Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-10-Speech-2-052"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-05-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Organisation of working time2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050510.4.2-052"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-05-10-Speech-2-0532
lpv:speaker	lp:Ria Oomen-ruijten2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; FEMM (2004-09-08--2007-01-14)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member; Temporary committee on policy challenges and budgetary means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013 (2004-10-14--2005-06-08)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-08-31--2007-02-14)3 unknown; Christen Democratisch Appèl (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; EMPL (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2004-09-16--2007-03-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, by saying, today, at first reading, that minimum rules for work are very important for health and safety in the workplace and also for the reconciliation of professional and family life, we are in fact underpinning the 1993 legislation. I note that some of those who engage in social dialogue have let pass the opportunity to deal with this subject themselves, or else we would not have needed to do it in this House. Thirdly, I note that there are many myths surrounding this topic, which have culminated in a polemic, even – and I do not wish to conceal this – in my own group. I would like to explode those myths, one by one. Firstly, with regard to flexibility, it is claimed that Lisbon and flexibility are no longer compatible with this legislation, but that is not the case, for the reference period for measuring 48 hours has been extended from 4 to 12 months. Secondly, given that I hear employers talk about the administrative burden, I would question the reason for changing this legislation. We are only changing in terms of flexibility and also in order to act upon a Court ruling. Thirdly, as for subsidiarity, at the moment, we are leaving it up to the Member States to decide whether stand-by or rest time during on-call duty must be paid and, if so, how much, and whether allowance is made for them, and, if so, to what extent. We are leaving this up to the social partners and the Member States to decide, for I think this is up to them. Finally, I would like to thank Mr Cercas and Mr Silva Peneda, who have tried to incorporate respect for the principle of subsidiarity into this document."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph