ELENA process

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Logo of the electronic remuneration statement procedure

By ELENA procedure ( electronic payment detection methods , including electronic proof of income ; original term JobCard ) was originally from 2012 in Germany proof of income electronically using a smart card and electronic signature are provided. The procedure included the central storage of employee data and the use of this data by the employment agencies and other agencies. Any signature card with a chip ( EC / Maestro card, electronic health card , new identity card, etc.) that works according to a uniform standard ( eCard API ) should be able to be used for queries using the ELENA procedure . The identification was made by the signature certificate .

After the introduction was initially to be postponed to 2014, the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy and the Federal Ministry for Labor and Social Affairs agreed in July 2011 to "discontinue" the electronic remuneration statement (Elena) "as soon as possible" because the data protection reasons required Signature cards did not spread quickly enough. The changes to the ELENA procedural law were reversed by law on December 3, 2011.

Employers have been reporting data since January 1, 2010.

Contrary to a different press release, the ELENA procedure has no connection to the introduction of the electronic income tax card .

Emergence

The JobCard was part of the 2006 Information Society Germany action program of the red-green federal government under Gerhard Schröder . The ELENA concept is based on a proposal by the so-called Hartz Commission and on demands from employers' associations. According to this, employee data that are required for decisions about claims to unemployment benefit and other benefits - including employment times and the amount of remuneration - will in future be stored temporarily at a central office. The "requesting offices" (initially agencies for employment, housing and parental allowance offices) could access this data if necessary - without asking the respective employer. In addition, employers no longer have to archive certificates, and the media breaks that have so far arisen during data transmission and processing would be avoided.

To prevent misuse of the centrally stored data, access should require the consent of the employee concerned - the "participant" - declared electronically. The declaration of consent should be electronically signed. For this electronic signature , a certificate for the creation of electronic signatures should be stored on a signature card. This certificate, together with the certificate from the retrieving authority, would have been the key to the stored employee data.

user

The procedure should regulate access to state benefits for which the employer's income and other proof of employment are required, such as the employment certificate in accordance with Section 312 of SGB ​​III . This affected around 40 million employees. On the other hand, the requesting bodies, e.g. B. the employment agency can access the data. The authority employees should only access the data required for processing the benefit application - after the person concerned (participant) has given his consent to the data retrieval for the respective authority.

ELENA process

Procedure

ELENA process

The ELENA procedure should work as follows:

  • When applying for social benefits, the processing authority (requesting office) asks the employee (participant) to obtain a signature card if he does not have one.
  • The participant applies for a signature card with a qualified electronic signature from a certification service provider ( TrustCenter ), which corresponds to the specifications of the eCard-API framework created by the Federal Office for Information Security .
  • The participant registers the signature card with the specialist procedures registry , a central public-law body. This can be done at the registration office or via a registration office (e.g. the employment agencies).
  • The specialist procedures registry links the identification number (ID) of the certificate of the chip card registered for the ELENA procedure with the participant's pension insurance number. (This procedure is necessary because the employee data at the ZSS (see below) cannot be stored under the pension insurance number for legal reasons, so a new storage criterion is required.)
  • The employer transmits certain data of its employees to the central storage location (ZSS) in electronic form according to the KKS - or the eXTra standard . The data are specified in the multifunctional earnings data record (MVDS).
  • If the employee (participant) becomes unemployed or wants to apply for housing or parental allowance, he / she goes to the responsible requesting office ( employment agency , housing, parental allowance) with his signature card . It requests the employee data required to apply for social benefits from the central storage location (ZSS). The chip card of the unemployed and the chip card of the employee of the requesting office serve to legitimize those involved.
  • Once the central storage location (ZSS) has checked all the information from the calling office (authorized office, authorized clerk, consent of the participant), it transmits the requested employee data to the calling office.
  • The requesting agency processes the data, for example by calculating the amount of unemployment benefit based on the amount of the wages.

map

Any signature card that can create qualified signatures within the meaning of the Signature Act should be suitable for the ELENA process. A continuously updated list of certified providers of signature cards and suitable card readers can be found on the Federal Network Agency's website .

Such signature cards are currently offered by the following companies, among others:

The new electronic identity card (nPA, formerly called ePA) and the electronic health card (eGK) should serve as further possible carriers for certificates for the creation of electronic signatures. The German Bundestag decided on December 18, 2008 to introduce the new (electronic) identity card. This was introduced on November 1, 2010.

In the ELENA procedure, the employee data should be stored at a central point - not on the chip card registered for the ELENA procedure. Dierse should only store the employee's name and card identification number.

Use

In 2002, politicians and employer representatives hoped that the ELENA process would provide employers with a rationalization potential with around 100,000 man-days in the area of ​​personnel administration, which should result in savings of an estimated 500 million euros per year.

