Maria Luisa CABRAL

What Maria Luisa CABRAL has said (5)

• “First, it's not the European level that classifies professions as dangerous or not dangerous, that it would not be covered by the health and safety acquis, because that is linked then to Social Security or retirement ages, or issues that are dealt at national level and are under member state competence. And what what we do on health and safety is we look at the risk of substances, not to professions, so that we protect the widest possible number of workers. That is the aim of our approach. We focus on a substance, and so those that are exposed to the substance should be protected, not profession by profession. On on the gender dimension. Um, I have to recognise Recognize the to to confess that I'm not aware of a gender dimension explicitly in this proposal, so it wasn't raised at any point. We have, uh, specifically asked for a gender attention in relation to other substances. I can take that forward. We don't have, of course, any objection to, to to any, uh, anything that would make things more gender balanced and adequate. But of course, we would need to have evidence that shows that what we are proposing does not reach this, this, uh, this, this objective. So I think that is that is very, um, important. Um. Then in relation to to to cobalt. We did we did the follow the advice of the advisory committee. And maybe what you are looking at is whether we we should not specifically say that we need to to to review the value.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion · EU rules on hazardous working conditions
• “Thank you. Thank you very much for the for the floor. And thank you for the important work on this topic. It comes as a good moment where the commission is preparing the quality jobs roadmap and the mobility package. It's clear for all of us, I think, in this room that competition cannot be based on abuse or exploitation of workers. It's also clear that this is a complex issue and there's not an easy fix. And the positions that we've seen here, we've also heard them during the consultation of social partners. For the preparation of the Quality Jobs roadmap, where you have the trade union side calling for more regulation limitation and the employer side calling for or calling for the attention that subcontracting is a form of business model and and that the focus should be on enforcement. So for us, it's important to carefully look at the issue and the evidence base before deciding on the way forward. At European level, as you know, EU labour law offers protection to all workers, including those in subcontracting chains. And there is specific EU law that offers additional protection for workers in subcontracting chains. This is the case, for example, of the Posting of Workers directive. This is the case of the Employer Sanctions Directive, but also of the Public Procurement Directive. And Member States can, as has been said, and have taken measures on subcontracting. This being said, we know there are challenges, as has been said here, and we're looking carefully at the issues. The public procurement directive is being evaluated and the commission will publish an evaluation this year before coming ahead with a revised directive. We have two ongoing European Labour Authority studies, including looking at national practices on subcontracting. And as you know, enforcement is a very big priority for this commission. So in short, we're looking at the issue and we're looking forward for further exchanges and discussions with this committee. Thank you very much.”
  Minimum wages harmonisation at EU level · EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers · EU policy on employment subcontracting
• “Thank you very much, chair, for giving me the floor, but also for putting our proposal in the right context. It's it's indeed very important for us that we do the utmost to limit work related deaths, an accident. And this is why we are proposing the six update of the directive on carcinogens, mutagens and reprotoxic. And as you rightly said, so this is to prevent cancer and other diseases that would come from exposure to these substances. Maybe I would just add another point. Um, if we want to look at this from the competitiveness angle, the fact that we have this limit values ensures that industries can continue to work with substances that are dangerous, but do so in a way that it doesn't impact the workers health. And I think this is very important. And and it shows how health and safety also fits in this wider competitiveness agenda. In addition, of course, to the zero death vision that we have. So what does this proposal do concretely? So first it sets limit values for two new substances. One is cobalt and inorganic cobalt compounds, which is very important also for our defence industry and our circular economy. So this new limit values are very timely because the exposure is not going away. Then we also added new limit values to 1.4 dioxane. Then we updated limit values For what we call p h, and we are proposing to add to annex one of CMD welding fumes that contain carcinogen, mutagen, and toxins. This is important because it would clarify that the directive protection applies uh, to to to these substances. The other important point that I would like to highlight in this introduction is that both for cobalt. As for Pah, we are proposing a also a transitional limit value of six years to allow industry to put in place the necessary measures before the definite transition value would kick in, as was suggested by the Advisory Committee on Health and Safety. And I think I would, um, stop here and would save the minutes that are left for replying to any questions that you may have.”
  Chemicals regulation · EU rules on hazardous working conditions
• “Yes, thank you very much indeed. A number of questions, uh, and and some questions asked, uh, concerning the same topic. First, let me say that there is no deregulation in the CMG proposal at all. We're proposing to add we're not proposing to take away anything. So it would be important that that is clear. Then, in relation to isoprene, it's true that the advisory committee proposed the limit value. But it's also true that in the impact assessment study that we conducted, there was no European added value to set a limit value at European level, because the workers exposure currently and in the future is already lower than what science proposes. So the Commission cannot propose to legislate on something where clearly no added value is, um, demonstrated. So that is an important point to make. So it's not that we are that anyone is contesting the nature, the dangerous nature of isoprene, but just that the exposure limit levels at this stage are such. And in the future are such that no added value would come from setting a limit at EU level. So that is for um. Isoprene as it contains concerns um firefighters indeed. And that was said by um the member of Parliament dealing with renew. Whatever we would do on on CMR d6 will increase the protection for for firefighters. Of course, going a step further, as suggested by um the S&D group would be very difficult and I would explain why.”
  EU rules on hazardous working conditions
• “But in any case, the Commission updates CMD regulation in accordance to science and we cannot do it faster. I know it's a call for many people because we first need to ask the the the agency, the agency to give us the science behind the values. And we do that by batches of substances. And we have every year we ask more and more and as they are ready, then we, we, we start the Preparation for the legislative proposals. So we are very confident that with this system that we have, we keep our acquis consistent up to date. And we have so far covered many substances, and I think I have covered all. There was a question from the Patriot group on transitional measures for specific sectors in relation to pay. And there the transitional values do cover specific values. So I think we are there. Maybe just one point in relation to isoprene. Indeed it is discussed in the Council working group. But but it's it's a step too far to say that member states are already supporting the inclusion of isoprene. This is still being discussed. It may be the case. Once the council position is ready. But at this stage there are discussions and there are some member states that ask and others that, uh, don't ask for it. Thank you.”
  Regulation of teleworking labour conditions