agenda, and this is already one of the points that you have in the current EU strategic framework for safety and health at work, and this will be more and more relevant. You know, OSH is increasingly global: climate change, chemical hazards, biological hazards, AI, supply chains, they transcend borders.
And it is a fact that the EU can shape the global agenda. Europe has not only the opportunity to define the future of OSH within its own borders, but also to influence, for example, how prevention is understood in other regions, and also in terms of the reinforced support for candidate and potential candidate countries in terms of promoting the upward convergence of OSH standards across Europe, you know, beyond.
Joaquim Pintado Nunes
Sure. Just two additional points. So, again, OSH could also be a common element of bilateral and multilateral common agreements, and also we welcome the EU commitment to responsible business conduct, and again, OSH is also an important element of, you know, in this area. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, and thank you for understanding.
We have a tight schedule and we still have one speaker before the questions and answers. So I would now like to give the floor to Mrs. Dimitra Theodorri, who is head of unit Health and Safety and Working Conditions at ETUI. So please, Mrs. Theodorri, the floor is yours.
Dimitra Theodori
Yes, thank you very much. I am indeed head of the Occupational Health and Safety Unit at the European Trade Union Institute. And there we work on improving occupational safety and health with a clear focus on the protection of workers while ensuring our analysis is evidence-based and and robust. And if you ask yourself why is she invited here while ETUC is also here, I have to make clear for friends that the European Trade Union Institute is a different organization with a research focus.
So thank you very much, an important discussion and I'm very happy to contribute to this discussion. And actually our research director Bart Vanhercke was the obvious choice but we saw the gender balance of your panel and decided to send a woman instead. So I have organized, oops, I have to, okay, oh no.
So, I have organized my intervention around two key areas. I will start talking about systemic challenges and then I will spend some time to talk about specific and emerging issues, but such is the fate of the last speaker, I'm afraid I will repeat things, but well, I will try to keep my intervention on these points short and I will conclude with some concluding remarks.
First the systemic... Yes. First the systemic challenges, these are issues that affect how the system functions as a whole. And we heard claims from BusinessEurope saying that there is, we have lack of data and I cannot agree more, but not when it comes to psychosocial risk. There is another more telling example and that's the lack of reliable exposure data on carcinogens and other hazardous substances.
We need this data not only to set exposure limits, but to make sure that we are focusing on the right priorities. Yet the monitoring remains fragmented and with most data staying within companies. So there is a need to ensure that workplace exposure data are systematically collected, they are of good quality and are used for prevention.
There is also a very strong case here for introducing a personal exposure passport for workers exposed to hazardous chemicals. This would allow workers to keep a record of their exposure history throughout their careers, even when changing jobs and employers. I also agree that we lack data when it comes to occupational diseases, but we also see a persistent underreporting of occupational accidents.
Missing the data on accidents and occupational diseases, the weak recognition of occupational diseases and reporting of occupational diseases against limits our quality of evidence for prevention. And then other issue I would like to bring into your attention is what I would like to call the invisible workers. These are people who are often missing from the statistics, the self-employed or bogus self-employed, migrant workers in precarious jobs and workers in complex subcontracting chains. This links directly to a bigger challenge. How do we keep workplace prevention effective in a labor market that is increasingly fragmented and driven by subcontracting and gig work?
Think of all the growing number of self-employed workers out there who are simply not covered by the OSH framework. Traditionally, responsibility and incentives were closely aligned. Employers were responsible for workers' health and safety and had a clear interest, direct interest in prevention because workers often stayed with them for most of their careers.
Today, subcontracting chains and more fragmented employment have weakened that link. Responsibility, control, and incentives are no longer matching automatically. And the result is a prevention gap. Evidence shows higher risks further down subcontracting chains and greater exposure for workers in insecure forms of employment. The challenge is therefore to ensure that responsibility follows control and that all workers, regardless of their contractual status or position in the supply chain, deserve or get the effective protection they need.
We also see, well, it was mentioned that there is a strong language on gender-sensitive approaches. That may be so, but in practice we see a lack of it, meaning that a lot of risks that affect women are under-recognized.
Understanding these issues requires consideration of both biological and social factors. If we look at the data today, we see that women show higher rates of sickness absence due to psychosocial risks, while men account for the vast majority of fatal accidents. When you take a gender perspective, that allows you to understand why this is happening and so to be able to introduce effective interventions.
And it brings to mind the very famous quote by Johan Cruyff who said, you will only see it once you understand it. And as once we look closer at the workplace, the next thing we realize is that it is aging fast. Combined with labor shortages and growing psychosocial pressures, this is reshaping occupational risks and makes us should give us the message that prevention has to be lifelong and not just one-off fixes. Now turning to the specific risks, I will start with chemicals. We still have chemical risks.
We still have 100,000 fatalities every year in Europe due to occupational cancers. And much still remains hidden.
Risks, for example, from pesticides are still seriously under-recognized, and there are increasing emerging new risks. I will use the example, which is only as an example, of crystalline silica. We know it for years that it is an issue. We know that the current limit value corresponds to a very high risk for the health, and therefore it is very welcome that this value is being revised.
But we also have a concern when it comes to engineered stone, which is a product that contains a very high silica levels and causes severe illness in young workers after only a few years of exposure. And as a result, some countries are introducing strict restrictions and given the risks involved and the availability of safer alternatives, that is easy to understand. This is an example because the same to give this simple message that exposure limits matter and the ongoing work to develop the revised and revised them is essential, but reducing risks will also depend on how workplace practices change.
But we had the issue of the critical raw materials and advanced materials. They are key indeed for the economy. But their production and processing can bring different sometimes serious occupational safety and health risks. We hear that there is a pressure to relax occupational safety and health rules when it comes to these materials in the name of strategic autonomy.
