14.7.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/1

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Demographic challenges in the EU in light of economic and development inequalities

(exploratory opinion at the request of the Croatian Presidency)

(2020/C 232/01)

Rapporteur:	Stéphane BUFFETAUT
Co-rapporteur:	Adam ROGALEWSKI

Request by the Croatian Presidency of the Council	Letter of 10.9.2019
Legal basis	Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Section responsible	Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship
Adopted in section	3.3.2020
Adopted at plenary	7.5.2020
Plenary session No	551 — Remote Plenary Session
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	249/0/12

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

This opinion was prepared before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The EESC recognises, however, that the COVID19 crisis will have important implications for the future EU policies addressing demographic challenges and growing inequalities between Member States. To that extent, the Committee urges the EU to prepare relevant policies with ambitious funding to protect citizens from the detrimental effects of the pandemic and most importantly the economic crisis which will follow, in order to mitigate the negative social impacts. Such policies should be prepared urgently and in consultation with the social partners and organised civil society.

1.2.

The EU’s present demographic situation requires a holistic approach that embraces social and economic policies, active labour market and cohesion policies, policies supporting families and especially the possibility of reconciling private and family life with working life, special measures for ageing workers, active and healthy ageing policies, sustainable and integrative immigration policies and measures and policies to prevent braindrain.

1.3.

Another baby boom is unlikely, and so it is paramount that labour market participation be improved in order to face the consequences of Europe’s demographic situation. The level of unemployment, under-employment and the inactivity rate are too high in too many Member States especially for young people whose unemployment rate is about twice the average rate of unemployment in every Member State. The EU needs to make combating unemployment a priority.

1.4.

Demographic dynamism also comes down to confidence in the future; this is why the EU needs a strong economy and a strong social policy. Otherwise, European women and men, in particular young people, will not have confidence in the future, and the resulting social and economic uncertainty will discourage them from having children. This is why the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights is a very important factor in improving the EU’s demographic situation. The EESC therefore sees positively the Commission’s intention to develop an action plan for its implementation based on a broad consultation process.

1.5.

Having children must not be an obstacle to pursuing a professional career or a reason for impoverishment or the loss of purchasing power especially for large families. It is important to maintain or implement stable and proactive family policy and human-centred labour market policies, including measures promoting a balance between personal and family life with working life (parental leaves, childcare and other caring responsibilities, outwork, flexible work) and financial and educational support. Particular attention must be given to single parent and larger families which are at higher risk of poverty. Stable and diversified family policies adapted to the cultural environment have proven their worth with regard to raising the fertility rate.

1.6.

Precarious working conditions and the lack of stable labour market perspectives as well as difficulties in renting or acquiring proper housing facilities, especially in metropolitan areas and big cities, is a reality for many young people. This makes it difficult for them to plan their future and become independent and found a family. This should be addressed more, both in EU and national policy.

1.7.

Internal mobility is a fundamental freedom of the EU that strengthens European competitiveness and provides opportunity to its citizens. As regards intra-EU mobility and the brain and labour drain related to internal migration, the social and economic upward convergence of Member States is the best answer but this needs time. The European Regional Development Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Social Fund must be specially oriented to help EU Member States with weaker economic performance to develop projects improving their social and economic development if they are to remain or become attractive to their own population. Measures encouraging people to return to their country of origin can be envisaged with a view to mutual enrichment.

1.8.

The economic and social environment is an important factor of attractiveness. The EESC believes that investment in efficient public services along with family-oriented investments should be a priority because they are laying the groundwork for the future. More public investment within Member States can be facilitated by reference to a ‘golden rule’ for investment with a social objective, in order to allow for more flexibility in budget rules.

1.9.

Immigration alone might not be the solution to Europe’s demographic challenge but it can help address it. In the short term immigration might have a positive influence on population and labour force growth provided that it is accompanied by fair and sustainable integration policies to help newcomers become established and avoid integration difficulties.

2. State of play

2.1.

Population size is influenced by fertility, mortality and migration. Although the situation differs in each country, we are seeing a general convergence in the EU with decreasing fertility and mortality rates. Despite some divergences between countries, the fertility rate in the Member States is often significantly and lastingly below the threshold for generational replacement. Even given the global trend of decreasing mortality and fertility rates (demographic transition), Europe is unusual in this regard.

2.2.

From 1950 to 1989, the annual increase in the number of people living in Europe was always more than 2 million. Since 1990, growth has remained below 1,5 million a year. At the same time, the rest of the world recorded average demographic growth clearly higher than Europe’s. In 1950, for example, Europe accounted for 21,7 % of the world’s population and stood at less than 10 % in 2017. Its demographic weight has never been lower (1).

2.3.

With regard to the birth rate, between 1952 and 1961 there were more than 12 million births each year in Europe. This figure fell to 7,3 million in 2000. There has been a slight increase due to migration, bringing relatively young populations to Europe and improving the birth rate in a minority of EU countries. The number of births currently fluctuates between 7 and 8 million a year.

2.4.

This needs to be seen against the mortality rate. Mortality moves both up and down: upwards due to the survival to advanced ages of many generations; downwards due to improved sanitary and medical conditions and healthier lifestyles, extending life expectancy in Europe (78 years for men, 83 years for women in EU-28). Overall, the number of deaths in Europe has been in the 8 to 8,5 million range annually since 1992.

2.5.

Since 1994 Europe has seen depopulation every year: a negative natural balance resulting from a number of deaths greater than that of births. This depopulation affects Germany, Bulgaria, Croatia, Spain, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia.

2.6.

In spite of migration, made up of people younger than the native population, 21st century Europe is experiencing an ageing population. The proportion of people aged 65 and more in the total population rose from 12,5 % in 1989 to 18,8 % in 2019. The EESC already stressed that the activity rate of the working-age population is more important than the elderly dependency ratio i.e. the ratio between working-age people and those over 65. Consequently there is a need to unleash the working capacity of the unemployed and under-employed. Better labour market integration of immigrants and access to training for unemployed and people in precarious work is essential to manage the demographic challenge linked to longevity.

2.7.

Some Member States have to cope with high intra-European mobility towards Member States with higher standards of living, exacerbating difficulties linked to the ageing of their populations since it is mainly the younger age groups which are leaving. They are experiencing a labour force drain concerning all skill levels and most importantly a braindrain which is worrying for the countries concerned; they have invested in education and training systems which then benefit other countries that can offer better working and social conditions. In 2018, 36 % of EU mobile workers have high level of education, 40 % a medium level and 23 % a lower education level. Yet only 20 % were employed in high skill occupations, 60 % in occupations with medium skill requirements and 20 % in low skill occupations (2).

2.8.

Furthermore, the movement of workers towards economically stronger Member States speeds up ageing and population decline in eastern Member States. If this movement continues at the same rate, the population of people over 65 in eastern Europe will be greater than that of western European countries (3).

2.9.

The movement of workers from eastern European countries to wealthier Member States is principally caused by the difference in wages, social protection and social standards which remain much lower than in the old Member States. While wage gaps between eastern and western Europe were narrowing until the crisis, the upward wage convergence of eastern Europe came to a halt in the wake of the crisis (4). In some eastern Member States, high emigration has resulted in labour shortages.

2.10.

At the same time, migration from southern to western Europe increased as a result of the economic crisis (5) and its consequences. In this case, poor labour market prospects including high unemployment resulted in stronger migration from southern to western Europe of all workers regardless of their qualifications.

2.11.

There are also non strictly economic factors such as legal, cultural and social conditions that contribute to migration. For instance some persons leave their country to more developed welfare states providing better social protection and health care. Some people may also suffer discrimination on the grounds of religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation and as a result migrate to Member States where the society and legal systems are more welcoming and protective. As a whole it is difficult to measure the magnitude of these mobilities and their impact on demographic issues.

3. General comments

3.1.

The EESC is calling for a holistic approach to address demographic challenges. This approach involves not only the fertility rate itself, but also the question of work-life balance, employment, equality between men and women, stable family policies, regional and cohesion policies, quality of public infrastructures and services.

3.2.

Discussing demography means talking about children, mothers and fathers and not simply numbers and statistics. They are people with their life plans, whatever the type of family. European societies must provide support and protection to the most vulnerable, in this area the child, whose rights and interests must prevail.

3.3.

The EESC has adopted a number of opinions on demography. In some of them, it has pointed out that countries which have solid family policies, which are moreover diverse in their provisions and reflect the cultures of the Member States concerned, are in a better demographic situation than those which have none or weak ones (6). In others, the Committee underlined the importance of solid labour market policies based on high labour market participation and high-quality employment as an effective way of addressing demographic challenges (7).

3.4.

The EESC believes that there are already policies in place which could be used to address demographic challenges, particularly in the light of economic and development inequalities. The European Pillar of Social Rights is an important instrument for achieving upward social and economic convergence in the EU, which will also help to address demographic challenges.

3.5.

The EESC believes that an environment that provides people with economic and social stability and decent living and working standards, in which the social partners’ role is important, is key to ensuring positive demographic trends in the EU. This includes more investment in social infrastructure, family policies, high-quality public services and active labour market policies.

3.6.

Examination of policies that are demographically effective reveals that they combine different measures that are stable over time. This is important because a parental and family project is, by definition a long term one. In relation to family policies, particular attention should be given to families at risk of poverty such as single parents and large families. It is important to remember that the second cause of poverty after unemployment lies in family breakdown and the risk of poverty grows with the number od depend children in a household. The EESC has called for a decent minimum income in the EU (8).

3.7.

The EESC stresses the crucial role of public services in social policies and support for families. High-quality, accessible and affordable care and assistance (for children, people with disabilities and the elderly) are key to tackling demographic challenges and supporting population growth. Underinvestment in public services have caused a shortage of personnel and lack of appropriate infrastructure. Particular attention should be paid to childcare services and education as well as policies focusing on older generations. One of the areas where underinvestment is most evident is long-term and health care for ageing people (9).

3.8.

The EESC calls for more investment in public services and social policies in order to meet the demographic challenges. The EESC reiterates its view that more public investment within Member States can be facilitated by reference to a ‘golden rule’ for investments with social objectives, in order to allow for more flexibility in budget rules. Existing and future EU funds, particularly the Investment Plan for Europe, should focus more and increase spending on social investment, family support and promoting equality as this will help address demographic challenges.

3.9.

The EESC emphasises the amount and importance of the unpaid work mainly performed by women who, through family solidarity, bear most of the cost of care and aid, support families and compensate for the lack of public infrastructure. This real work is rarely recognised as such, although unpaid care and domestic work are respectively estimated at 10 and 39 % of gross domestic product in the world (10). It is important, and fair, to recognise and support the work of unpaid caregivers, usually family members, who have chosen not to work to provide care and assistance to sick, disabled and other dependent family members by, among others, providing sufficient investment in care infrastructure. Member States should be encouraged to recognise the economic, social and moral value of this work by giving them an appropriate status and financial support as well as safeguarding their social security entitlements.

3.10.

Special attention should be given to the rural population which is ageing even faster than the population as a whole. A defining trend in rural life all over Europe is declining population, as young people tend to move to big towns and cities for education and work. Safeguarding living standards, including decent labour market perspectives, as well as investing in infrastructure, public services and education would be one of the key measures to fight depopulation of rural areas and small and medium-sized provincial towns.

3.11.

The EESC underlines the important role played by civil society organisations and social partners in discussing and developing policies on demographic challenges.

4. The importance of quality employment, proactive labour market policies and policies that support a balance between work and private and family life

4.1.

The EESC considers that proactive labour market policies which contribute to the creation of stable employment and the well-being of workers are important and effective measures for tackling demographic challenges. Indeed most of the European population’s income comes from work, and without job creation, dynamic labour market perspectives, security in the labour market and quality employment it is difficult to establish a family and to provide it with decent living conditions. Through collective bargaining, the social partners can make an important contribution to improving wages working and social conditions.

4.2.

The EESC takes note of the report on Demographic scenarios for the EU (11), which states that the most feasible and effective remedy to negative consequences of population ageing is neither focusing on higher fertility rates nor more migration, but rather increasing labour force participation. In the medium and long term, a more balanced demography is necessary to ensure the balance of our social spending and the dynamism of our economy.

