Committee on Employment and Social Affairs Ordinary meeting
Legende
Markierungen im Transkript
- Text Aktuell abgespielter Satz
- Text Suchergebnis
- Text Redebeitrag, auf den der geöffnete Link verweist
Klicken Sie auf einen Satz, um das Video ab dieser Stelle abzuspielen. Markieren Sie Text, um ihn mit Redner, Zeitstempel und Link zu zitieren.
Weitere Optionen
Versatz
Versatz des Transkripts
Exportieren
Live aufgezeichnet
Versionen dieses Videos
- Aufzeichnung Endgültige Version · 23. Juni 2026
- Live aufgezeichnet Live übertragen am 23. Juni 2026Angezeigt
Die Transkripte können sich von Version zu Version leicht unterscheiden.
EMPL European Parliament
Ihren Sitzungen folgenBrigitte VANDENBERRE
Weg met die termen hoger en lager. Weg met onbetaalde stages. Want laten we ervoor zorgen dat er diploma's komen die in de hele Unie geldig zijn. Dat we zorgen dat het Erasmus-programma voor iedereen toegankelijk is. En dat mbo'ers en vakmensen meepraten aan de tafels waar beleid wordt gemaakt waar zij mee te maken krijgen.
Zodat we niet alleen over mensen praten, maar ook met mensen praten. Als wij die echte Europese Unie van vaardigheden willen, dan moeten we stoppen met het rangschikken van talent.
Dan moeten we niet meer spreken over hoger en lager, maar ieder pad als een pad van waarde zien. En als we zorgen dat iedere jongere, ongeacht de gekozen route, het gevoel krijgt dat haar talent of zijn talent ertoe doet, dan pas kunnen we bouwen aan een sterk Europa voor de toekomst. Dank u wel.
Thank you so much, Mr. Van de Meer, for your presentation. And we then move on to the shadow rapporteurs for two minutes each. Mrs. Vincze is represented by Mrs. Romana Tomc. So, please, the floor is yours.
Romana Tomc
Hvala lepa.
Thank you very much for the floor. Unfortunately, my colleague Angelika can't be with us today and I will read her points on the boosting skills in the Union report. Thank you, rapporteur, for this very solid draft report and thank you to all colleagues who have tabled amendments. The report already goes in a very good direction, but Angelika nevertheless submitted a number of amendments to reinforce a few key points.
First, she wanted to put a stronger emphasis on dual VET systems and apprenticeships which have proven highly successful in preparing young people for the labour market. Second, she believes we need to further strengthen the role of enterprises, especially SMEs, as key partners in vocational education and training. She also focused on making VET more attractive through better progression pathways, lifelong learning opportunities and more flexible learning formats including micro-credentials.
In addition, she highlighted the importance of Erasmus+ mobility and the need to make participation easier, particularly for SMEs and apprentices. She also believes that we should build on existing European and national structures and avoid creating unnecessary administrative burdens when implementing the Union of Skills. Finally, Angelica underlined the importance of skills mobility, recognition of qualifications, and the contribution of VET to Europe's competitiveness and industrial transformation. She looks forward to the negotiations and she is confident that together we can deliver a balanced and ambitious report. Thank you.
Romana Jerković
Thank you, Chair. Dear colleagues, first of all, I would like to thank to the rapporteur for a very good work on this important report. There are a few points I would like to highlight and which are also reflected in my amendments. First, vocational education and training is not only about responding to the labour market needs.
It is also about ensuring that the green and digital transitions are fair and create opportunities for everyone. That is why quality jobs must be at the heart of this report, because VET can only become an attractive pathway if it leads to a decent work, fair wages, good working conditions and the real career prospects. At the same time, and here I agree with the rapporteur, that the vocational pathway deserves equal recognition alongside academic education. Second, strong social dialogue is essential. Trade unions and social partners must be closely involved in identifying future skills needed, needs, shaping VET policies, improving curricula and ensuring high quality apprenticeships.
Third, we should strengthen the gender perspective in this report. I think we need to address persistent gender stereotypes in education and career choices and encourage a more balanced participation of women and men across all vocational sectors. To achieve all of this, we must also invest in the people who make vocational education possible.
Quality VET depends on well-supported teachers, trainers, and workplace mentors. So they need attractive working conditions, opportunities for continuous professional development, and clear career prospects so they can provide learners with the skills they need in a rapidly changing labor market. Thank you so much.
Thank you very much. And from the Patriots, Mrs. De La Pisa Carrión.
Gracias, presidente, señorías. Agradecemos...
