Socialists vow to sink EU working time deal[fr][de] 

"This is a health and safety law - and as a point of principle there should be no room for an opt-out," said Stephen Hughes, a British Labour MEP and spokesman for the Socialist Group. 

In a statement, Hughes said the agreement on working time, clinched at the eleventh hour by EU employment ministers on Monday night, was "the worst of both worlds" as it gives employers the opportunity to opt out or calculate working time over a period of up to one year.

"Ministers missed an opportunity to ensure that European workers are properly protected against the dangers of irregular hours and overwork," Hughes said.

Spanish Socialist MEP Alejandro Cercas, Parliament's rapporteur on the working time directive, added: "The common position adopted by the Council makes conciliation with the European Parliament extremely difficult."

He called on fellow MEPs in other political families to follow the Socialists in rejecting the bill when it is presented to Parliament for approval. "I think this is a fight worth having. We can bring people from the Liberal and EPP-ED groups in our direction," Hughes said.

With 215 members, the Socialist Group is currently the second largest political force in the European Parliament, after the centre-right EPP-ED Group (284 members). But it will need support from MEPs in other groups if it is to reject the bill.

Robert Fitzhenry, a spokesperson for the EPP-ED Group, told EurActiv that the Socialists "will not have the power to block" the agreement. He said the EPP-ED was currently debating the details of the proposal before adopting a position on the issue.

Neil Corlett, a spokesman for the Liberal group (ALDE), said "a majority" of MEPs in his group "will live with the compromise" reached by the ministers. But he conceded that some French members "may have a problem with it".

The Parliament is set to debate the agreement in plenary next week. The full House will vote on the bill later on this year after the Council has finalised the final details of the compromise in a 'Common Position'.