Showing posts with label Reform 2013. Show all posts
Career blockage for colleagues at grades AST9 and AD12
As
a precaution and to avoid any risk of inadmissibility of the applications
before the CST, in addition to the complaints already lodged by 31 March 2014, new templates have been made available to
attack the indication, added on 4 April to your promotion file in
SYSPER2, that you are not eligible for promotion, and also your exclusion from
the list of officials proposed for promotion published on 24 June. Please
note that the new Art. 90 complaints must be introduced before 24 September.
Coordinated Action against the 2014 Staff Regulations
To defend staff to the best of our ability, the trade unions and staff associations of all institutions have decided to join forces for the lodging of appeals. That will enable us to ensure that each appeal covers all the pleas in law and arguments used in the various complaints.
By acting together, we will also show the Court of Justice that it is not just a few isolated colleagues, but all staff of all institutions who are up in arms against the illegalities of the new Staff Regulations and the disdain that the co-legislator has shown for staff’s acquired rights.
For most appeals it will not be necessary for everybody who made a complaint to appeal. We will make an appeal in each case for a certain number of representative cases.
To allow us to choose those cases, we ask all those who made a complaint to send a message to the following email address set up for all trade unions and staff associations for the purpose of managing the appeals (OSP.Recours2014@gmail.com) indicating the complaints that you introduced and giving a short summary of your situation (for example, for travelling time and annual travel costs, indicate your place of origin, whether you return there often, your family situation, what you received previously and your function group, or contract type, and grade).
Warning: for the appeal for those who have lost their right to travelling time and to the annual payment of travel costs (a total loss, not a reduction in the amount paid), the timing is very tight: the appeals have to be lodged before the end of August.
Annual Travel Allowance: new art. 90
During March 2014, many of you made a complaint against the reduction or elimination of the annual travel allowance.
We thank you once again for your trust!
In fact, we had considered that, in order to ensure the admissibility of Article 90§2 complaints regarding both the travelling time and the travel expenses, it was important to make them immediately after the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations.
With its replies, the Appointing Authority is considering that the complaint regarding the reduction of travelling time is admissible.
On the contrary, for travel expenses, the relevant individual decision that a complaint can be made against is the salary slip of the month of June.
Therefore it is essential to introduce a new art. 90 complaint concerning travel expenses.
Various new templates, covering a range of different situations, and contesting the reduction or elimination of the annual travel allowance are now available on our dedicated website
Deadline: within 3 months of receiving your payslip of June 2014. To avoid problems, we advise lodging the appeal before the end of August 2014.With its replies, the Appointing Authority is considering that the complaint regarding the reduction of travelling time is admissible.
On the contrary, for travel expenses, the relevant individual decision that a complaint can be made against is the salary slip of the month of June.
Therefore it is essential to introduce a new art. 90 complaint concerning travel expenses.
Various new templates, covering a range of different situations, and contesting the reduction or elimination of the annual travel allowance are now available on our dedicated website
Salary adaptation 2011 and 2012
The deadline for lodging an appeal is 31/07/2014.
Art. 90 for career blockage
The Commission officials concerned have found, from 14 April 2014 on, a mention in the SYSPER2 file showing a career blockage.
This mention may be regarded as a decision of individual application of the appointing authority also challengeable.
As a precautionary measure, it seems necessary to also lodge a complaint against this decision.
We draw your attention to the fact that such a complaint must be filed no later than 14 July 2014.
You will find at these links (template AD12 and 13 - template AST9 - cover page) the templates of complaint adapted for both AD 12 - AD 13 and AST9 colleagues.
Simply fill in this template and send it, accompanied by a "print screen" of your SYSPER2 file, to the functional mailbox HR MAIL D2 by 14 July at the latest together with the enclosed art. 90 filled-in template.
Thank you again for your trust!
Art.90 complaints: don't miss the deadline!
Career
,
Reform 2013
,
Rights
You can lodge from www.recours2014.eu a series of art. 90 complaints against the most controversial provisions contained in the new Staff Regulations.
We wish to remind you that today 31 March it
is the last day to lodge the following art. 90 complaints:
We would also like to remind
that an art. 90 complaint against the reintroduction of the 6% Solidarity
Levy is available here.
Deadline: 10 April.
According to art. 90, "Any
person to whom the Staff Regulations apply may submit to the appointing
authority a complaint against an act affecting him adversely, either where the
said authority has taken a decision or where it has failed to adopt a measure
prescribed by the Staff Regulations. (...)"
Therefore lodging a
complaint is a statutory right, which cannot affect your career or
your personal working condition.
Our R&D experts are available
to answer all your questions and doubts, and to help you introducing your
complaint.
Feel free to contact us in
case of need.
Reform Complaints: dedicated website available!
