Email newsletter

HR news and jobs direct to your inbox

Recruitment Marketing Awards

The 2012 Recruitment Marketing Awards launch in February – check out last year’s winners

Jobs - HR job search

International HR jobs
HR manager jobs
HR director jobs

Site map

Search and Subject Links

Quick links to subjects:

Search People Management

This site is the online magazine for the CIPD Opens in a new window

Why we need a review of consultation on European directives

Comment

Comment on the blogs

Become a member

Peter Reid

29 Mar 2010 | 10:15

Forward to a colleague

Colleague’s email address

Your name

Your email address

Personal message
(Maximum of 120 characters)

Articles more than one month old can be viewed only by CIPD members or PM Subscribers.

Europe hits HR professionals hardest at the point when European directives are implemented into UK law. Implementation usually involves consultation. This is the chance for the knowledgeable practitioner to influence the shape and content of UK law. Unfortunately, consultation on European directives is limited and the scope for change is marginal as a recent example highlights.

In November the government consulted on implementing the Recast European Works Council (EWC) directive. Since 1974 I have lived and breathed EWCs, negotiating one in 10 of all EWC agreements. Having attended over 500 EWC meetings, the consultation exercise should have been manna from heaven. However, as I waded through the consultative document I became depressed and sorry for the civil servants charged with implementation.

To understand the difficulties civil servants face you need to understand how employment law is made in England. The traditional process is green paper and white paper consultation followed by employment bill with detailed examination by Commons and Lords standing committees. In short, a series of checks and balances to turn ideas into practical realities. Consultation on European directives is constrained because the scope for change is minimal.

Law makers have two fears. First, any variation (however practical and well meaning) to an EU directive risks legal challenge by the commission. Second, any addition risks accusations of “gold plating”. The inevitable consequence of these fears has become “copy out”, an old Greek trick beloved of law makers.

A superficial examination of the Recast EWC directive suggests that there are simply a few changes to definitions. The practical reality is that those few changes in definition fundamentally change EWC’s from annual meetings to “ongoing” consultative bodies, while ill-thought-out drafting of the restructuring clause will damage UK multinationals and those other companies that fly under the UK flag. Far from a minor change there will be very real practical issues to be addressed by companies. At a minimum, effective liaison between meetings and management control will be vital.

Instead of rushing to implement, there needs to be a better understanding of the way cross-border consultation currently operates and the impact of any changes for the future. Civil servants should propose a review from the ground up. There is plenty of time for such a review. June 2011 is member states implementation date, but that is not set in stone. No EU member state met the original EWC deadline back in 1996, with implementing years later. In fact delayed implementation is commonplace and the European norm, particularly when a member state does not like a proposal. The UK was opposed to revising the directive and should take the long view on this issue. Anything else, particularly the current proposed rush to implement, is against our national interest.

To post your comment you have to login

Username

Password

Forgotten your log in details?

Not registered on PM or CIPD?

To post a comments you need to be a CIPD member of PM subscriber
Registration will be on the CIPD site

Bookmark and share

What are these?

HR blogs delivered to you by RSS
What is RSS

Links open in new window

Get listed: To include your own link here contact the PM advertising team.

About the specialists

Apprenticeships that work

New guidance to help you in developing high-quality apprenticeships

HRD Conference 2012

Add value to your business with practical L&D solutions from HRD

Links open in new window

People Management neither recommends, nor is responsible for, the content of external sites listed here.

Your link here: contact the PM sales team.

It’s untenable to have a normal retirement age in public-sector schemes that is significantly different from the state retirement age

Brian Bailey, Director of pensions, West Midlands Pension Fund and member of High Pay Commission