But I think if you ask me this is a very false trade-off because precisely because these materials are so important, they need to be produced and used safely, otherwise you shift the whole costs to the health systems and the workers. Now, previous speakers mentioned psychosocial risks. I would not, the only thing I want to share with you when it comes to that is this is a core health and safety issue. We have enough data proving that it is an issue. But what we also see, we don't see a lack of effort.
We see that there are a lot and multiple national laws, guidelines, social partner agreements that exist on this issue. But instead of providing clarity, this patchwork creates complexity and leads to inconsistent and uneven protection across the EU. And we also have the evidence that clear legislation can effectively drive action.
So the point this point now is that there is a role for focused EU measures in improving and aligning existing practices.
Dimitra Theodori
Yes. Then I will sorry, I was not looking at you, so I will not go then I will I will not because a lot of the issues that are mentioned by other speakers are repeated in my in my presentation. Okay.
So then I would like to come to the final slides because I think that whatever the issues are, whether they are systemic gaps or specific messages, we need to make sure that our prevention and our evidence keeps pace with change. And there is still a lot of significant work ahead us.
And to get there, the Advisory Committee on Safety and Health will continue to play a vital role, delivering the structured expert consensus we need to overcome our practical implementation challenges. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. We will now move on to the questions and answers session, starting with the group representatives or coordinators for one and a half minutes. And we will start with Mrs. Abadía Jover from EPP.
Maravillas Abadía Jover
Spanish. Gracias, presidenta, y gracias también a los ponentes.
Creo que la estrategia ha sido un buen camino sobre el que trabajar para tener un mercado laboral seguro y productivo, sin duda. Sin embargo, me gustaría poner el foco sobre lo que no aparece en la estrategia, sobre un grupo de trabajadores que históricamente ha quedado fuera del debate europeo sobre la seguridad y la salud en el trabajo: las fuerzas y cuerpos de seguridad. La propia directiva marco 89/391 reconoce la especificidad de estas profesiones. Sin embargo, durante la, durante décadas, la Unión Europea no ha desarrollado un marco específico para abordar los riesgos inherentes a quienes protegen nuestra seguridad.
Y hablamos de riesgos muy concretos: agresiones, violencia deliberada, lesiones graves e incluso la muerte en el ejercicio de sus funciones. Europa ha regulado riesgos específicos en numerosos sectores, por lo que resulta difícil explicar a los ciudadanos que quienes se enfrentan diariamente a la violencia criminal, al narcotráfico, a las mafias, a la delincuencia organizada, siguen sin contar con un reconocimiento específico. Durante demasiado tiempo se ha tratado a la policía como una excepción, pero cuando miles de agentes son atacados cada día y cada año en Europa, cuando decenas pierden la vida en acto de servicio, ya no estamos ante una excepción, estamos ante un riesgo estructural y así lo acaba de reconocer el pleno del Parlamento Europeo en su última sesión. Por ello me gustaría preguntar si consideran que el actual marco normativo protege adecuadamente a estos profesionales y qué medidas concretas piensan impulsar durante esta legislatura para reconocer y abordar estos riesgos específicos. Estos profesionales llevan muchos años esperando y no pueden esperar más.
Gracias.
Marianne Vind
Thank you chair. The current framework on health and safety at work has set important directions.
Zero tolerance on work-related deaths was the right ambition. Now the strategy is coming to an end, but we are far from the finish line. In 2023, almost 3,300 died in workplace accidents in the EU. So the next strategy must give us real tools. One where management takes responsibility before the accident happens, not after.
And we need stronger labor inspections across EU, so companies should not compete on poor working conditions. At the same time, AI and algorithm management can turn up the speed and pressure and take control away from workers.
We already know that mental health at work and stress are huge problems across Europe. We know it in the last strategy too. So now it is time to move from awareness to rules. As William Cockburn also mentioned, this is the biggest cause of lost working days, so it's also expensive for the employers. Earlier today, I met with frontline workers who told me about being shouted at, spat on, and worse, just for doing their job.
What do we think that does to a person? If we are serious about making progress, when will the Commission start on a directive on the prevention of psychosocial risk at work? Mr. Olsen already mentioned the Quality Job Act. So I'm very curious to hear you elaborate on this and whether psychosocial risk will be included. Thank you.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Gracias, presidente. Mucho gracias a los diferentes invitados.
Gracias, señorías. Hoy hablamos de una estrategia sobre seguridad e higiene laboral que parece dar pie a una nueva legislación, ley de trabajos de calidad. Antes de abordar este tema, me gustaría preguntar cuál es el grado de seguimiento o de implementación de la directiva llamada marco de seguridad y salud del trabajo 89/391. ¿Por qué no antes de presentar o proponer una nueva legislación no se plantea una modificación de la anterior, no? Que además esta nueva realmente amplía, no se queda solamente en el tema de la seguridad laboral, sino que también aborda algo que no es tan claro que sea competencia de la Unión Europea como son parte de lo que es el entorno laboral o las condiciones de trabajo.
Me imagino que los resultados dependerán mucho de los países, ¿no?
¿Se podrían mejorar los logros? ¿En qué sectores hay recorrido y objetivos de mejora? Por ejemplo, los médicos, ¿no? En España a los médicos les falta una legislación acorde con 2026. Estamos viendo las mayores huelgas de la profesión.
Hay una tasa de suicidio de médicos más alta de toda Europa y también de todas las profesiones. Cada día se agreden a más de dos médicos. Encadenan guardias de 24 horas con jornadas laborales completas. El 94% sufre burnout y es todavía mayor cuando son médicos menores de 30 años.
Durante la pandemia tuvieron que atender a los pacientes sin equipos de protección adecuados. ¿Tienen algún comentario o si están al día de la situación que sufren los médicos en España? Gracias.