4.3.

Measures to combat in-work poverty are of the utmost importance in providing decent living conditions for families and providing children and parents with a decent life. The EESC notes the Commission President’s intention to ‘ensure that every worker in our Union has a fair minimum wage’ (12). With this in mind, the EESC will prepare an exploratory opinion on Decent minimum wages across Europe.

4.4.

Quality jobs, which are factors for economic stability, access to training in order to improve the skills and competences of workers and the possibilities of matching secure and flexible working conditions are one way to support demographic growth. Particular attention should be given to part-time or flexible work arrangements in order to improve work-life and private and family life balance. One measure allowing for a better work-life balance and protecting family and private lives at a time of accelerated digitalisation is the right to disconnect, considered by the EESC as good practice (13).

4.5.

In previous opinions (14), the EESC called for proactive gender equality policies in order to eliminate the pay gap between men and women and to promote measures facilitating a work-life balance. Studies show it is beneficial for families, as well as for the European economy and competitiveness, for men to be involved in care-related tasks. Boosting women’s labour market participation would make it possible to develop their potential at a time when the EU workforce is declining and its population ageing.

4.6.

Special attention should be paid to young workers who are or may become parents. The average EU youth unemployment rate remains higher than that of the working population in general and can range from 5 to 40 % in some countries (15). Young people are also particularly affected by precarious working conditions (16). Moreover, the lack of job creation, dynamic labour market perspectives, security in the labour market as well as difficulties in renting or to acquiring housing facilities makes it difficult for them to plan their future, and to become independent, settle down and form a family. Access to quality employment for young people should be developed: this would give them the security they need to start a family.

4.7.

At the other end of the generation chain, there is a need for policies to support older workers in the labour market so that they can work until the legal retirement age in force in their country (17). This could be achieved by improving employment opportunities and working conditions to create work that better accommodates the needs of older people. Special attention should be given to combating age discrimination in the labour market.

4.8.

Particular attention should also be paid to occupational health and safety given that ageing leads to an increased risk of developing health issues. Therefore, it is crucial to organise work and to design workplaces in such a way that these illnesses can be prevented and more employees are able to work until the regular retirement age (18).

5. Relevance of family policies to achieving dynamic demography

5.1.

Member States which follow active family policies have higher birth rates than those which do not have or have weak family policies. The aim is to guarantee that having children, who ensure the future of Europe, does not have a penalising effect on the standard of living or career prospects. To achieve this, it is necessary to mix fiscal measures, social legislation, direct financial aid and efficient and affordable public services, including childcare systems. When implemented, these policies are effective (19). But to remain so, they must be sustainable and constitute a stable legislative base.

5.2.

These family policies are however part of a broader framework which guarantees their effectiveness: jobs, economic and social dynamics, a family-friendly culture, adapted housing policy, an efficient education system, and environmental policies. Lastly, family life and working life are among the main concerns of European men and women, so they must both be at the heart of the concerns of European society.

5.3.

Demography is the domain of the long term and require coordinated European action. The EU should develop common guidelines based on intergenerational solidarity and gender equality, taking into account national cultures and social policy differences. The present situation of the European Union requires also measures aimed at raising the birth rate. As it has been said that ‘to govern is to foresee’, it is crucial to act today.

6. Migration including intra-EU mobility

6.1.

Regarding the role of immigration in addressing demographic challenges, the EESC reiterates its view that immigration has a positive influence on population and labour force growth. If natural population growth becomes negative, immigration can help keep the total population and labour force constant. Admittedly, immigration is not the ultimate solution for tackling the consequences of demographic ageing in Europe. Nevertheless, it could also be a remedy to shortages of labour and skills that are unrelated to demographic processes (20).

6.2.

Care should also be taken not to foster the systematic migration of the highly qualified and highly skilled, further exacerbating the skills gap with developing countries which would harm their economic and social development. It is also important to implement active reception and integration policies in order to avoid difficulties in establishing themselves in a new country and a new culture.

6.3.

The free movement of EU citizens is a fundamental freedom of the Union. However high levels of intra-EU migration can pose particular challenges for the Member States of origin, such as accelerating ageing or loss of work force and competences, and for the receiving one.

6.4.

The question is whether this EU mobility is irreversible or whether it is only temporary and returns to the country of origin will be the rule. In fact a large part of the persons leaving their own country return home in two years. It is a form of circular mobility. Such movements are mutually enriching for the countries concerned. For this to be more the case, there would have to be upward economic and social convergence between east and west and south to west. Narrowing the existing gap is the best way to slow down this labour leakage.

Brussels, 7 May 2020.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER

(1) Gérard-François Dumont ‘Vue de ses frontières, une Europe vieillissante mais attractive pour les migrants’ (‘Seen from its borders, Europe is ageing but attractive to migrants’), Diploweb, La revue géopolitique, 3.11.2019.

(2) https://www.etui.org/Publications2/Working-Papers/Why-central-and-eastern-Europe-needs-a-pay-rise

(3) Demographic Scenarios for the EU, 2019, https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/demographic-scenarios-eu

(4) https://www.etui.org/Publications2/Working-Papers/Why-central-and-eastern-Europe-needs-a-pay-rise

(5) 2018 Annual Report on Intra- EU Labour Mobility Final Report 2018.

(6) OJ C 218, 23.7.2011, p. 7 and OJ C 161, 13.7.2007, p. 66.

(7) OJ C 318, 29.10.2011, p. 1 and OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 60.

(8) OJ C 190, 5.6.2019, p. 1.

(9) OJ C 71, 24.2.2016, p. 46.

(10) https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/CN.6/2017/3

(11) Demographic Scenarios for the EU, 2019.

(12) OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 142.

(13) OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 52.

(14) OJ C 129, 11.4.2018, p. 44 and OJ C 110, 22.3.2019, p. 26.

(15) Speech by Ms von der Leyen.

(16) OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 60.

(17) OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 142.

(18) https://osha.europa.eu/sites/default/files/publications/documents/Work-related_MSDs_prevalence_costs_and_demographics_in_the_EU_report.pdf

(19) OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 60.

(20) OJ C 110, 22.3.2019, p. 1.

14.7.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/8

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Sustainable funding for lifelong learning and development of skills, in the context of a shortage of skilled labour

(exploratory opinion requested by the Croatian Presidency)

(2020/C 232/02)

Rapporteur:	Tatjana BABRAUSKIENĖ
Co-rapporteur:	Pavel TRANTINA

Request by the Croatian Presidency of the Council	Letter, 10.9.2019
Legal basis	Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Bureau decision	24.9.2019
Section responsible	Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship
Adopted in section	3.3.2020
Adopted at plenary	7.5.2020
Plenary session No	551 — Remote Plenary Session
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	254/1/6

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

The EESC welcomes the focus of the mission letter of Commissioner Nicolas Schmit (1) on implementing and updating the Skills agenda, focusing on identifying and filling skills shortages and supporting reskilling as a part of the just transition, as well as exploring the idea of proposing individual learning accounts as one of the possible ways of enabling adults (both employed and unemployed) to accumulate training entitlements and use them for quality assured training.

1.2.

The EESC supports the Council Conclusions on ‘The key role of LLL policies in empowering societies to address the technological and green transition in support of inclusive and sustainable growth’ (2), adopted on 8 November 2019, which call on the Commission to ‘update the efficiency, scale and target groups of current lifelong learning policies in order to better respond to learning needs arising from changes in society and the world of work, including by further developing the European Education Area’ (3).

1.3.

The EESC appreciates that one of the priorities of Croatian Presidency of the Council of the EU (4) is investment in research and innovation, greater accessibility of high-quality and lifelong learning and developing new skills adjusted to jobs of the future.

1.4.

The EESC welcomes the fact that, in its communication on ‘A Strong social Europe for just transitions’ (5) — which states that skills are key for the future — the European Commission encourages the EU Member States to provide inclusive and high-quality education and training from an early age and to support people in their continuous development throughout their careers.

1.5.

The EESC calls on the European Commission and the Member States to take effective action towards the implementation of the first and the fourth principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), to ensure quality and inclusive lifelong learning (LLL) as a right for all citizens in Europe at workplaces and beyond and to support the implementation of these principles with sustainable public funding agreed with the social partners and civil society.

1.6.

The EESC would like to see a particular focus on the access of the most vulnerable groups in society to lifelong learning opportunities. Effective support should be provided to workers of all skills and qualification levels and in all sizes of companies and organisations, regardless of the geographical area, while ensuring sustainable financing from public authorities, companies and trade unions, for example through individual training accounts or other schemes and tools according to national practices.

1.7.

The EESC suggests that the European Commission be more ambitious in setting indicators and benchmarks for lifelong learning, in particular for the participation of adults — including employees — in education and training, within relevant policy frameworks and the upcoming ET2030 Strategy Framework. The Commission should ensure that the EU financial instruments, such as Erasmus+, the European Social Fund (ESF), InvestEU, the Sustainable Europe Investment Plan (SEIP), the Just Transition Fund (JTF) and other relevant EU funds, support the achievement of these benchmarks effectively and in synergy with each other.

1.8.

In addition, the EESC calls on the EU institutions to agree on a single inclusive Key Competences framework going beyond school education, thus addressing the need for adult learning (AL) and acquiring life skills, and emphasising in particular the skill of learning to learn and the skills for democratic citizenship that are essential to support adults in taking an active role in society. The EESC also calls for increased investment in non-formal and informal learning environments, which are particularly relevant in terms of acquiring these competences.

1.9.

The EESC believes that in the context of the European Semester it is necessary to create coherence between the European Commission’s call for sustainable investment in education and training and the call for optimisation measures, which in some cases damage such an investment. Public investment in lifelong, and particularly adult, learning needs to be increased in every Member State.

1.10.

The EESC reiterates its call for a greater focus on social investment, inter alia, in education, training and LLL. The EESC suggests discussing whether the ‘golden rule’, i.e. on excluding future-oriented public investments from the calculation of net public deficits under the European Monetary Union’s fiscal rules, could also be applied to social investment supported by the EU Structural Funds.

1.11.

The EESC calls on future EU presidencies and the European Commission to continue to enhance cooperation among decision-makers at the highest level following the initiative of the joint Council meeting of the EU’s finance and education ministers, to discuss how to ensure sustainable public funding for education and training, in particular for adult learning. There is also a need to engage with ministers of employment and social affairs. Such cooperation should also take place at national level.

1.12.

The EESC calls on the Member States to ensure effective support for the employed and unemployed people who face difficulties in accessing quality and inclusive adult education and training by ensuring targeted funding for those in need, such as the unemployed, the non-standard workers, the low-skilled, people with disabilities, older people and people from socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, while taking into account the gender dimension.

1.13.

The EESC suggests that measures such as setting indicators relating to public and private investment in vocational education and training (VET), and the access of workers to paid leave for training purposes should be considered in line with Employment Guideline 6: Enhancing labour supply and skills (6) which calls on the Member States to seek to ensure the transfer of training entitlements during professional transitions. This should enable everyone to anticipate and better adapt to labour market needs.

1.14.

The EESC believes that Member States should support the public sector, as well as non-profit education providers and civil society organisations to sustain funding for the provision of good quality inclusive and more accessible lifelong learning. The high quality of education and training provision should be ensured through high-quality assurance mechanisms supported for example by EQAVET and other tools.

1.15.

The EESC suggests that in order to ensure effective investment in upskilling and reskilling of workers in companies, further data is needed on investment by companies and financial support by governments. The own contributions of workers, trade unions and other stakeholders should be properly analysed and feed into policy discussions, with focus on investment in different skills.

1.16.

The EESC believes that the democratic governance of LLL policy development and implementation, including effective social dialogue and consultation with organised civil society, makes investment more effective in terms of achieving policy aims.

1.17.

The EESC encourages Member States to make the best use of the opportunities provided by the available EU funds, which should also be supported by national resources. The forthcoming MFF should in any event counter the limitation of budgetary possibilities for LLL at Member State and EU level. The programmes themselves should be more inclusive, simpler and more manageable for smaller beneficiaries and smaller projects.

