Business furious after MEPs scrap working time optouts 

35 MEPs voted in favour and 13 against the report drawn up by Spanish Socialist MEP Alejandro Cercas, which calls for an end to the opt-out clause three years after the text enters into force. 

The 'no' votes came mainly from UK Conservatives, who pledged to defend the opt-outs that the UK government had successfully managed to insert into the text agreed upon by governments in June. 

The opt-outs would allow workers to work up to 60-65 hours a week, provided that there is agreement among social partners. However, this would clearly exceed the 48-hour weekly average, calculated over one year, that Parliament had asked for. 

With this vote, the committee confirmed its first-reading position of 20 October (EurActiv 21/10/08), which sets the Parliament on a collision course with the Council should the text be adopted in plenary on 17 December. EU employment ministers are set to debate the issue on 18 December. 

Should the informal talks the Parliament is now holding with the Council not lead to an agreement before the plenary vote, conciliation talks will necome necessary, potentially delaying the file beyond the next European elections in June.

Businesses furious

While trade unions welcomed the vote, business organisations clearly expressed their dismay, saying the elimination of opt-outs would deprive them of the flexibility they needed in times of economic crisis. 

On-call time = working time? 

Business groups also regretted MEPs' position that on-call time for medical staff should be considered as working time. On-call time means "any period during which the worker has the obligation to be available at the workplace in order to intervene, at the employer's request, to carry out his activity or duties," the committee text reads. 

Member states argue that on-call time should make a distinction between "active" and "inactive" on-call periods. According to them, only the former should be considered as working time unless national legislation, a collective agreement or an agreement between the social partners provides otherwise. 

MEPs recognised that there was a difference between active and inactive on-call time, but they nevertheless insisted that the full period of on-call time should be counted as working time. 

Compensatory rest periods 

Another controversial issue between member states and MEPs is the question of compensatory rest periods for workers. Member states argue that it should be up to national governments to determine a "reasonable period" within which such compensatory rest should be granted. 

The committee, on the other hand, decided that such compensatory rest periods should be granted at the end of the working period, in accordance with applicable legislation or an agreement between the social partners. 

The leader of the UK Conservatives in the European Parliament, Philip Bushill-Matthews, urged the UK government to ignore the committee's decision to scrap the opt-outs, which he said were indispensable in times of recession. 

He pledged that his group would now work to secure enough support to retain the opt-out before the plenary votes on it in December. 

UK MEP Stephen Hughes, employment spokesperson for the Socialist Group, defended the vote. He said: "We are dealing here with a piece of health and safety legislation. It is wrong in principle to have an opt-out from health and safety law, it's as simple as that." 

British Green MEP Jean Lambert said she was "very pleased" that MEPs had shown "their commitment to ending opt-outs from the Working Time Directive". 

"This legislation is flexible enough to allow for intensive periods of work, while ensuring that workers are not placed under continuous, excessive pressure. It is important to remember that this is first and foremost health and safety legislation," Lambert pointed out. 

The European SME federation, UEAPME, condemned the committee vote, describing it as "short-sighted and irresponsible behaviour which will plunge Europe back into legal uncertainty and damage both employers and employees". 

It called on the plenary to reject the amended directive "for the sake of closing a long-lasting impasse and especially in the light of the deteriorating economic situation in Europe". 

BusinessEurope, representing more than 20 million European companies, argued along the same lines, saying that if confirmed by the plenary, the legislation "would significantly hamper the flexibility that is necessary for workers and companies to operate in today's global economy". 

The organisation's president, Ernest-Antoine Seillière, said the opt-out was "a vital tool for companies and many individuals value the opportunity it offers to earn more money by working additional hours". 

The European Trade Union Confederation  (ETUC) celebrated the vote as a "first victory", calling on the plenary to confirm the vote.