21.10.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 389/93

Rapporteur:

Jan SIMONS

1.1.

The EESC agrees that the common system of professional qualifications in inland navigation should be based on required competences instead of required experience as was previously customary. It also agrees with the expectation that the EU-wide recognition of professional qualifications will benefit the development of inland navigation.

1.2.

EU internal labour mobility is an important issue for addressing the structural shortage of qualified deck crewmembers. A mandatory assessment of competencies for all deck crewmembers will improve the image and attractiveness of the profession.

1.3.

The preservation of existing safety standards on major international waterways must be considered a minimum requirement in order to properly introduce the proposed policy.

1.4.

Improving the enforceability of the regulations by the responsible authorities will firstly discourage unlawful social practices, and secondly boost competitiveness and fair competition.

1.5.

In the EESC’s view, continued and broadened close cooperation between the European Commission and the River Commissions, especially the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine (CCNR), remains indispensable for the good governance of the European inland waterway network.

1.6.

The EESC agrees, subject to the participation of certain river commissions, that, alongside common competence requirements to be developed by the European Committee for drawing up standards in inland navigation (CESNI), there is a need for objective criteria for identifying waterways or stretches of waterways with specific risks, for which the Member States may impose additional requirements in addition to the common professional qualifications.

1.7.

The principles and purposes of the chosen policy underpinning the proposal urgently need to be communicated more explicitly.

2.1.

Competitive industries rely on the ability to transport large volumes of freight in a cost-efficient way. Inland navigation vessels have a loading capacity that is equivalent to hundreds of trucks: one convoy of four pushed lighters (= 7 000 net tons) is 280 trucks at 25 net tons each. This could help to save on transport costs and protect the environment.

2.2.

The Main-Danube-Canal, the Rhine and the Danube directly link 13 Member States over a length of 3 500 km, from the North Sea to the Black Sea. Each year, approximately 500 million tons of cargo is transported on these waterways, with transport on the Rhine alone accounting for 67 % of the total volume. Over 75 % of inland waterway transport (IWT) within the EU is cross-border transport. In Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, the modal split share of IWT is 12,5 %, 25 % and 38,7 % respectively and on the Rhine corridor, the industrial heartland of Europe, it is even above 50 %.

2.3.

With an annual cargo of 150 billion tonne-kilometres, IWT plays an important role in the functioning of the EU’s multimodal logistic chains. According to recent studies, the EUR 2,2 billion added value in the IWT sector leads to direct and indirect economic added value of EUR 13,2 billion, i.e. a multiplier of 6,0.

2.4.

Some key figures on the EU IWT labour market:

2.5.

The EESC has already provided the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission with opinions regarding this industry, including on Social policy within a pan-European system for regulating inland-waterway transport in 2005 (1), An Integrated European Action Programme for Inland Waterway Transport (known as Naiades) in 2006 (2) and the Naiades II package in 2014 (3).

2.6.

Here the Committee for the first time ‘call[ed] for the establishment of a Community social policy for inland waterway transport’ which has experienced ‘further developments … in recent years through social dialogue, leading to the drawing up of specific rules on working time’ subsequently leading, in 2014, to the Committee calling for ‘new initiatives’ to be developed. ‘The proposed harmonisation of occupational profiles (based on social dialogue) and coordination of professional qualifications at European level will play a key role here; the Commission will need to put these into effect in close cooperation with river commissions, in particular the Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine’.

2.7.

In the meantime, the Commission has intensified its cooperation with the CCNR and has already obtained some significant results, such as the joint identification of required competences (PLATINA tables of competencies) and, stemming from their shared wish to improve the regulation of inland navigation, the establishment, in June 2015, of the European Committee for drawing up Standards in Inland Navigation (known as CESNI). CESNI swiftly got to work and in 2015 produced standards for technical requirements for inland waterway vessels. It has also been decided to set up a CESNI working group on professional qualifications. CESNI is also expected to take an important role in the area of professional qualifications by drawing up the standards referred to in the proposal.

2.8.