We have listened to you!
Following the proliferation of announcements and complaint forms, and
taking into account your expectations and requests,
we have:
- grouped the efforts of a large number of Trade Unions from all Institutions and Agencies to provide you with the best defence of your rights and to demonstrate our commitment to a single set of Staff Regulations;
- set up the biggest pool of lawyers ever!
You can find the outcome of our work, and all art. 90 forms at:
Visit
our website and:
1)
check all the actions that we are launching, and look at video
presentations of our lawyers for each of them;
2)
download the complaint/request template, complete it and send it to the
AIPN of your Institution, according to the instructions that you find on our website
Have
you got any question concerning your personal situation?
A team of
experts is available -
in each Institution - to help you get an answer!
New Staff Regulations: presentation on JRC Intranet
At the following link, you can also find a list of questions and their respective answers related to some aspects affecting careers.
As already anticipated in a previous message, we are preparing a series of art. 90 complaints to be lodged against the most critical aspects of the new Staff Regulations.
These art. 90 templates will be made available well before the end of March (deadline to introduce complaints).
Don't hesitate to contact us in case you need any additional information or support related to your personal situation.
Future legal actions against the new Staff Regulations
At the moment we are working hard - together with other Trade Unions – to provide you the highest possibilities of success in these actions. To this extent, a large pool of legal experts has been put in place and is preparing a series of art. 90 complaints. If you don't see anything coming out from us yet, it's not because of inactivity or lack of interest. On the contrary, we are supporting a coordinated approach, and we are working hard on it. So, don't panic! The deadline for an art. 90 complaint is 31/3/2014. Well before this, you'll get the chance to contest – in the best possible way – aspects of the new Staff Regulations that are negatively affecting your working life and career.
Change of Job Type to AST/SC - note to HR Director
Also thanks to our intervention, all concerned colleagues received a message which eased some of the worries that we had expressed.
We are grateful to DG JRC for being one of the few Directorates General - if not the only one so far - which gave some information about this recent conversion.
In addition to what HR explained, we also received reassurance that it is not needed to change job in order to be able to follow the previous AST career.
In practice, the type of post of job is different from the type of post of person, without affecting career of the occupying official.
In the end, it appears as the problem originates more by the confused way in which the change is presented in Sysper2, being more a formal rather than a substantial issue.
Our R&D staff representatives will bring this issue to the discussion at the next CSC (Central Staff Committee) plenary meeting in Brussels next week.
Some more questions remain concerning the technical and scientific positions now advertised as AST/SC. We sent a note expressing our worries to our Director of Human Resources, and of course we'll keep you informed of any follow-up on this issue.
More on reclassification AST/SC
We have been informed that all people concerned will receive in the next days a targeted communication which we hope will clarify our (and your!) doubts.
Change from AST to AST/SC career structure
If your job was previously classified as AST, it is possible that it has been converted to the new Function Group AST/SC. There is no indication of the criteria used for converting a post from AST to AST/SC; many posts – also scientific positions! – that do not fit within the “secretary/clerk” definition have been converted to the new Function Group.
While the 2014 reform foresees that this new AST/SC function group is applicable only for the new Secretaries/Clerks that will be recruited in the future, we have noticed that the Administration already converted many existing jobs from AST to AST/SC the very first days of January! AST/SC and AST salary grids are different. AST/SC has only 6 grades, from AST/SC1 to AST/SC6. There is also a shift of one grade, downwards of course! It means that the remuneration of an AST/SC6 corresponds to the AST 5 one.
This conversion applies only to the job type and not to the person. According to our information, the current AST job holder can continue his/her career within his/her new AST/SC post as before 1 January 2014, but once vacant, the AST/SC post can only be filled with a new AST/SC staff.
The number of “classic AST” positions will decrease as a consequence of these conversions to AST/SC. This conversion will increase even more the difficulty for mobility to full AST positions as well as the recruitment of qualified staff.
This is what R&D thinks of this issue:
1. As this magic trick did not follow the necessary social dialogue procedure with the Trade Unions, we urge the Administration to meet as soon as possible with them and to carry out modifications as applicable;
2. We wonder how the Administration can fill a vacant AST/SC position (retirements, change of post…) when no AST/SC open competitions have been launched yet.
3. The reform and the new Staff Regulations apply to all the EU institutions. How can the Commission explain that the Administration of the Council, for example, opted instead for a smooth and progressive change, properly targeted and negotiated with the Unions?
4. We regret the lack of clear communication, notifying the concerned staff of important changes in their Sysper2 profile.
R&D already got in touch with the HR Department and we are still waiting for more information. We are asking that any AST/SC colleague can have the guarantee that the introduction of the AST/SC Function group will have absolutely no impact on the current job holders in terms of salary, career evolution, promotion, etc…
In case you wish to stay informed and help us in managing this issue, please contact us and let us know your situation so that we can have a full picture of the different cases within the JRC and better defend your interests!