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Agradecemos al ponente un informe concreto y alineado con los avances que consideramos oportuno hacer en la formación profesional en Europa para generar las competencias que atienden las necesidades de la sociedad y también la vocación de las personas. El primer paso es hacer atractiva la formación profesional, que no se ha dignificado o incluso degradado y hay una mala percepción de estos oficios. Este término oficio es un concepto que no tiene una traducción similar en inglés. Por eso hemos lamentado no poder hacer las enmiendas en español, ya que es un concepto que denomina las profesiones que implican una presencia y puesta en práctica, pero con una connotación positiva en sí misma, incluso con un prestigio, ¿no?
De hecho, en la actualidad adolecemos y hay escasez de este tipo de profesionales que den servicios esenciales para la sociedad.
Y se está originando un cuello de botella en áreas tan necesarias como la vivienda, tanto para creación como mantenimiento, viabilidad del sector primario, que es quien nos procura alimento, o el sector de los cuidados. Este tipo de profesiones no se relacionan siempre con la transición verde y digital. Por eso no vemos apropiado que este informe le dé a estas transiciones tanta prioridad. Es necesario dignificar y reconocer su específica contribución sin tratar de perseguir un igualamiento entre profesiones, ya que este concepto de jerarquía, que también el informe intenta eliminar, puede ser adecuado para ordenar las funciones y responsabilidades y reconocer las competencias, las habilidades y los conocimientos específicos bajo principios como el del esfuerzo, la competencia, la experiencia y la excelencia.
Los oficios se han ido renovando entre generaciones y es imprescindible que esto este sentimiento de continuidad y pertenencia se mantenga para poder afrontar un futuro con seguridad y poder así incorporar la innovación. Ya acabo.
Estamos en un momento crucial para orientar un futuro todavía incierto pero lleno de oportunidades. La tecnología nos permitirá llegar más allá como seres humanos y como sociedad en sectores como la salud, la energía. Pero no podemos olvidar que hay necesidades que siguen allí y que además son aquellas que son esenciales porque atienden las necesidades reales de las personas. Muchas gracias.
And from the ECR, Mrs. Vivaldini is replaced by Mrs. Gemma.
Chiara Gemma
Grazie Presidente. Prendo la parola a nome dell'onorevole Vivaldini. Vorrei cominciare ringraziando la relatrice per l'ottimo lavoro svolto. L'istruzione e la formazione professionale soffrono ancora oggi di svalutazione e investimenti insufficienti rispetto ad altri percorsi formativi.
Il report evidenzia correttamente il ruolo strategico dei VET nel rispondere alla crescente domanda di competenze professionali alimentata dalle transizioni demografiche ed economiche, dal reshoring industriale e dalla necessità di rafforzare la competitività e la manifattura europea. Condividiamo dunque l'approccio della relatrice che chiede una sostanziale valorizzazione dei diversi percorsi di istruzione e la necessità di un maggiore sostegno ai VET. Tale sostegno dovrà naturalmente tener conto delle competenze degli Stati membri in materia di istruzione e formazione, valorizzando il contributo dell'Unione quale piattaforma di cooperazione, coordinamento e condivisione delle migliori esperienze.
Per questo, nell'integrare la proposta, abbiamo presentato alcuni emendamenti che sottolineano la necessità di rafforzare il dialogo tra sistemi formativi, imprese, famiglie e associazioni locali. Un confronto costante è fondamentale sia per orientare i giovani verso scelte più consapevoli e coerenti con le proprie aspirazioni, sia per ridurre il disallineamento tra competenze offerte e richieste dal mercato del lavoro. Oggi, infatti, circa il 22% dei laureati risulta sovraqualificato rispetto alle mansioni svolte, mentre molte piccole e medie imprese segnalano difficoltà nel reperire personale qualificato.
Ringrazio dunque per l'ascolto e auguro ai colleghi e ai rispettivi staff un buon lavoro. Grazie.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And from the Greens? No. Right, I am shadow for the Left, so I will shortly give my own comments. I agree with all the speakers about the importance of this topic for Europe's future well-being, economic vitality and employment, as well as social and ecological sustainability.
And of course also for the skills agenda, because skills do not materialize from thin air, but really if we want to be successful with the skills agenda, we also need to recognize the importance of high-quality vocational education and training systems to be able to reach this goal.
So in recent years, the importance and value of VET has received more recognition within the EU, but as has been mentioned, it is still not on an equal footing compared to more academic studies and pathways.
So a lot of work remains to be done and I really think that European Parliament can have an very important role in emphasizing this. Some points, I think it's important to stress. First is the importance of vocational education being inclusive, that we also need to pay attention to the well-being of students and teachers. An inclusive and accessible vocational education and training also plays a key role in supporting learners at risk of exclusion from the labor market. It promotes equal opportunities and also strengthens social cohesion.
So this is important both from the point of view of young students but also for older learners that are already in working life. So I want to stress the importance of individualized support and also the importance of special education professionals, psychologists and assistants.