The present Commission proposal came about following extensive and lengthy consultations with many of the organisations involved and the social partners (for example: international river commissions (Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine, Danube Commission, Sava Commission); United Nations Economic Commission for Europe; national administrations in charge of IWT policy-making and legislative and administrative activities; professional organisations (European Barge Union and the European Skippers’ Organisation); trade unions: European Transport Workers’ Federation — IWT section; PLATINA, Platform for the implementation of Naiades; IWT training and education institutions in Europe EDINNA; AQUAPOL and the European Federation for Inland Ports. The European inland waterways transport social partners include the European Barge Union, the European Skippers’ Organisation and the European Transport Workers’ Federation).

3.1.

Inland waterway transport (IWT) is a cost-saving and energy-efficient transport mode that could be used more efficiently to support the European Union’s energy efficiency, growth and industrial development goals. However, its contribution is hampered by existing difficulties in terms of labour mobility, vacancies that cannot be filled and skills mismatches. Varying minimum requirements for professional qualifications for inland navigation across the Member States do not provide sufficient assurance for individual countries as regards the recognition of professional qualifications of crew from other Member States, particularly as this also affects the safety of navigation.

3.2.

The objective of the directive is to facilitate labour mobility in the inland waterway transport sector by ensuring that skilled workers’ qualifications are recognised throughout the Union. The initiative builds on over 19 years of experience with Directives 96/50/EC on obtaining national boatmasters’ certificates and 91/672/EEC on the reciprocal recognition of national boatmasters’ certificates for boatmasters operating on inland waterways other than the Rhine.

3.3.

The proposal extends the recognition of professional qualifications to cover all deck crewmembers and is based on the required competences. It provides for recognition throughout the European inland waterway network on the basis of:

According to the Commission, not only will employees benefit from improved labour mobility and new career opportunities, above all the sector as a whole will benefit as it becomes more attractive for both businesses and workers.

4.1.

The EESC agrees that the common system of professional qualifications in inland navigation should be based on required competences instead of required experience as was previously customary. It also agrees with the expectation that the EU-wide recognition of professional qualifications will benefit the development of inland navigation.

4.2.

The Committee attaches great importance to continued and expanded cooperation between the European Commission and the River Commissions, particularly the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine (CCNR). In particular, the joint efforts of the CCNR and the Commission to harmonise and modernise the rules are important for developing a coherent policy for the European waterway network. The EESC stresses the importance of establishing and maintaining a level playing-field within the IWT sector and emphasises that modernised rules will have to go hand in hand with modernised enforcement.

4.3.

As part of the Naiades II package, the proposal aims to introduce a common system of competency-based minimum standards, which is of great importance in determining the level of safety on inland waterways in the European Union. The EESC believes that this system must not undermine best practices for all categories of inland waterways.

4.3.1.

The proposal therefore provides that Member States may create exceptions or set additional requirements for certain waterways or stretches of waterways. These measures must, of course, be effective and proportionate, so that their number is limited to what is strictly necessary. In general, no lowering of any existing standard is envisaged. However, the safety standards on different waterways may vary.

4.4.

As regards international rivers, the transnationalisation of IWT has led to the establishment of river commissions in order to secure a single regime for commercial use. As such, the Rhine regime dates back over 200 years. Commissions were also later founded for the Danube, Moselle and Sava rivers.

4.4.1.

The Rhine regime is not only distinguished by its long history, but above all by its comprehensive legal framework, notably its international legal framework.

4.4.2.

A broadened and properly founded institutional context is deemed indispensable by the Committee in order to ensure that the legislation for navigation on Europe’s inland waterway network is coherent and consistent. From an institutional as well as an economic and social perspective, continued and broadened close cooperation between the European Commission and the CCNR remains highly recommended.

4.5.

The EESC agrees, subject to the participation of certain river commissions, that, alongside common competence requirements to be developed by the European Committee for drawing up standards in inland navigation (CESNI), there is a need for objective criteria for identifying waterways or stretches of waterways with specific risks, for which the Member States may impose additional requirements in addition to the common professional qualifications.

4.6.

From a European perspective, the preservation of existing safety standards on major international waterways must be considered a general requirement in order to properly introduce the proposed policy. A coordinated river basin approach to addressing this issue has developed from a long-standing international tradition and is generally accepted by all relevant stakeholders.