1.18.

The EESC points out that it is important to regularly review the effectiveness of financial and non-financial support measures in reaching specific groups of adults and efficiency in the use of resources. Robust monitoring and evaluation arrangements need to be in place. The results of evaluations should feed into and inform policymaking in relation to LLL.

1.19.

The EESC believes that there is a need for financing mechanisms which mobilise national resources and involve adequate sharing of costs between public authorities and private entities as well as, individuals and other relevant stakeholders (e.g. social partners, training providers, NGOs).

1.20.

The EESC calls for a more nuanced understanding of learning environments’ needs to be integrated into education, training and LLL policies, guided by the overarching principle of supporting learners’ individual and unique potential. This means recognising, including through sustained investment, the value of learning environments beyond formal education as dynamic hubs of competence development — from which the latter can also draw expertise in adopting more inclusive and innovative approaches to meeting learners’ needs.

1.21.

In order for LLL to be successful, the EESC appeals to all EU and national decision-makers to address the following challenges for LLL environments and to financially support solutions to these issues, in line with the scope of their responsibilities:

1.21.1.

design and implement long-term strategies for fostering collaborations between formal, non-formal and informal learning providers from a learner-centred perspective;

1.21.2.

ensure that learners can take an active role in their learning pathways by designing these primarily around their needs;

1.21.3.

support learners of all ages and backgrounds in accessing, combining and moving between different forms of learning, in line with their personal needs and aptitudes;

1.21.4.

treat the validation of non-formal and informal learning (as stipulated in the Council Recommendation on Validation (7)) as an urgent priority;

1.21.5.

enhance the provision of lifelong learning opportunities at local level by making use of existing community and education infrastructures.

2. General background

2.1.

As defined by the Council (8), lifelong learning covers learning from early childhood education and care to post-retirement, including the entire spectrum of formal, non-formal and informal learning, with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competences from a personal, civic, social and/or employment-related perspective. LLL considers each individual as the subject of learning and enables all people to acquire the relevant knowledge to take part as active citizens in the knowledge society and the labour market, facilitating free mobility for European citizens. In this opinion, the focus is put on sustainable funding for lifelong learning and development of skills, in the context of a shortage of skilled labour.

2.2.

Learning happens everywhere and constantly, actively and passively, in formal, informal and non-formal settings. Therefore, a more nuanced understanding of learning environments needs to be integrated into education, training and LLL policies, guided by the overarching principle of supporting learners’ individual and unique potential. Both ‘life-wide’ and ‘lifelong’ education should be supported by sustainable public funding and there should also be a special focus on older generations, with resources for providing means that are adapted to their ways of learning. The EESC therefore reiterates (9) that funding at both EU and national level must, among other things, invest in inclusive, high-quality education and training, which should be accessible and affordable for all and geared towards current and future labour market needs. Returns from adult learning can be assessed as being as high as those from initial education and training and even higher education (10).

2.3.

The impact of global trends, such as economic, technological, environmental, social and industrial shifts in line with the digital revolution, is huge — from the economy, innovation, science and education to health, sustainability and governance — and is rapidly transforming the world of work and the skills profiles of many occupations. The pace of change necessitates continuous skilling, reskilling and upskilling for all citizens throughout their lives, focusing in particular on providing effective support to workers and the unemployed, while ensuring sustainable financing by public authorities, companies, through individual training accounts and other tools.

2.4.

At the same time, the disruptive nature of these changes is making the task of predicting future skills needs ever more challenging. Skills supply is also evolving but it takes time to adapt to emerging skills needs. Even though employers underline the importance of STEM, digital skills and VET, there is now also a shift towards soft/transversal skills (11), that enable people to adapt to working environments and different life situations (12). These skills are usually developed in organisations offering non-formal education (youth organisations etc.) and sustainable financial support to these providers is essential.

2.5.

Moreover, it is important to invest now in strategic development of new training programs. They are key policy tools to respond to skill needs and gaps, and investment in them can take some time to show results, particularly for programmes at higher levels and of longer duration. In order to inform the education and training system far enough ahead, the systematic anticipation of skills needs is essential to enable strategic responses and prevent skills mismatches (13).

2.6.

The situation with the recent COVID-19 pandemic across the world has shown that learning can adapt quickly to changes in circumstances, if necessary. Learners develop a variety of new approaches, such as independent or project learning, become more curious and enhance their IT skills to engage in remote learning. A number of digital platforms are being used, provided free of charge. Essential transversal skills are helping both learners and teachers adapt to this change. When life returns to ‘normal’, society should draw lessons from this experience and continue to develop these approaches and skills, investing in them sufficiently, in order to enable every learner, whatever their social situation, to get involved and benefit from them.

3. Political context

3.1.

The Commission Communication on ‘A Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions’ (14) highlights that skills are key for the future. Skills allow people to reap the benefits from a rapidly changing pace of workplace. Half of the current workforce will need to update their skills within the next five years, and the digital and green transitions will require new sets of skills. VET, along with apprenticeships can foster the employability of young people and adults alike and meet the changing needs of businesses.

3.2.

The EESC recalls that the right to education was enshrined in Unesco’s constitution (1945) under the heading ‘education for all’, and lifelong learning (LLL) has received increasing attention in the context of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), featuring prominently in SDG4 on education. SDG4 is envisaged not only as a way to enhance skillsets and boost the economy, but also to further the aims of cultural diversity and peace. However, the targets of the SDGs which define the role of LLL do not include any benchmarks in terms of financing (15).

3.3.

The EESC emphasises the need to implement the first and fourth principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), by making quality and inclusive education, training and LLL a right for all in Europe and to support the implementation of these principles with sustainable public funding agreed with the social partners and organised civil society. This right needs to become a reality to ensure that all adults have equal access to quality and inclusive education and training both within workplaces and beyond. Effective support should be provided to workers of any skills level and in any size of company, regardless of the geographical area they work in.

3.4.

The EESC stresses that EPSR rights and principles, including the right to quality and inclusive education, training and LLL at the national level, need to be implemented with adequate public investment (16). Budgetary resources are, however, in some cases still subject to the strict budgetary constraints of the internal market and to the fiscal rules set by the Stability and Growth Pact and it remains a challenge for governments to find the necessary public resources to achieve social re-balancing. The conflict between the binding budgetary rules and a set of rights and principles without the resources to enforce them remains unresolved.

3.5.

The ILO Global Commission on the Future of Work report ‘Work for a Brighter Future’ (17) points out that establishing effective lifelong learning opportunities for all is a joint responsibility, requiring the active engagement and support of governments, employers and workers as well as educational institutions. Governments, in cooperation with social partners need to broaden and reconfigure skills development policies, employment services and training systems to provide workers with the time and financial support they need to learn. The report proposes establishing a system of learning entitlement through a reconfigured ‘employment insurance’ system or ‘social fund’, and introducing ‘individual learning accounts’ that would allow workers to take paid time off to engage in training.

3.6.

The EESC welcomes the important initiative of the Finnish Presidency of the Council, which organised the first-ever joint Council meeting between the EU’s finance and education ministers, to discuss the importance of public funding for education and training. The Committee calls on future EU presidencies and the European Commission to continue this initiative to enhance cooperation among decision-makers at the highest level. There is also a need to engage with ministers of employment and social affairs. The EESC would then like to see this kind of cooperation implemented at national level.

3.7.

The EESC supports the focus of the mission letter of Commissioner Nicolas Schmit (18) on implementing and updating the Skills agenda, identifying and filling skills shortages and supporting reskilling as part of the just transition. Exploring the idea of proposing individual learning accounts is one of the possible ways that could lead to enabling people of working age to accumulate training entitlements and use them for quality-assured training. The EESC calls on the Member States to ensure tripartite cooperation and shared responsibility on the allocation of available public resources to employees and workers.

3.8.

The EESC is pleased to note that the Council Conclusions on ‘The key role of LLL policies in empowering societies to address the technological and green transition in support of inclusive and sustainable growth’ (19), adopted on 8 November 2019, call on the Commission to ‘update the efficiency, scale and target groups of current LLL policies in order to better respond to learning needs arising from changes in society and the world of work, including by further developing the European Education Area (20), by reflecting LLL in the future strategic framework for cooperation in education and training and by using the opportunities provided by Erasmus+, the ESF and other relevant Union instruments’.

4. State of play

4.1.

While the data on overall investment in LLL is lacking, evidence (21) suggests that only around 0,1 to 0,2 % of GDP accounts for public expenditure on adult education. The total expenditure on adult education, including other financial sources such as funding through employers, learners’ fees, varies between 1,1 and less than 0,6 % of GDP. At the same time, Cedefop’s latest estimates suggest that there are 128 million adults in the EU-28+ with potential for upskilling and reskilling, representing 46 % of the adult population of this area (22). Only 11,1 % of adults are involved in adult learning, while the European Union set itself the target of achieving 15 % by 2020, on which it failed to deliver.

4.2.

The Lisbon European Council conclusions (23) set clear aims for all concerned to increase the annual per capita investment in human resources, while the Employment Guidelines (13, 14 and 16) (24) call on Member States to set corresponding targets. The EESC welcomes the fact that the European Commission’s 2019 Country Reports (25) within the European Semester process call for increased investment in education and training in 16 countries (26) and in skills in 24 countries (27), to counterbalance a decade of budget cuts and underfunding of education systems, with their well-documented detrimental effects on quality education, education personnel and infrastructure (28).

4.3.

The EESC notes that there is a clear lack of coherence between the European Commission’s call for sustainable investment in growth-friendly areas, such as all sectors of education, and the call for optimisation measures, which damage them. A Commission’s communication on the main findings from the Country Reports (29) of the European Semester in 2019 depicts a favourable economic scenario, with public finances improving in every Member State. Nevertheless, the communication also warns of global uncertainty and calls on the Member States to continue boosting productivity, improving the resilience of their economies and ensuring that economic growth benefits all citizens.

5. General comments

5.1.

Member States must offer training opportunities to all — unemployed people and wage-earners, women and men. To this end, measures such as setting indicators relating to public and private investment in VET and schemes allowing workers to take paid leave for training purposes should be considered and required in Employment Guideline 6: Enhancing labour supply and skills (30). In this connection, the EESC has already pointed out the need to safeguard decent living conditions during training. EU measures should be considered and examined with a view to making the good practice instruments used in some EU Member States, such as grants, loans, collective agreements on paid training leave or other provisions standard practice in the other Member States (31).

5.2.

Social partners and civil society organisations also have a leading role to play in governance of the education and training system, including anticipating and delivering skills, and the social partners’ shared responsibility at company level is essential in terms both of investing in the forward-looking education and training of their employed workforce and also of bearing the necessary retraining costs of any workers they have made redundant. The most vulnerable of these are older people.

5.3.

Discussions about an EU proposal for individual learning accounts (ILAs) are at a very early stage, but there are a number of considerations that should be further elaborated if such a proposal is to be introduced, for example, whether workers’ training is defined by law and/or collective agreement, which must be respected in order to ensure that employers and workers are able to shape the content, venue and time/period of the training. This is therefore a national competence, and recommendations to the Member States concerning how ILAs should be funded and who should receive the financial support (companies, training institutions, public employment services or workers) must be defined via social dialogue respecting collective agreements and national legislation. It is important that these reflections pay attention to the diversity of national systems and approaches and that the social partners play an important role.

5.4.

The EESC reiterates its call for a greater focus on social investment, inter alia, in education, training and LLL. The EESC has already called for consideration of the principle of the ‘golden rule’, i.e. excluding future-oriented public investments from the calculation of net public deficits under the EMU’s fiscal rules (32). The EESC suggests discussing whether the ‘golden rule’ could also be applied to social investment supported by the EU Structural Funds (33).

5.5.

The combination of flexible, adapted learning and personalised support, starting with lifelong career guidance, also helps to get the inactive and long-term unemployed into work, leading to social and economic gains, as well as long-term welfare savings. An optimal mix of components or features of the approach can create the conditions for consolidating, developing, and implementing the Council Recommendation on upskilling pathways (34) in a sustainable way, despite the fact that target groups, skills needs and governments change over time. Training provision must be designed in a way that fosters and supports mobility between and within sectors. Securing these transitions benefits workers’ employability and employers’ capacity to attract new recruits.

