Europaudvalget 2017-18
EUU Alm.del Bilag 845
Offentligt
Joint Declaration from Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands and
Austria on the revision of the Unemployment Benefits Chapter in Regulations (EC) No
883/2004 and 987/2009
With this joint declaration [Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands and
Austria] wish to express our grave concerns regarding the general approach of the Council reached on
EPSCO June 21, 2018 on the revision of the Unemployment Benefits Chapter in Regulations (EC) No
883/2004 and 987/2009, particularly regarding the aggregation of periods, cross-border and frontier
workers and transitional periods. We find the agreed text unbalanced. The goal of fair burden sharing is in
our opinion not achieved. Our unemployment benefit schemes are now less protected and the main
purpose of unemployment schemes to get unemployed persons as quickly as possible back to work could
be endangered.
We believe that a closer connection with the Member State of last activity should exist in the aggregation
situation, and that it is essential that the mobile worker has established a genuine link with the labour
market of the Member State of last activity before receiving unemployment benefits. We believe that the
proposal for increasing the period of prior affiliation with the Member State of last activity has not been
adequately addressed.
The Eu opea Co
issio ’s p oposal o the e ui e e t of a i i
um qualifying
period of an uninterrupted period of at least three months’ insurance, employment or self-employment in
the Member State of last activity has been reduced to one month thus creating greater disparity between
the positions of the different Member States. A period of one month of insurance, employment or self-
employment is not sufficient to establish a genuine connection to the labour market in the Member State
of last activity. We therefore keep requesting a more balanced approach to establish a genuine connection
to the labour market in the Member State of last activity.
As regards cross-border and frontier workers, we would like to stress that the unemployment benefit is not
a regular wage loss benefit. In principle, it provides a replacement income, with the emphasis on getting
the unemployed person back to work as quickly as possible. We are of the opinion that the employment
services in the Member State of residence have better prerequisites for and possibilities of assisting the
unemployed in finding a new job and of ensuring that the conditions for receiving unemployment benefits
are actually complied with. For the system to work, the incentives must be in the right place: payment of
the benefit and control and activation measures should go hand in hand. While changes in the
unemployment chapter should focus on improving the existing regulatory framework by stimulating cross-
o de oope atio
et ee Me e States to a hie e o k esu ptio , the P eside y’s p oposal
switches the competence for the payment of the benefit from the Member State of residence to the
Member State of last employment. The proposal thereby insufficiently reflects the special nature of
unemployment benefits and ignores the fact that work resumption is a key issue that needs to be
addressed.
On this basis, the Member States signing this declaration are of the opinion that the competence for cross-
border and frontier workers should remain unchanged, namely that the Member State of residence should
remain the competent Member State to provide unemployment benefits. If the existing reimbursement
mechanism is perceived as a problem by some Member States, then work should focus on reimbursement
to achieve a better solution.
Furthermore, a shift of competence regarding cross-border and frontier workers will trigger
disproportionate administrative burdens and have significant financial impacts on national systems, as
entire processes and work-streams would have to be fundamentally overhauled. It is also essential to stress
notable differences in the cross-border components of their labour markets.
EUU, Alm.del - 2017-18 - Bilag 845: Orientering om udfaldet af Rådsmøde nr. 3625 (beskæftigelse mv.) 21-22/6-18
For these reasons, we cannot agree to the modifications proposed by the Presidency. Our compromise
proposals have not been accepted. In addition, we are of the opinion that these modifications require
significant and lengthy preparatory work at the level of national administrations. This would mean that the
transitional period for the unemployment benefits chapter has to allow for sufficient time to account for
the implementation of appropriate processes. We find that seven years is an appropriate period to ensure
a well-functioning implementation.