Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2013)236 - Measures facilitating the exercise of rights conferred on workers in the context of freedom of movement for workers - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2013)236 - Measures facilitating the exercise of rights conferred on workers in the context of freedom of movement for workers. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2013)236  |
| date | 26-04-2013 |
Freedom of movement for workers is one of the four fundamental freedoms on which the Single Market is based. It is one of the core values of the European Union and a fundamental element of EU citizenship. Article 45 TFEU enshrines the right of EU citizens to move to another Member State for work purposes. It specifically includes the right not to be discriminated against on the grounds of nationality as regards access to employment, remuneration and other conditions of work. It also includes the removal of unjustified obstacles to the freedom of movement of workers within the European Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union confirms in Article 15 that every citizen of the Union has the freedom to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State.
Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 details the rights derived from the freedom of movement of workers, and defines the specific areas where discrimination on the grounds of nationality is prohibited, in particular as regards:
– access to employment
– working conditions
– social and tax advantages
– access to training
– membership of trade unions
– housing
– access to education for children
Article 45 TFEU and Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 are directly applicable in all Member States. This means that there is no need to adopt national legislation to transpose those provisions. Any national authority at any level and any employer, whether public or private, must apply and respect the rights stemming from those provisions.
In spite of this, EU citizens who want to move or who actually move from one Member State to another for work purposes continue to face problems in exercising their rights. The difficulties they face go some way to explaining why geographical mobility between EU Member States has remained at a relatively low level: according to the EU-Labour Force Survey, in 2011, only 3.1% of the working-age European citizens (15-64) lived in an EU Member State other than their own i.
A Eurobarometer survey in 2009 showed that while 60% of European citizens considered free movement of workers to be a good thing for European integration, only 48% thought it was positive for individuals. Moreover, according to the results of a more recent Eurobarometer (September 2011), 15% of European citizens would not consider working in another Member State because they feel there are too many obstacles.
Similarly, the European Parliament's report on Problems and prospects concerning European citizenship of 20 March 2009 detailed persisting obstacles to the cross-border enjoyment of rights. It called on the Commission to produce a list of obstacles to the exercise of EU citizens' rights, based on the results of a public consultation, and make specific proposals to address those obstacles.
More recently the European Parliament by its Resolution on promoting workers' mobility within the European Union of 25 October 2011 calls on the Commission and Member States to take measures in order to "to guarantee…the correct implementation of the existing legislation on non-discrimination, to take practical measures to enforce the principle of equal treatment of mobile workers…"
In its Conclusions of EPSCO Council of March 2009 on Professional and geographical mobility of the workforce and the free movement of workers within the European Union, the Council invited the Commission and the Member States to promote measures supporting labour and social mobility as well as the equal treatment and non-discrimination of migrant workers in line with the acquis and to further develop appropriate strategies and tools for the identification and analysis of barriers to geographical and professional worker mobility and to effectively contribute to the removal of existing barriers, in accordance with the Treaties.
The report delivered by Mr Monti on 9 May 2010 (‘A new Strategy for the Single Market’) underlines the fact that the overall freedom of movement of workers is a success from a legal point of view, but it is the least used of the four freedoms of the Single Market. The report points out that the majority of Europeans see too many obstacles to working elsewhere in the EU and a number of legal and administrative barriers still remain in the field of free movement of workers. According to the report, obstacles in this area are the hardest to overcome.
In July 2010, in its Communication on 'Reaffirming the free movement of workers: rights and major developments' the Commission pointed out that it will explore ways of tackling the new needs and challenges (in particular in the light of new patterns of mobility) facing EU migrant workers and their family members, and in the context of the new strategy for the single market will consider how to promote and enhance mechanisms for the effective implementation of the principle of equal treatment for EU workers and members of their families exercising their right to free movement.
This objective was reinforced in the 2010 EU Citizenship Report 'Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens rights'[7] of 27 October 2010. The Commission identified the divergent and incorrect application of EU law on the right to free movement as one of the main obstacles that EU citizens are confronted with in the effective exercise of their rights under EU law. Accordingly, the Commission announced its intention to take action to facilitate free movement of EU citizens and their third-country national family members by enforcing EU rules strictly, including on non-discrimination, by promoting good practices and increased knowledge or EU rules on the ground and by stepping up the dissemination of information to EU citizens about their free movement rights[8].
