The European Parliament's Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) committee on 23 June 2026 debated two legislative files: a reform of vocational education and training (VET) and the proposed 28th regime corporate framework for startups, known as 'EU Inc.' The debates revealed divergences on the scope of worker protections and anti-abuse measures, though no formal votes were taken.
On VET, rapporteur Brigitte Van Den Berg (Renew) stressed the need for equal recognition of VET qualifications across member states, improved mobility, and increased funding. She noted that Erasmus+ currently covers only half of eligible applications, according to Commission representative Anna Bansik. Romana Tomc (EPP, also speaking for ECR) backed dual vocational systems and proposed a European VET diploma to enhance portability. Romana Jerković (S&D) and Li Andersson (The Left) linked VET to decent work, social inclusion, and lifelong learning, while Margarita De La Pisa Carrión (PfE) highlighted under-prioritised sectors such as care and construction.
On EU Inc., rapporteur Johan Danielsson (S&D) warned of risks including fraud, letterbox companies, and weakened worker participation. He proposed limiting the framework to startups and excluding high-risk sectors. Romana Tomc (EPP, also for ECR) supported optional simplification for businesses but insisted on labour-law safeguards. Anna Strolenberg (Greens/EFA) and Özlem Demirel (The Left) pushed for longer registration times and stronger anti-abuse measures. João Oliveira (The Left) outright rejected the proposal. Commission official Dan Dionisi defended the framework as startup-friendly and within national legal orders. Danielsson signalled willingness to negotiate but warned of possible rejection if safeguards are insufficient.
EMPL coordinators will continue discussions, with a committee vote planned for 10 September 2026. The debates affect VET learners, SMEs, startups, workers, and national authorities. Positive impacts include potential simplification for startups and improved VET recognition, while negative impacts include possible regulatory burdens and risks of abuse if safeguards are weak.