not satisfy anybody but inflame the situation.
There’s more than a touch of arrogance in the Commission’s
spokespeople too. If enough countries in the EU want it changing it
could jeopardise the whole EU if they persisted in a blank refusal to
contemplate any action at all.
xxxxxxxxxx cs
A reader has just e-mailed me to say “[My husband] has just phoned to
tell me that some of the Italian workers have gone home.
Can't say why, but maybe it's because of the cold weather!!”
Can’t trace any mention anywhere yet!
===================
EU OBSERVER 2.2.09
Brussels resists pressure to tweak workers' law
HONOR MAHONY
BRUSSELS - The European Commission has said it will not be
pressured into making new rules on employees' rights with an EU law
governing the hiring of foreign workers at the centre of a high-level
dispute in Britain.
Workers at the Lindsey oil refinery in north-eastern England have
been protesting a move by the refinery's owner, Total, to award a
€220 million (?200m) contract to Italian-based firm Irem.
Irem is using its own employees - Italian and Portuguese workers -
for the job. EU rules say this is allowed for temporary contracts so
long as the foreign workers are employed under the same terms as
local workers.
But British workers have been protesting the move, which comes at
time when the country is facing rising unemployment rates and is
officially in recession, having been hard hit by the global financial
crisis.
The strikes, which started in the middle of last week, on Monday
spread to Sellafield, a nuclear plant in the north-west of England,
where around 900 are on strike for 24 hours.
But the commission is refusing to be rushed into changing the so-
called Posted Workers Directive, one of the key laws guaranteeing the
functioning of the internal market.
It pointed out that Britain has strongly benefited from the law, with
more workers posted abroad than it has foreign workers posted in the
UK, and said it was the best tool with which to fight the current
economic downturn.
"At this stage ...we have considered that it is not necessary to
revise the Posted Workers Directive," said employment spokeswoman
Chantal Hugues, suggesting that the protests are more about people
being generally "worried about their jobs" than about the application
of the directive.
The commission's chief spokesman, Johannes Laitenberger, underlined
several times the importance of open markets and warned against a
"spiral of people closing borders to each other," which would
eventually mean that "all will be the poorer."
"I think we have sympathy for the concerns of the people, but that
does not mean that their problems will be solved by the wrong
solutions."
His words came as the head of the Party of European Socialists
accused the commission of being right-wing and committed to laissez-
faire economic policies.
"The strikes in the UK are just the latest example of growing
frustration and fear among workers. Workers are beginning to question
the freedom of movement because the European Commission has allowed
it to be used to undermine wages and working conditions," said party
chief Poul Nyrup Rassmussen.
The 1996 Posted Workers Directive has become a focal point of anger
for trade unions and left-wing politicians.
They say that while they support the principle of free movement of
workers, the law itself is being abused.
This feeling was compounded by two landmark judgements by the EU'S
highest court, known as the Viking and Laval cases, that say that
workers cannot protest against foreign companies bringing in workers
and paying them less than stipulated within local collective
bargaining agreements.
"European governments must close this legal loophole that drives a
huge hole through social Europe," said Brendan Barber of Britain's
Trade Union Congress on Friday, referring to the directive.
For his part, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has defended the EU
law and tried to calm tensions in the dispute.
However, his words "British jobs for British people" uttered in his
first speech to the Labour Party in late 2007, echoed on the banners
and in the speeches of the strikers, have come back to haunt him as
his government struggles to stop the dispute from taking on a
xenophobic note.
===================
POLITICS HOME 2.2.09 (House of Commons)
Clarke: PM's use of 'British jobs for British workers' phrase
"irresponsible" and self-serving
Shadow Business Secretary Ken Clarke responded to the Commons
statement made by Business Minister Pat McFadden on the oil refinery
strikes by asking if the Government was seeking an amendment to the
EU workers directive, whether the Government was unified in its
response and calling Gordon Brown "irresponsible".
"I am asking for reassurance this is a statement from the whole
Government, not just the Department of Trade and Enterprise," he asked.
He added: "Is the Government seeking amendments to the EU workers
directive?"
He continued: "Will the Minister accept Industrial action is not the
way to take forward any of these arguments and will he also ensure we
won't see riots in Italy about the use of British workers there?"
Mr Clarke also condemned the Prime Minister's use of the phrase
'British jobs for British workers' as "irresponsible" and self-serving.
"Will he admit the irresponsible use of the phrase 'British jobs for
British workers' by the Prime Minister was part of a 'Britishness'
campaign and to secure his own job security, not anyone elses?"
[responses not in the posting -cs]