Chiara Gemma
Grazie, Presidente. Grazie a tutti i relatori per l'interessante contributo. Qualche riflessione. Mentre ci avviciniamo alla conclusione del quadro strategico ventuno-ventisette, credo sia importante partire da una valutazione concreta dei risultati raggiunti e delle sfide che restano aperte.
In questi anni sono stati compiuti progressi importanti nella promozione della salute e sicurezza del lavoro, ma il contesto nel quale operiamo sappiamo tutti che è cambiato profondamente. La digitalizzazione, l'intelligenza artificiale, le nuove forme di organizzazione del lavoro, l'invecchiamento della popolazione attiva e la crescente complessità dei processi produttivi stanno modificando la natura stessa dei rischi professionali. Per questo motivo, il prossimo quadro strategico dovrà concentrarsi meno sulla produzione di nuove regole e più sui risultati che vogliamo raggiungere. Credo che la vera sfida non è aumentare la complessità normativa, ma ridurre concretamente gli incidenti, le malattie professionali e le morti sul lavoro, rafforzando prevenzione, formazione e applicazione efficace delle norme già esistenti.
L'obiettivo deve essere quello di migliorare concretamente la sicurezza nei posti di lavoro, mantenendo un approccio pragmatico, proporzionato e sostenibile, soprattutto per le piccole e medie imprese che costituiscono l'ossatura del sistema produttivo europeo. Durante la scorsa plenaria, il Parlamento ha adottato una risoluzione che rafforza l'obiettivo Vision Zero.
Alla luce di questo rivolgo due domande alla Commissione. La prima: come intende rafforzare la cultura della prevenzione nel nuovo quadro strategico garantendo misure pratiche proporzionate e sostenibili per le imprese, in particolare per le piccole e medie imprese? E due: come integrerà i rischi emergenti nelle politiche OSH evitando oneri sproporzionati e sostenendo nel contempo innovazione e competitività? Grazie.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. From Renew, I have no speaker on my list. So, from the Greens, Mrs. Ohisalo.
Maria Ohisalo
Thank you very much, Chair, and dear panelists, thank you very much for sharing all these good insights to the topic.
We all know that much has already been achieved on EU OSH, but however there are still a lot of issues that demand further attention. Particularly AI management, psychosocial risks and mental health at work, as well as climate change induced impacts at work must be addressed in the new framework with a renewed vigor. And I'm happy to hear from so many panelists many of these already raised here. We already have recognition that digital transition and climate change, climate crisis we can say, have a huge impact on how the world of work changes. But now it is time to go further.
Occupational safety and health protections have struggled to keep up particularly with the evolving risks from climate change, and the severity of the magnitude of its effects on workers is not widely appreciated and understood. Higher temperatures, UV radiation, air pollution and extreme weather events are impacting occupational safety and health across almost all economic sectors. And the way how EU member states address climate-related OSH risks varies considerably.
And I think mere recommendations are not sufficient anymore. The risks must be addressed in a holistic manner. And we are, for example, preparing an INI report here regarding extreme temperatures at work. And my question goes to the Commission: will you be using the Quality Jobs Act by the end of the year to better address climate change-related OSH risks? And then how do these two processes also link together, this strategic work and also the whole Quality Jobs Act?
Catarina Martins
Obrigada, senhora presidente. Vou falar em português. Eu agradeço as intervenções e queria fazer três questões concretas entre os balanços que aqui deixaram e também os novos desafios. Primeiro, sobre a crise climática e ao encontro também do que acabamos de ouvir, ou seja, sabendo o aumento dos acidentes de trabalho e das mortes durante as ondas de calor, quando teremos a imposição de limites máximos de temperatura vinculativos na União Europeia com critérios? Lembro que em Espanha já existem.
Segunda, uma questão também para todos sobre gestão algorítmica.
A diretiva do trabalho em plataformas proibiu penalizações decididas cegamente por máquinas, mas o controlo algoritmo já se estendeu à logística e à indústria. Gostava de vos ouvir sobre como expandir este tipo de regras transversalmente, prevenindo ritmos de trabalho desumanos e proibindo que os algoritmos penalizem trabalhadores por pausas de segurança. Em terceiro lugar, sobre precariedade laboral. Para quando a responsabilidade solidária automática, obrigando legal e financeiramente a empresa contratante principal por qualquer acidente de trabalho ou doença profissional ocorridos na sua cadeia de produção? A fragmentação de contratos e a subcontratação em cadeia aumentam a invisibilidade das relações de trabalho e até dos trabalhadores, diluem a prevenção dos riscos químicos à saúde mental, geram medo e provocam uma enorme subnotificação de acidentes e mesmo de doenças profissionais.
Ouvimos aqui muitas vezes que é necessário diminuir a burocracia, bem, mas para isso precisamos de normas vinculativas claras e eficazes e é sobre elas que gostaria de vos ouvir também. Obrigada.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much and we will move straight on to the catch-the-eye part so everybody has time to take the floor, and starting with Mrs. Kellemans and it's one minute for the second part. If there are other members who wish to take the floor please indicate this now.
Estelle Ceulemans
Merci Madame la Présidente, je vais m'exprimer en français et j'ai tout d'abord deux questions pour le représentant de BusinessEurope qui est avec nous en ligne. Je voudrais savoir d'abord ce qu'ils entendent, ce qu'il entend ou en tout cas propose lorsqu'il parle de 25 % de simplification administrative qui doit aussi être appliquée au secteur de santé sécurité au travail.
On est ici quand même sur des questions de santé, de sécurité, de vie parfois quand on voit qu'il y a quand même 100 000 morts chaque année à cause de l'exposition à des risques chimiques. Voilà, donc moi je suis un peu surprise et je voudrais vraiment savoir ce qu'il entend par là de manière un petit peu concrète.