Secondly, increasing the attractiveness, social recognition, remuneration and working conditions of VET teaching profession is essential for recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, which is a precondition for a functioning education system. And thirdly, for us to be able to create a skills agenda that can really address skill shortages and our responses to the digital and green transitions, we also need to create an individual subjective right to lifelong learning, upskilling and reskilling, as was proposed in the Draghi report on European competitiveness, and make sure that all vocational education qualifies and credentials should offer clear pathways for further studies, so that we have no closed doors in our education systems. Also want to thank the rapporteur for a very good report, looking forward to our cooperation.
So, we do not have the rapporteur from the CULT committee present, as I understand. Are there any other members that wish to take the floor under catch-the-eye on this point? Yes, Mrs. Moratti, please, one minute.
Thank you, Chair, I will speak in Italian. Ringrazio la relatrice per il suo ottimo lavoro, perché le priorità che stiamo discutendo toccano il cuore della strategia europea delle competenze. Vorrei segnalare alcuni punti. Il primo è l'inclusione dei giovani NEET.
Letizia Moratti
Non possiamo accettare che una parte delle nostre generazioni resti esclusa dai percorsi di istruzione, formazione e lavoro. Serve un approccio realmente personalizzato, fondato su orientamento, tutoraggio, mentorship, capace di accompagnare ogni giovane verso percorsi formativi e professionali concreti. La seconda priorità è la mobilità delle competenze. Un vero mercato unico del lavoro richiede che le qualifiche accademiche e professionali siano riconosciute in modo più rapido e, dove possibile, automatico tra gli Stati membri.
Questo implica rafforzare il ruolo dello European Qualification Framework e basare sempre più il riconoscimento sui risultati di apprendimento, non solo sui percorsi formali. La terza priorità riguarda il rafforzamento dei sistemi di apprendimento basato sul lavoro.
L'alternanza scuola-lavoro attraverso work-based learning, l'apprendistato di qualità e giustamente retribuito e il dual education system deve diventare una componente strutturale dei sistemi educativi europei, non solo nelle imprese, ma anche nella pubblica amministrazione, nei centri di ricerca, nel terzo settore, per offrire ai giovani esperienze formative più ampie e concrete. In sintesi, la sfida europea è semplice ma decisiva: rendere le competenze accessibili, attrattive, riconosciute e realmente spendibili in tutta l'Unione. Grazie.
Thank you very much. I have no further request for the floor, so I will give the floor to the Commission representative, Mrs. Anna Banczyk, for the next three minutes, please.
Anna Banczyk
Thank you very much. I would like to thank the rapporteur for this very comprehensive draft report and for all the valuable comments in this debate.
I would like to first of all say that we fully share your views on the need for more VET professionals, for more recognition for their expertise and for better gender balance. This is given the labour market situation today, the trends that we see for the next ten years, and including growing evidence of the impact of AI on jobs, which point to the need for more VET professionals, notably in technical fields and healthcare. We take also good note of your call to focus the VET strategy on quality, labour market relevance and promotion of VET. At the same time, we also agree that personal development of students and workers is equally important.
Basic skills are foundations for adaptability and mastering career transitions, and they are also key enablers for active citizenship. We also fully support the views regarding VET mobility. The level of VET mobility is unfortunately stagnating at 5%. While there are various challenges to be addressed in facilitating the preparation and organisation of mobility, the main obstacle is clearly the lack of funding. Today, with available Erasmus+ budgets, we are able to finance only around half of quality eligible applications.
That means that if we had the double amount of Erasmus+ budget for mobility, we would be already very close to the 12% target.
We also support the call to link VET to regional industrial and technological clusters. This is indeed the core of our Erasmus+ flagship action, Centers of Vocational Excellence. And I would like to recall that the proposal for European Competitiveness Fund foresees new VET business partnerships, which should also help address the double challenge for SMEs: training of skilled workers and access to the latest technologies in key sectors.
And finally, with the skills portability initiative, we are indeed looking at measures which will address barriers to free movement of workers related to skills and qualifications. These should benefit all workers regardless of the type of qualifications they have, because again, we very much agree with the general message of this draft resolution calling for valuing VET qualifications equally to academic ones. And to finish, I would like to thank again for this timely initiative, which will provide a valuable input to the EU VET strategy, and we are looking forward to the final version of this report in the autumn. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And then the floor back to the rapporteur, Mrs. Van Sparrentak, for concluding remarks, three minutes.
Brigitte VANDENBERRE
Thank you very much all for your responses. Before I'm turning to answer them and to your amendments, I would like to point out that a study that was recently presented to the EMPL Committee, called Rights and Benefits Gaps of Vocational Education and Training Learners and Professionals in the EU, and this clearly underlines both the urgency and the timeliness of this INI. And the findings of this report show that too many VET learners and professionals still face unequal access to rights, support, and opportunities across the EU. And this is exactly why this INI is the answer to that.
