UĦM Voice of the Workers eMagazine issue 04

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS ISSUE 04 JANUARY 2014

EDITOR’S NOTE

The Working Time Directive

Contents All at work!

02

Modern, Modern Times

03

GRTU’s position on Working Time

04

Reviewing the Working Time Directive 05 Protecting workers’ health and safety 06 The Working Time Directive: An Insight into Pending Issues 07 Initiatives at European Union level 09

Welcome to issue 4 of the Voice of the Workers e-magazine.

Is there such thing as too much work? Should there be a capping on how long workers work every week? What if this stops people earning more? But aren’t health and safety issues important to us? And how about the much discussed work-life balance?

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

The discussion rages on, because there is more than one facet to this issue. Withering it down to one or two arguments may render this issue dangerously simplistic.

What are the arguments involved?

What do the social partners think of this? Does a blanket solution exist? We trust you will find this issue interesting. Enjoy!

Moderation of working hours ensure not just physical but also mental safety of workers, their colleagues, as well as their families READ MORE ON PAGE 3 1

Image: Scene from Modern Times (1936) – Charlie Chaplin

All at work!

Working for maximum output at maximum efficiency. In the movie ‘Modern Times’ Charles Chaplin effectively relates the injustices being faced by workers in the early days of the industrial revolution. We might laugh or cringe at the sorry state of workers’ rights during those days. But are we really looking at what is happening today? In our refined, Information Age world, are we working less or more? Are all workers being given the chance to achieve a good work-life balance? Is there today a post version of ‘Modern Times?

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

2

Modern, Modern Times

IN THE DARK EARLY DAYS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, WORKERS WERE A MEANS TO ACHIEVE THE TARGETED LEVELS OF MASS PRODUCTION IN FILTHY FACTORIES. WORKERS’ RIGHTS DID NOT EXIST THEN, SO MUCH SO THAT A NEED WAS FELT FOR WORKERS TO UNITE AND MAKE THEIR VOICED HEARD AND THEIR RIGHTS ESTABLISHED AND RESPECTED. CHARLES DICKENS, CHARLES CHAPLIN, AND MANY OTHERS GIVE A VERY GRAPHIC INSIGHT INTO THE HARSH WORLD OF THE FIRST YEARS OF THE 20TH CENTURY Enter the Information Age, where much of what we do is literally at the click of a button, mouse or smartphone. This surge of better ways of working and living brought about the aspect of comfortable living, and the increase in the rate of entertainment and free time to working hours. However, time has shown that this is not the case. Our crave to become more efficient made us try to push new boundaries. This meant that our lives have become faster, and our daily routines are revolving around us at dizzying speed. This has been carried forward even in our workplaces. It is common to hear of lunch at your desk, or increases in hours of work for different sectors of the economy.

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

This has been the basis behind the development by the European Union and by our National legislation, of the Working Time Directive. The directive aims at providing the maximum amount of hours that can be worked, with aspects of capping over overtime and pay, and the number of consecutive hours being worked.

The Working Time Directive asserts the fact that every person has a right to rest and time off from work. Working too long hours could result in unsafe conditions, both for the worker as well as for those around him or her. There are many instances where accidents happened on the place of work that resulted

from lack of rest, sleep and excessive work pressures. Rail, air and land transport disasters, construction accidents, accounts of office rage are witness to this fact. Moderation of working hours ensure not just physical but also mental safety of workers, their colleagues, as well as their families.

Maltese workers are known for their industriousness. Many opt for one, two or more part-time jobs after their full-time working hours, mainly to bolster their income. This is good on one aspect, as this generates wealth and helps the economy to grow.

However, this comes at a price. A lack of free time means less time for the enjoyment of life, family 3

and friends. People’s social lives are effected, and some also pay a price in terms of their families’ well-being. These issues do not impinge on the life of the worker and his or her family, but also have ramifications on society and the economy as a whole. It is a known fact that, for example, one of the highest sector of people who work very long hours are self-employed persons. This is very much true in Malta, where around 68% of longer working hours are in the self-employed sector. In Europe, long working hours are a male phenomenon, where males are twice more likely to work more than 48 hours per week than men. The sectors most affected by longer working hours include hotels and restaurants, as well as in the construction sector.