Deuxième question, il considère effectivement que la directive cadre de 1989 est son étalon or, elle est suffisante, il ne faut surtout pas la changer. Mais alors comment compte-t-il faire pour un peu rencontrer les trous dans la raquette et les nouveaux défis ? Je pense qu'ils ont suffisamment été cités par les experts aujourd'hui, mais je m'en permets de reciter certains : la santé mentale au travail, travailler dans des conditions extrêmes, le manque d'approche au niveau du genre. Mais donner un autre cas précis aussi puisque quand il dit que tout va être réglé au niveau de la législation des États membres ou par la concertation sociale, quand on voit que la France tout simplement supprime les lieux de concertation sur santé sécurité au travail dans les entreprises, c'est évidemment extrêmement problématique.
Konstantinos Arvanitis
Σας ευχαριστώ. Ήταν πολύ ενδιαφέρουσα αυτή η συνάντησή μας εδώ και το πρώτο σχόλιο είναι ότι μου έκανε ενδιαφέρον θετικό η πλευρά των εργοδοτών. Οι εργοδότες είπαν για ενιαίο φορέα παρατήρησης και συμμόρφωσης, οι εργοδότες. Και μίλησαν και για τον ευρωπαϊκό κατώτατο μισθό. Όμως το βασικό θέμα που υπάρχει είναι ότι στις χώρες, στα κράτη μέλη, δεν έχουμε συλλογικές διαπραγματεύσεις.
Το λέω αυτό γιατί η πλευρά των εργοδοτών έχει προσπεράσει το πολιτικό υποκείμενο που είναι η δεξιά. Γιατί η δεξιά μιλάει για αυτορρύθμιση. Κάτι λοιπόν ακούμε λάθος. Κοιτάξτε σήμερα ποια είναι η είδηση πρόεδρε. Τώρα που μιλάμε πληροφορήθηκα ότι ένας εργάτης 70 χρονών οικοδόμος έχασε τη ζωή του στην πατρίδα μου στα Χανιά.
Εδώ έχουμε δύο ειδήσεις. Πρώτον, ότι ένας άνθρωπος 70 χρονών είναι οικοδόμος και χάνει τη ζωή του. Και δεύτερον, ότι είναι μαύρη εργασία. Δεν ήταν ασφαλισμένος, ήταν ανασφάλιστος.
Επιμένω λοιπόν και κλείνω με αυτό στην υποκαταγραφή των εργατικών δυστυχημάτων και ατυχημάτων, πώς αυτό θα λυθεί και με ποιον τρόπο. Όχι να ελέγξουμε τα κράτη μέλη, να επιβάλουμε στα κράτη μέλη για το δικαίωμα στη ζωή. Ευχαριστώ πρόεδρε.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. I have no further requests for the floor, which means that we will go to the replies. Many questions regarding many different aspects of this topic, so I will go through the whole list of speakers and I must please ask you to limit your answers to two minutes because we will have the Executive Vice-President here at four.
So, Mr. Lores Hernandez from the ETUC.
Ignacio Doreste Hernández
Thank you very much. A very relevant question, all of them. Regarding the occupational safety and health risk of the policemen, yes, this is something that we acknowledge, that they are exposed to specific risk. One of our member organizations is EuroCop, representing trade unions of policemen across the European Union. And indeed, security is a public service.
These workers should be, should be protected. On the need to move from recommendation to rules, yes, I mean, this is at the very core of the ETUC demands. At this regard, I also wanted to praise the European Parliament on the very good report that was done as a follow-up of the strategic framework of the European Commission.
Then, well, we believe that the European Commission has done a very good immense work on the evaluation of the so-called OSH acquis, including also the framework directive. And about the possibility of reforming the framework directive, this is something that the European Trade Union Confederation is against because this piece of legislation is based on very strong principles when it comes to, for example, workers' participation, but also the obligations of employers to provide for risk assessment.
Sorry, I have three minutes for the reply or only one? Two, well, then I can continue. Thank you very much. Regarding the occupational safety and health risk of health workers, this was a very pertinent question as well. We very much agree on that and there is a need to address staff shortages as part of action which is needed when it comes to enhance occupational safety and health.
So there is an interlink there. At this regard, we look with great interest to the work that the European Parliament is currently doing on the protection of psychosocial risk and we believe that there is going to be references to staff shortages as well. All of the elements which have been presented by the speakers I believe are cross-sectoral.
Yes, and then I also wanted to say that there has been a very pertinent question on subcontracting and indeed we believe that by taking action on full chain liability and limitation of the subcontracting chain, we will also have good occupational safety and health outputs. Thank you very much.
Clemens Itserodt
Thank you very much and also thank you for the for the good discussions and the important questions. I will try to of course keep it very brief. So there were some questions directly addressed to BusinessEurope, firstly on the administrative burdens.
I tried to be clear in the in the speech, but I'm I just want to reiterate that this is not about lowering protective standards. It is the point is that compliance efforts must reach the workplace and not just be a paper-based exercise. As we mentioned or as I mentioned, the the framework directive of course covers all risks, which we agree upon in the stocktaking exercise, the tripartite stocktaking exercise. So when we talk about burdens, we mean that we need to go through the OSH acquis and make sure that there that genuine duplication or rules that have no actual effect is removed.
So for instance, when the same chemical is regulated under two different rule sets, so when it's both in the REACH and in the OSH, it should only be one place. So it's not about lowering standards, it's about making things more clear. Then there was also I think a question on the social partner agreements. In this case, we're not again, we're not arguing for the absence of rules, but for rules that are more flexible. So the EU sets binding objectives and then the member states may have more freedom or the social partners may determine how to reach this.
