quote:

---

A rule which allows workers to choose to put in more than 48 hours a week may end after MEPs voted to scrap it.

---

From BBC

One of the problems with a lot of journalism and analysis about the EU is that it focuses almost exclusively on the "big events" like the so-called Constitution, or new decisions arrived at by the Council. Which makes this little piece about an EP bill refreshing. Some of the most interesting and exciting (for progressives anyway) developments happen in EP, where the lack of party discipline has made for some interesting, unpredictable votes.

I'm generally in favour of this type of work week legislation, primarily because of the effect on long working hours on family life, but it's an issue that has long had a UK opt-out. It could be little things like this that become the focus of UK opposition to the European Constitution because it's an area that needs 'hard law' to be effective rather than voluntary integration that's happened in other sectors. Rather than the substance of the 'constitution', it will be these kind of "creeping intergrations" that will galvanize Euroskeptics (especially the Tories) against it. In the UK at least, most opposition to the EU is of the neo-liberal variety, that would like to see a "Europe à la carte": i.e. one that would include free trade but not a social charter.

I know that many business interests in France felt that the shortened work week made them uncompetitive against their longer-working neighbours, and were probably lobbying to even the playing field, so that the EU could play a small role in dampening the effects of globalization.

Edited to make myself clearer.

[ 12 May 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:

Some of the most interesting and exciting (for progressives anyway) developments happen in EP, where the lack of party discipline has made for some interesting, unpredictable votes.

---

quote:

---

Unions said the decision was a victory for UK employees, but business groups said competitiveness would suffer.

Under the current system - used more in the UK than elsewhere - individuals can opt out if they want to work longer hours.

The Working Time Directive was first agreed in 1993, and the changes were debated as part of a 10-year review.

MEPs voted by 378 to 262 in support of a number of changes to the directive, including scrapping the opt-out.

"The measures we are supporting give workers a good degree of flexibility to manage their working hours," said Gary Titley, the leader of the Labour MEPs.

The T&G union hailed the MEPs' vote as a blow against the UK's "long hours culture".

General Secretary Tony Woodley said: "The opt out is harming the health and safety, the family life and the productivity of British workers.

"MEPs have done the right thing for British workers who have been put under unacceptable pressure to sign away their rights in the past by employer."

The plan would have to be approved by the Council of Ministers. The UK government hopes to block it from becoming law.

But the vote saw Labour MEPs oppose the UK government line and side with many Socialists, Communists and Greens in backing the changes.

---

Wouldn't it be great if the UK had a Labour government? Thanks for posting this, Kurichina.

[ 12 May 2005: Message edited by: Wilf Day ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rufus Polson:
Of course, it seems that sometimes the bureaucrats just ignore the EP's decisions. That's what appears to have happened on the patent issue.

---

They have a back and forth and try to wear each other down is probably a better description of the process. But it's for this reason that I'd like to see the trend of increasing the EP's power relative to the Council of Ministers and the Commission continue. (I assume you're referring to the Commission when you talk about bureaucrats.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
Wouldn't it be great if the UK had a Labour government?

---