Contractual Agents: the effects of the Reform
Several Contractual Agents whose contract will end shortly contacted us to inquire about the possibility to work again for the Institutions once the reform has entered in force.
Most probably CAs whose contract ends in a period of time (6 months probably) close to the entry into force of the new staff regulations will have the possibility to keep their job and have another 3-year-contract. Former CAs who already had 3 years of contract within the institutions may have the possibility to work for other 3 years without taking part to a new EPSO test. Of course everything has to be settled in the negotiations related to new General Implementing Provisions (the rules governing the implementation of the Staff Regulations in each Institution) related to the recruitment of CAs. It is clear that these new regulations will only open possibilities, the agent must also fulfill the needs of the service, in other words, no contract extensions or renewals will be guaranteed.
Furthermore, it is expected that internal competitions may exceptionally be opened to Contract Agents FG II, III, IV but with tight restrictions (i.e. already having 3 years of service and with access only to certain kinds of competitions based on grade and function group). Only up to 5% out of the total amount of recruitments may come from these internal competitions.
Note that we give this information based on information currently known; more details and certainty will be obtained upon the revision of the General Implementing Provisions.
R&D Ispra will follow this file very closely in order to support the legitimate expectations of the Contractual Agents, and will be available to answer any questions you may have. In the meantime we recommend existing CA staff to discuss the options with their direct superior.
Reform: R&D Ispra analysis of the proposed agreement
With this message we want to provide you with our analysis and some reflections on the proposal/agreement on the reform from the point of view of the content rather than the form of the process that lead to it, since we believe that you will be more interested in what it means in practical terms than in the negotiations and the formalities as such.
Before going to the analysis we want to stress that we are by no means happy with the agreement and that it can be only considered as a "least bad" result as compared to what could have been the case. We shouldn't forget that the whole exercise was not meant to improve all benefits for staff or to "repair" the mistakes of the reform of 2004. No, it is just a money saving operation that was executed under political pressure from many Member States, which will in fact not really save so much money in the end. The Member States proposed a major deterioration of the staff regulations, e.g. by the elimination of the expatriation allowance; application of the levy to family and other allowances; cutting pension entitlements by as much as 20%; raising pension contributions by 36%; pension age up from 63 to 67; recruiting future secretaries and clerks on 20% lower salaries, just to mention a few of their demands. We agree with the sentiments of our colleagues of the European Parliament and we want to quote them here: "If it had not been by the firm stance of the EP all these measures would had seen the Official Journal. We feel we need to express our thanks to President Schulz, rapporteur Roth-Behrendt and JURI chair and shadow rapporteurs for their defence of a permanent, independent and competent European civil service."
In the light of this, it is realistic to at least have a look at the agreement in detail to be able to look at the real outcome, rather than focusing on emotions. Bear in mind that with the completely diverse population of staff, i.e. "old" before 2004 staff, "young" after 2004 staff, CA's, TA's, end of career, start of career, singe staff, staff with family, "expats", etc. it is impossible to find a compromise package that minimises the dissatisfaction of everybody to the same extent. For the Member States the old slogan "divide and conquer" seemed to be the strategy.
The analysis of the agreement was presented and discussed in the R&D Ispra meeting of Thursday 27 June open for all our members and with their valuable input we arrived at the following interpretation (see link). In the agreement there are many elements that continue with the deterioration path started with the 2004 reform. However, there are also some improvements (i.e. 6 year contract agents with also possibilities of internal competitions; automatic payment adjustment clause (method); increase of salary grid and recruitment level for AST/SC; increase of promotion rate of AD5 - AD7 colleagues; insertion of clause supporting the European Schools) and flexible working-time arrangements.If the agreement will be accepted by the EP, the task for the staff representation will be to try to minimise the negative impact of the application of the new rules and to continue with the defence of the EU and its staff.
Before going to the analysis we want to stress that we are by no means happy with the agreement and that it can be only considered as a "least bad" result as compared to what could have been the case. We shouldn't forget that the whole exercise was not meant to improve all benefits for staff or to "repair" the mistakes of the reform of 2004. No, it is just a money saving operation that was executed under political pressure from many Member States, which will in fact not really save so much money in the end. The Member States proposed a major deterioration of the staff regulations, e.g. by the elimination of the expatriation allowance; application of the levy to family and other allowances; cutting pension entitlements by as much as 20%; raising pension contributions by 36%; pension age up from 63 to 67; recruiting future secretaries and clerks on 20% lower salaries, just to mention a few of their demands. We agree with the sentiments of our colleagues of the European Parliament and we want to quote them here: "If it had not been by the firm stance of the EP all these measures would had seen the Official Journal. We feel we need to express our thanks to President Schulz, rapporteur Roth-Behrendt and JURI chair and shadow rapporteurs for their defence of a permanent, independent and competent European civil service."