It's not making rules voluntary or lowering the floor. There must, of course, be a guaranteed floor, but the implementation, we believe, could be more flexible, so it's closer to the people on the ground who have to make it work.
I think that's where I will I will stop. Thank you.
Stefan Olsson
Thank you Chair and thank you very much for the questions. I think many of your very very comprehensive questions link to this issue that that we all see with the strategic framework that we need to address them through several means. And and this is what we're trying to do in in if we take the Quality Jobs Act where I cannot I'm not in a position to predict the outcome as we are sure soon launching the second stage consultation of the social partners but as has been expressed we will in that consultation and and then in the act address the issues of psychosocial risks of of temperatures and also a number of other OSH related issues with regard to AI etc.
But I will not try to use a crystal ball, especially since my highest boss will be here in a few minutes to say what that will entail. A few specific points. The security forces were raised.
I think it's important there to just emphasize that that this paragraph in the framework directive refers to specific activities that are pertinent to them. So it is not that for example the gendarme or or the police are not they are not protected by OSH, but it is in the specific a soldier of course will be in wartime affected by by a very big risk. So that type of specific risk, but for example working time or or chemicals that is not directly war related do apply to the security forces.
And I also there was the comment on doctors in Spain. I mean here again what we're looking at is that there is a solid legal framework that implements the EU acquis and that there is a system around that. Specific cases of course will always come up and when they do we try together with the European Parliament and the Council to address them. But I think in general for example Spain has a very impressive implementation of the acquis. So this is really again about this and I think that's what the what we can do together in the strategic framework to see okay there is the legal side but there's also the labor inspectorate that was raised by another honorable member and the financing of this and their tools.
So so how can we make it work de facto on the ground? And and that's what it's all about. I think I I think there are just two misunderstandings. I think that that it is very important to see that we are not opening up the framework directive. This is a framework strategy and the acquis is broader than the framework directive.
We have another 24 directives where we can do changes. And as the ETUC said, opening up the framework directive would be a bit risky, we think, as it does lay down this principle of anticipation and employer responsibility that we are unique with in Europe.
So, I'll stop there. Sorry for going over time, Chair.
William Cockburn
Yes, thank you, and thank you for the honorable members for the insightful questions. A number of points around vulnerable groups, sectors. We've indeed met with social partners from armed forces and heard about the day-to-day risks that they have, and as the Commission said, there are protections within, within limits. The current strategy put a focus on healthcare workers as part of their preparedness actions following the experience of the pandemic, and indeed EU-OSHA was tasked with carrying out research and identifying good practices. And I'm pleased to say that that work is, is progressing well.
This is a collective that as the speaker as the honorable member mentioned experiences the highest levels of risk across various areas and some of the worst outcomes across all sectors so certainly a priority. Also as other members mentioned underreporting in construction I would add also in agriculture and EU-OSHA will be is already started research on work-related accidents highlighting the need for lower underreporting better recording of accidents but also of course importantly supporting supporting prevention.
Various points also made about third-party violence, which again is something that in our trends we're seeing as an increase. As regards climate change, I would draw attention to the heat guide that we produced at the request of the Commission, which has been one of our highest downloaded publications, so reinforcing what you said about that importance.
Artificial intelligence in worker management likewise an issue that we've been looking at closely and highlighting the the good proposals in the platform workers directive on transparency and algorithmic management. Compliance is is at the heart of this and it's something that we've been looking at for for many years through our workplaces survey, our employer focused survey, ESENER. And again, as I mentioned, the focus is really on micro and small enterprises. And there we identify three broad groups: those who are actively looking to improve their prevention practices, another group that take action in reaction to an adverse event or to an inspection, and then there's a third group that is not even thinking about health and safety at all.
Maybe they're at the end of a supply chain under a very difficult economic situation and have other priorities. We need to tackle this through awareness-raising tools and support as well as legislation, and I think that comes through clearly in our research. I'll leave it there and thank you again for a very enriching exchange.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. I just got word that the Executive Vice-President is a bit late. So for ILO and ETUI you can use a bit more than two minutes if you want to. I'm sorry about not treating everyone equally, but starting with Mr. Pintado Nunes from the ILO.
Joaquim Pintado Nunes
Yes, thank you so much. So just also some observations in terms of how the ILO can support the ongoing discussion and forthcoming work. I heard some references to all that relates to different categories of workers, including police forces and other public service workers. So just confirming that in terms of application of Convention No. 155, one of the fundamental ILO conventions, so the convention does apply to all workers, including all workers in the public service.
So there is no exception. But again, member states may use, you know, a flexibility clause that does allow for exceptions for groups, you know, in relation to which in the context of the country, there could be special problems of application of the convention, after of course consultation with the social partners.
So it may happen that you know any given country in the EU may have excluded a given group of workers due to problems of special nature that of course would need to be informed to the ILO. Also many references to all that relates to climate and myself you know I also addressed that issue but also a remark that there is a standard a convention that was adopted last year in June. So a new convention on biological hazards in the working environment convention number 192 that also is quite relevant in terms of indirectly affecting the possible effects of climate change for example in what concerns the expansion to different regions of vector-borne diseases.
And this is what we have been seeing that in Europe we may have, you know, some diseases that were not so common to, you know, to happen in EU member states that, you know, may become a challenge in the near future exactly because climate is changing and, you know, insects and other vectors may also be moving or, you know, being more frequent in in in the European space.
Also in terms of all the discussions around platform work and digitalization, so you all are aware of course that this is the second year of discussion here at the ILO on a possible standard or standards on platform work that also addresses occupational safety and health. And as a matter of fact, you know, also some of the questions that were exchanged here in terms of, you know, responsibilities, liabilities, direct employer, other stakeholders, those are also addressed by the the standards being discussed this year, exactly, you know, starting this week.
