29.6.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/4

1.

Must clause 5 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC (1) of 28 June 1999 be interpreted as precluding national legislative provisions such as Articles 48 and 53 of Ley Orgánica 6/2001 de Universidades of 21 December 2001, which do not provide for a maximum duration for successive employment contracts, in circumstances where there are no domestic legal measures in place to prevent abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment contracts for university lecturers?

2.

Must the definition of ‘permanent worker’ set out in clause 3 of the Framework Agreement annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC be interpreted as precluding a provision such as the second paragraph of additional provision 15(1) of the Estatuto de los Trabajadores which states that the employment contract of such a worker may be terminated where the contracting authority fills the post occupied?

3.

In view of the fact that under domestic law it is deemed an appropriate measure, for the purposes of preventing and punishing the misuse of temporary employment contracts in the private sector, for workers that are considered to have a contract of indefinite duration to be entitled to receive compensation where the contract is terminated for a reason unrelated to the individual worker concerned, and that no equivalent measure exists in the public sector, is it an appropriate measure within the terms of clause 5 of the Framework Agreement annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC for government employees with contracts of indefinite duration to be given the same right to receive compensation as is laid down by law in respect of workers having contracts of indefinite duration in the private sector?