1

Pillar 1 Transposition of Directive 2003/59/EC

Final conferenceBrussels,

April 3. & 4., 2012

AFT-IFTIM

Objectives of the study

Transposition and enforcement issues• Proof of CPC & completion of periodic

training• Mutual recognition of qualification

Cooperation between social partners• Design of training• Financing of training• Follow-up of implementation

Organisation of training• Approval of training providers• Training programmes• Trainers profiles• Tests

Impact of the Directive• Road safety• Fuel consumption• Drivers skills• Attractiveness of the profession

Directive 2003/59/EC

2

Methodology

Information

Literature review

European survey

Interviews

3

Dissemination and collection of the questionnaires

4

• 300 contacts representing:– Authorities in charge of implementation– Social partners – Training providers

• 74 questionnaires collected from 22 member States but unevenly filled– 19 from Competent Authorities– 36 from Social partners representatives– 19 from training providers

• Member States not representated in the survey:– Greece– Ireland– Latvia– Malta– Slovakia

Transposition has sometimes been a long process

5

A rhythm reflecting the need for stakeholders to understand all the issues of Directive 2003/59/EC

6

• A temporal dimension explained not only by issues and challenges to face with Directive 2003/59/EC : – Sustainable mobility (road safety, fuel savings, …), – drivers qualification, – Attractivness of the profession, …:

• But also by characteristics of consultation and social dialogue in Member States :– A broad nature of the social dialogue in the sector that relies

mainly on tripartism;– social dialogue in the road transport sector that is still in its early

stages on training issues mainly in the new Member States.

Consultation of social partners organised and structured in some countries

7

• Consultation that has actually taken place with the implementation of the Directive was mainly held at a national level:– Belgium, experts’ committee set up by the Service Public

Fédéral Mobilité et Transports;– Finland, National working group set up by the Transport Ministry; – France, Commission Nationale Paritaire pour l’Emploi et la

Formation– UK, Stakeholder Group with various partners (Sector Skills

Councils, Trade Associations, Trade Unions etc.)

But non formalized in other Member States

• In new Member countries, the most important level of collective bargaining is at company level, when it exists. Social partners have been involved only from implementation and enforcement process.

• Lack of formalization of social partners cooperation is reflected in governance and monitoring of national vocational training systems.

• However a general feeling from workers representatives to not have been consulted during transposition and implementation: Belgium, Bulgaria, Spain, Sweden

8

Consultation focused on a variety of topics

• Choice of the initial qualification:– training + test;– or test only.

• Choice for the recording of the qualification:– code 95 on the driving license– Issuance of a Driver qualification card.

• Training programme/– uniform programme prepared by competent authority.– or different programmes prepared by each training centre);

• Financing of training, …

9

Consultation of social partners has led to cooperation

Member StateDesigning the training

programmesFinancing the drivers

training

Austria ü  

Belgium ü ü

France ü ü

Hungary ü  

Lithuania ü  

Luxemburg ü ü

Netherlands ü  

Spain ü ü

Sweden ü  

United Kingdom ü  

10

Cooperation in designing training programmes and financing drivers training:

• In Finland, an automotive and transport examining commission has been established to oversee training

• No answer from Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Slovenia and UK

Recording of the qualification (1/2)

Dri

vin

g li

cen

ce (

Co

de 9

5) • Austria

• Belgium• Cyprus• Finland• Germany• Latvia• Luxemburg• Malta• Netherlands• Poland• Slovakia• Slovenia D

rive

r q

ualif

ica

tion

ca

rd • Bulgaria• Czech Republic• Denmark• Estonia• Finland• France• Greece• Hungary• Ireland• Italy• Portugal• Romania• Slovenia• Spain• Sweden• UK

11

Recording of the qualification (2/2)

12

• Some Member States have chosen both code 95 on the driving licence and the Driver qualification card:– In Germany and Luxemburg, code 95 is used for national or

resident drivers whereas drivers with foreign driving licence, driver qualification card will be issued;

– In Finland, both options are possible, the most frequently used being the mark on the driving licence.

• In Belgium, a certificate is issued when the driver does not hold a Belgian or a European driving licence.

Initial qualification (1/2)

• The Directive 2003/59/EC offers 2 options for the system of initial qualification:• Course attendance and test

• 280 hours training• Accelerated initial training: 140

hours

15 Member States

• Only tests

10 Member States

• Both options

2 Member States

13

14

Initial qualification (1/2)

• In some Member States practices tend to move away from their choices of initial qualification option.

• Romania• The expensiveness of training and the lack of (public)

funding tend to discourage candidates from undergoing courses.

• Malta• Training courses have been developed to improve success

rate to the test. Drivers with a minimum experience are encouraged to undergo 90 hours training, less experienced drivers are oriented to 140 hours training in training centres approved by Transport Malta.

Periodic training

15

• Art 3 Directive 2003/59: Compulsory course attendance

• Art 7 Directive 2003/59: to update the knowledge (…), with specific emphasis on road safety and the rationalisation of fuel consumption

• Organised by an approved training centre

• 35 hours every five years, given in periods at least 7 hours

Periodic training – Organisation

16

• A wide variety of implemented periodic training: from 7 hours per year during 5 years to a 35-hour unique session periodic training

• The Czech Republic has chosen the system of a 7-hour session per year that avoids huge fluctuations from one year to another;

• In Germany, the organisation of the 35-hour PT is under the responsability of each federal State (Bundesland);

• In France, the organisation (21h + 14h) is possible but rarely proposed.

7-hour x 5

• Czech Republic

• Germany• Italy• Lithuania• Netherlands• Slovenia• Spain• Sweden• United

Kingdom

1 x 35 hours

• Bulgaria• Denmark• Estonia• France• Germany• Hungary• Lithuania• Luxembourg• Poland• Romania

21h + 14 h

• Denmark• France

Other methods

• Germany• Netherlands• Finland• Belgium• United

Kingdom

Periodic training – Deadlines for the first periodic training

2012

• Estonia

2013

• Austria• Czech Republic• Denmark• Finland• Germany• Hungary• Italy• Lithuania• Malta• Poland• Spain• UK

2015

• Belgium• Luxemburg• Netherlands• Portugal• Spain• Sweden

• Most of Member States have defined 2013 as deadline for completing periodic training sessions in the carriage of passengers and 2014 in the carriage of goods.

17

18

Opinion on completion of periodic training

- Most respondents are confident on completion of periodic training on schedule, respondents from Slovenia and UK are skeptical whereas a few ones (25%) have given no answer nor opinion.

- However some apprehension exists regarding the training provision and potential bottlenecks just before the deadlines.

Some rules have been set in order to make sure drivers undergo their training in a good time to avoid shortages on labour market and penalties to drivers. Some Member States have planned the periodic training according to the age or birthdays of candidates or to the date of issuance of driving licences, and some (Luxemburg) have even developed a system of reminders sent to drivers.

Mutual recognition of qualification

Initial qualification:

Widespread acceptance of mutual recognition, except in Denmark, Hungary, Lithuania and Sweden

UK: more than thirty cases of such recognition to Polish and Latvian drivers in 2010.

Periodic training:

The 35-hour periodic training must be entirely undergone in one single Member State to be recognized, sometimes under conditions that information could be checked.

Sweden does not recognize initial qualification nor periodic training.

The recognition of a partial periodic training is more problematic: to this date, no information system exists, so Authorities are reluctant to accept periodic training certificates.