Then turning to your comments and the amendments that you tabled. Thank you very much to the EPP group for the amendments tabled by Angelika Winzig. I strongly support the emphasis on the effectiveness of dual and apprenticeship-based systems. These systems are proven pathways into employment and the link you make between to better youth labor market outcomes is very important. I also particularly welcome the focus on clear progression pathways including the EQF level five and above.
This is essential if we want VET to be seen as high-quality and future-orientated choice. Then to the S&D group, I would like to highlight the amendments also from Nikola Djakovic. I strongly agree that VET can only be attractive if it leads to quality jobs. The focus on fair wages, decent working conditions, and job security is fundamental, and I also very much welcome the attention to the attractiveness of teaching of the teaching profession in VET. Because without well-supported teachers, trainers, and workplace mentors, we will not be able to deliver the skills that Europe needs.
I also very much welcome your comments on the gender perspective. Then to the PPE, we agree where you also emphasize the dignity and importance that is needed for VET students and VET professionals. And I think that in this report, we underline that all jobs are important for our, that contribute to our modern and resilient economy. But for me, that economy is based on the green and digital transition, because that is the only future-proof economy that we can go towards.
And all jobs that contribute to that need our full support and the dignity that they deserve. When I go on to the ECR, I very much welcome your contributions also, in particular the proposal to better integrate tertiary VET institutions at EQF level five and six into research and innovation ecosystems. Because this is an important step for the emancipation of VET. And I also strongly support the idea of a European VET diploma that enhances the mobility and visibility of VET qualifications. So thank you very much for that.
Then lastly, thank you very much- oh sorry, I have still two to go.
First of all, the Greens, thank you very much for your comments on behalf also of Benedetta Scuderi. I already talked to her last week about this report and I'm very happy that you broadened the perspective beyond the immediate labour market needs and that you emphasized on the critical thinking, the active citizenship and the media literacy that is essential for everyone today. And also strongly support the focus on the gender gaps in VET and the need to secure the equal success, especially in STEM fields. And of course, aligning the VET with the green transition and the future sustainable sectors is key for Europe's competitiveness and resilience. I took a very short introduction, you know, so I have two minutes I think to spare.
Finally, to come to you, Ms. President, thank you very much for giving me the time. I appreciate very much your amendments, also especially the strong focus on the well-being of students, of teachers and trainers, as well as the better cooperation between VET providers and employers to identify and validate skills more effectively and upskill on the workplace. And I very much agree with you, no closed doors in education.
So to conclude, I'm looking very much forward to the cooperation in the shadow meetings, and I'm convinced that together we can put forward a really ambitious INI on vocational education and training, and we hopefully can reshift the focus of the EU on more equality in educational pathways. Thank you very much.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. Then we move over to the next item on the agenda, the 28th regime corporate legal framework, or EU Inc. And I will start with giving the floor to the rapporteur, Mr. Danielsson, for five minutes.
Johan Danielsson
Thank you, Chair.
As you all know, the Commission proposal on EU Inc aims to create a European company form that would make it easier to establish a business and operate across borders within the EU. The Commission initiative is presented as a key element of the EU's competitiveness agenda, intended to support innovation, investment, and startups through a harmonized corporate framework. While the proposal has been welcomed by some as a way to reduce administrative burdens, it has also raised significant concerns among trade unions, legal experts, business organizations, as well as public authorities. And importantly, I think, the criticism of the proposal is not limited to labor market actors. For example, in my own home country, Sweden, several authorities have warned that the current proposal may create new opportunities for fraud and economic crime.
I will give you some example.
The Swedish Prosecution Authority highlights three main concerns. First, that the fully digital registration and administration process makes it more difficult to verify ownership and company representative. Secondly, it limits national authorities' ability to conduct identity checks and other preventive controls. And thirdly, the absence of minimum capital requirements lowers the barriers for abusive actors. Similar concerns have been raised by the Swedish Enforcement Authority, which sees a substantial risk that the EU in-companies could be used as instrument for criminal activity.
Furthermore, the Swedish police authorities has advised the government not to support the proposal in its current form. The police argue that criminal actors already exploit companies as a tool for fraud and other offenses and that the proposed framework would further reduce opportunities for preventive checks. The Swedish Bar Association has likewise identified a number of unresolved legal questions, including the relationship with national company law, liquidation procedures and insolvency rules. And this is a few examples from Sweden.
In Germany, the Confederation of Skilled Crafts and Small Businesses concludes that the proposals entail significant risks of abuse and substantive shortcomings that are disproportionate to the limited benefits. And yesterday, we could all read in Euractiv that the Council's own legal experts urge fundamental rework of the EU Inc. I think this shows that the concerns and the problems surrounding EU Inc extends beyond labor market issues, even if these are the focus of our EMPL opinion. The concerns related to company law, creditor protection, insolvency, and anti-fraud safeguards will primarily fall within the competence of the JURI committee and will hopefully be addressed by Rene Repasi in his report for the legislation.
