Dies ist eine HTML Version eines Anhanges der Informationsfreiheitsanfrage 'Commission meetings with BusinessEurope'.



Informal meeting with social partners 
Ref. Ares(2021)3024303 - 06/05/2021
Online, 6 October 2020 
Better Regulation 
The opening-up of the policy-making process and the strengthening of stakeholder 
consultation introduced by the Better Regulation Agenda in 2015, has led to an increasing 
variety of consultation activities. Better Regulation rules differentiate between feedback 
(e.g. on inception impact assessment) and consultation (e.g. public consultation).  

Article 154 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires the 
Commission to consult social partners before making legislative proposals (two-stage 
consultation). This requirement applies for certain areas such as working conditions, 
social security, labour market, etc. outlined in Article 153 TFEU. The Better Regulation 
rules explicitly acknowledge the social partners’ role and involvement in Tool #11 (Social 
Partner initiatives). 

For this reason, the Better Regulation rules elaborate that the two consultation processes 
(public and Social Partners one) are kept separate. 
 
Social partners claim that the Better Regulation rules to publish an inception impact 
assessment or to launch a public consultation do not properly take into account the 
particular role conferred by the Treaty to them.  

This issue has been brought up in the context of the Minimum Wage initiative. Social 
Partners have reacted against the publication for feedback of the inception impact 
assessment and public consultation. They expressed their concerns to the President, 
Vice-President Dombrovskis and Commissioner Schmit. It was finally agreed not to 
publish an IIA nor a public consultation. 

There is no Better Regulation requirement to have the public consultation running in 
parallel with the Social Partners’ ones. The timing for launching a public consultation 
depends on the circumstances of each case. 

Our legal service has not seen any legal incompatibility for having both types of 
consultation on initiatives related to Article 153 TFEU.  

The views of other stakeholders might also be relevant: 
 The views of other stakeholders would be relevant especially in Member States (such
as east and south Europe) where Social Partners may not be represented 100% and in
every business sector.

 There are areas and (new) forms of work where public consultation undoubtedly brings
specific benefits. For example, the area of platform work allows people, based in
different jurisdictions, to engage in work on an individual basis. These people may be
better reached via broad, online public consultation.

 When it comes to social affairs, the Commission’s public consultation activities
systematically cover all EU languages and advertises them through various
communication channels. This makes the consultation process inclusive-for-al  EU
citizens. Therefore, the benefit of having a public consultation extends beyond
consulting employers and workers represented by Social Partners only.

The  forthcoming revision of the Guidelines and Toolbox will be an opportunity to 
clarify further the rules about stakeholder consultation activities for initiatives requiring 
two-stage social partner consultation. We aim to have it released by the end of the year, 
following a Communication on Better Regulation. 

The Communication will cover areas like 
 rationalising our consultation system by, for example, merging roadmaps and inception
impact assessments into one ‘Cal  for views and evidence’; as well as
Topics for discussion 
1/2 

Informal meeting with social partners 
Online, 6 October 2020 
  strengthening our simplification and burden reduction approach, introducing foresight in 
our assessments, increasing the transparency of the evidence used and making our 
evaluation reports even more useful for policymaking.
 
Since the introduction of Better Regulation guidelines, in the last 5 years there have been 
only two cases of Social Partners consultations without public consultations on initiatives 
under Article 153 TFEU. Both cases were accompanied by very explicit explanations: it 
was either a very technical file (carcinogens), or extensive targeted consultations to 
stakeholders had already been done (transparent and predictable working conditions). 

Contact – briefing contribution:  
 
 
Topics for discussion 
2/2