For the six applications planned in June 2008, the National Regulatory Control Council estimated savings potential of 85.6 million euros per year. For the first three certificates in the previous form, total annual costs for the economy of EUR 106.88 million were determined according to the so-called standard cost model. The other three certificates were taken into account on the basis of a study by the Bonn Institute for SME Research (IfM) with a flat rate of 5 million euros per year; together, this results in annual costs of around 122 million euros for the economy, which the ELENA process should save.

According to the opinion of the Regulatory Control Council, the expected savings were offset by 36.4 million euros as annual costs of the ELENA process for the economy. This results in a total relief for the companies through the ELENA process of around 85.6 million euros per year in the introductory phase. The extension to include further certificates and evidence should bring about a further relief of around 5 million euros per year.

The ELENA process would not have offered employees any financial advantage. The accelerated data transfer should result in employees receiving the benefits they are entitled to more quickly.

Indirect goals

With the ELENA process, the federal government wanted to promote the use of digital signatures (“qualified electronic signatures” based on certificates on chip cards). If almost half of the German population is equipped with signature cards and qualified certificates, one can expect that this will drive trade on the Internet and thus have a beneficial effect on the economy in general.

The legal framework for digital signatures was first created in 1997 with the Signature Act. The use of signature cards remained far below expectations until 2008 for a number of reasons. Time and again, providers of signature cards (including subsidiaries of former state-owned companies such as Telekom, Post and Bundesdruckerei) asked the state to ensure that applications were mandatory.

If ELENA certificates for the creation of digital signatures were to be made available to the general public, the predominant PIN / TAN procedures in online banking , for example, could be replaced by electronic signatures. However, this would also require the spread of chip card readers.

Areas of application

The ELENA procedure should start with certificates for unemployment benefit , housing benefit and parental benefit . Further tasks of the employment agencies, municipal procedures and civil law procedures (e.g. legal aid ) should follow later. All employees and civil servants subject to social security contributions would have been affected.

German building associations and IG BAU demanded that the methodology of the ELENA process be adopted in the building industry. However, other social security agencies as well as the main customs offices and social security offices of the construction industry should not access the data stored at ELENA-ZSS. The building associations hoped that an ELENA-like procedure would help combat illegal work more efficiently . The Federal Ministry of Economics and Labor confirmed in the joint declaration on the construction industry of July 8, 2004 that these requirements can be implemented in organizational and technical terms.

Obligation to participate

Since an efficient changeover from paper to electronic data transmission on the part of the requesting offices requires that participation in the procedure is mandatory for all potential applicants, there was a legal obligation to participate in the ELENA procedure.

costs

55 million euros were available for the infrastructure, including start-up financing. Since the ELENA procedure should work with existing signature cards, only the costs for the certificate were added to it. Participants should be reimbursed for the costs of the process itself (certificate for creating signatures) if the certificate was acquired at the request of a requesting authority. The BMWi announced on June 25, 2008: “According to the economy, the future costs of the qualified certificate will be around 10 euros for 3 years. Upon request, citizens will be reimbursed for the cost of the certificate, so that it is ensured that everyone can realize their entitlement to a social benefit. ”The prerequisite for reimbursement is the benefit of a social benefit.

Legal framework

On March 6, 2009 the Federal Council approved the draft law on the ELENA procedure.

Since 2006, employers have only been allowed to create reports on social security on machine-usable data carriers ( e.g. magnetic tapes or CD-ROMs ) or by remote data transmission . Reports in paper form are only permitted in exceptional cases. For this purpose, Section 28a (1) and Section 28b (2) of SGB ​​IV were reformulated.

The technical infrastructure that enables data to be transmitted electronically to the collection points can be used for the ELENA reports to the central storage location (ZSS).

history

2002

On August 16, 2002, the Commission for Modern Services on the Labor Market , set up by the federal government and named after its chairman Peter Hartz , presented its report on reducing unemployment and restructuring the Federal Labor Office. Among other things, she recommended developing "an insurance card as a signature or key card", "which is available for the relevant competent authority to access certificates of earnings and employment certificates if authorized by the applicant". The federal government agreed to this and other proposals of the Hartz Commission on August 21, 2002 and decided to introduce a “JobCard” as a signature card and the ELENA procedure.

The question of the technical feasibility of the ELENA process should be clarified in a pilot project. To this end, the lead Federal Ministry of Economics and Labor placed an order with the central associations of the statutory health insurance funds and their IT service providers, the Information Technology Service Center of the Statutory Health Insurance (ITSG). The pilot project started on November 21, 2002.

2003

The Federal Commissioner for Data Protection said on 7 May 2003 in the 19th annual report that the planned JobCard method and data storage associated with it still on stock data protection law would have to be tested.

On July 31, 2003, the ITSG presented its concept for the ELENA process. The procedure was tested with fictitious data from September 2003. Several employment agencies as well as companies such as Volkswagen and Deutsche Lufthansa were involved .