Managers of small enterprises, skilled agriculture and fisheries workers, corporate managers, drivers and plant mobile operators, health professionals, crafts and trades workers, head the sectors where workers work more than 48 hours per week in Europe.

There are workers who need to be protected from excessive working hours, and the Working Time Directive is essential for these workers to have a legal framework they could refer to. In Malta, the primary source of employment legislation is the Employment and Industrial Relations Act. Some aspects of the directive include: • A limit to weekly working time which must not exceed 48 hours on average, including any overtine • A minimum daily rest period of 11 consecutive hours in every 24 • A rest break during working time, if the worker is oh duty for longer thyan six hours • A minimum weekly rest period of 24 uninterrupted hours for each seven-day perios, which is added to the 11 hours’ daily rest.

There are also special rules for working times in a restricted range of sectors, including doctors in training, offshore workers, fisheries workers, and workers in urban passenger transport.

A night worker is taken to be someone who works at least three hours of his daily working hours within these hours or works more than 50 per cent of his annual working time during night time.

A night worker’s normal hours of work must not exceed an average eight hours in any 24-hour period and the average number of hours worked each night will be calculated on the total number of hours worked for a period of 17 weeks in the course of the worker’s employment.

Legislation is useless if the people who are regulated by it are not aware of it. Your union officials are naturally expert at these issues. However, worker awareness is essential. If our lives are to achieve balance, we need to be aware of regulations that are enacted for our own well-being and safety. All workers demand respect. And this is as it should be. But before asking for respect, workers need to respect themselves. And the best tool to respect yourself is to be informed.

GRTU’s position on Working Time GRTU agrees with the necessity to re-assess the Directive in the light of changes that have taken place in working patterns since it was originally conceived.

Flexible and legally ensured working time arrangements are absolutely crucial for SMEs.

GRTU feels that any discussions and negotiations must constitute a workable solution to the benefit of employers and workers, respecting the health and safety of workers and fixing the issues flagged by the European Court of Justice, VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

notably on “on-call time”.

GRTU feels it is essential to maintaining the opt-out as a permanent provision of the Directive. Certain aspects of working time management are best dealt with at national level as these are closest to the needs and realities of their own labour market. Maintaining the opt-out gives them this needed flexibility.

GRTU also contends it is important to give Member States the possibility to calculate the average weekly working

time of 48 hours over a 12-month reference period.

This would respond to the needs of companies faced with fluctuations of activity such as seasonal variations and also employees.

The inactive part of an on-call duty should not be regarded as working time, except if the employee is physically present at the workplace. This would respond to the continuing trend towards more flexible forms of work organisation and individualised working hours.

4

Reviewing the Working Time Directive

The European Union (EU) Directive 2003/88/EC, more commonly referred to as the Working Time Directive, was created as a means through which the health and safety of workers are protected in accordance to a set of minimum standards which are applicable throughout the EU. The Directive lays down provisions for a maximum of 48-hour working week (including overtime), rest periods and breaks, and a minimum of four weeks of paid leave per year, to protect workers from adverse health and safety risks. It applies to all sectors of activity, both public and private. In June 2004, the European Commission put forward a proposal to amend

the Directive in order to reflect the changes to working patterns and practices over the years. By April 2009, the EU Council and the European Parliament were not able to reach agreement on the proposal. In March 2010, the Commission initiated a twostage consultation with social partners (workers’ and employers’ representatives) at EU level, hoping for an agreement on the matter.

The position of the Maltese Government in relation to the main issues raised can be summed up as follows: • The possibility to make use of the opt-out: It is, in principle, an individual’s right to freely choose or refuse the option of the 48 hour week.

•

•

Definition of compensatory rest: The need for more flexibility with regard to when the compensatory rest is to be granted.

Calculation of the works per hour per contract and not per worker: The Directive is to be applied per contract and not per worker.

The consultations led to the need to re-consider undertaking a complete review of the Directive rather than just focusing on specific issues.

Following extensive talks on reviewing the Directive, no agreement was reached by the end of 2012. It is now up to the Commission to decide on the way forward.

