Gaps in social security protection of mobile persons: Options for filing these gaps

Abstract

The effects of crossing borders can be advantageous or disadvantageous for the persons concerned; these are all part of the game and cannot be challenged on the basis of EU law. After all, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) does not provide powers for harmonisation, but only for coordination. However, the coordination rules themselves may make a person worse off when he or she makes use of the right to free movement. More precisely, such an effect may occur in combination with differences between national systems to which coordination rules are applied. One example is that the coordination rules provide that a person is subject to unemployment benefits in the country of residence and, as a result, if that person becomes ill, also to sickness benefit in that country. If the duration of sickness benefit in the country of residence is 52 weeks, but the waiting period for disability benefit (supposing, for instance, that this is (mainly) due from the country of employment) is 104 weeks, there is a gap of 52 weeks in protection. The relevance of such gaps is not to solve particular cases as such; after all, these are closely linked to particular national systems. The relevance lies in the more general approach that is now being developed by the Court of Justice to address such gaps. This will be useful in cases other than those discussed here and may be further developed in order to be codified in the Coordination Regulation.