But also from a stricter labor market and worker rights perspective, the proposal raises significant concerns. In particular, the proposal creates clear risk of forum shopping, circumvention of national system of worker participation and downward pressures on labor standards. Our draft opinion in EMPL therefore focuses on ensuring that it should not be possible to use an EU Inc as a vehicle for social dumping or to undermine workers' rights. The main elements of the draft opinion are the following. First, we try to limit the scope of EU Inc to startups.
The current proposal is open to all company regardless of size and sector. Secondly, we exclude sectors with a particularly high risk of labor exploitation and abuses, such as construction, agriculture, and transport. We clarify that the regulation only governs company law matters. Employment contracts should continue to be governed by the law determined under the Rome I Regulation. We ensure that rules on work board-level representation are determined by the Member State where the work is performed and cannot be circumvented through the use of an EU Inc.
We also strengthen safeguards around the proposed EU employee stock ownership scheme by ensuring participating workers that they retain voting rights and dividend rights and by preventing stock options from replacing ordinary wages. We also introduce prohibitions against dividend distribution where outstanding wage claims or similar employer-related liabilities remain unpaid. We delete the proposed simplified insolvency regime for startups. We are removing provisions that unnecessarily restrict Member States from imposing requirements on EU Inc companies, including the prohibition on requiring a physical presence, which of course would make collective bargaining impossible. And we also introduce sanctions where EU Inc is deliberately used to reduce wages and avoid social security contributions.
So this is the main focus of the report. As you all know, the deadline for amendment was last Friday. The deadline for drafting the report was the Friday before. I know we have received somewhere above 200 amendments. We are currently looking at them.
I'm looking forward to this first exchange and then of course the continued collaboration with colleagues to try to make as good report as possible for the EMPL committee.
Tack så mycket. And I will now give the floor to the shadows for two minutes each, starting with Mrs. Tomc from EPP.
Romana Tomc
Bom govorila zdaj v slovenščini. Hvala poročevalcu za uvodna izhodišča. Ko govorimo o uvajanju 28. režima in nove pravne oblike EU-inc, imamo pred sabo seveda zgodovinsko priložnost, ampak hkrati tudi ogromno odgovornost. Naš cilj mora biti jasen. Moramo pomagati našim inovativnim startupom in malim podjetjem, da postanejo globalno konkurenčni.
Zato sem v svojih amandmajih izpostavila ključno načelo Think Small First. Če želimo, da ta uredba uspe, moramo podjetjem omogočiti preprosto, hitro in nebirokratsko pretvorbo v obliko EU Inc brez likvidacij in nepotrebnih administrativnih ovir na vhodu. Pretirana vnaprejšnja regulacija bi ta projekt pokopala še preden bi dobro zaživel. Vendar pa, to želim posebej poudariti v tem odboru, gospodarskega uspeha nikoli ne smemo terjati na račun naših delavcev in socialnih standardov. Evropsko socialno tržno gospodarstvo mora temeljiti na ravnotežju.
Rada bi tudi povedala, da se EU Inc ne sme in se ne more uporabljati za obvod delovnopravne zakonodaje ali zmanjševanje pravic delavcev. Vse tisto, kar ni neposredno urejeno s to uredbo, mora ostati v izključni pristojnosti nacionalnega prava držav, držav članic. S tem spoštujemo nacionalne tradicije in preprečujemo pravni kaos na terenu. Naj zaključim, da kljub temu, da podpiram vsak korak k izboljšanju enotnega notranjega trga, sem do tega projekta precej skeptična.
Nisem prepričana, da z njim prihaja veliko poenostavitev, menim, da se utegne zgoditi ravno nasprotno. Veselim se sodelovanja pri oblikovanju mnenja, nujno pa je, da odpremo vrata inovacijam in razbremenimo naša podjetja, hkrati pa ohranimo polno vzdržnost za naše delavce. Hvala lepa.
Thank you, and on behalf of the Patriots, Mrs. Delapis-Sakari on.
Muchas gracias, presidente, señorías. Hablaré en español.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
En nuestras enmiendas hemos querido inspirar en la dirección de la Declaración de Budapest sobre competitividad elaborada durante la presidencia húngara del Consejo. Porque la primera pregunta que debemos hacernos es si es necesario generar este tipo de entidad mercantil europea para mejorar nuestra competitividad. Consideramos que su base legal es algo débil, ya que los tratados no dan una atribución directa a la Unión Europea para formar este tipo de entidades. Y vemos flecos que no están resueltos. Por ejemplo, en esta propuesta no queda claro cómo se resuelve la tributación de la actividad, si es a nivel nacional, si es a nivel europeo.