5.6.

The EESC believes that Member States should support the public sector, as well as non-profit education providers and civil society organisations to sustain funding for the provision of high-quality lifelong learning opportunities, which should be more accessible. The high quality of training provision should be ensured through good quality assurance.

5.7.

Improving investment in adult learning and employee training is linked to a large extent to appropriate research input into design, reform, and implementing LLL policies and systems. In order to ensure effective investment in upskilling and reskilling of workers in companies, further data is needed on investment by companies and financial support by governments. The own contributions of workers, trade unions and other stakeholders should be properly analysed and feed into policy discussions, with a focus on investment in training different skills (professional, company-related, key competences, basic skills, etc.) for workers of different skills levels, both women and men, training within companies and outside, provision by other providers, etc.

5.8.

Adult education, due to its wide range and vast number of different providers, lacks coordination at both Member State and European level. An integrated approach that ties together multiple policy domains and stakeholders, with special focus on democratic governance of LLL policy development and implementation, including effective social dialogue with social partners and consultation with civil society, may improve policy effectiveness of investment, thereby increasing the chances that the highly diverse potential target groups will be reached and that the needs of vulnerable individuals will be addressed.

5.9.

In order for the LLL to be successful, the EESC appeals to all EU and national decision-makers to address the following challenges for LLL environments and to financially support solutions to these issues, in line with the scope of their responsibilities:

5.9.1.

design and implement long-term strategies for fostering collaborations between formal, non-formal and informal learning providers in order to support learners’ learning and training needs; such strategies should be co-created with and encompass support for their representative associations at regional, national and European level in order to be sustainable;

5.9.2.

ensure that learners can take an active role in their learning pathways by designing these primarily around their needs, enabling them to become active creators rather than passive consumers of knowledge and innovation;

5.9.3.

support learners of all ages and backgrounds in accessing, combining and moving between different forms of learning, in line with their personal needs and aptitudes, through more flexible education and training systems and the provision of high-quality lifelong guidance;

5.9.4.

treat the validation of non-formal and informal learning (as stipulated in the Council Recommendation on Validation (35)) as an urgent priority in light of its potential to boost the visibility of all skills, competences and knowledge that may support meaningful participation in society and the labour market, particularly for vulnerable groups (36);

5.9.5.

enhance the provision of lifelong learning opportunities at local level by making use of existing community and education infrastructure to create multifunctional learning spaces open to all; such ‘Community Lifelong Learning Centres’ already exist in various forms across the Member States but should become a mainstream concept for policy-making.

6. Specific comments on European and national funding sources and policies needed to ensure sustainable funding (37)

6.1. On EU sources of funding

6.1.1.

The European Commission in its 2021-2027 Multi-financial Framework announced several ways to improve the EU Investment Plan by introducing in the InvestEU framework the creation of a window dedicated to Social Investment and Skills. This demonstrates a commitment to earmarking social investment and creating the right instruments to allow it to happen.

6.1.2.

The Commission and the Member States should use the opportunities provided by the EU funds (such as the ESF, Erasmus+, EFSI, and other relevant EU instruments) and make the best use of the available EU financial resources. The upcoming MFF should in any event counter the limitation of budgetary possibilities for LLL at Member State and EU level (38). However, while EU funds can play an important role in the development of skills/LLL, over-reliance on EU funds may raise concerns about funding sustainability as EU funding is allocated to projects and is temporary by nature.

6.1.3.

In order to ensure sustainable national investment in LLL and AL, the European Semester process plays an essential role in highlighting the necessary focus on funding. For national/regional LLL policies to be effectively implemented, an adequate level of funding needs to be secured. More sustainability and continuity of funding is key in order to ensure the sustainability of the work of adult education and training provision and the ability of LLL providers to innovate and develop within the field.

6.2. On policies supporting proper distribution of funding

6.2.1.

Developing an evaluation culture is important. Various factors can contribute to it, such as a political commitment to evidence-based policymaking (and accountability), legal requirements for evaluation, evaluation requirements of European funding and training and education of evaluators to ensure evaluation throughout the policy cycle.

6.2.2.

It is important to regularly review the effectiveness of financial and non-financial support measures in reaching target groups of adults and efficiency in the use of resources. Robust monitoring and evaluation arrangements need to be in place. The results of evaluations should feed into and inform policymaking in relation to LLL. Based on robust evidence, evaluations can suggest the need to modify (or discontinue) existing measures and/or introduce new ones. They can also identify effective practices which could be expanded through further or more sustained funding. Social partners should be involved in monitoring and evaluation of the systems.

6.2.3.

There is a need for financing mechanisms which mobilise national resources and involve adequate sharing of costs between public authorities, employers, individuals and other relevant stakeholders (e.g. social partners, training providers, NGOs). As set out in Cedefop’s database on financing adult learning (39), there are various financing mechanisms, targeted at individuals and companies/employers and aimed at increasing participation and private investment in education and training. These possibilities have to be properly coordinated by public authorities, while in the case of sectoral training funds it is mainly the social partners that take a coordinating role. The financial instruments for individuals include, for example, individual learning accounts (ILA)/vouchers, (low cost) loans and paid training leave. The financial support for companies might be through training funds (based on company levies), tax-incentives, or grants (funded from general taxation). These kinds of cost-sharing instruments are also a way of ensuring joint responsibility for developing/implementing LLL policies and investing in skills.

6.2.4.

Social dialogue and collective agreements, in particular at sectoral level, play an important role in the governance of training systems and in creating training opportunities and improving the relevance and provision of employee training. This involves social partners working together to foster transition and career paths between sectors. Training funds have been established in several Member States and can play an important role (40).

6.2.5.

Financing instruments might be more effective when combined with suitable non-financial support measures. The instruments need to be carefully designed to target effectively the specific/priority vulnerable groups (such as the low-skilled, older unemployed, employees of SMEs). When designing a financing instrument, it is also important to consider its complementarity and synergy with other existing instruments.

6.2.5.1.

Non-financial measures for individuals also involve the measures generally provided as part of career guidance or lifelong guidance services and validation opportunities. These services should also inform learners about the financial support for adult learning available to them and how to access it.

6.2.5.2.

For companies, non-financial support may be offered through: information and advice in relation to funding opportunities, administrative support in applying for funding, identifying training needs and developing training plans through consulting services, promoting partnerships or company networks (among SMEs or including SMEs) to pool resources and address insufficient training capacity.

6.2.6.

Any administrative burden for applicants, recipients of funding and the entities managing the funds should be minimised, while proper design/appropriate targeting and effective monitoring of the financing instrument should ensure that deadweight and/or substitution effects are avoided.

Brussels, 7 May 2020.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER

(1) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/mission-letter-nicolas-schmit_en.pdf

(2) OJ C 389, 18.11.2019, p. 12.

(3) European Education Area.

(4) https://eu2020.hr/

(5) COM(2020) 14 final.

(6) OJ C 332, 8.10.2015, p. 68.

(7) Council Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning (OJ C 398, 22.12.2012, p. 1) and (OJ C 13, 15.1.2016, p. 49).

(8) Council conclusions on The key role of lifelong learning policies in empowering societies to address the technological and green transition in support of inclusive and sustainable growth.

(9) OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 165.

(10) Report on European Agenda for Adult Learning.

(11) For instance, the World Economic Forum published a report (2015) that focused on the pressing issue of the 21st-century skills gap and ways to address it through technology, where it highlights the need for competencies (such as critical thinking and collaboration) and character qualities (such as curiosity, initiative and leadership) besides traditionally mentioned foundational literacies.

(12) Opinion OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 46 and OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 8.

(13) World Economic Forum report — New Vision for Education: Unlocking the Potential of Technology.

(14) COM(2020) 14 final.

(15) European association for the education of adults (EAEA) background paper on Adult education and sustainability.

(16) OJ C 262, 25.7.2018, p. 1.

(17) Global Commission on the Future of Work report on Work for a brighter future.

(18) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/mission-letter-nicolas-schmit_en.pdf

(19) OJ C 389, 18.11.2019, p. 12.

(20) European Education Area.

(21) European Commission Report — Developing the adult learning sector.

(22) Cedefop.

(23) Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March 2000 — Presidency Conclusions.

(24) Employment guidelines.

(25) Country reports.

(26) for BG, HR, CZ, EE, FI, DE, GR, IE, IT, LV, LU, PL, RO, SK, ES, and UK.

(27) for AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, EE, FI, FR, DE, GR, HU, IT, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SK, SI, ES, SE, and UK.

(28) for BG, EE, GR, IT, PT, RO, and SE.

(29) COM(2019) 500 final.

(30) OJ C 332, 8.10.2015, p. 68.

(31) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 8, OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 60.

(32) OJ C 177, 18.5.2016, p. 35, OJ C 268, 14.8.2015, p. 27.

(33) OJ C 226, 16.7.2014, p. 21.

(34) Council Recommendation of 19 December 2016 on ‘Upskilling Pathways: New Opportunities for Adults’ (OJ C 484, 24.12.2016, p. 1.)

(35) Council Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning (OJ C 398, 22.12.2012, p. 1).

(36) OJ C 13, 15.1.2016, p. 49.

(37) See also ‘Cedefop analytical framework for developing upskilling pathways for adults’.

(38) In its opinion (OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 194), the EESC called for the Erasmus+ programme’s budget to be tripled.

(39) Cedefop database.

(40) European social partners Report ‘Promoting social partnership in employee training’.

14.7.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/18

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States

[COM(2020) 70 final]

(2020/C 232/03)

Rapporteur-general:

Ellen NYGREN

Referral	Council of the European Union, 6.3.2020
Legal basis	Article 148(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Section responsible	Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship
Adopted at plenary	7.5.2020
Plenary session No	551 — Remote Plenary Session
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	251/03/07

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

The EESC welcomes the proposed revised employment guidelines. Their role to serve as a long-term compass for the employment policies of EU Member States is important also in times of crisis. Employment policies are key to the economic and social development of the European Union as a whole and that of its Member States. The implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights is a common means to strive for sustainable upward convergence, and in this respect the revision of the employment guidelines is appropriate. The EU and its Member States must make further efforts to eliminate disparities. Upward convergence is a cross-cutting principle, which must be taken into account and integrated into all EU policies.

1.2.

The proposal on the revised employment guidelines was published before the broad outbreak of COVID-19. COVID-19 has since developed into a pandemic and its effects have led to a striking need for urgent action also in terms of labour market policies. In order to limit the spread of the disease, measures have been put in place in an unprecedented way in all EU Member States and beyond. The EESC finds that more is needed in terms of coordinated action.

1.3.

The EESC is convinced that only a comprehensive European economic recovery plan would allow the EU Member States, its citizens, companies and workers to best face the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and rebuild a more sustainable and resilient European economy. While it is uncertain how long the extraordinary situation created by the COVID-19 crisis will last, it is clear that the labour market effects will continue over an extended period. The Employment Guidelines for 2020 should, therefore, also be adapted to take account of this new situation.

1.4.

The economic shock caused by the COVID-19 outbreak, has already resulted in an employment and social crisis, which may have a severe and long-lasting impact on the European labour markets. In this context, adopting an additional and extraordinary/emergency employment guideline in order to guide necessary adaptions of employment policies in the EU Member States to tackle this unprecedented situation should be considered for this year. Such an emergency COVID-19 employment guideline could include references to efficient temporary measures needed to mitigate the impact of the crisis, such as short-term work arrangements, income support, extension of sick pay and the promotion of remote working (while respecting employers’ responsibility for the health and safety of the employees).

1.5.

According to Guideline 5, Member States are still encouraged to foster ‘innovative forms of work’. While new forms of work and innovation provide opportunities for growth, the EESC has previously highlighted the many challenges associated with this type of work. The employment guidelines should seek to translate the trends associated with these new forms of work into fair employment opportunities. The call for setting up adequate and fair wages, either through improving statutory minimum wages mechanisms where they exist or through collective bargaining, should be welcomed. The involvement of social partners is key, and it is very positive that the Guideline 5 is calling for Member States to ‘promote social dialogue and collective bargaining with a view to wage setting’. The guideline should in this respect include in the very end proposals to strengthen the effectiveness of collective agreements by enhancing their coverage.