4.6.1.

In this regard specific attention should be given to the river Rhine. This international waterway, which, along with the Danube, is one of the most challenging from a nautical perspective, carries over 2/3 of European inland waterway traffic. Its riparian states have already established a high level of safety based on the Revised Convention for Rhine Navigation and supervised by the CCNR.

4.7.

The CCNR has already established a binding multinational mechanism for identifying stretches of waterways with specific risks. In the EESC’s view, coordinating national decisions and decisions by river commissions at Community level would therefore be a step forwards with regard to the mobility of qualified workers.

4.7.1.

Common criteria for identifying a specific risk should therefore be introduced. The EESC acknowledges that establishing universal and objective criteria for identifying stretches where specific risks occur also includes the benefit of a transparent decision-making process with a broadened scope.

4.7.2.

The Danube basin does not yet offer binding multinational mechanisms for identifying stretches with specific risks. However, the EESC views actions from Member States, supported by EU funding, to improve and guarantee the navigability of the Danube as a crucial element for corridor development.

4.7.3.

A proposal for a methodology for identifying waterways or stretches with specific risks could be:

4.8.

The proposal aims to encourage job mobility in the largest possible single labour market for inland navigation, which is accessible to workers from all Member States, in order to address the structural shortage of qualified crew. The EESC confirms that this is an important issue to be addressed.

4.8.1.

A mandatory assessment of competencies for all deck crewmembers already at operational level will improve the image and attractiveness of the profession for both apprentices and newcomers from other sectors.

4.8.2.

The EESC supports the European Commission’s goal of keeping the sector accessible for more practically oriented workers. New opportunities for those changing career who already have a maritime or other background to gain qualifications quickly are also welcomed by the EESC.

4.9.

The EESC recognises that the proposal is based on well-informed policy choices. However, it is not easy to identify those in the proposal itself. The Committee therefore also highly recommends communicating the principles and purposes of the chosen policy more explicitly.

5.1.

Considerably reducing the number of relevant documents, as well as keeping and updating them electronically, could improve the effectiveness of enforcement and alleviate administrative burdens whilst enabling control services to function more efficiently. As a result unlawful social practices will be discouraged on the one hand and competitiveness and fair competition will be reinforced on the other.

5.1.1.

The EESC strongly recommends keeping social partners, international river commissions and control services involved and committed in this respect.

5.2.

Practical examinations are usually executed on board a vessel but should also be possible on a simulator, naturally with the required practical experience. A uniform standard for the technical features and functionalities of inland waterway vessel handling simulators should therefore be determined by CESNI, along with standards for approving such tools.

5.2.1.

The proposed directive also accepts approved training programmes instead of administrative exams. In this regard the EESC notes that it should be guaranteed that there is no conflict of interests between the examiner and the teacher or trainer of a candidate for examination.

5.2.2.

The EESC welcomes the recognition of approved training programmes but has serious doubts about their added value without a good system for establishing and ensuring quality.

5.2.3.

The possibility offered by the proposal of taking a practical examination to demonstrate acquisition of the required skills through non-formal and informal learning — in this case by sailing — is also in line with the Committee’s opinion on that subject (4).

5.3.

Additional standards for specific operations should also be envisaged where international safety standards already apply, e.g. in the field of passenger transport. The EESC notes that this could also apply to LNG experts required for bunkering IWT vessels. However, it should be recognised that maritime standards are not adequate and appropriate for inland waterway vessels.

5.4.

According to the European Commission in the impact assessment study, ‘the share of self-employed and employees in Europe is respectively 27 % and 73 %’. However, these figures are less useful if not split into freight and passenger transport, given that 40 % of the employment is linked to passenger navigation and SMEs owning/operating one vessel represent 80-90 % of the market in the western part of the EU, in particular Belgium, the Netherlands, France and Germany.

5.5.

The EESC welcomes the fact that both the Commission and the Member States will evaluate the implementation of the Directive but considers that the river commissions must also be involved in this process. The EESC considers that such evaluation at national, European and international scale will provide a good basis for a possible future review of the Directive when appropriate.