But of course it's too early to know what will be the outcome of this discussion. So this is just what I wanted to stress. Thank you.
Dimitra Theodori
Yes, thank you very much. Very interesting. I think that many of the previous speakers have covered a lot of the questions I would like to. The question regarding the police forces is already covered. When it comes to, I would like to come back to two things.
One is climate change and heat stress.
I have had many speakers expressing their concerns about that. I think I can confirm this is one of the priorities that we need to address, not only because it's a serious risk that affects the whole Europe, but also because it's a risk that we know how to deal with it. So that's for me the most frustrating part in this discussion. We know exactly how to deal with this risk and that's an extra argument, if you ask me, to act upon it. It's a high actionable area.
So when it comes to underreporting of accidents, I have also mentioned it in my presentation. This is a reality. It applies, it is not relevant for all member states, but for many member states it is. And there are also a lot of workers that simply fall off the statistics, as I said. So I don't want to take more of your time.
I think that was the most important, the two most important things that I would like to add. Yes.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. That brings us to the end of this hearing, and I would again like to thank all speakers and all colleagues for this exchange. I think it has clearly shown that even though there is a high level of health and safety measures at the workplace currently foreseen in the EU, this is not a topic where policymakers and legislators can rest. So we need to continue further strengthening our efforts to reach the highest level of health and safety protection at work as possible. And let's not shy away from calling for the necessary measures and introducing a strategic framework which will guarantee healthy and safe workplaces, no matter how the labor market will evolve in the future.
So thank you all very much, and we will continue straight away once the Executive Vice-President gets here.
So members, according to the information we have gotten, the Executive Vice-President should be here any minute. Any minute now.
So, dear Executive Vice-President, dear colleagues and distinguished guests, on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, I would like to welcome you to today's exchange of views on the European Commission's recently announced social package.
And I also have to say, with all due respect, in the spirit of good cooperation, I hope in the future it is possible to start more on time than now, because the members of the committee are also busy people. So I think half an hour is a record in my committee, and I like to stick to the schedules and also make sure everybody gets the chance to take the floor. So let's move on with the issues today. We know that we are living in a time when many Europeans are struggling with the rising housing costs, energy insecurity, precarious work, demographic pressures and growing inequalities.
We also know that progress when it comes to the targets based on the European Pillar of Social Rights has not been near as as good as it should be, especially when it comes to the poverty reduction target. So against this backdrop, of course, the ambition to strengthen social inclusion, reduce poverty and support persons with disabilities and promote equal opportunities deserves both recognition and close attention from our committee. So, while many details are still to come, this package is an important step in the right direction, and at the same time a number of important questions remain open, and I am sure that the members will be raising them today during this important discussion.
So, our committee stands ready to engage constructively with the Commission and all stakeholders to ensure that this package becomes not just a statement of intent, but a real instrument for improving the lives of people across the Union. So we really look forward to today's discussion and would like to start by giving the floor to you, Executive Vice-President, for the first 15 minutes.
Roxana Mînzatu
Thank you, and I express my full apologies for this big delay. So, I'm really, I'm really sorry. But I'm very happy to be here today to exchange on our social package adopted on the 6th of May. It has been the result of extensive consultations, months of consultations at all levels, also with the intergroup in the European Parliament, but also with people experiencing poverty, civil society, a lot, a lot of stakeholders. That being said, I need to thank first and foremost to the European Parliament for the very strong involvement in the process.
And although, as I've said in the plenary, it's not a perfect, is not a perfect package, but it is for sure a better package because the Parliament gave so much input and support and push to this.
As you know it's it's based the package is based on four pillars the first ever EU anti-poverty strategy the strengthened EU child European child guarantee the the proposal for a council recommendation on housing exclusion and the communication on enhancing the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030. Now on the anti-poverty strategy why act with a strategy at this moment?
Simple answer is because the impact of poverty in Europe is significant. One out of five Europeans experience a risk of poverty and social exclusion. Things will become worse if we do not act urgently. We are looking at numbers on child poverty, for example, that we measure against the targets of the pillar and things are not improving, just to give one example. And the numerous shocks that are occurring can also very easily make this one out of five even more significant.
So, with less than four years to go towards our 2030 targets, including the one on anti-poverty, we see that we are not getting a realistic pathway towards achieving that goal, and so we really need to accelerate. Now, this strategy is not the full accelerator, but it does provide for a clear roadmap with concrete deliverables. I would communicate about these deliverables on three directions. First, we discussed about jobs, because work remains the most powerful route out of poverty. Of course, we don't speak about any types of jobs, we speak about quality jobs with fair wages, with good working conditions.
Also, we look at jobs and employment in the anti-poverty strategy from the perspective that one in 12 workers across the European Union is considered working poor. That is about 16 million people who have jobs and can barely manage life with the income that they have. And then there are more than 50 million people in Europe who are outside the labor market. A big part of them, people who could work, but still remain outside the labor market and at great risk, at greater risk of social exclusion.
And a big part of this category of population is is women, is young people, is people with migrant background, just to name a few of those that are most exposed to poverty because of lack of routes to employment. And this is clearly a loss for everyone, for people that are denied to a chance to build a better future, is for businesses that are struggling to find the talent that they need, but it's also a problem for our children whose prospects are shaped by whether their parents have a job, a good job or not. Finally, obviously, I must say that it's a loss for the taxpayer who will finance more safety net measures for those that are most vulnerable and not helped in due time. Now later this year, the Commission will launch the first stage consultation of our European social partners, that is the first step towards tabling a potential directive on effective activation measures for those excluded from the labour market.
