1) Coordination of social security systems aims to facilitate mobility within the EU by linking national systems to prevent loss of benefits for migrant workers. 2) Key actors in coordination include the European Commission, Council, Parliament and Administrative Commission. The Administrative Commission deals with administrative questions and uniform application. 3) Coordination faces administrative challenges at national levels including organization, staffing needs, and preparation to handle international cases according to the principle of good administration. Electronic data exchange helps address some challenges.

1. Coordination: Purpose, Actors
and Administrative Challenges
15 September 2011
trESS Irish seminar, Dublin
Pr. J.-Ph. Lhernould, TRESS visiting expert

2. Impact of national rules on migrants
• Migration patterns
– EU citizen having his professional career in at least two Member
States (MS) and claiming retirement pension(s)
– EU citizen residing in one MS and working in another one
– EU citizen working in one MS and family residing in another MS
– EU citizen staying in another MS for holidays or for a short work
mission
– EU citizen having his professional career in one or more MS and
retiring in another MS
– EU citizen losing job in one MS and seeking job in another MS
– EU non-active person moving to another MS
– etc.

3. Impact of national rules on migrants
• National schemes are based on the principle of
territoriality
• Cross-border situations may therefore create
problems for migrants
• No affiliation or double affiliation
• No entitlement to benefits
• Fragmented contribution record
• Loss of benefits if move to another country

4. Impact of national rules on migrants
• Coordination rules aim at facilitating international
careers and mobility within the EU
– Coordination rules are intended to prevent the migrant
worker, as a result of his migration from one MS to
another, from losing the benefit of his periods of
employment and thus being placed at a disadvantage in
relation to the position in which he would have been if he
had completed his entire career in only one MS
– Coordination rules facilitate mobility of non-active persons
(pensioners, students, tourists, etc.) by ensuring that their
mobility will not affect their right to be insured or to be
entitled to social security benefits

5. Free movement of workers and citizens
• Coordination of social security introduced in 1958
• To remove obstacles to freedom of movement of
workers between Member States
• In support of objectives of the Treaty of Rome
(internal market)

6. Harmonisation versus coordination
• Drafters of Treaty of Rome considered two
approaches to solving the problems of social security
for people exercising their right of free movement
within the Community:
- One to harmonise the different social security systems of
the member countries
- The other to coordinate them
• Opted for coordination – coordination links social
security systems in such a way that national
competence is preserved

7. The Treaty, Art.48
• The European Parliament and the Council shall (…) adopt
such measures in the field of social security as necessary
to provide freedom of movement for workers; to this
end, they shall make arrangements to secure for
employed and self- employed migrant workers and their
dependants:
– (a) aggregation, for the purpose of acquiring and retaining the
right to benefit and of calculating the amount of benefit, of all
periods taken into account under the laws of the several
countries;
– (b) payment of benefits to persons resident in the territories of
Member States.

8. II. Actors
The EU social security legislation
•Co-decision procedure:
• Council: social security ministries of 27
• European Parliament
• On equal footing: 2 readings + conciliation committee
• + Opinion of national Parliaments: eight-week period
shall elapse between a draft legislative act being made
available to national Parliaments and the date when it is
placed on a provisional agenda for the Council for its
adoption of a position under a legislative procedure

9. European Commission
• Put forward legislative proposals
– Internal resources: DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, unit B4
(free movement of workers Coordination of social security schemes)…but
other DGs’ interested in social security
– External resources: reports by independent experts
• Establishes institutional links:
– between Council and Parliament
– With the Administrative Commission (AC)
• Guardian of the Treaties: ensures Regulations
are implemented

11. Administrative Commission
• The AC for the Coordination of Social Security
Systems (art. 77 of 883/2004):
– composed of a government representative of each of the MS,
assisted, where necessary, by expert advisers.
– Representatives of the EC attend the meetings in an advisory capacity.
– Secretariat provided by the EC.
• Deals with administrative questions and questions of
interpretation arising from the coordination
regulation.
• Facilitates the uniform application of regulations, in
particular by promoting exchange of experience and
best administrative practices

12. Administrative Commission
• Helps to reach agreements on questions of principle
which have arisen between the MS
• Decides on the technical and procedural details for
exchanging information between MS’ institutions,
which is necessary for awarding/paying benefits or
for determining the legislation applicable
• Need for amendments and changes to the
coordination regulation can be discussed
• Makes interpretative decisions and
recommendations

13. Advisory Committee
• Composition:
– one government representative / MS
– one representative from the trade unions / MS
– one representative from the employers' organisations /
MS
• Powers and functions:
– to examine general questions or questions of principle and
problems arising from the implementation of the
regulations
– to formulate opinions on such matters for the
Administrative Commission and proposals for any revisions
of the said provisions

14. III. Administrative challenges
• Principle of good administration
• Authorities and institutions of the Member States shall lend one
another their good offices and act as though implementing their own
legislation
• Authorities and institutions of the Member States may communicate
directly with one another and with the persons involved or their
representatives
• Institutions and persons shall have a duty of mutual information and
cooperation to ensure the correct implementation of this Regulation
• The institutions, in accordance with the principle of good
administration, shall respond to all queries within a reasonable
period of time and shall in this connection provide the persons
concerned with any information required for exercising the rights
conferred on them by this Regulation (Art, 76 BR)

15. Good administration
• Persons concerned must inform the institutions of the competent
Member State and of the Member State of residence as soon as
possible of any change in their personal or family situation which
affects their right to benefits under this Regulation
• Authorities, institutions and tribunals of one Member State may not
reject applications or other documents submitted to them on the
grounds that they are written in an official language of another
Member State (Art, 76 BR)

16. Good administration
• Backed up by electronic exchange of data (EESSI)
• to exchange social security information only by electronic means
• a communication system allowing national social security institutions
to exchange social security information in a secure manner concerning
persons covered by the regulation. Information is exchanged via
structured electronic documents (SED), replacing the paper E-forms
used under old regulation.
– EESSI consists of 3 parts:
• a central unit (CN) to be hosted in the Commission Data Centre and
including the EESSI Directory Services
• the international parts of the access points of the Member States (up
to 5 for each Member State) which are connected via a safe network
with the CN and through which all electronic data have to be
exchanged between Member States;
• an application to be deployed in the national administrations.

17. Administrative challenges: national level
Organisational questions
• more intense collaboration with other MS
• bad organisation can be more harmful than bad
legislation: need for modernising local, regional and
central administration.
• bad national coordination also has an impact on
international coordination: lot of administration is
required (eg. sickness benefits) so administration needs
to be prepared (data exchange) with indication of
competent institutions (who delivers certificates ?
centralised or decentralised ? )

18. Administrative challenges : national level
Staff requirement
• increase of people involved
• workload and involvement in several fields (see eg. Adm.
Com, Audit board, Consultative Committee, Technical
Committee, Social working Party council, relation with
bilateral countries
• follow-up of ECJ case law and EU political agenda
(increasing soft law = non binding legislation)

19. Administrative challenges : national level
• Administration needs to be prepared to handle
international files, sent information, language
aspects, arrange financial matters
• All other fields of social security (equal
treatment, supplementary pensions, SPC,
Missoc, impact internal market) ... closely related
to Regulations, so internal structure might reflect
that and not artificial split

20. Where to find practical information?
• DG EMPL:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=849
• TRESS:
– http://www.tress-network.org/
• Brochure: “The EU provisions on social
security - Your rights when moving within the
European Union - Update 2010”
– http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pub