MEUSAC 280 Republic Street, Valletta VLT 1112 Tel: +356 2200 3315 • Fax: +356 2200 3329 • Email: info.meusac@gov.mt www.meusac.gov.mt VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

5

Protecting workers’ health and safety

THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE IS STILL AN ON-GOING ONE NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE EUROPEAN UNION HAD ISSUED THIS DIRECTIVE MORE THAN TEN YEARS AGO IN 2003. THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION HAD ISSUED SUCH DIRECTIVE TO PROTECT WORKERS’ HEALTH AND SAFETY INSISTING THAT WORKING HOURS MUST MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS APPLICABLE THROUGHOUT THE EUROPEAN UNION The main purpose of the Working Time Directive was aimed at limiting weekly working hours, which must not exceed 48 hours on average, including any overtime. It also insisted on a minimum daily rest period of 11 consecutive hours in every 24 hours and a minimum weekly rest period of 24 uninterrupted hours for each seven day period, in addition to the 11 hours’ daily rest. There were also other conditions such as a paid annual leave of, at least, four weeks per year, extra protection for night work and that amongst other things, night workers would have the right to free health assessments and, under certain circumstances, to transfer to day work. The Directive also sets out special rules on working hours in a limited number of sectors, including doctors in training, offshore and sea fishing workers amongst others.

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

Throughout the years, the reaction of the different StakeHolders whilst agreeing on many of the proposals strongly disagreed on the EU working hours and demanded that these be reviewed. However, views differed on the kind of changes needed: the Business Sector called for more flexibility, while the Trade Unions wanted more effective protections.

Different EU Countries gave different views according to the needs and requirements of the particular Country. Malta, for example objected on the limiting of overtime especially in the Tourism Sector where the number of skilled workers in this sector is still rather limited. In November 2011, a joint decision was taken between all the main cross-sectoral workers’ and employers’ representatives to start negotiating the Working Time review. Extensive talks

were held but, to date, no agreement was reached. This now means that it is now up to the Commission to decide on the review of the Working Time Directive. The Commission is carrying out a detailed impact assessment which will take full account of both the Employers’ and Employees’ concerns and suggestions.

It is also important to point out that the Working Time Directive has also been clarified and interpreted through a number of rulings in the European Court of Justice. For example the SIMAP judgement defined all time when the worker was required to be present on site as actual working hours, for the purpose of work and rest calculations while the JAEGER judgement confirmed that this was the case even if workers could sleep when their services were not required.

6

In conclusion, there were mixed reactions in Malta too. The most important concerns seem to have been the maintenance of the possibility to make use of the opt-out clause, the definition of compensatory rest and the calculation of the works per hour per contract and not per worker.

Malta’s two largest Unions GWU and UHM had expressed their

approval at the decision taken by the European Social Policy and Employment Ministers over the Working Time Directive, allowing Maltese workers the chance to choose to work more than eight hours of overtime a week, an opt-out Clause the Maltese Government had fought hard to keep. However both Unions favoured the fact that Maltese

workers should have enough time to spend with their family and to rest. The Medical Association of Malta showed reservations about the removal of the opt-out.

Alternattiva Demokratika urged the Government and Civil Society to support the proposed Working Time Directive which establishes a maximum average of 48 hours of a working week.

MCESD 280/3, Republic Street, Valletta, VLT1112 Tel: (+356) 2200 3300 www.mcesd.org.mt

Dr Peter Agius Head European Parliament Office, Valletta

The Working Time Directive An Insight into Pending Issues The Working Time Directive (WTD)1 lays down minimum requirements concerning working hours, rest periods and annual leave. The WTD allows EU countries various derogations.

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

Malta and 15 other EU countries have decided to introduce individual opt-out provisions to regain a degree of flexibility.2 In the 2010 report drawn up by the Commission it resulted that

22 out of the 27 EU countries breached one or more provisions of the WTD.3 There have been numerous cases in national courts over how 7

to interpret WTD rules. In the SiMAP case of 2000,4 the Court of Justice of the EU ruled that all on-call time that an employee spends at the workplace amounts as working time, even if such employee is resting. This and other rulings5 were one of the main driving forces behind a decade-long effort to reform the directive.

The last round of negotiations between the European Parliament and Council failed in 2009 as they did not reach a compromise on three crucial points: 1. The opt-out provisions which allow Malta and other countries to go beyond the agreed weekly 48-hour working cap. Those in favour of the opt-out from the 48hour week rule argue that it gives companies and workers plenty the required flexibility.