Second pillar on the anti-poverty strategy, access to quality services. People in poverty face systems that are hard to navigate. Many do not know what services they are eligible for or how these services can help them. So we will propose a Council recommendation on integrated access to services so that we are able to address exactly this: a better outreach, fast needs assessment, better cooperation between administrations, integrated support plans, personalized support plans for those in need.
Third, what we are saying is that in order to fight poverty we need to mobilize all actors because it is a collective responsibility. And that's why we are calling on every member state to appoint a national anti-poverty coordinator at the highest political level, if possible in the Prime Minister's office, so that we make sure that poverty is tackled with a whole of government approach, not just in one ministry and also across all governance levels.
We are also looking at how to deepen our partnerships with the Parliament and in particular as I've mentioned with the Intergroup on Fighting Poverty, with the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee, with the private sector and philanthropy through the new Coalition Against Poverty which we plan to launch in the autumn and crucially with people who have experienced poverty themselves. And this through a framework, a new structured dialogue that we are setting up so that we can work effectively with them. Now the scale of what is possible is clear. Just investing an additional 0.25% of the EU's GDP could help 18.5 million people leave poverty behind.
The question is not whether we can afford to act, but is whether we can afford not to act. Second part of our package is strengthening European Child Guarantee. We chose to put such a strong focus on child poverty because we know how important it is to tackle poverty really early. Poverty in childhood is a phenomenon that leaves scars that shape the lifetime of a person. It doesn't just deprive that child of opportunity, it takes away hope, it makes his life perspectives even worse.
The European Child Guarantee has already helped expand access to essential services. Since its launch, 450,000 more children under the age of three have gained access to early childhood care. 850,000 more children have joined school-based activities and school meals programs. But we must go further and ensure that it delivers real change in every child's life. And that is why the Commission plans to develop a new European Child Guarantee card, a simple digital tool to help children in need access the support they are entitled to, making it more visible, coordinated and effective.
And we will build stronger synergies between the Child Guarantee and European Youth Guarantee so that vulnerable children continue to receive support as they become young adults. Third, on the proposal for a Council recommendation on fighting housing exclusion, which comes on top of the European Affordable Housing Plan adopted in December last year. When we speak of housing exclusion, we are not just referring to homelessness, which is still the reality for more than one million people across Europe. We are also speaking about people who have a roof over their heads but might be only one shock away from housing exclusion. We think of students, of single parents, of low-income workers, but also the many middle-class families who took on mortgages at variable interest rates and now struggle to repay them.
We are putting forward a new approach to housing exclusion, moving from emergency responses to prevention and long-term solutions.
So if I had to sum it up in two words, housing first is the principle. Our proposal sets out measures that Member States can take to better support those most at risk of losing their homes. Early warning systems, person-centered support like debt counseling or targeted rental support, these are just some examples. We will also help governments expand affordable and social housing by mobilizing investment, reusing existing homes and supporting diverse housing models.
Finally, just a few words on the communication on enhancing the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030. Around 90 million Europeans live with a disability. For too many of them, rights that exist on paper are still not a reality in daily life, whether it is access to work, education, transport or independent living. This is not only a question of fairness and equal rights, it is also a question of Europe's social and economic strength. That is why we are reinforcing our strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030 with a clear focus on delivery.
We will roll out concrete tools like the digital European disability card and the European parking card to improve accessibility across transport and public services.
And we will help make independent living a reality for persons with disabilities. We will launch an EU alliance to support the creation of centers for independent living, backed by EU funding, and step up actions for inclusive education and employment. With an aging population and a growing number of acquired disabilities, disability can happen to everyone at any point in time, so it is something that concerns us all. In the end, I just want to say that I hear your calls, you first said it in the plenary as well, disappointment that there is no fresh money or that there are not strong enough binding tools to make this strategy work on the ground.
This package is indeed calibrated, it respects the treaty framework while reflecting also today's political realities. But I think that we need to acknowledge that this package is not just pioneering, it is practical. It will help Member States act faster, more effectively, combining jobs and support in a way that works, with guidance and measures to improve fight against poverty, including child poverty. It is definitely not enough, we all agree that the challenge is much greater, and to all those questioning EU-level social legislation, it will help Member States tackle shared challenges.
It will help them do that by tackling insecure jobs, labour shortages, high housing costs, lack of childcare, complicated access to support. It helps them doing so through legislation that is justified, not just for the sake of it. It's a very long speech, so I would rather end it now. Please, sorry, I don't know, colleagues. I would ask, answer your questions.
Li Andersson
Okay, thank you very much. And we will then move on to the questions from the group coordinators or other group representatives. And I thought I would take two questions at a time. So two questions, answers, two questions, answers. Two minutes each, starting with Mr Radtke from EPP.
Dennis Radtke
Yes, thank you, Chair. I'm going to speak in German. You have the right channel? Is it working? Is it working now?
Funktioniert's? Klappt? Ja? Klappt oder klappt nicht?
Funktioniert es oder nicht? Gibt mir jemand ein Signal, wenn es funktioniert? Ja, das ist super. Ja, dann fange ich an. Ja, Frau Vorsitzende, liebe Frau Vizepräsidentin, liebe Roxana, herzlichen Dank für die Gelegenheit zum Austausch.
Herzlichen Dank für die kurze Übersicht, die du uns hier gegeben hast. Ich meine, die Gesetzgebung, die nun aufgegleist werden soll, wird natürlich hier in diesem Ausschuss mit großer Spannung erwartet, weil die Schwerpunkte in dieser Legislaturperiode natürlich bisher ganz andere waren.