De todas maneras, recordamos que ya existe un modelo de sociedad europea que no está siendo casi utilizado. Creemos que si hubiera una necesidad real por parte de nuestro tejido productivo, hubiera sido más razonable una modificación de la regulación anterior. Hoy nos surgen acciones para reducir las cargas administrativas, para protección frente a la competencia de terceros, seguridad jurídica, predictibilidad, energía suficiente, accesible, materias primas y creemos que esta regulación no ayuda en esta dirección. Las sociedades mercantiles en el mercado único no tienen una dificultad para operar. Incluso las diferentes tradiciones jurídicas ofrecen un abanico interesante de opciones.
Esta es nuestra riqueza. Por ejemplo, sobre la participación de los trabajadores en las empresas se prevén diferentes formatos entre países, no quiere decir que haya uno mejor que otro. La diferencia no implica fragmentación, sino oportunidades de encontrar marcos que ofrezcan características específicas que sean atractivas para sectores determinados y que exista así una distribución natural que genere puestos de trabajo y prosperidad a lo largo del espacio europeo.
Me gustaría terminar con una pregunta al ponente porque no hemos tenido no hemos entendido por qué se excluyen algunos de los sectores ya que no existe otro modelo de sociedad donde algo así se haya aplicado. Muchas gracias.
Li Andersson
Thank you. And from the ECR, Mrs. Gemma will speak on behalf of Mr. Donatson.
Chiara Gemma
Grazie Presidente. Il gruppo ECR sostiene la proposta EU-Inc come strumento concreto per rafforzare la competitività europea e ridurre gli oneri burocratici che frenano le nostre startup nel mercato unico. Però dobbiamo essere chiari su questa proposta perché deve essere e come deve diventare.
Prima di tutto, EU-Inc deve restare uno strumento volontario aggiuntivo, senza ostacolare le forme giuridiche nazionali esistenti. Deve infatti rimanere possibile scegliere il modello nazionale invece di EU-Inc se lo ritiene più adatto al proprio modello di impresa. In secondo luogo, il diritto del lavoro, i contratti collettivi, la previdenza sociale e i meccanismi di fissazione dei salari restano di competenza nazionale.
Non accettiamo che un regolamento di diritto societario diventi il pretesto per armonizzare in modo surrettizio materie che restano di esclusiva competenza nazionale. In terzo luogo, riteniamo fondamentale il contrasto alle cosiddette letterbox e al dumping salariale. Proponiamo che tutte le società UE Inc riportino il numero di dipendenti paese per paese. È una misura semplice e mirata per assicurarsi che nessuna impresa evada i contributi previdenziali nascondendosi dietro a una sede legale fittizia. In quarto luogo, sulla partecipazione dei lavoratori in consiglio di amministrazione, rispettiamo le tradizioni nazionali dove esistono, ma non imponiamo la cogestione agli stati che non la prevedono.
È giusto che ogni stato mantenga il proprio modello di relazioni industriali. Infine, sosteniamo la partecipazione azionaria dei dipendenti come strumento di allineamento degli interessi, ma questa deve essere volontaria e non può sostituire i minimi salariali obbligatori. Concludo ribadendo che EU Inc può essere utile come strumento di competitività, ma dobbiamo vigilare affinché non diventi un pretesto per aggirare la normativa vigente del diritto del lavoro in Europa. Grazie.
Li Andersson
Thank you.
And from Renew, I do not have a speaker, no? And from the Greens, Mrs. Ohisalo is speaking on behalf of Mrs. Franz-Barenton.
Maria Ohisalo
Yes, very much thank you, Chair. Dear colleagues, the objective of fostering cross-border business scaling is laudable, but the creation of a 28th corporate regime must never become a backdoor for social dumping, letterbox companies, or the erosion of labor standards. We welcome the draft report by the rapporteur, Mr. Danielsson, that has included important safeguards in this direction. The EU Inc label must stand for innovation and fair play, not an escape route from national labor laws.
To achieve this, the amendments of the Greens/EFA group focus on four vital pillars. First, we must limit the scope. EU Inc should be strictly reserved for genuine, unlisted startups and scale-ups. Crucially, we must entirely exclude sectors with a high risk of labor exploitation, such as construction, logistics, and care work. Second, watertight social safeguards.
We must ensure absolute alignment with Rome I and social security coordination. The choice of a registered office cannot be used to circumvent collective bargaining, direct employer obligations, or social security contributions.
Third, priority of compliance over speed. The proposed 28-hour fast-track registration is a compliance blind spot. We propose moving to two working days and granting authorities the power to extend this window to verify risks of tax evasion or social security fraud. And finally, democracy at work and fair pay.
Changes in corporate form must not erode worker voice. Companies must adhere to the employee participation rules of the member state where collective rights are most favorable. Furthermore, employee stock option plans must remain strictly voluntary, highly transparent and can never substitute regular wages or bypass pension contributions. So colleagues, we cannot scale up Europe's economy by watering down Europe's social model. Innovation and strong workers' rights must remain two sides of the same coin.