1.6.

Regarding Guideline 6 on ‘Enhancing labour supply and improving access to employment, skills and competences’: the EESC appreciates that the guideline refers to an overarching vision of competences aligned with a productive system which is sustainable. The EESC welcomes that the guidelines are calling on Member States to adapt and invest in their education and training systems to provide high quality and inclusive education, including vocational education and training. The EESC calls in this respect for more effective European and national strategies on ensuring sustainable financing for reskilling and up-skilling of all adults through life-long learning focusing in particular on providing effective support to workers and the unemployed.

1.7.

Regarding Guideline 7 on ‘Enhancing the functioning of labour markets and the effectiveness of social dialogue’: The proper functioning of social dialogue is essential for any employment policy, including the implementation of the EU employment guidelines. Therefore, more needs to be done to facilitate and promote social dialogue, both at national and European level. In addition, the Commission has made advances in the involvement of civil society in the European Semester process, and this is to be welcomed and should be built upon. One element missing in this guideline is the need for a better occupational safety and health. In the context of the COVID-19 outbreak, a healthy and safe workplace is vital in order to combat the risk of getting infected and for spreading virus and other diseases. As always, and particularly in these exceptional circumstances, employers need to take the responsibility of the health and safety of their workers and provide them and their representatives with adequate information, make risk assessments and take prevention measures. Public authorities, businesses, employees and social partners must all play a role in order to protect workers, their families and society at large.

1.8.

Most small and micro enterprises have limited economic and managerial resources, and should therefore be provided with practical, financial and tailored support for occupational safety and health (OSH) programmes for them to adapt workplaces, and to quickly implement new procedures and practices to protect workers. Labour inspectors, EU-OSHA (the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work), the Enterprise Europe Network and the competent authorities at national level can offer practical support — such as cost effective and free of charge user-friendly tools, information, guidance and advice.

1.9.

Concerning Guideline 8 on ‘Promoting equal opportunities for all, fostering social inclusion and fighting poverty’: all forms of discriminatory practices must be fought. Social protection and health care must be provided to all. Promotion of women’s participation in the labour force, as well as active ageing for all, should be supported by proper measures like access to quality public services and decent working conditions for all. The employment guidelines should also consider social protection objectives like full and effective coverage, adequacy and transparency.

2. Background

2.1.

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that Member States are to regard their economic policies and promoting employment as a matter of common concern and shall coordinate their action within the Council (1). Article 148 TFEU provides that the Council is to adopt employment guidelines. The guidelines frame the scope and direction for Member States’ policy coordination and they serve as a basis for country specific recommendations within the European Semester process.

2.2.

The employment guidelines and the economic policy guidelines were first adopted together as an ‘integrated package’ in 2010, in connection with the Europe 2020 strategy. In 2018, the employment guidelines were aligned with the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights. The EESC welcomed this alignment from the very beginning (2), but demanded here and in a number of its subsequent opinions (3) that more has to be done in practice to truly fulfil and implement the Pillar.

2.3.

Since the European Semester has been updated in order to integrate the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Annual Growth Survey has been transformed into the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy (ASGS), and the employment guidelines are now proposed to be revised.

2.4.

The Commission’s proposal for a Council Decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States was adopted on 26 February 2020, before the start of the coordination of emergency measures to deal with the COVID-19 outbreak. The immediate objective of public authorities must be to seek to ensure the right balance between safeguarding public heath by reducing the spread of the virus and maintaining vital economic activity.

2.5.

The ILO has warned that the employment impacts of COVID-19 are ‘deep, far-reaching and unprecedented’ (4) which could lead to millions of jobs losses, as well as an increase in underemployment and in the working poor, which far outweighs the effects of the 2008-2009 financial crisis. Reducing the scale of the impact will depend on how quickly and decisively political decisions are taken and implemented.

2.6.

The EESC is convinced that only a comprehensive European economic recovery plan would allow the EU Member States, its citizens, companies and workers to best face the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and rebuild a more sustainable and resilient European economy (5). Member States should reach rapid agreement on a new multi-annual financial framework (MFF), reducing uncertainty regarding EU investment funding from 2021.

2.7.

Businesses and workers across a range of economic sectors have been dramatically affected. Many enterprises, particularly micro and SMEs and social enterprises are threatened with insolvency and millions of workers are vulnerable to income loss and redundancy (6). On average, about 90 % of SMEs report to be economically affected and expect an increase in the unemployment rate in a range between 3 %-5 % points (7). Targeted measures are needed to support businesses and jobs in key sectors that have been particularly impacted.

2.8.

In Europe and across the world, healthcare workers have rightly been applauded as the heroes on the front line, doing their utmost to save lives and in too many cases paying the ultimate price themselves. In some countries, they, as well as teachers, other public sector workers, live-in care workers and caregiver workers have been undervalued and suffered the brunt of austerity measures, following the 2008 crisis. Going forward, it is essential that this renewed appreciation is concretely translated into improved terms and conditions and the necessary investment in public services and in particular in the welfare system.

2.9.

The COVID-19 crisis is also sharply illustrating the existing structural problems in European labour markets. Inequalities persist between workers who benefit from more stable and secure forms of work and those in more precarious forms of work. Flexibility for both employers and workers is needed to address the rapid changes in the world of work and this must be underpinned by promoting security and fair working conditions in all forms of work.

2.10.

Many of the workers who are typically considered as ‘low’ skilled and, are commensurately low-paid, have in fact been the key workers helping to keep our world moving, often putting themselves and their loved ones at risk.

2.11.

Those workers, who are already the most vulnerable in terms of access to and participation in the labour market, are at greater risk of exclusion. This includes women, the young, people with disabilities, and other groups experiencing discrimination in the workplace such migrants and Roma. Certain workers, particularly women, may be forced to abandon their jobs in order to fulfil caring responsibilities for children and other family members.

2.12.

The main concern of European companies has been to keep their position on the market and maintain jobs for millions workers. Companies and the social partners have been finding pragmatic solutions, such as adapting business plans, introducing short time working schemes, teleworking or other flexible alternatives, and creating conditions for a distance training at company level.

2.13.

In the light of these developments, the European Union’s coordination of employment policies must be adapted to respond to this new and unprecedented situation. The Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation on the establishment of a European instrument for temporary support to mitigate unemployment risks in an emergency (SURE) following the COVID-19 outbreak (8) is a welcomed initiative to provide immediate support to workers and businesses. If speedily implemented, this will help to cushion the negative employment impacts and foster conditions for a prompt recovery. While it is uncertain how long the extraordinary situation created by the COVID-19 crisis will last, it is clear that the effects will continue over an extended period. The Employment Guidelines for 2020 should, therefore, also be adapted to take account of this new situation.

2.14.

The Employment Guidelines should be stable over a longer period and valid for all Member States, given different national circumstances. However it should be considered in face of the current COVID-19 outbreak — which is already showing signs of transforming into an economic and social crisis, with severe and long-lasting impact on the European labour markets — to adopt this year an additional and extraordinary/emergency employment guideline in order to guide necessary adaptions of employment policies in the EU Member States to tackle this unprecedented situation. The existing Open Method of Coordination should be further improved to support Member States to benchmark progress to reform and improve the performance of their employment policies and national social protection systems.

2.15.

An emergency COVID-19 employment guideline could include references to efficient temporary measures needed to mitigate the impact of the crisis, such as short-term work arrangements, income support, extension of sick pay, postponement of employers’ social security contributions, preliminary tax on salaries and value added tax, and the promotion of remote working (while respecting employers’ responsibility for the health and safety of the employees).

2.16.

Against the background of the COVID-19 crisis, the EESC takes this opinion as an opportunity to put forward comments and recommendations on how to tackle the unprecedented disruptions of labour markets in a growing number of countries followed by the partial shutdown of social and economic life in order to fight the virus infection. This situation will make it necessary for EU Member States to adapt their employment policies.

3. General comments

3.1.

The EESC refers to previous opinions on the employment guidelines and reiterates some valid points from these:

—	Greater efforts are required to invest in quality job creation and to tackle precarious work as this also restrains productivity (9).

—	The EU and its Member States must make further efforts to eliminate disparities. Upward convergence is a cross-cutting principle, which must be taken into account and integrated into all EU policies (10).

—	The EESC reiterates its call for a proper social investment package as part of a European growth and investment programme worth 2 % of GDP (11).

—	Provisions on gender equality need to be featured into each guideline and there needs to be a strong focus on issues of low pay in addressing the gender pay gap (12).

—	The strategy of social inclusion for people with disabilities, for migrants and for Roma is reaffirmed in various opinions.

—	Effective social dialogue is key to achieving upward social convergence and access to quality employment, skills and competences and to improving the design and implementation of reforms stemming from these objectives (13).

—

The only way of building fairer societies is to generate more inclusive and sustainable economic growth and jobs coupled with improved productivity and competitiveness with the aim of ensuring that people have decent working conditions, adequate remuneration and pensions and are able to exercise their rights (14).

—

The Committee has also drawn attention to the need for improvements to the scoreboard and the need for a both economic and social European Semester in one of its opinions on the Pillar (15). The relationship between the surveillance of macroeconomic matters and employment and social policies is critical.

—

It is still the view of the EESC that despite advances with the Pillar and the integration of employment guidelines with the broad economic policy guidelines there remains a lack of convergence between both packages of guidelines. The EESC welcomes the update of the guidelines, based on the integration of the Sustainable Development Goals into the European Semester.

3.2.

The EESC reiterates that when designing policies for regulating the labour market and social rights, competitiveness, productivity and social sustainability including workers’ rights should form a seamless part of those policies, given that there is a clear connection between them. All policies implemented by European, national and local institutions should take into account an appropriate balance between economic sustainability, and social and environmental sustainability (16).

3.3.

Employment policies are key to the economic and social development of the EU as a whole and of its Member States. The employment guidelines have an important role to bring together the Commission, national governments, employers and trade unions to modernise employment policies and social protection systems to the changing economic and social context in Europe.

3.4.

The European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) can be a means for promoting upward convergence and better living and working conditions in the whole of EU. The future of the labour market should be a key priority in the debates on the Pillar, in order to address the major changes taking place in this area, and a consistent European employment strategy covering the following themes is needed:

—	investment and innovation;

—	employment and quality job creation;

—	fair working conditions for all;

—	fair and smooth transitions supported by active labour market policies;

—	equal opportunities for all;

—	the involvement of all stakeholders, especially the social partners

—	investment in education and training systems to provide high quality and inclusive education, including vocational education and training, lifelong learning, upskilling and reskilling notably to take account of digital and green skills requirements.

3.5.

Effective implementation of the EPSR in the Member States will only be possible if they have sufficient financial resources to invest in social policies, thus translating rights and principles into specific policy initiatives. Therefore, mechanisms such as the European Social Fund and the European Fund for Strategic Investments must play an important part (17).

3.6.

In particular, unemployment poses a major challenge for most countries. The effects of the COVID-19 crisis demand more efforts for active labour market policies than under normal circumstances. More needs to be done at both EU and national levels.

3.7.

Aligned with the principles of the EPSR, the employment guidelines can be an important tool for Member States in developing and implementing policies and measures to mitigate the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 crisis in the short term, and to emerge from the crisis without undermining labour rights or losing competitiveness. This can be coordinated within the European Semester framework. For the employment guidelines, it should be a priority to promote social dialogue. A strong social dialogue should be ensured at all levels in order to deal with the effects of the crisis in a sustainable way, both economically and socially.

3.8.

Job retention plus properly compensated short-time work is in this view better for employers as well as employees than redundancy. The EU-wide promotion and the financial support of such labour market instruments would be an important contribution to stabilise economic and social life in these exceptional circumstances.

3.9.

In this context, the EESC welcomed the establishment of SURE (18), the instrument announced by the EU Commission and developed to financially support short-time work arrangements, income compensation mechanisms and other measures aimed at preventing unemployment following the COVID-19 outbreak.

3.10.