2004

In May 2004 the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported that the federal government was no longer aiming to introduce it in 2006, but in 2007. Initially, only the unemployed and public sector employees should be given the signature card.

The Federal and State Data Protection Commissioners decided on October 28, 2004 to have an investigation carried out as to whether and how the employee data should be protected from unauthorized access by end-to-end encryption.

2008

According to the BMWi announced on June 25, 2008, the digital signature should initially apply to six certificates: Federal parental allowance, certificate of employment after the end of the employment relationship, certificate of additional income, certificate of marginal employment, certificate according to the Housing Promotion Act, incorrect occupancy tax - this could simplify around nine million processes per year become. The system should be expanded to 45 other areas, including child benefit and unemployment benefit II. Each measure should relieve the economy by around five million euros. The system costs should not be higher than the previous administrative costs.

The employer should automatically transfer the required data to the central storage location (ZSS) at the data office of the pension insurance provider.

2010

Media reported that Federal Minister of Economics Rainer Brüderle is considering suspending ELENA. With reference to the burden on public budgets and doubts as to whether the introduction of the middle class will really relieve the burden, a moratorium must be considered. A new report by the Regulatory Control Council showed a potential saving of € 8.2 million.

2011

On July 18, 2011, the Federal Ministry of Economics announced the fastest possible termination due to the lack of distribution of electronic signatures, which are required under data protection law. In addition, the data collected should be deleted as soon as possible. With effect from December 3, 2011 the ELENA procedure was discontinued. The law was promulgated in the Federal Law Gazette on December 2 and came into force on December 3, 2011.

On December 6, 2011, the cryptographic keys used to decode stored data were destroyed.

2012

April 2012. The already reported 700 million data records were physically deleted.

2014

In 2014, the Federal Employment Agency introduced the less extensive successor system “Accepting employers' certificates electronically” (BEA). The final report for the “Optimized Reporting Procedure in Social Security” (OMS) was also presented.

2015

In January 2015, the final report of the follow-up project was presented by OMS.

criticism

The ELENA process has been criticized by various data protectionists . The millionfold collection of employee data at the central storage location (ZSS) is an inadmissible data storage in advance, without it being foreseeable whether the data will ever be needed.

In addition, employers would be burdened twice in the introductory phase, as all certificates still have to be issued for the time being, despite the ELENA procedure.

It was also criticized that originally every striker would have been recorded, regardless of whether they were in official or “wild” strikes (such as the Opel strike). It also records who was “locked out” by the employer. The Federal Ministry of Labor announced on January 5, 2010 that strike times could no longer be recorded as such. In January 2010, the ELENA Advisory Board should also check all data to be collected for their absolute necessity. In addition, in 2010 employee representatives should be granted a statutory right to be heard when a decision is made on the content of the data to be collected.

Employers should create a monthly pay record. Compared to the job reference, employees would have no influence on this, but would be informed about the sending of the data record and would have the right to view data stored about themselves according to Section 103 SGB ​​IV .

The data record should include name, date of birth, insurance number , address, etc. as well as absences, warnings and possible "misconduct", as this information would be necessary for decisions about possible blocking periods. According to Section 99 (4) SGB ​​IV , only the accessing offices integrated in the procedure have access to the data. Access by employers or tax authorities as well as the confiscation of the data by a public prosecutor would be excluded. Employment agencies collect some of the information in the certificate of unemployment benefit even without the ELENA procedure, in which case ELENA only changes the transport route and the storage of the data.

One of the major points of criticism was that there were fears of who could access the stored data in the future. Scenarios that the ELENA card could be presented in an application fueled this fear, although the ELENA procedural law defined that the data may only be used for the areas of application specified in the law and that transmission, use or confiscation was not permitted. Nevertheless, two online petitions against ELENA were initiated at the German Bundestag . The number of signatories (27562 and 5901 respectively) did not oblige the Petitions Committee to deal with it publicly.

Constitutional complaint

After the ruling on data retention was announced, in whose lawsuit more than 34,000 people were involved, the data retention working group and the FoeBuD also initiated a class action against the ELENA proceedings. On March 31, 2010, 22,005 powers of attorney were transported to Karlsruhe and submitted as a collective complaint to the Federal Constitutional Court. The complaint requests that

§§ 97 and 98 of the fourth book of the Social Security Code in the version of the Act on the Procedure for Electronic Remuneration Statement (ELENA Procedure Act) of March 28, 2009, Federal Law Gazette I No. 17, issued on April 1, 2009, are deemed incompatible with Art. 2 Para. 1 i. V. m. Art. 1 Paragraph 1 and Art. 4 Paragraph 1 in conjunction with Article 140 of the Basic Law in conjunction with Article 136 Paragraph 3 of the Weimar Constitution.

