The third meeting of the project was organized on 11/9/2023. During the meeting the mean expert presented the the Comparative Report of the Research Phase. He begins his presentation by highlighting the information contained in the “desk searches” carried out by national experts on the proposed topics:

– Posting of workers with transpositions of regulations in all countries that contain a regulatory framework that regulates the coverage and protection of workers

– Information and Consultation, participation systems also implemented by the countries; where Italy Norway and Italy have social dialogue, but only Italy and Spain have a collective bargaining procedure; The collective agreement being the one that regulates the conditions of employment of the workers

– Conditions of employment of workers established through collective agreements; although experts indicate needs such as the development of training and occupational health (Italy and Spain) or various aspects of salaries in all countries.

He then went on to comment on the comparative results of the surveys carried out among workers and employers from which he drew the following conclusions:

On knowledge and application of European and national regulations on the posting of workers:

– There is greater knowledge of European regulations by employers than by workers, although these also say they know it in percentages close to 60%; and both groups affirm that this regulation applies to the transportation sector in their country. Although neither workers nor employers believe that these regulations guarantee the rights of workers.

– There is a high degree of ignorance about the existence of specific regulations in Croatia and Poland and in Italy, only among workers

– Lack of information is the most important problem posed by the current regulations on travel; followed by problems of interpretation and lack of clarity of the norm. Although there are countries that also refer to the incorrect application of the regulations by companies and the lack of transposition of the regulations.

On the participation systems of transport workers: The Information and Consultation:

-It can be stated that workers receive information provided by employers to their representatives (although the difference of 20 points in the percentage of employers, 78%, compared to workers, 58%, is strange.

The majority of workers value the information received and the consultation system established as useful or appropriate (above 70%).

-Participation systems and problem solving by workers are carried out, for the most part, through unions or worker representatives. Although there is a percentage close to 40% who would do it “directly with the employer.”

Regarding the employment conditions of posted workers:

-The collective agreement is designated, by majority, as the instrument through which the salaries of workers in the transport sector are set. However, there are 22% who point out direct negotiation between employer and worker, and 16% who affirm that it is established directly by the employer.

-The base salary, the supplements established in the collective agreements or in the employment contract and the supplement for seniority in the company are

 They point out as the mandatory concepts that make up salary remuneration:

-The non-mandatory concepts, indicated by the majority, are transport allowances, subsistence and accommodation during trips, there being a consensus between both groups and, in general, by country, that the person responsible for paying the allowances related to the displacement of the worker for reasons of his work, is the employer.

-Working conditions in the transport sector are considered acceptable by the majority of respondents, although with percentage differences by country, highlighting Italy where the majority are considered not adequate.

– The majority of workers receive recognition, at least annually, about their health status, with percentages that slightly exceed 70%; as well as training on safety and health in your workplace with a frequency and quality that is considered adequate

– Workers indicate salaries as the priority in terms of their needs, followed by greater recognition by the employer and being consulted by the employer on labor and professional issues.

On employers’ knowledge of the current European regulations on

Mobility:

Knowledge of the legislation on the operations that road transport companies have to carry out between various Member States is very low, barely exceeding 50% on average for the participating countries; although this percentage is significantly lower than the minimum percentages in Italy,  11%, and in Poland, 35%.

There is a profound and widespread lack of knowledge about the existence of an online tool to declare the movements of your workers (only Spain, with 73% and Norway, with 52%, show significant knowledge)

The tachograph record, the copy of the travel declaration and the copy of the employment contract are the three documents most frequently mentioned by employers as those that a driver must carry during their travel

Debate and comments on the comparative report.

The representative of Norway, Arthur K., explained why discrepancies arose between the responses obtained on the information (which raised doubts due to the workers’ lack of knowledge) and the consultation, which was more dynamic and concrete. In addition, he referred to travel allowances and the discrepancies that existed between what workers received and what they believed they should receive and in the interpretation of the regulations regarding them.

The representative of Italy, Francesco M., referred to three aspects:

1.- The type of companies, small, that made it difficult to collect data and apply rights to workers, as well as facilitating employers’ failure to comply with the employment conditions of their workers. He referred to the lower unionization of these workers; to the unfair competition that occurred from Romania and Bulgaria and the fact that until 2006 they did not have regulations in this regard.

2.- The existence of self-employed workers, false self-employed people, on-demand work and riders in the transport group that prevented the application of collective agreements

3.- Deficiencies in health and safety due to lack of investments and lack of diligence on the part of drivers to comply with these safety standards

For her part, the representative of Greece, Klaudia A., referred to the comments made by Italy, also assuming them in her country and commented on the lack of knowledge of the workers in her country, which made it difficult to transmit much of the information.

Finally, the representative of Croatia, Hrvoje B., commented on the absence of data on collective bargaining in his country and in his report.

The coordinating expert, Ángel L., responded to the experts’ interventions, thanking them and adding comments to them, highlighting some aspects referring to Spain and coinciding with the intervention made by the representative of Italy.

Next point discussed was the assessments on the preparation and dissemination of scientific articles on the national research of each partner and new dissemination strategies.

The representative of Spain, Ángel L., begins his intervention by commenting on the dissemination carried out in his country; in two parts: A first information in March, about the existence of the project and the completion of the survey. And a second information, sent on July 20 to the media, on the results of the research phase carried out in Spain. He announced that this week new information will be sent on the conclusions of the comparative report and in subsequent days the scientific articles along the lines agreed upon by the partners.

The organization is informed that the articles from Spain, Italy and Greece have been received and that the Comparative Report will soon be sent to all partners for dissemination.

Presentation of the Argument Line of the “Scientific Article Package” that describes the Mobility Package. –

The speaker comments that the articles designed are based on the conclusions drawn from the research phase and contained in the Comparative Report; and that its development attempts to maintain a logical order in its presentation to have a plot thread between them. Explain that some articles, due to the limited space of each one of them, are a consequence (or development) of a previous one. The first 3 define the Mobility Package with its different standards.

Finally, he comments that the union of these articles could compose a manual on the impact of the Mobility Package on transport workers. Based on this first information, he commented on the title and the basic content he proposed.

Meeting close with discussion and planning of the next activities in the project and Q&A session.