With respect to the guidelines to Member States on how to apply this instrument, the EESC calls upon the Commission to ensure at least that a) all Member States put in place short-time work or similar measures, b) such measures should cover all workers, sectors and companies, c) payments are made preferably to companies that step up efforts to avoid dismissals, d) Social Partners are fully involved in the designing, development and implementation of the schemes, at national, sectoral and company level, and adequate EU funding should be allocated to help Member States implementing the measures needed.

3.11.

In their recent Joint Statement on COVID-19 (19), the European Social Partners urge that all efforts need to be undertaken to help workers, enterprises, economic activities and public services to survive the crisis, so they will be able to resume their activities when the crisis ends, to keep workers in their jobs meanwhile, to protect them from unemployment and loss of income, and to alleviate financial losses.

3.12.

The Social Partners urge the governments to approve in particular measures envisaging:

—

avoiding single market distortions, including bans and export restrictions and especially for export of medical equipment and medicines, and stopping closing borders for goods; safeguarding all freight transport modes is a priority within the EU, also having an essential role to coordinate and inform regarding actions taken in Member States;

—	encouraging Member States’ spending and investment particularly to reinforce staff, equipment and means for national health services, social protection systems and other services of general interest;

—	mobilising unused structural funds and other EU funds, to support Member States in ensuring financial and income support for workers affected by unemployment or suspension from work;

—	ensuring credit access and financial support for enterprises, especially all types of SMEs, affected by lockdown and emergency measures, with a coordinated intervention from the EU budget, the ECB, the EIB, and national promotional banks;

—	activating the Solidarity Fund for natural disasters and any other available funding at EU level adjusting the currently insufficient budget;

—	the efforts by the European Commission to deploy full flexibility within State Aid rules should also be acknowledged.

3.13.

Member States should involve national Social Partners in the designing and implementation of national measures.

3.14.

The Commission and Member States must ensure that financial support reaches enterprises, especially all types of SMEs, and all workers, including those with precarious jobs who are most vulnerable.

3.15.

The Commission’s plan to apply flexibility regarding the application of its fiscal and State Aid rules is essential to supporting public services, which are stretched to the limit, as well as companies and workers hit by the crisis.

3.16.

EU funds invested in protecting workers and enterprises from the worst effects of the crisis should be additional to Member States’ spending.

3.17.

Europe must show responsibility, solidarity and efficiency in facing this emergency, by protecting all its affected citizens, workers and enterprises.

4. Specific comments

4.1.

The role of the employment guidelines to serve as a compass is important also in times of COVID-19 crisis, when short-term measures get most of the attention. The long-term perspective must not be forgotten even in times of urgency, in order to strive for sustainable upward convergence.

4.2. Guideline 5: Boosting the demand for labour

4.2.1.

From a long-term perspective, the guideline falls short in providing effective measures to boosting the demand for labour. All measures proposed refer to entry barriers for businesses and putting forward tax shifts to reduce the fiscal burden of labour. This proposal is short-term and does not consider the political implications of reducing the financial capacity of the state.

4.2.2.

4.2.3.

The call for setting up adequate wages, either through improving statutory minimum wage setting mechanisms where they exist or through collective bargaining, should be welcomed. The involvement of social partners is key, and it is very positive that the guidelines are calling for Member States to ‘promote social dialogue and collective bargaining with a view to wage setting’. The EESC is currently preparing an opinion on decent minimum wages (21).

4.2.4.

The movement of taxation away from labour to other sources in the Guidelines is welcomed as well as the new specification. However, there is need for more clarity on other possible sources. The EESC has adopted opinions targeting issues like aggressive tax planning, fraud and evasion (22).

4.2.5.

This guideline should include in the very end proposals to strengthen the effectiveness of collective agreements by enhancing their coverage. At the same time it is a prerequisite and of utmost importance that the subsidiarity principle as well as the autonomous role of the social partners is fully respected (23).

4.3. Guideline 6: Enhancing labour supply and improving access to employment, skills and competences

4.3.1.

It is good that the guideline refers to an overarching vision of competences aligned with a productive system which is sustainable. The EESC welcomes that the guidelines are calling on Member States to adapt and invest in their education and training systems to provide high quality and inclusive education, including vocational education and training.

4.3.2.

The EESC encourages Member States to make the best use of the opportunities provided by the EU funds, which should be also sustained by national resources. The EESC calls for more effective European and national strategies on ensuring sustainable financing for reskilling and up-skilling of all adults, focusing in particular on providing effective support to workers and the unemployed by public employment services, companies, individual training accounts and other practices used at the national levels. Given the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak, immediate measures might be needed to adapt the labour supply to current needs and demands, for instance companies in the service sector temporarily lending their staff to the healthcare sector.

4.3.3.

The EESC suggests to the European Commission to be more ambitious in setting indicators and benchmarks of adult learning participation and access to employee training as well as indicators relating to public and private investment in VET, and the right of workers to paid leave for training purposes should be considered and required in Employment Guideline 6 (24).

4.3.4.

Reskilling and upskilling will be a key ingredient in order to adapt the labour markets during the times of the COVID-19 crisis but also to make sure that Europe emerge from it stronger and more competitive. Member States should build up or strengthen job transition support mechanisms and systems, with support from the European Social Fund. The purpose of such mechanisms is to create ways back to employment, preventing redundancies leading to prolonged unemployment, but also opening pathways to new jobs and various processes of job-creation.

4.3.5.

A better understanding of the changing nature of work and employment relationships in the digital era should lead to a more effective EU employment policy. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a situation where more people than ever before are teleworking. Teleworking is not suitable for all circumstances or all types of positions, but if telework is practised correctly, it can be an important component of the response to providing working time flexibility to help workers achieve better work-life balance and in the interests of companies. Ensuring proper health and safety arrangements both in the workplace and regarding conditions for teleworking, including respecting working time limits, is essential. More research into and investment for measures to address new and emerging risks, including stress and other psychosocial risks is also required.

4.3.6.

Bringing about full digital literacy for all teachers and pupils as well as for all Europeans, including those in marginalised areas, requires proper public funding and competent technical staff. It is essential to guarantee access to the internet and provide digital literacy training to anyone at risk, and to ensure that such people are able to exercise their rights and access social services.

4.3.7.

The EESC already stressed the need to safeguard decent income during training. Instruments used in some EU Member States should also be examined with a view to making good practice in the area of minimum standards regarding entitlements to educational leave standard practice in the other Member States.

4.3.8.

In matters of the support for the unemployed and in light of the increased number of workers who are long-term unemployed, the employment guidelines should address the need for undertaking early action to avoid the scarring effect of being outside the labour market. The coverage and level of unemployment benefits need to be sufficient. Some national systems are too rigid when it comes to qualification and the reimbursement is too low. In this respect, the EESC has recently called for European actions towards minimum standards for national unemployment schemes (25).

4.3.9.

While facilitating employment opportunities in all kinds of forms of work, putting quality jobs on the agenda should be at the core of the long-term employment vision of the EU.

4.4. Guideline 7: Enhancing the functioning of labour markets and the effectiveness of social dialogue

4.4.1.

The call to fight for transparent and predictable conditions, to prevent segmentation and precarious employment, and foster the transition towards open-ended contracts is a positive sign. The same applies to the strengthening and enhancing of social partners capacity to bargain collectively. The employment guidelines should also aim at promoting collective bargaining coverage and ensuring that all workers have the right to organise and free access to trade union representation.

4.4.2.

The provisions on access to impartial dispute resolution in this guideline should have general application rather than just to ‘unfair dismissals’. However the rights of parties to utilise the courts where alternative dispute resolution has failed should be respected (26).

4.4.3.

Other positive elements of the Commission proposal, in comparison with current employment guidelines, are the emphasis on fair conditions for mobile workers, and references to the fight against discrimination and putting an end to in-work poverty. It will be important for Member States to take mobile workers, including frontier workers, into account when implementing measures, such as closing borders, to cushion the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak.

4.4.4.

One element missing in this guideline is the need for a better occupational safety and health. In the context of the COVID-19 outbreak, a healthy and safe workplace is vital in order to combat the risk of being infected and for spreading virus and other diseases. Employers need to take the responsibility of the health and safety of their workers and provide them and their representatives with adequate information, make risk assessments and take prevention measures. Public authorities, businesses, employees and social partners must all play a role in order to protect workers, their families and society at large. To enhance the functioning of labour markets, Member States should invest in occupational health and safety, and ensure adequate means and provisions for labour inspectorates or trade union health and safety representatives and support for employers.

4.4.5.

Most small and micro enterprises have limited economic and managerial resources, and should therefore be provided with practical, financial and tailored support for occupational safety and health (OSH) programmes for them to adapt workplaces, and to quickly implement new procedures and practices to protect workers. Labour inspectors, EU-OSHA (the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work), the Enterprise Europe Network and the competent authorities at national level can offer practical support — such as cost-effective and free of charge user-friendly tools, information, guidance and advice.

4.4.6.

The EESC would suggest more to be done to promote capacity building for social partners in social dialogue, provide for investment in structures to support social dialogue and to promote procedures that promote social dialogue. There are countries with less developed social dialogue and indeed those who are still at the setbacks in this area due to the crisis. We welcome the efforts of the European Commission to increase the cooperation with social partners in the context of the European Semester. Given the centrality of social dialogue in the delivery of the Pillar of Social Rights and in the implementation of the employment guidelines and Country Specific Recommendations, the EESC reiterates its call for it to be present in all Member States and urges all political players at national and European level to strengthen collective bargaining structures at all levels. In addition, the Commission has made advances in the involvement of civil society in country specific reporting and this is to be welcomed and should be built upon.

4.5. Guideline 8: Promoting equal opportunities for all, fostering social inclusion and fighting poverty

4.5.1.

Social protection coverage is approached in the light of the demographic challenge and the need for workers to stay longer at work. The employment guidelines should also consider objectives like full and effective coverage, adequacy and transparency.

4.5.2.

Gender equality can only be achieved by increasing women’s participation at every level of the labour market, both in terms of employment rates and by increasing women’s average working hours. Further measures are needed to address barriers to women’s employment such as lack of affordable and accessible care and to eliminate the gender pay gap. To do so, various structural obstacles need to be addressed at European and national levels, including increased investment in quality public services and measures to address pay transparency. Entrepreneurship can be an opportunity for women’s economic independence with quality jobs, successful careers, lifting women out of poverty and social exclusion, and contributing to a more balanced gender representation in decision-making.

4.5.3.

For people with disabilities, it is particularly important that access to the labour market is facilitated by addressing discriminatory practices. Proper support must be provided by employment services and public campaigns to tackle prejudice and promote non-discrimination of people with disabilities. As regards access to services with regard to disability, it is necessary to refer to independent living as well as accessibility.

4.5.4.

In order to secure access to healthcare for all, the need for a sustainable, efficient, affordable and accessible provision of quality health care services and proper funding for appropriately trained health care staff must be given attention.

4.5.5.

With regards to active ageing, concrete proposals are needed to avoid the promotion of inadequate policies for senior workers. As agreed by the European Social Partners in the ‘European social partners’ autonomous framework agreement on active ageing and an inter-generational approach (27), active ageing ‘is about optimising opportunities for workers of all ages to work in good quality, productive and healthy conditions until legal retirement age, based on mutual commitment and motivation of employers and workers’.

4.5.6.

The EESC also stressed in this regard in a number of opinions, the need to promote intergenerational solidarity flanked by effective growth and employment policies. We need a real ‘active ageing’ policy, to have good working conditions, health and safety and working time policies and to increase participation in lifelong learning. We further need to boost employment rates for older people, who are often obliged to give up work early due to health problems, the intensity of work, early dismissals, and lack of opportunities for training or re-entering the labour market (28).

Brussels, 7 May 2020.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER

(1) Article 146 paragraph 2, Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

(2) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57.

(3) OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 1.

(4) See ILO Monitor 2nd edition: COVID-19 and the world of work.

(5) See EESC's declaration ‘The EU’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak and the need for unprecedented solidarity amongst Member States’.