On September 14, 2010, the Federal Constitutional Court rejected an application for an interim order against the ELENA proceedings.

See also

literature

  • Gerrit Hornung : The digital identity. Legal problems with chip card IDs: digital ID card, electronic health card, JobCard procedure. Nomos 2005, ISBN 3-8329-1455-2 .
  • Christoph Schaefer: Improved protection of fundamental rights through an electronic certification process. In: Journal for Legal Policy 3/2006, pp. 93–96.
  • Norbert Warga: The Elena concept. In: Data protection and data security 4/2010, pp. 216–220.
  • Heinrich Wilms: ELENA and the right to informational self-determination Nomos 2010, ISBN 978-3-8329-6051-3 .
  • Christine Zedler: Beautiful Elena. Electronic remuneration statement In Forum Recht 02/2010 p. 71. ( PDF file )

Web links

 Wikinews: Electronic Remuneration Statement  - in the news

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ tagesschau.de: Test phase for wage registration procedure extended: Government postpones use of ELENA ( Memento from November 22, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
  2. ^ Information from the ver.di legal department ( Memento from December 18, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
  3. ↑ AFP: Government buries employee database "Elena"
  4. ↑ a b Federal Ministry of Economics: "ELENA procedure will be discontinued" ( Memento from July 22, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  5. ↑ Text and amendments to the law of November 23, 2011 (Federal Law Gazette I p. 2298)
  6. ↑ http://www.bildblog.de/31988/lohnsteuermann-ueber-bord/
  7. ↑ ELENA process description, Annex 6 ( Memento of May 21, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 432 kB)
  8. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20110107040647/http://www.welt.de/print/welt_kompakt/print_politik/article11962399/Regierung-setzt-Krankenkassen-unter-Druck.html
  9. ↑ Ab stellenwatch.de : Answer to a request to MP Peter Hintze from June 30, 2008 ( Memento from July 2, 2008 in the Internet Archive )
  10. ↑ Volker Briegleb: employee data in reserve . heise online November 30th, 2009. "Elena should help the qualified digital signature to break through."
  11. ↑ Press release of the Federal Council of March 6, 2009 ( Memento of February 28, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  12. ↑ tagesschau.de - Brüderle wants to stop ELENA ( Memento from July 6, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
  13. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20160130205454/https://www.normenkontrollrat.bund.de/Webs/NKR/Content/DE/Artikel/2010-09-13-elena-gutachten.html
  14. ↑ PDF; 235 kB "Law to amend the Accommodation Statistics Act and the Trade Statistics Act as well as the repeal of regulations for the electronic remuneration statement procedure"
  15. ↑ heise online : Federal government decides to end Elena , accessed on October 13, 2011
  16. ↑ Press release from the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology ( Memento from December 6, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  17. ↑ ELENA data will be deleted ( Memento from February 16, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  18. ↑ All ELENA data has been deleted - press release by the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information ( Memento of April 22, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  19. ↑ BEA project: Accepting certificates electronically. Federal Employment Agency, September 11, 2015, accessed on March 26, 2019 .
  20. ↑ Archive link ( Memento from July 8, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  21. ↑ Financial Times Deutschland: Slimmed-down Elena should collect employee data ( Memento from May 5, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  22. ↑ Latest news on OMS. February 6, 2014, accessed August 4, 2016 .
  23. ↑ The final report on the OMS follow-up project is available. Haufe, January 29, 2015, accessed August 4, 2016 .
  24. ↑ Press release of the Independent State Center for Data Protection Schleswig-Holstein from June 25, 2008 ( Memento from April 6, 2009 in the Internet Archive )
  25. ↑ http://www.fr-online.de/home/datenbank-elena-wer-streikt--wird-erfasst,1472778,3271132.html ( Memento from July 9, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ) Database Elena Who is on strike , recorded by Frankfurter Rundschau on November 30, 2009.
  26. ↑ Zeit-Online: Network activists mobilize against "Elena"
  27. ↑ FoeBud eV: sign-up page for the constitutional complaint ( Memento of 5 September 2013 Internet Archive )
  28. ↑ Constitutional complaint against "Elena" - data protectionists start attack on huge social data storage Spiegel-Online from March 16, 2010
  29. ↑ Tagesschau.de: Collective complaint at the Federal Constitutional Court - More than 22,000 citizens are suing ELENA ( Memento from April 4, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
  30. ↑ Does well:.. Article 136, paragraph 3 Weimar Reich constitution August 11, 1919.
  31. ↑ FoeBud / Meinhard Starostik: Verfassungsbeschwerde ELENA - 1 BvR 902/10 - Copy of the constitutional complaint filed on March 31, 2010 with the Federal Constitutional Court on behalf of 22,005 complainants , PDF (170.8 kB) of April 14, 2010.
  32. ↑ BVerfG, 1 BvR 872/10 of September 14, 2010 .