I believe that EMPL as committee, as as EMPL committee, we have a crucial role to play and look forward, we look forward to working together to fulfill this.
Özlem Demirel
Yeah, thank you chair, I will speak in German if you need translation. Ja, dankeschön Frau Vorsitzende, vielleicht vorweg, Sie können sich das vorstellen, dass für uns Linke dieses Vorhaben nicht so viel Freude bereitet, aber wir ganz mit großer Sorge auf diese Entwicklung schauen und da sind schon viele Sachen von anderen Kolleginnen angesprochen worden.
Neben Fragen von Insolvenzrecht, Steuerrecht und anderen beschäftigt uns natürlich die Frage, ob hiermit mit einem 28. parallelen System klare soziale Errungenschaften unterminiert werden sollen und die Säule europäischer sozialer Rechte in Gefahr gerät, ob wir eine Situation haben können, wo die gewerkschaftliche Mitbestimmung tatsächlich eingeschränkt wird. Und das wollen wir mit allen Mitteln natürlich verhindern. Und wir als Linke fänden das eigentlich gut, wenn der EMPL-Ausschuss eigentlich eine Ablehnung dieses Vorhabens mitgeben könnte. Falls dies aber nicht Konsens in dieser Runde ist, haben wir sehr, sehr viele konkrete Vorschläge gemacht, die vorgenommen werden müssten. 49 Änderungsanträge haben wir insgesamt gestellt.
Und ich möchte drei davon hier einmal ein bisschen konkreter aufgreifen.
Wenn die Kommission dieses Vorhaben begründet hat, hat sie gesagt, sie möchte Start-ups begünstigen. Doch real ist dieses Vorhaben aktuell ausgeweitet worden auf alle möglichen Unternehmen. Und wenn es so ist, dass man unbedingt ein 28. System braucht, dann würden wir sagen, muss es definitiv beschränkt werden auf innovative Start-ups und das ganz streng.
Das Zweite ist, wir wissen von Notaren und Fachleuten, dass 48 Stunden keine realitätsnahe Vorgabe ist zur Gründung dieser Unternehmen und schlagen deshalb in Abstimmung mit denen mindestens zehn Werktage vor. Und wir wollen darauf bestehen, dass auf jeden Fall das Arbeitsrecht ausgeklammert ist aus diesen Gesetzgebungen und wir wollen, dass natürlich das Arbeitsrecht gilt, wo das Unternehmen tatsächlich ansässig ist. Das sind die Mindestanforderungen, die wir an ein solches Vorhaben stellen würden. Ich hoffe, dass wir in den Beratungen gut vorankommen. Ich möchte dem Berichterstatter aber dennoch danken, weil ich finde, dass er schon in seiner Vorlage sehr, sehr viele gute Punkte aufgenommen hat.
Ich hoffe, wir schaffen gemeinsam, die Interessen der Beschäftigten vom EMPL-Ausschuss zu vertreten.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much and are there other members who would have wanted to take the floor on this topic? If not, I will give the floor to the, yes, Mr. Oliveira, one minute.
João Oliveira
Obrigado, presidente.
Este 28º regime jurídico trata-se de um offshore jurídico de natureza federal, imposto por cima das legislações nacionais e sobrepondo-se a elas, criado para favorecer as multinacionais e os grandes grupos económicos em prejuízo dos trabalhadores, das pequenas e médias empresas e das economias nacionais menos desenvolvidas. Este offshore jurídico cria condições para contornar, diminuir e enfraquecer mecanismos legais de proteção previstos na legislação nacional em questões como as das obrigações das entidades patronais nas relações laborais, regras e mecanismos de representação dos trabalhadores, contratação coletiva, obrigações fiscais e contributivas, enquadramento em regimes de segurança social, regras prudenciais e regulatórias nos mais diversos setores de atividade. Este regulamento é uma expressão da lógica da desregulação económica e social e da lei da selva neoliberal elevada a um expoente máximo. É um salto perigoso que não tem possibilidade de remendo e tem de ser rejeitado.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And now no further requests so I will give the floor to the Commission to Dan Dionisi who is from the who is head of unit of unit company law from the European Commission for the next three minutes.
Dan DIONISI
Many thanks, Madam Chair. Good morning everyone.
The proposed EU INC regulation provides the core element of the 28th regime, its corporate legal framework. The proposal, indeed as was mentioned already, directly contributes to the Union's drive for competitiveness and single market integration, as called for in the Letta and Draghi reports, and it also responds to strong calls from startups and scale-ups and the broader business community, as well as from the European Council and from the European Parliament itself. The proposed corporate framework is simple, flexible, and digital. It is meant to make it easier for companies to set up, grow, and attract investment in the single market.