(6) SMEunited ‘A view on the COVID impact on and support measures for SMEs’; BusinessEurope ‘Video conference of the members of the European Council on 23 April 2020 — Letter from Pierre Gattaz and Markus J. Beyrer to the President of the European Council Charles Michel’.

(7) SMEunited ‘A view on the COVID impact on and support measures for SMEs’.

(8) COM(2020) 139 final.

(9) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 32, point 3.1.4.

(10) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 32, point 1.7.

(11) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, point pt. 1.3 and 4.3.

(12) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, point pt. 1.13.

(13) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 32, point 3.3.1.

(14) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 32, point 3.4.1.

(15) OJ C 81, 2.3.2018, p. 145.

(16) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 32, point 1.3.

(17) OJ C 282, 20.8.2019, p. 32, point 3.5.5.

(18) European instrument for temporary support to mitigate unemployment risks in an emergency (SURE) following the COVID-19 outbreak

(19) European Social Partners joint statement on COVID-19

(20) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, point 5.1.

(21) EESC opinion on ‘Decent minimum wages across Europe’ (SOC/632) (ongoing).

(22) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57; OJ C 129, 11.4.2018, p. 1.

(23) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, point 5.5.

(24) EESC opinion on ‘Sustainable funding for lifelong learning and development of skills, in the context of a shortage of skilled labour’ (exploratory opinion at the request of the Croatian presidency) (SOC/629) (see page 8 of this Official Journal).

(25) OJ C 97, 24.3.2020, p. 32.

(26) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, point 5.9.

(27) ‘European social partners’ autonomous framework agreement on active ageing and an inter-generational approach

(28) OJ C 237, 6.7.2018, p. 57, point 5.9 and opinion on ‘The changing world of work and the longevity/ageing population — The preconditions for ageing workers to stay active in the new world of work’ (OJ C 14, 15.1.2020, p. 60).

14.7.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/29

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down certain transitional provisions for the support by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) in the year 2021 and amending Regulations (EU) No 228/2013, (EU) No 229/2013 and (EU) No 1308/2013 as regards resources and their distribution in respect of the year 2021 and amending Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013 as regards their resources and application in the year 2021’

(COM(2019) 581 — 2019/0254 (COD))

(2020/C 232/04)

Rapporteur working alone:

Arnold Puech d’Alissac

Consultation	Council, 22.11.2019 European Parliament, 25.11.2019
Legal basis	Articles 43(2) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Section responsible	Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment
Adopted in section	6.3.2020
Adopted at plenary	7.5.2020
Plenary session	551 — Remote plenary session
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	254/0/7

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

The EESC congratulates the Commission on its proposal for a transition year for the CAP (first and second pillars) in 2021; a year without direct aid from the first pillar would have resulted in deficits for all farmers; a year without aid from the second pillar would have interrupted commitments for high environmental and climate objectives and put back investment for modernisation.

1.2.

According to the Commission’s proposals, the transition period that will begin on 1 January 2021 should be one year. The EESC strongly recommends introducing a flexible mechanism for extending this period by an additional year, which would be triggered automatically if the EU’s long-term budget (multiannual financial framework) and common agricultural policy are not agreed and approved by 30 October 2020.

1.3.

The EESC is pleased that the conditions for receiving aid between 2020 and 2021 are remaining in force, as EU farmers have already got to grips with conditionalities and greening.

1.4.

The EESC warns of the risk of setting the deadline for notifying changes at 1 August 2020. Too late an agreement on the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) might fail to allow timely decisions to be taken at national level.

1.5.

The Commission’s approach in regularising the number and value of basic payment (BPS) entitlements is forward-looking.

1.6.

Convergence of BPS entitlements remains at the discretion of the Member States, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle.

1.7.

The possibility of extending the rural development programmes (RDPs) by a year has to go hand in hand with the possibility of using all second pillar funds not used during the period 2014-2020 after 2020.

1.7.1.

The Committee particularly stresses the urgent need to ensure rapid uptake of the second pillar with a view to getting activity going again after the crisis triggered by COVID-19. This would entail supporting young farmers setting up in business, the short supply chains which have been so important during the crisis, collective production and marketing initiatives and agrotourism. In this situation, particular attention must be given to outermost, island, mountain and remote regions which are heavily dependent on tourism.

1.8.

The EESC welcomes the fact that second pillar multiannual measures (organic farming and agri-environment-climate measures) are extended by a year, but calls for the duration of the related commitments to be extended to five years, as in the 2014-2020 period. The proposal to limit this to three years will certainly generate red tape and certainly not lead to results for the environment.

2. Background

2.1.

The budget programming period for the current CAP ends on 31 December 2020. Although the current CAP regulations are not formally limited in time, the absence of relevant budget allocations will make them inapplicable. Furthermore, the legislative proposals defining the CAP for the next programming period (2021-2027) are still under negotiation and unlikely to be adopted in time to allow this new CAP to be implemented as of 1 January 2021. The implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans, currently being drafted in each Member State, will start at the earliest on 1 January 2022. A Transitional Regulation for the year 2021 is therefore called for.

2.2.

2.3.

The Commission is currently working on drafting such a text, but it does not include the following points:

—	the decision on convergence of BPS entitlements in 2020, scheduled to enter into force on 1 January 2020;

—	the amendments relating to the Programme of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI), which enter into force on 1 January 2021.

2.4.

This Regulation will extend and partially amend the existing regulations, in particular to provide for the budget envelopes related to the measures extended. It amends the following Regulations:

—	(EU) No 1303/2013 (1): common provisions on the European Funds (Articles 1, 2 and 3);

—	(EU) No 1305/2013 (2): support for rural development (EAFRD) (Articles 6 and 8);

—	(EU) No 1306/2013 (3): financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy (Articles 6, 7 and 9);

—	(EU) No 1307/2013 (4): rules on direct payments (EAGF) (Article 10);

—	(EU) No 1308/2013 (5): common organisation of the markets (CMO) (Articles 6, 7 and 11);

—	(EU) No 228/2013 (6) (and (EU) No 229/2013 (7)): specific measures for the outermost regions (POSEI) (and specific measures for the smaller Aegean islands) (Articles 12 and 13).

2.5.

The budget for 2021 will be consistent with the proposal for the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), which has still not been unanimously agreed by the Council and has therefore not been adopted by the European Parliament (no amendment possible). Here are the Commission’s proposals:

—	2021 budgets for the EAGF (EUR 39,884 billion) and the EAFRD (EUR 12,258 billion): consistent with the provisions of the Regulations on the future CAP and MFF;

—	all rules and requirements in force in 2021: support will continue to be granted to farmers for a further year in accordance with the conditions and requirements covering the period 2014-2020;

—	transfer of funds: option for Member States to continue to transfer funds between the EAGF and the EAFRD after 2020, with a cap of 15 % for all cases;

—	allocation and value of BPS entitlements: the possibility of addressing errors made by Member States in the allocation of payment entitlements, in terms of both the number and value of these entitlements;

—	convergence of value of BPS entitlements: option for Member States to continue the process of convergence of BPS entitlements after 2019: 2020 and/or 2021;

—	crisis reserve: maintained during the transitional period at the same amount each year as in the 2014-2020 period, i.e. EUR 400 million (2011 prices);

—	implementation of the EAFRD: option to extend the RDPs exceptionally by a year;

—	second pillar multiannual measures (organic farming and agri-environment-climate measures): option to extend the multiannual measures for the 2014-2020 period by a year. For new commitments, a shorter timeframe (maximum three years) will have to be proposed by the Member States;

—	CMO and POSEI: necessary adjustments to the allocations in order to respect the total amount of the EAGF provided for by the future MFF.

3. Notifications required

3.1.

By 10 days after the entry into force of the Transitional Regulation:

—

whether the rural development programmes are being extended until 31 December 2021.

—	list of regional programmes that need to be extended,

—	corresponding budget allocation in the context of the annual distribution for the year 2021 (and therefore the part of the 2021 budget that will not be transferred to the period 2022-2027),

—	subject to demonstrating the risk of lacking funds and not being able to undertake new legal commitments in accordance with the EAFRD Implementing Regulation for the period 2014-2020.

3.2.

By one month after the entry into force of the Transitional Regulation:

—	whether the procedure for internal convergence of BPS entitlements towards an average value is to be continued for the year 2020.

3.3.

By 1 August 2020:

—

whether the reduction of direct payments exceeding EUR 150 000 per year is to be applied for the calendar year 2021, and any estimated product of reductions for the year 2021;

—	whether a transfer of funds is to be made, and if so, the percentage transferred (up to 15 %) of the 2021 EAGF, in order to provide additional funding for the 2022 EAFRD,

—	whether a transfer of funds is to be made and, if so, the percentage transferred (up to 15 %) of the 2022 EAFRD, in order to provide additional financing for the 2021 EAGF;

—	for 2021: whether a redistributive payment is granted;

—

for 2021, the percentage of the 2021 EAGF ceiling for the following aid measures:

—	redistributive payment,

—	young farmers payment (N.B. statutory maximum: 2 %),

—	voluntary coupled support (N.B. statutory maximum: 15 %),

—	payments for areas facing natural constraints under the first pillar,

—	NB: The ceiling for the Basic Payment Scheme (BPS) is calculated by deducting the ceilings for other aid from the EAGF annual ceiling (as for the period 2015-2020);

—	Whether the regional BPS is applied in 2021 (with regions being defined according to objective and non-discriminatory criteria, such as their agronomic and socioeconomic characteristics, their regional agricultural potential or their institutional or administrative structure).

—	Whether the procedure for internal convergence of BPS entitlements towards an average value is to be continued for the year 2021.

3.4.

By 31 December 2020:

—	modification of work programmes for the olive oil and table olives sector.

3.5.

Distribution of the EAGF ceiling between the different categories of first pillar aid:

Member States have to notify the budget allocation for 2021 for each different category of first pillar aid, with the exception of greening, which remains fixed at 30 % of the first pillar; in particular, Member States have the option of revising each year the part of the EAGF allocated to the redistributive payment and the optional coupled payments.

3.6.

Reduction of direct payments:

—

background: Article 11 of the current Regulation ((EU) No 1307/2013) only provides for a notification obligation for Member States as regards their decisions on implementing a reduction of direct payments to be granted to a farmer for a calendar year exceeding EUR 150 000 for the years 2015 to 2020;

—

proposal in the Transitional Regulation: with a view to ensuring a continuation of the existing system, Member States also have to notify their decisions implementing a reduction of direct payments exceeding EUR 150 000 and the estimated product of reduction for the calendar year 2021. The Regulation provides more flexibility to Member States, allowing them to adjust the value of BPS entitlements or the reserve, possibly with different rates of adjustment. In this case, if Member States’ notifications on the EAGF ceilings allocated to the different first pillar categories of aid affect the BPS ceiling, then Member States are to, depending on the modification of the BPS ceiling:

—	linearly reduce or increase the value of all BPS entitlements, and/or

—	reduce or increase the national or regional reserve.

3.7.

Number and value of BPS entitlements:

—

background: some Member States may have made errors in establishing the number or value of BPS entitlements when they were allocated in 2015. Many of those errors, even when they occurred for a single farmer, influence the value of the BPS entitlements for all farmers and for all years. Some Member States made errors also after 2015 when BPS entitlements were allocated from the reserve (e.g. in the calculation of the average value). These non-compliances are normally subject to financial correction until corrective measures are taken by the Member State concerned;

—

proposal in the Transitional Regulation: in the light of the time that has elapsed since the first allocation of BPS entitlements in 2015 and the efforts made by Member States to establish, where relevant, correct entitlements, and also in the interest of legal certainty, the number and value of payment entitlements should be considered legal and regular with effect from 1 January 2021. This rule does not apply to payment entitlements allocated to farmers on the basis of factually incorrect applications, except in cases where the error could not reasonably have been detected by the farmer.

3.8.

Convergence of BPS entitlements:

In order to continue the process of convergence according to this ‘tunnel model’ with a view to a fairer distribution of direct payments, Member States may continue to converge BPS values towards a national or regional average after 2019 instead of either moving towards a uniform rate or keeping the value of BPS entitlements at their 2019 level. The Transitional Regulation requires Member States to notify their convergence decision each year for the following year. This will be the case for 2020 and 2021. In the case of further internal convergence in 2020, BPS entitlements held by farmers on 31 December 2019 having a value below the national or regional average will benefit from an increase in their value for the year 2020. In order to finance this increase, the BPS entitlements held by farmers on 31 December 2019 having a value above the national or regional average will be reduced. The same mechanism is also possible for 2021.