The European Parliament has voted for the lapse of the opt-out provisions three years after the directive’s entry into force and has recommended the abolition of all exceptions to the right of the workers to

VOICE OF THE

WORKERS

impose their own limit to their own working time.6 2. The issue whether on-call time should be counted as working time. The European Parliament has voted that any period of on-call time, including inactive time, should count as working time, and that inactive on-call periods can be calculated in a specific way for the purposes of complying with the maximum weekly average working time.7 3. The issue of multiple contracts, thus defining whether the 48-hour limit should be applicable per worker or per contract.8 The European Parliament has stated that working time is to be defined as the sum of the periods of time worked under each contract.9

of discussion again after the European Parliament elections in May and the arrival of a new Commission.

Work, working conditions and the generation of new employment opportunities are expected to be part of the critical choices that MEPs will need to decide for us as Maltese in the coming five years. For this reason, the institutional campaign leading to the European Elections of 24 May 2014 will include a focus on work and the issues related thereto with emphasis on the issues, the aspirations and expectations of the Maltese workforce.

Join the debate on: www.facebook.com/ parlamentewropew References

Extensive talks were held throughout in 2012 between workers’10 and employers’ representatives11 on the WTD review, however no agreement was reached. Although the WTD reform seems to be on hold, it is expected to be on the table

1 Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time.

2 Malta applies the opt-out provisions to all sectors. See Regulation 20 of the Organisation of Working Time Regulations 2003 (SL 452.97).

3 European Commission, SEC(2010) 1611 final ‘Detailed Report on the Implementation by Member States of Directive 2003/88/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time’, 21 December 2010.

In November 2013 the Commission referred Greece and Ireland to the Court of Justice for not complying with the EU rules on limits to working time for doctors in public health services (See IP/13/1108 and IP/13/1109).

4 Case C-303/98.

5 For instance on the issue of resting period see the Jaeger ruling Case C-151/02 of 2003.

6 The vote was taken by the EMPL Committee of the European Parliament on 17 December 2008 (PR 200812151PR44549) 7 ibid.

8 Malta and ten other EU countries apply the directive per-contract.

9 See Fn 4.

10 The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC).

11 BusinessEurope, the European Centre of Employers and Enterprises providing Public Services (CEEP) and the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (UEAPME).

8

Initiatives in Europe

DOCUMENTS

There are many initiatives being undertaken at European Union level that may be of interest to you. These include conferences, information documents, tools, as well as online fora. This information, compiled

by CIA REPRESENTATION OFFICE IN BRUSSELS (Confederazione Italiana Agricoltori) who are partners in this project, will help you become aware of what is happening at European Union level, such as how the issues are being discussed, as well as opportunities for participation.

STATE OF THE ART OF THE WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE SUMMARIZED BY EUROPEAN TRADE UNION CONFEDERATION (ETUC) The trade unions have long demanded that a limit be set on working time. The European Union has acknowledged this principle since its foundation, notably by the European Social Charter in 1961 and the Charter of Fundamental Rights in 2000.

The directive, presented in 2003, aims to both set out a framework for working time for occupational health and safety reasons and to limit a broad culture of excessive working time. The European Commission is reviewing the Directive 2003/88/ EC through a 2-stage consultation of EU-level workers’ and employers’ representatives and a detailed impact assessment.

DECEMBER 2012: FAILURE OF THE REVISION OF THE WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE NEGOTIATIONS Following attempts by and the failure of the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council to revise the Working Time Directive, the European social partners ETUC, BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME and CEEP decided to enter negotiations in November 2011 for the revision of this directive. The negotiations were now broken off.

Information about the latest updates are available at the following links: tinyurl.com/pkdtkxy www.etuc.org/r/675

Information about the Working Time Directive are available here: tinyurl.com/ks9cxu5

UNION ÓADDIEMA MAGÓQUDIN (Malta Workers’ Union) Dar Reggie Miller, St Thomas Street, Floriana, FRN 1123 - Malta Tel +356 21220847 - +356 21234801 - +356 21236484 • Email info@uhm.org.mt www.uhm.org.mt Operational Programme II - Cohesion Policy 2007-2013 Empowering People for More Jobs and a Better Quality of Life Project part-financed by the European Union European Social Fund (ESF) Co-financing rate: 72.25% EU, 12.75 MT, 15% Private Funds Investing in your future