In its Employment package of 18 April 2012 (Communication from the Commission 'Towards a job-rich recovery')[9], the Commission announced its intention to 'present a legislative proposal (information and advice) in order to support mobile workers in the exercise of rights derived from the Treaty and Regulation 492/2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union'.
President Barroso (Political guidelines for the 2010-2014 Commission) has also underlined the gap between theory and practice and has called for the principle of free movement and equal treatment to become a reality in peoples’ everyday lives. In his State of the Union address on 12 September 2012, President Barroso underlined the need to create a European labour market, and make it as easy for people to work in another country as it is at home[10].
The gap between the rights that EU citizens have in theory and what happens in practice has also been underlined in several reports from institutions and, increasingly, the European Union is being called upon to act in this regard[11]. 2013 has been designated as the European Year of Citizens[12]. It will focus on citizens' rights and on EU action ensuring that these rights are effectively enforced for the benefit of citizens and the EU as a whole.
Over the years, the Commission has received a lot of complaints from citizens who want to move, or who have actually moved to another EU country for work purposes, and whose rights are not respected. Citizens feel unprotected in the host Member State and unable to overcome the obstacles they face.
There are many different examples of obstacles and problems:
(a) Public authorities not complying with EU law (non-conforming legislation or incorrect application) and the effect on EU migrant workers
Problems with compliance of national legislation and general practices still persist in Member States and continue to be reported to the Commission. These include:
– different conditions applied for recruitment of EU nationals;
– nationality conditions for access to posts which are not covered by the exception in Article 45 TFEU;
– introduction of nationality quotas for EU citizens (e.g. in the field of sport at professional level);
– different working conditions for EU nationals (remuneration, career prospects, grade, etc.);
– access to social advantages made subject to conditions which are more easily met by nationals than by EU citizens (e.g. a residence condition);
– professional qualifications and experience acquired in other Member States are not taken into account or they are taken into account in a different way than those obtained in the host Member State for the purpose of access to employment (e.g. additional points are awarded to the latter);
– residence condition required by national legislations for access to study grants for EU migrant workers and members of their families despite well-established case law of the CJ in this area;
– discrimination against frontier workers.
(b) Employers and legal advisors not complying with EU law
Information collected by experts and by the Commission[13] suggests that there is a recurrent problem with public and private employers' awareness of EU rules, regardless of whether the legislation at national level is compliant or not. Being unaware of the rules and lack of understanding seem to be the main reasons for this problem, especially when it comes to private employers (e.g. only residents for a certain period can apply for a job vacancy, no recognition of previous professional experience or professional qualifications acquired in another Member State, excessive language requirements etc.).
Legal advisors are also not always aware or familiar with Union law on free movement of workers.
(c) EU migrant workers not having access to information or the means to ensure their rights
In several surveys[14], citizens have mentioned that they do not know where to turn to when faced with problems concerning their EU rights. There is also evidence that migrants find it difficult to access the protection available to them, for example, they are not aware of national procedures and systems, they lack the linguistic ability to access services or the cost of legal advice and assistance is too high.
The problems identified affect EU citizens who move to another Member State for employment purposes and come back to their Member State of origin in order to work.
In order to tackle these problems specific objectives have been identified:
– lessening discrimination against EU migrant workers on the grounds of nationality;
– closing the gap between EU migrant workers' rights on paper and their exercise in practice by facilitating the correct implementation of existing legislation;
– reducing the incidence of unfair practices against EU migrant workers;
– and empowering EU migrant workers to ensure their rights are respected.
(a) Network of experts on free movement of workers
The network of legal experts in the field of free movement of workers reports annually on the legal situation pertaining in the European Union[15].
The first report[16], finalised in January 2011, focused on the enforceability of the right to equal treatment on the basis of nationality as regards EU migrant workers and on the existing legal framework in each Member State. The report came to the conclusion that this right is rarely given the same level of protection and guarantees as the right to equal treatment on other grounds (such as race, age and sex). EU migrant workers are still perceived in most of the EU countries as holding a status closer to that of third-country national workers than to that of national workers. Many EU migrant workers facing discrimination based on their nationality have to rely on a generous interpretation of national law adopted to implement the EU equality Directives combating discrimination on other grounds.