At the same time, it provides strong safeguards to prevent fraud and abuse. Not only it does not create loopholes, but strengthens existing controls, for instance against money laundering, by ensuring that all relevant authorities share the same, checked and legally valid company information through the application of the once-only principle. For online identification of founders and directors, it relies on the existing eIDAS framework, and I would like to recall that fully online setup of companies in Europe is already possible under existing EU company law. The EU Inc is a harmonized corporate framework that will be embedded in the legal order of each Member State.
Let me be clear: EU Inc companies are national companies, not a supranational company form. In addition to extensive consultations carried out last year, the preparation of the Commission's proposal significantly benefited from the Parliament's own-initiative report on the 28th regime adopted in January. The close cooperation throughout the parallel preparatory processes led to a high degree of convergence between our proposal and the Parliament's resolution. This concerns, for example, the broad scope of the framework.
While designed to mainly meet the needs of startups and scale-ups, it is not limited to companies meeting certain definitions, but legally available to all founders who deem it fit for their business model. This is in line with the quasi-unanimous feedback during the consultations, including from the startup community, and indeed in line with the Parliament's resolution. There are very strong reasons for that, as requiring companies to demonstrate compliance with specific criteria would add significant burden and create legal uncertainty as they may outgrow the criteria during their life cycle.
We fully agree that the EU-Inc proposal cannot be used to undermine existing rules and standards, in particular as regards the protection of employees, labor law, or social security rules. In this context, it should be underlined that the proposal does not affect Union or national employment laws. These are clearly outside the scope of the proposed regulation. Therefore, those rules would apply to EU-Inc companies in the same way as they apply to other limited liability companies in the EU.
Similarly, employee participation rules in the Member State in which an EU-Inc has its registered office, if any, will apply to that EU-Inc company, thus ensuring equal treatment between EU-Inc companies and comparable national company forms. In case an EU-Inc company will be created through or will carry out a cross-border conversion, merger or division, rules and procedures for such cross-border operations under the Codified Company Directive 2017/1132 will apply, including those safeguards concerning possible negotiations on employee participation.
The Commission has thoroughly considered this issue and is of the view that determining the rules on employee participation by the law of the place of employment would create legal uncertainty, since the place of employment is susceptible to multiple interpretations and would create an unwarranted difference in treatment between the EU Inc and other limited liability companies. Keeping in mind the ambitious timeline for agreement on the EU Inc proposal set by the EU leaders and by the three institutions in the One Europe One Market roadmap, my team is fully committed to supporting the co-legislators throughout the legislative negotiations and we look forward to a continued constructive and efficient cooperation. Many thanks.
Li Andersson
Thank you. And then the floor back to the rapporteur for concluding remarks, three minutes.
Johan Danielsson
Thank you. I will be brief because I have a coordinators' meeting upstairs.
First to end where the Commission ended on the ambitious timeframe. Of course this is not ambitious, it's stupid, but we will try to work with the stupid timeframe. We have more or less agreed with the euro-rapporteur that we could have aimed to finalize the work before the summer, but it would be possible for us to vote 10th of September in committee and still be in time for JURI. It will give us some more time, but still. I'm therefore quite happy that we have some remarks that are coming back from several political groups.
There are some grounds I think to find a common EMPL position. I heard the remark from the Left that we should just simply reject the whole proposal.
I have also seen that we have similar amendments from individual members from other political groups. For me, for my political group, it is not unlikely, if we fail to improve the proposal in the end in the JURI committee and in the Parliament, that we will decide to reject the whole proposal, because if not properly amended, this is not acceptable. But the starting point is to try to improve the proposal. I think the point of an EMPL opinion is to give good input to the JURI committee so that we can make sure that we amend the proposal in a way so it will be acceptable.
So that is the starting point that I will try to put for the work. On the concrete issue from Renew on why limiting the scope to specific sectors, I think, firstly, I think if it is only for scale-up, which is the rhetoric from the Commission, then one way could be to find a way to limit it to the scale-ups, the innovative companies. I think to exclude certain sectors with high risk is some sort of a safeguarding that would work. Because let's take construction. Both employers and trade unions want to be out of the proposal because they see this will just be an opening for letterbox companies in a fraud-sensitive sector.
I would say if you include enough safeguard so it works for construction, it makes no sense for startups.
So I think that could be then a way to make this proposal not completely unacceptable in the end. Let's see if we can agree on that, but I look forward to the continuing discussions with all the shadows. And I'm running to upstairs. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. That means we conclude this debate and also for the EMPL coordinators, we will continue here in this room with the coordinators' meeting right away. So I will please ask those who should not be present for the coordinators to have a lunch or something. Coffee break.
Stellen Sie eine Frage zu diesem Video – ich analysiere das Transkript, um Ihnen zu antworten.