3.9.

Single area payment scheme (SAPS):

—

background: some Member States implement basic payments outside the allocation of BPS entitlements, i.e. without historical references, via the SAPS. This scheme was only possible until 31 December 2020. However, the next CAP regulation also allows Member States to implement basic payments based on area rather than on historical references;

—	proposal in the Transitional Regulation: the regulation allows for the extension of the SAPS after 31 December 2020 with the current modalities continuing to apply.

3.10.

Partnership Agreement: the Member States’ Partnership Agreement, setting out the common basis for support from the four European funds, including the EAFRD, for the period 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020, must continue to be the framework strategy document for the year 2021.

3.11.

Extension of the 2014-2020 regional RDPs for 2021:

—	Member States may decide to extend one or more of their regional RDPs, to be notified to the European Commission within 10 days of the entry into force of the Transitional Regulation, including the corresponding budget as part of the annual breakdown for the year 2021;

—	this notification is independent of the current procedure for revision of the RDPs;

—	the notification must provide evidence of the risk of lacking funds and not being able to undertake new legal commitments in accordance with the EAFRD Implementing Regulation for the period 2014-2020;

—	this extension will be financed from the EAFRD budget for the year 2021;

—	the extended RDPs will have to preserve at least the same level of environmental and climate ambition;

—	the Member States can also not extend their regional RDPs if funds remain from the previous years; in this case, they have the option of transferring funds from the 2021 EAFRD to the financial allocations for the years 2022 to 2025.

3.12.

Consequences of extending the RDPs: this extension results in all deadlines (annual implementation report and annual review meetings required up until 2024, ex-post evaluation report to be completed by 31 December 2025) and the period of eligibility of expenditure (incurred and paid up until 31 December 2024) being put back by a year.

3.13.

Extension and contracting arrangements for multiannual commitments:

—	case 1: agri-environment-climate measures, organic farming — conversion and maintenance — animal welfare For new commitments undertaken from 2021, Member States have to define a commitment period of between one and three years in their RDP(s);

—

case 2: agri-environment-climate measures, organic farming maintenance

If Member States provide for an annual extension of commitments after the end of the initial period, this extension cannot go beyond a year, from 2021. (N.B.: for support to organic farming, this extension option is only available for organic farming maintenance, not conversion);

—	case 3: agri-environment-climate measures, organic farming maintenance, and animal welfare For new commitments immediately following a commitment undertaken during the initial period which comes to an end in 2021, these new commitments can only be undertaken for a period of one year.

3.14.

Eligibility of expenditure covering national strategic plans (NSPs) and transition between programming periods: in order to facilitate the transition between previous and future programming periods, the following expenditure is to be eligible under the EAFRD for the period 2022-2027 and provided for in the NSPs (amount and EAFRD contribution rate).

—	Expenditure related to commitments undertaken under previous programming periods [under Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (8) or Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013] and going beyond 1 January 2024 or 1 January 2025 (case where five-year commitments were undertaken during 2019 or 2020).

3.15.

Support programmes for the fruit and vegetable sector:

Producer organisations (POs) having an operational programme (OP) extending beyond 31 December 2021 have, by 15 September 2021, to submit a request to their Member State to the effect that their OP be modified to meet the requirements of the future Strategic Plan Regulation or replaced by a new OP approved under that Regulation. If the PO does not submit an operational programme for modification or replacement, the programme will end on 31 December 2021. The work programmes for the period 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2021 have to be extended until 31 December 2021. POs, associations of POs and interbranch organisations have to modify their work programmes accordingly and notify them to the Commission by 31 December 2020.

3.16.

Support programmes for the olive oil and table olives sector:

The work programmes for the period 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2021 have to be extended until 31 December 2021. POs, associations of POs and interbranch organisations have to modify their work programmes accordingly and notify them to the Commission by 31 December 2020.

3.17.

National apiculture programmes:

The national programmes will have to end on 31 July 2022. The articles of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 concerning apiculture programmes will continue to apply after 31 December 2021 in relation to expenditure incurred and payments made for operations implemented before 1 August 2022.

3.18.

Support programmes in the wine sector:

—	background: EU funds are allocated to Member States through national support programmes for five years to finance specific support measures for the wine sector;

—

proposal in the Transitional Regulation: the national support programmes end on 15 October 2023. The articles of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 concerning support measures from national support programmes will continue to apply after 31 December 2021 in relation to expenditure incurred and payments made for operations implemented before 16 October 2023.

Brussels, 7 May 2020.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320.

(2) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 487.

(3) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 549.

(4) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 608.

(5) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(6) OJ L 78, 20.3.2013, p. 23.

(7) OJ L 78, 20.3.2013, p. 41.

(8) Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ L 277, 21.10.2005, p. 1).

14.7.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/36

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, amending Regulations (EC) No 1936/2001, (EU) No 2017/2107, and (EU) 2019/833 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2016/1627

[COM(2019) 619 — 2019/0272 (COD)]

(2020/C 232/05)

Rapporteur:

Gabriel SARRÓ IPARRAGUIRRE

Consultation	Council, 6.12.2019 European Parliament, 16.12.2019
Procedural basis	Articles 43(2) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Section responsible	Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment
Adopted in section	6.3.2020
Adopted at plenary	7.5.2020
Plenary session No	551 — Remote meeting
Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions)	251/0/10

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1.

The EESC welcomes the adoption of a multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna fisheries in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, since the current level of biomass for this population, at a historic high, means that the emergency measures introduced under the earlier recovery plan can be dropped.

1.2.

The Committee considers that laying down a multiannual management plan in the European Union, that ensures the application of the measures set out in Recommendation 18-02 adopted at the 21st special meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) in 2018, is the best way of maintaining stocks above biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, taking account of the specificities of the different types of gear and fishing techniques used in these fisheries.

1.3.

The EESC would suggest that the legislators update the proposal for a regulation in order to incorporate the amendments agreed in 2019 by the ICCAT in its Recommendation 19-04.

1.4.

The Committee considers that Article 29(3) of the proposal should be amended to bring it into line with Recommendation 19-04, as explained in point 4 of this opinion.

2. Summary of the Commission proposal

2.1.

The purpose of the proposal for a regulation considered in this opinion is the application of the multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean adopted by the ICCAT, with a view to ensuring biomass levels above those capable of producing maximum sustainable yield.

2.2.

Those Member States with bluefin tuna fishing opportunities will have to draw up annual fishing plans that include the quotas allocated to each gear group, the criteria used for the allocation, the measures to ensure the respect of individual quotas, the fishing seasons, designated ports, the rules on by-catches and authorised vessels.

2.3.

Member States with bluefin tuna fishing opportunities must also establish annual fishing capacity management plans to adjust their fleets to the allocated fishing opportunities, annual inspection plans to ensure compliance with the regulation and annual farming management plans to set the estimated about of bluefin tuna available for farming. All these plans are to be transmitted to the Commission by 31 January of each year.

2.4.

The technical measures set out in the regulation comprise a limit on fishing seasons for specific fleets, such as purse seiners and large scale pelagic longline vessels, a minimum authorised size generally of 30 kg or minimum length of 115 cm, together with a level of authorised by-catches which must not exceed 20 % of the total catches on board at the end of each fishing trip.

2.5.

The control measures to be applied by the Member States include an obligation to submit, one month before the start of the period of authorisation, lists of all catching vessels authorised to fish actively and commercially exploit bluefin tuna resources, and lists of traps. The Commission must also be provided with detailed information on the fishing activity by authorised vessels in the preceding year, including the catches of each vessel, and with information on any joint fishing operations that have taken place.

2.6.

Masters of vessels of less than 12 metres (the fisheries control regulation (1) already establishes a requirement for those of 12 metres or more) are required to notify the competent authority of the relevant Member State, at least four hours before the estimated time of arrival in the port, of the quantity of bluefin tuna caught, the geographical area where the catches were taken, and the identification of the vessel. In addition, transhipment at sea by Union fishing vessels carrying bluefin tuna, or by third country vessels in Union waters, is prohibited.

2.7.

The Member States are to be responsible for implementing a national observer programme ensuring minimum cover of percentages determined according to the various fleet segments, and must also ensure the presence on board of an ICCAT observer for purse seiners. Any transfer operations must be notified in advance to the relevant Member State for authorisation or, where appropriate, refusal; video cameras must be used to verify the number of fish transferred. Similarly, caging of specimens must be notified in advance and monitored via video cameras.

2.8.

Monitoring and surveillance will be ensured by a vessel monitoring system for vessels with a length equal to or greater than 12 metres, and inspections will be carried out under the ICCAT Joint Scheme of International Inspection.

2.9.

The trade, landing, import, export, placing in cages, re-export and transhipment of bluefin tuna that is not accompanied by the validated documentation set out in the regulation is prohibited.

3. General comments

3.1.

In general terms the EESC agrees with the proposal for a regulation, as it transposes an ICCAT recommendation. Likewise, it welcomes the results of the recovery plan which has brought bluefin tuna biomass to the highest levels since records began.

3.2.

In 2019 ICCAT Recommendation 19-04 was adopted amending Recommendation 18-02, which is the subject of the present opinion. The Committee therefore suggests that the legislators adapt the proposal for a regulation in line with Recommendation 19-04.

Specific comments

4.1.

Article 29(3) lays down that Union purse seiners shall not engage in joint fishing operations with purse seiners from other contracting parties to the ICCAT convention, although paragraph 62 of Recommendation 19-04 provides that ‘(…) However, a CPC (2) with less than five authorised purse seine vessels may authorise joint fishing operations [JFO]with any other CPC.

Each CPC conducting a JFO shall be responsible and accountable for the catches made under this JFO’.

4.2.

The Committee considers that the proposal for a regulation should take account of the exception set out in the previous point: i.e. it should allow joint fishing with other CPC fleets. The Committee nevertheless considers that a protocol should be agreed on a bilateral basis in advance on the operational arrangements to be followed by the vessels and, in particular, by the authorities of each CPC on handling the catch declaration documents required by the current rules.

Brussels, 7 May 2020.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy, amending Regulations (EC) No 847/96, (EC) No 2371/2002, (EC) No 811/2004, (EC) No 768/2005, (EC) No 2115/2005, (EC) No 2166/2005, (EC) No 388/2006, (EC) No 509/2007, (EC) No 676/2007, (EC) No 1098/2007, (EC) No 1300/2008, (EC) No 1342/2008 and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1627/94 and (EC) No 1966/2006 (OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1).

(2) Contracting party to the Convention.

		ISSN 1977-091X
Official Journal of the European Union		C 232

English edition	Information and Notices	Volume 63 14 July 2020

Contents		page
	I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions
	OPINIONS
	European Economic and Social Committee
	551st EESC plenary session (remote), 5.5.2020–7.5.2020
2020/C 232/01	Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Demographic challenges in the EU in light of economic and development inequalities (exploratory opinion at the request of the Croatian Presidency)	1
2020/C 232/02	Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Sustainable funding for lifelong learning and development of skills, in the context of a shortage of skilled labour (exploratory opinion requested by the Croatian Presidency)	8

	III Preparatory acts
	European Economic and Social Committee
	551st EESC plenary session (remote), 5.5.2020–7.5.2020
2020/C 232/03	Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States [COM(2020) 70 final]	18
2020/C 232/04	Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down certain transitional provisions for the support by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) in the year 2021 and amending Regulations (EU) No 228/2013, (EU) No 229/2013 and (EU) No 1308/2013 as regards resources and their distribution in respect of the year 2021 and amending Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013 as regards their resources and application in the year 2021(COM(2019) 581 — 2019/0254 (COD))	29
2020/C 232/05	Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, amending Regulations (EC) No 1936/2001, (EU) No 2017/2107, and (EU) 2019/833 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2016/1627 [COM(2019) 619 — 2019/0272 (COD)]	36