Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-04-Speech-3-308"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20030604.9.3-308"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, I believe that the promotion of employee financial participation is very important both for company employees and for the development of companies. Perhaps greater participation and, thus, also a greater acceptance of responsibility can even help make companies more successful and profitable and so contribute to increased employment and increased access to capital. Some people even maintain that the development of various types of financial participation systems could be a possible way of achieving increased growth and faster compliance with the Lisbon strategy objectives. That would be a mercy worth quietly asking for, since the Lisbon objectives appear more and more to be taking on the character of illusions. Whatever the case may be, profit-sharing systems of various kinds can in any event create good incentives for employees, give rise to greater enthusiasm for the job in hand and strengthen the link between company and employees. To that extent, we are in agreement, Mr Menrad. When it comes to these aspects of the content of the report, I think that Mr Menrad has done some quite excellent work and carried out a good analysis of the problems that, in spite of everything, are involved in this issue. I do not however share the view that this is something that should be decided or debated at EU level. The rapporteur has himself written in the report that it is unnecessary to harmonise the provisions for financial participation systems and that it is neither desirable nor practicable to do so, either, because it would impede the flexibility of Member States’ policies. I agree with that. Subsequently, Mr Menrad says, however, that a European framework is needed for the promotion of employee financial participation through the coordination of agreements on general principles, social security issues and fiscal aspects. Why, though? The coordination of models and conditions would benefit neither companies nor employees. I therefore see no reason why any of the EU institutions should have any dealings with this issue, with its host of specific requirements and considerations of which it will be necessary also to take account. Companies’ profit-sharing systems are the concern of companies and their employees, and it is therefore with them that this issue should reside. The Moderate delegation will therefore vote against the report, for must take a different view."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"someone"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph