Sources of data used 1.1.List of Studies and other sources of information

2.Research and use of data in the impact assessment

For the problem definition, data was mainly available through studies previously carried out for the evaluation of the legislation (SH&E, 2002 and ARC, 2009). These studies indeed contain rich data about regulations in place in the Member States, market situation at airports for "services subject to restrictions" (number of providers per category, self-handling airlines, third-party handling airlines, airports providing groundhandling services), centralised infrastructures, subcontracting practices. The mentioned studies also contained "soft data" (i.e. qualitative opinion or estimations of stakeholders) about "size of the market open to competition" (so-called contestable market, which has however changing definition for groundhandling depending on the situation and therefore was not used), quality levels, prices evolution, employment, security and safety problems. The consultation document was also used to request sources of information and data about a number of criteria ("Changes in profitability of groundhandling providers", "Staff wages, levels and contract types;" "Staff qualifications and training provisions;", "Health and safety of workers;", "Staff transfer issues"; "Number of providers and length of service of incumbents;" "Quality levels in tenders;").

In its study, SDG tried to further quantify the problems for the "size of the market open to competition", for employment conditions (including operational pressure, transfer of staff), for safety issues, and for the state of the industry (profitability levels of the groundhandling industry). SDG could use other EC studies (Booz&co, 2009 or ECORYS, 2008) or company financial statements to assess employment conditions; partial information about transfer of staff was only obtained in 2 Member States. As for security and safety, examples of security and safety issues were obtained in the consultation.

In the case where the result of the existing studies was really considered too weak, additional investigations have been carried out by the Commission's services (inquiry about the approvals for the 27 Member States, safety statistics about groundhandling).

The best results available have been used in the impact assessment problem definition. Nevertheless, where some data were impossible to assess (such as the quantitative evolution of prices of groundhandling services), it was clearly mentioned in the IA.

As for prices of groundhandling, it was confirmed by the consultant (SDG) that no reliable quantitative assessment of the level of prices was possible, due to the following constraints: prices of groundhandling services are determined between groundhandling companies and airlines and are not publicly available. What is included in the price is the subject of non-disclosed contractual agreements, and the scope covered varies between the cases (in terms of groundhandling categories covered, of duration of the contracts, of number of airports, of types of expected quality/services, etc.). In addition, overall prices of groundhandling services sometimes include the fees levied for centralised infrastructures by the manager of these infrastructures, which are, as a general rule, not part of the prices agreed upon between the airlines and its groundhandling providers. It is generally considered that groundhandling prices represent 5 to 12% of an airline operating costs¹, but no assessment at airport levels allows finding the price of services at a given airport. Consequently, only a "perception" by stakeholders (airlines, airports, groundhandling providers) of groundhandling prices and their evolution can be expected. However, quantifications of these perceptions (as made in SH&E and ARC reports) revealed that they were subjective, depended on the specific companies' activities and locations, and consequently gave rise to a variety of results that did not necessarily reflect the same realities. It was therefore judged preferable to base the analysis on parameters affecting groundhandling prices (competition, centralised infrastructures prices, costs for groundhandling providers) and how they can in qualitative terms affect the overall prices.

For job creation, the number of employees in the groundhandling sector is not known for the current period and only assessments exist. IAHA estimates the number of workers for groundhandling companies members of IAHA to be around 60,000; Booz and co study found that approximately 40,000 people were working in the sole groundhandling independent companies², but put a warning that this figure is certainly underestimated. An attempt was made to assess the evolution of groundhandling jobs for each kind of groundhandling providers (airlines, independent, airports), but no figures are available for airports. Finally, estimations can range from one number to the double. Regarding the increase in groundhandling jobs for the baseline scenario, the main driver is considered to be traffic increase, but no figure exists as concerning the impact on groundhandling jobs of air traffic growth. SDG assessed it to be 50% of air traffic growth (3% per year).

As for wages in the groundhandling sector, despite further investigations regarding the quantification of wages evolution, no reliable figures could be found which could be used as a solid indicator at EU level. Indeed, the lack of data in this regard³ could not be improved: SDG tried to assess the average wages in the UK⁴ (but it was for 2 companies and in the UK only); request for information on this subject was made (notably in the public consultation). More information was finally obtained from German workers' representatives showing that, at a number of German airports, the difference between average wages for workers (with the same level of experience) in some identified categories of groundhandling services depends on their employer (incumbent airport companies providing higher wages than independent companies) and tended to lag behind inflation. This data was used for assessing social impacts due to changes of employers. It is to be recognised that evolution in wages at EU level may be difficult to interpret considering the number of categories of services, the national levels of wages and their evolution (due for instance to the increase in standard of living).