The second report, submitted in October 2011, presented an overview of the main problems surrounding application of the rules on free movement of workers identified in each Member State. There are some problems, apparently of a systemic nature in some Member States, which simply constitute unlawful discrimination. Most of the problems stem from indirect discrimination or unjustified restrictions on the exercise of workers' right to free movement. For example, residence criteria governing eligibility for certain social and tax advantages, excessive language requirements, or Member States failing to take into account years worked in a similar post in other EU Member States for the purpose of calculating a public-sector employee’s seniority and associated advantages.
(b) Discussion within the Advisory Committee on free movement of workers
Barriers to free movement of workers, problems of discrimination on the grounds of nationality and the need to better enforce the current EU rules were discussed at a series of meetings of the Advisory Committee on Free Movement of Workers between October 2010 and October 2012. The members of the Advisory committee, made up of representatives of Member States and Social Partners represented at European and national level, were also asked to reply to a questionnaire issued by the Commission. The questionnaire was designed to identify what action is being taken at national level to inform, assist, support and protect EU workers in relation to the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011.
The members of the Committee acknowledged the importance of the real and effective application of existing rights. Suggested responses to this need ranged from awareness raising activities to stronger enforcement of the rules and better access to information and support for EU migrant workers. During the meeting of the Advisory Committee on free movement of workers of 30th October 2012, Social partners, both ETUC and Business Europe, expressed broadly favourable positions to the proposal of a Directive.
(c) Public consultation
The Commission carried out a public consultation between June and August 2011. Citizens, national authorities, labour unions, employers’ organisations, and associations (NGOs, associations of independent professionals, etc.) gave their views on the main problems workers face when exercising their right to free movement, on the current level of workers' protection and on the need for the EU to act in order to help workers fully enjoy their rights.
A total of 243 replies were received, of which 169 were from citizens and 74 were from organisations, including national authorities. Among the responses from organisations, trade unions were the most active in providing contributions (27% of the respondents), followed by NGOs (17%), national authorities (15%) and employers' organisations (12%).
The majority of respondents agreed that EU workers should be better protected against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Adoption of EU legislation was the most important course of action suggested by trade unions, NGOs, private companies, regional and local authorities and citizens. National authorities were divided. Employers clearly indicated that awareness-raising is very important. Setting up contact points or structures in the Member States was seen as an important measure by the majority of respondents. Exchanges of practice between EU countries was also considered an important tool, while non-profit organisations, trade unions, private companies and regional authorities[17]saw supporting organisations as important.
In line with its policy on better regulation, the Commission conducted an impact assessment of policy alternatives, based on an external study[18], which concluded in April 2012.[19]
The different policy alternatives contain a range of options representing different degrees of EU intervention: maintaining the status quo, effecting change without regulation, or regulating. With respect to the latter, the options provide differentiated scenarios ranging from soft intervention (non-binding legal instrument such as a Recommendation) to maximum intervention in the form of a binding legal instrument such as a Directive.
All these options were analysed against the general objectives.
The Impact Assessment demonstrated that a binding legislative initiative would impact tangibly on the exercise of free movement rights. A binding legal instrument imposing obligations on Member States to adopt appropriate measures to ensure that there are effective mechanisms for the dissemination of information and advice to citizens is an effective and efficient way of achieving the stated objectives.
The preferred option is a Directive combined with other initiatives, such as common guidelines on specific subjects to be adopted by the Technical Committee[20] on free movement of workers. A Common Guidance document would address the specific issue of the application of EU law in the field of the free movement of workers.
A Directive introducing measures intended to support EU migrant workers confronted with problems of free movement would aim to raise national authorities' awareness of the issue and increase their action against discrimination on the grounds of nationality. Through increased visibility of the issue, citizens would become more informed about their rights and public and private sector employers and other stakeholders' (NGOs, Social Partners…) would also become more aware. Moreover, without creating additional burdens on employers, a Directive would significantly contribute to better understanding and enforcement of EU law by specifically requiring Member States to ensure that stakeholders are better informed. Additionally, by providing a specific means of redress against any breach of rights under Article 45 TFEU and allowing third parties to intervene on behalf of EU migrant workers, it will become easier for citizens to exercise their rights and receive support in doing so.
The draft impact assessment was endorsed by the Impact Assessment Board (‘IAB’) in July 2012. The opinion of the IAB as well as the final Impact Assessment and its executive summary are published together with this proposal.