Umso mehr schauen natürlich alle da drauf. Für mich ist aber auch klar, aus meiner Perspektive, das, was jetzt als Erstes kommen soll, kann eigentlich nicht losgelöst betrachtet werden von dem, was sonst noch in der Pipeline ist. Und das ist für mich zum einen die Diskussion, wie geht's weiter mit dem ESF+ und zum anderen natürlich auch das Paket, was in der zweiten Jahreshälfte ja kommen soll, Stichwort Fair Labour Mobility, weil wenn wir am Ende über soziale Dimensionen reden, kann man das nicht losgelöst voneinander betrachten.
Und für mich ist auch klar, wir können in diesem Paket nette Maßnahmen auf den Weg bringen, wenn wir aber sozusagen an der wichtigsten Grundlage für Kofinanzierung von vielen Projekten gleichzeitig rütteln, dann ist es nicht nur wertlos, sondern das ist kontraproduktiv. Und deswegen ist es für mich ganz essenziell, dass wir diese Diskussion nicht losgelöst voneinander führen, sondern dass wir diese Diskussion ganzheitlich führen. Und kann nur nochmals auch darum bitten, dass wenn dieser Prozess jetzt aufgegleist wird, das in einer Art und Weise zu tun, die es für uns im Parlament am Ende auch händelbar macht, damit wir am Ende auch wirklich zu einem Gesamtpaket kommen, das für die große Mehrheit hier im Parlament vertretbar ist und das uns in den entsprechenden Aspekten auch nach vorne bringt. Danke schön.
Gabriele Bischoff
Dann kann ich vielleicht mal ausnahmsweise in Deutsch auch weitermachen und kann da sehr gut anschließen. Wir begrüßen wirklich sehr, dass das Paket vorgelegt wurde. Wir sehen das auch in einer Linie auf der einen Seite mit dem Quality Jobs Act, aber insbesondere ist wichtig, wenn wir Armut wirklich bekämpfen wollen, dass wir sicherstellen, dass wir die Ressourcen dafür haben.
Also ich will ein Beispiel geben. Ich war letzte Woche in der Grünen Woche in einem Housing First Projekt der Caritas für Frauen spezifisch ausgerichtet. Ein ESF-Projekt, was wirklich unwahrscheinlich erfolgreich ist.
Zu wissen, dass wir allein in meinem Land 40 % weniger Mittel haben werden für solche Projekte, wo wir sehen, dass der Bedarf eigentlich größer wird, denn wir schaffen es ja nicht, die Armut einzugrenzen, ist wirklich das, das müssen wir zusammen sehen und wirklich dafür kämpfen, dass wir nicht nur die Ressourcen haben, sondern dass sie auch festgelegt sind dann tatsächlich zur Armutsbekämpfung hier. Und die Zahlen sprechen ja hier für sich tatsächlich, dass wir hier eben auch gucken, und das ist richtig, was für Rahmenbedingungen müssen wir schaffen, dass die Menschen, von denen du gesprochen hast, Roxana, die eben außerhalb des Arbeitsmarktes sind, wirklich auch gute Rahmenbedingungen haben. Dazu gehören Kinderbetreuung zum Beispiel, dazu gehören gute Schulen, damit sie wirklich dann auch am Arbeitsleben partizipieren können.
Deshalb die Richtung stimmt, aber wir müssen es schaffen, die notwendigen Ressourcen dafür festzulegen. Wenn wir das nicht hinbekommen, dann ist es, als würde man einen Tisch haben, wo die Beine wirklich nicht ausbalanciert sind. Das wird nicht funktionieren. Und ich glaube, wenn wir nicht dafür sorgen, dass wir ausreichend Partizipation an der Gesellschaft haben, dann wird es enorme Auswirkungen für unsere Gesellschaft haben.
Deshalb Unterstützung für die Vorschläge. Wir wissen, die Kompetenzen sind da sehr begrenzt, aber wir haben die Möglichkeit, die Ressourcen dafür zu schaffen und das müssen wir jetzt auch wirklich zusammen hinkriegen. Der Beschäftigungsausschuss hat das hier als klare gemeinsame Position, aber wir müssen das richtig stark in die Verhandlungen bringen, sonst fürchte ich, wird es in weiten Teilen ein leeres Versprechen bleiben.
Roxana Mînzatu
Thank you for many comments. Today is not my day, I tell you. For many comments, not necessarily maybe questions. I agree with you. I think that the strategy is also a driver in the negotiations.
I agree with you. I think the existence of this new strategy should be a driver in the negotiations between co-legislators on the budget, on the ESF+ included, on the national plans, on the whole MFF. Because in the end, resources, but also administrative capacity, the right measures and policies combined will generate the impact that we have.
For example, on the discussion that we have on activation policy and the potential activation directive, what we say is that we need the right combination between pathways toward employment and support through different types of services and many times benefits. The combination, the personalized, the integrated approach is the one that delivers.
And many times this is about exactly supporting equality between men and women because it is meant to also support a lot of women that are taking care of their children and unable to continue their career due to lack of childcare, for example. Or a person with disability who would be able to perform a certain type of role professionally but cannot do that due to different, you know, lack of adaptation of workplace, lack of, you know, support services that they would need so that they can go to work. And this is quite important. And in all of this, ESF does play a role because with ESF we have developed so much of our European capacity to deliver social services. So I cannot say that I disagree to the least with you.
I would not say that the strategy is only budget. So the value of the strategy resides also in how supported it will be financially, yes, by the whole of the MFF, not just ESF, but by the whole cohesion policy. But it is also about the type of political ambition and direction that we set. And I think, for example, on child guarantee, while I totally agree that it's important to invest more resources, it is also important that we know that every child effectively has access within reach to those five basic services. And if not, that we can do something about it, which currently is not the case.
That's why we pilot this European child card. It's important to make sure that, you know, it's not just statistics helping children, it's every child really knowing case by case what their situation is.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.