We note that there are currently a large number of variants in which various EU countries have understood how to implement the provisions of the European Framework Agreement on telework signed in Brussels on 16 July 2002. This situation can have an impact on the human resources and policies of companies operating in several European countries that are not able to introduce a uniform practice for teleworking. The idea that the objectives set at the Lisbon European Council of 23 and 24 March 2000 form the basis of European legislation on teleworking is widely accepted. These objectives include the implementation of the eEurope Action Plan, as the transition to a knowledge-based digital economy will be an important factor for growth, competitiveness and the labour market. In accordance with the objectives set at that meeting, the European Commission prepared the eEurope 2002 Action Plan for the Feira European Council from 19 to 20 June 2000. The Action Plan identified the modernisation of work organisation as one of the challenges facing the EU. The eEurope 2002 Action Plan for the European Council stressed that greater flexibility will lead to the technological advantages offered by flexible working hours and a flexible workplace, and that the social partners have been invited to support flexible working arrangements for the benefit of workers and employers. (eEurope 2002). On 30 June 2005, after negotiations, representatives of poland`s largest employers` and trade union organisations agreed on a draft agreement to implement the provisions of the 2002 European Framework Agreement in Polish organisations. Although the agreement contains most of the provisions of the European Framework Agreement and even contains additional provisions and detailed explanations on certain issues, it has never been formally ratified. This was due to the fact that the signatory parties did not reach agreement on the list of amendments that should be requested by the government in order to translate it into legislation.
The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the Union of Industrial and Employers` Confederations of Europe / the European Union of Crafts and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (UNICE/UEAPME) and the Centre for Enterprises with Public Participation (ECPE) have signed a framework agreement on teleworking aimed at ensuring greater security for teleworkers employed in the EU. This agreement is of particular importance because it is the first European agreement concluded by the social partners themselves. The member organisations shall report to an ad hoc group set up by the Signatory Parties under the responsibility of the Social Dialogue Committee on the implementation of this Agreement. Within four years of the signature of this Agreement, that ad hoc group shall draw up a joint report on the implementing measures taken. In Italy, the national interfaith agreement was signed on 9 June 2004 with the aim of implementing the provisions of the European Framework Agreement. The agreement was signed by the main trade union federations (Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro, Confederazione Italiana Sindacati Lavoratori and Unione Italiana del Lavoro) as well as by 21 workers` associations from all sectors. (Maddaloni and Pedersini, 2008). The agreement addressed issues that must regulate teleworking, thus adopting the principles set out in the European Framework Agreement with some changes (Maddaloni and Pedersini, 2008): volunteering, conditions of employment, provision of work equipment, private life, health and safety, work organisation, training offer.
However, we can note that the Royal Legislative Decree adopts the provisions of the European Framework Agreement (Aspra and Alonso, 2020). The legislative decree referred to equal opportunities, equal treatment and non-discrimination of workers working in this form, the voluntary and reversible nature of the contract for this form of work organisation, the minimum clauses to be provided for in such a contract, the employer`s support for the cost of equipment and the associated operating costs. the measurement of working time and the possibility of its “flexibility”, the recognition of the right to health and safety at work for workers working in this form, the recognition of the right to privacy, including the recognition of the right to digital separation (Rodriguez-Escudero, Ruiz de Salazar and MartÃnez de Luco Ybarra (2020), recognition of collective rights. . . . .