Contents
- LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
- BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
- General context
- The Problem
- Objectives
- 2. RESULTS OF CONSULTATION WITH INTERESTED PARTIES AND OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT
- 2.1. Consultation with interested parties
- 2.2. Impact assessment
- 3.2. Legal basis
- 3.3. Subsidiarity and proportionality principles
- 3.4. Detailed explanation of the proposal
- 3.4.1. CHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS
- 3.4.1.1. Article 1 - Subject matter
- 3.4.1.2. Article 2-Scope
- 3.4.2. CHAPTER II - ENFORCEMENT
- 3.4.2.1. Article 3- Defence of rights - Means of redress - Time limits
- 3.4.2.2. Article 4 - Action of associations, organisations or other legal entities
- 3.4.3. CHAPTER III - PROMOTION OF EQUAL TREATMENT - CONTACT POINTS, STRUCTURES OR BODIES - DIALOGUE
- 3.4.3.2. Article 6 - Dialogue
- 3.4.4. CHAPTER IV - ACCESS TO INFORMATION
- 3.4.4.1. Article 7 - Dissemination of information
- 3.4.5. CHAPTER V - FINAL PROVISIONS
- 3.4.5.1. Article 8 - Minimum requirements
- 3.4.5.2. Article 9 - Transposition
- 3.4.5.3. Article 10 - Report
- 3.4.5.4. Article 11 - Entry into force
- 3.4.5.5. Article 12 - Addresses
3.1. General context — summary of the proposed action
The present proposal for a Directive aims to improve and reinforce the way in which Article 45 TFEU and Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 are applied in practice across the European Union by establishing a general common framework of appropriate provisions and measures for facilitating a better and more uniform application of rights conferred by EU law on workers and members of their families exercising their right to free movement.
The proposal for a Directive introduces, in particular, legal obligations in order to:
- guarantee EU migrant workers an appropriate means of redress at national level. Any EU worker who believes that he/she has been the victim of discrimination on the grounds of nationality should be able to make use of appropriate administrative and/or judicial procedures to challenge the discriminatory behaviour;
- further protect workers by ensuring that associations, organisations or other legal entities with a legitimate interest in the promotion of the rights to free movement of workers may engage in any administrative or judicial procedure on behalf or in support of EU migrant workers where there has been a violation of their rights;
- set up structures or bodies at a national level which will promote the exercise of the right to free movement by providing information and supporting and assisting EU migrant workers who suffer from nationality based -discrimination;
- raise awareness by providing employers, workers, and any other interested parties with easily accessible relevant information;
- promote dialogue with appropriate non-governmental organisations and the social partners.
This proposal is based on Article 46 TFEU, the same legal base as Regulation (EU) No 492/2011, which allows for the adoption of Regulations or Directives under the ordinary legislative procedure.
The problems identified with respect to the application and enforcement of EU Law on the free movement of workers, and in particular of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011, are linked to the objectives set out in Article 3 i TEU, under which the European Union established an internal market based on a highly competitive social market economy, aimed at full employment and social progress, and in Articles 45 (freedom of movement and non- discrimination on the grounds of nationality for EU workers) and 18 TFEU (non- discrimination on the grounds of nationality for EU citizens).
The applicable EU rules need to be applied appropriately and effectively. Differences and disparities in the way Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 is applied and enforced in the different Member States are detrimental to the proper functioning of free movement as a fundamental freedom. There is evidence to suggest it is very difficult to create the required level playing field for workers exercising their right to free movement throughout the EU. Under these circumstances, the necessary legal clarity and certainty can only be achieved at EU level.
The objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and action at EU level is therefore required.
In line with the principle of proportionality, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objectives. In order to improve the application and enforcement of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 in practice, it proposes preventive measures, such as the guarantee of appropriate means of redress and the provision of information support and advice in accordance with national traditions and practices.
Bearing in mind the nature of the proposed measures, it will give Members States the freedom to choose the implementing measures best suited to their national judicial systems and procedures.
Article 45 TFEU is a provision of EU law which is directly applicable in the national judicial order of Member States and which directly confers on European citizens the right to move to another Member State for work purposes and to accept offers of employment, to work there without needing a work permit, to reside there for that purpose and to stay there even after employment has finished. It also confers the right to enjoy equal treatment with nationals as regards access to employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment. Thus it implies the abolition of any discrimination (direct or indirect) based on nationality in the exercise of these rights as well as of any unjustified obstacle which impedes the exercise of the right to free movement[21].
Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 is also a legal instrument which by its nature is directly applicable and Member States do not have to take implementing measures in order for their citizens to be able to rely on the rights conferred by that Regulation.
The rights conferred by that Regulation on individuals, which will be easier to enforce under the present proposal, are those contained in Chapter I “Employment, Equal treatment and Workers’ families, in Articles 1 to 10. They concern in particular access to employment (Section 1, Eligibility to employment, Articles 1 to 6), equal treatment in relation to employment and working conditions (Section 2, Employment and equality of treatment, Articles 7 to 9) and the family members of the worker (Section 3, Workers’ families, article 10).
The present proposal for a Directive does not concern Chapter II of Regulation (EU) No 492/2011, Clearance of vacancies and applications for employment (Articles 11 to 20), Chapter III, Committees for ensuring close cooperation between the Member States in matters concerning the freedom of movement of workers and their employment (Articles 20 to 34) or Chapter IV, Final provisions (Articles 35 to 42).
The proposal does not modify the scope of application of the Regulation (EU) No 492/2011. It only applies in cases of discrimination on the grounds of nationality in relation to the matters covered by that Regulation, by introducing the provisions of protection, information and support, in accordance with Articles 3 to 7 of the present proposal for a Directive. It underpins the guarantee of equal treatment and reinforces remedies in cases of unjustified obstacles in relation to eligibility and access to employment for workers exercising their right to free movement within the European Union.
In this context the proposal for a Directive covers the following matters:
- access to employment;
- conditions of employment and work in particular as regards remuneration and dismissal
- access to social and tax advantages;
- membership of trade unions;
- access to training;
- access to housing;
- access to education for workers' children.
This Article imposes a legal obligation on Member States to provide EU migrant workers with appropriate means of redress at national level. It also relates to the enforcement and defence of rights, which in itself concerns a fundamental right. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union confirms the right to an effective remedy for everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the European Union are violated or not respected. The proposal covers both judicial and extra-judicial means of redress, including alternative dispute settlement mechanisms such as conciliation and mediation. Ombudsmen and equality bodies or other similar structures may also provide an alternative to the general courts. In accordance with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union this Article provides that, in case where Member States only provide for administrative procedures, they shall ensure that any administrative decision may be challenged before a tribunal.
In conformity with the case-law of the CJ[22], paragraph 2 of this Article specifies that the previous paragraph is without prejudice to national rules relating to time limits for bringing actions as regards the principle of equal treatment, provided that these time limits are such that they cannot be regarded as capable of rendering virtually impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Union law on free movement of workers.
This Article introduces an obligation for Member States to ensure that associations, organisations or legal entities (such as trade unions, NGOs or other organisations) may engage in any administrative or judicial procedure on behalf or in support of EU migrant workers in the event of violations of their rights under either the Directive or under Regulation (EU) No 492/2011. It would be left to Member States' discretion to define the way this provision should be implemented in practice, according to the national judicial systems and procedures.
Associations, organisations or other legal entities can play a significant role in the defence of rights on behalf of or in support of a worker and members of his/her family[23]. The assistance could be different from one Member State to another according to their judicial system, procedures, traditions and practices (e.g. the trade unions could intervene, or bear the costs or assisting victims of discrimination).
Mirroring Article 3 the second paragraph of Article 4 specifies that the first paragraph is without prejudice to national rules relating to time limits for bringing actions.
3.4.3. CHAPTER III - PROMOTION OF EQUAL TREATMENT - CONTACT POINTS, STRUCTURES OR BODIES - DIALOGUE
3.4.3.1. Article 5 – Contact points, structures or bodies.
This Article provides for structures on information, promotion and support or for bodies to be established at national level to support EU migrant workers and promote, analyse and monitor the rights conferred on them and the members of their families by EU law. These functions may, however, also be exercised by existing bodies already established by Member States to fight discrimination on other grounds in the context of the implementation of EU legislation, or agencies with responsibility at national level for the defence of human rights or the safeguard of individuals' rights. In this case Member State must ensure allocation of sufficient resources to the existing body for the performance of additional tasks. To this end the training of experts could be eligible under the European Social Fund.
The tasks of these structures or bodies should include:
(a) Providing information to all relevant stakeholders and increasing support for EU migrant workers; providing advice and assistance to alleged victims of discrimination pursuing their complaints, without prejudice to the rights of the legal entities referred to in Article 4. Whilst in some countries equality bodies established under EU Directives fighting discrimination on other grounds have legal standing and can bring a case to court, in others, they can only provide assistance to the claimant, or provide observations to the court.
(b) Conducting independent surveys concerning discrimination on the basis of nationality;
(c) Publishing independent reports and making recommendations in relation to equality of treatment and the fight against nationality based discrimination.
(d) Publishing information on any issue relating to the application at national level of EU rules on free movement of workers.
It would be left to each Member State to decide whether creating a completely new structure is necessary, or whether existing bodies can be assigned the tasks described above for the promotion of non-discrimination exist in all Member States. At present nationality could be covered by the competence of existing Equality bodies in 19 Member States[24].
Moreover, this Article provides for synergies between existing or new structures or bodies with other information, promotion and support tools at EU level, such as Your Europe, SOLVIT, EURES, Enterprise Europe Network and the Points of Single Contact.
Building on existing structures has the advantage of benefiting of the existing knowledge and experience. It also increases simplicity and accessibility since it avoids the risk of creating confusion and uncertainty as to where to turn in case of problems.
This Article requires Member States, in accordance with national traditions and practices, to take adequate measures to encourage and promote dialogue with social partners and non-governmental organisations which have, in accordance with their national law and practice, a legitimate interest in contributing to the fight against discrimination on grounds of nationality.
This Article provides for the appropriate dissemination of information about the rights of workers and members of their families in relation to equal treatment arising from the Directive and from Articles 1 to 10 of Regulations (EU) No 492/2011. The more effective the system of public information and prevention is, the less need there should be for individual remedies. The proposal for a Directive leaves the choice of information tools to the Member States, but on line or digital information with links to the existing information tools at EU level, Your Europe and EURES websites should be made compulsory.
However, this can be complemented by any other public information activities reflecting the best practices noted by the national experts and stakeholders such as awareness-raising campaigns or specific information. The active role of social partners, equality bodies, NGOs and other associations could also be very important in the dissemination of the information.
The first paragraph is a standard non-regression provision which specifies that Member States may have, or may wish to adopt, legislation providing for a higher level of protection than that guaranteed by the proposed Directive.
The second paragraph expressly indicates that Member States have the discretion to extend the competencies of the bodies referred to in Article 5 to encompass also non-discrimination on grounds of nationality for all EU citizens and their family members exercising their right to free movement, as enshrined in Article 21 TFEU and Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States[25].
The third paragraph provides that Member States should not lower any existing level of protection against discrimination when implementing this Directive.
Member States are required to adopt the necessary implementing measures within a period of 2 years after the entry into force of the Directive, and to fulfil certain information requirements, such as communicating to the Commission how the Directive is transposed into national law and making reference to the Directive in any implementing measures.
In this context in accordance with the Joint Political Declaration of Member States and the Commission on explanatory documents of 28 September 2011, it would be appropriate that Member States accompany the notification of their transposition measures with one or more documents explaining the relationship between the components of the present Directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition instruments. Bearing in mind that for some provisions of this Directive, such as those on structures or bodies foreseen in Article 5 several Member States dispose already legislation to fight discrimination on other grounds in the context of the implementation of EU legislation, or agencies with responsibility at national level for the defence of human rights or the safeguard of individuals' rights, the explanatory documents would permit to better identify the specific measures adopted or already in place in order to fight discrimination on the basis of nationality.
The Commission has to present a report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the implementation of this Directive no later than two years after the expiry of the deadline for its transposition. It can also make appropriate proposals for further measures where necessary. Therefore, in the context of its implementation report and experience gained on the ground, the Commission will also monitor the way Member States opted to extend the competencies of the structures and bodies referred to in Article 5 to the right to equal treatment without discrimination on grounds of nationality of all Union citizens and their family members exercising their right to free movement under Union law.
This is a standard clause specifying that this Directive will enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This is a standard provision specifying that the Directive is addressed to the Member States.
This proposal is expected to have limited implications on the Union budget. Expenses for an evaluation study in 2015 are estimated to not exceed 0,300 million EUR and will be covered by funds available from the budget line financing the free movement of workers, coordination of social security systems and measures for migrants, including migrants from third countries. Costs for human resources (0,131 million EUR p.a.) will be covered under heading 5 of the Multiannual Financial Framework. Details are given in the financial statement annexed to this proposal.