In the light of this, it is realistic to at least have a look at the agreement in detail to be able to look at the real outcome, rather than focusing on emotions. Bear in mind that with the completely diverse population of staff, i.e. "old" before 2004 staff, "young" after 2004 staff, CA's, TA's, end of career, start of career, singe staff, staff with family, "expats", etc. it is impossible to find a compromise package that minimises the dissatisfaction of everybody to the same extent. For the Member States the old slogan "divide and conquer" seemed to be the strategy.
The analysis of the agreement was presented and discussed in the R&D Ispra meeting of Thursday 27 June open for all our members and with their valuable input we arrived at the following interpretation (see link). In the agreement there are many elements that continue with the deterioration path started with the 2004 reform. However, there are also some improvements (i.e. 6 year contract agents with also possibilities of internal competitions; automatic payment adjustment clause (method); increase of salary grid and recruitment level for AST/SC; increase of promotion rate of AD5 - AD7 colleagues; insertion of clause supporting the European Schools) and flexible working-time arrangements.If the agreement will be accepted by the EP, the task for the staff representation will be to try to minimise the negative impact of the application of the new rules and to continue with the defence of the EU and its staff.
Strike on 26/6
At this moment the technical reading of “the proposal” for the amendment of the Staff Regulations is going on and we don’t know yet what the outcome will be. It looks like the current proposal may be subject to further changes. Though we think that a detailed understanding should be the basis for the decision to strike or not, R&D Brussels (under umbrella of the Front Commun Intersyndical) calls for a strike tomorrow. We, R&D Ispra, haven’t made an in depth analysis of the consolidated compromise yet, but considering the limited time we express our loyalty to the position of R&D Brussels. As already communicated in previous messages the decision to strike or not is totally yours. At this link you may find the full text of the proposed modifications of the staff regulations that could be of help for you to decide.
Our consideration on a possible strike
We have received several questions from members on the position of R&D Ispra considering the message of Vice President Šefčovič and the strike notice that was issued by the trade unions. Based on what Šefčovič said R&D Ispra thinks that it is worthwhile to wait for the final texts and the outcome of tomorrow’s trilogue before calling for a strike. If a final agreement is along the lines explained by Mr Šefčovič we believe that it is – although certainly not ideal - a realistic and acceptable compromise. If however, the devil is indeed in the detail and the final texts deviate significantly and negatively from what is on the table now, the option for a strike is still open.
We’ll keep you informed in the following days.
Update: trilogue reform
This morning we attended a meeting with Mr. Frutuoso de Melo (Deputy Director General DG HR) to update staff representatives on the discussions of yesterday’s trilogue.
The main topic discussed in the trilogue was the method for the annual salary adaptation. An agreement now seems to be possible on a proposal from the European Parliament which is very close to the initial proposal of the Commission. The main change would be the presence of a “moderation” clause according to which the adaptation would be split into two halves when the increase of purchasing power is over 2% (half paid on 1st July of year before - as was the case with the previous method - and half paid on 1st April of the current year).
This moderation clause is only related to the change of purchasing power, the inflation would always be reflected in the annual salary adaptation. It was explained that this moderation clause, if it had already existed over the past 20 year period, would have been applied only one time, in 2009.
The topics for discussion at next week’s trilogue will focus on careers and pensions. Regarding careers, the EP might also be open to negotiate with the Council a link between high AD grades and responsibilities.
Concerning other measures, the Commission is maintaining its position.
Parliament pushes for change to the MFF
The vote of last Wednesday does not imply that the whole MFF negotiations will have to start from scratch, it was only an intermediate step in the co-decision procedure. The Parliament will give or refuse its consent on the MFF in July 2013.
With the vote of last Wednesday, the Parliament expressed its concern about the following main points:
- a lack of transparency and respect of the EP role during the negotiations of February
- the need for flexibility in the budget between different items of expenditure
- the need for a mid-term review of the MFF, after the establishment of the new Commission and EP
- no roll-over of 2013 unpaid bills into the new MFF
The EP is clearly showing to the Council that its increased power given by the Treaty of Lisbon has to be taken into account. The fact that the EP is counterbalancing the Council is positive for the defense of the European project and the public service that makes it possible!
In this context the reform of the staff regulation is not expected to enter into force before Jan 2014 at least.
For more information on the vote of Wednesday we invite you to have a look at the Parliament press relase and the Commission press release.
We remind that you can find more information on the MFF and the reform on the R&D website.
Latest update on the reform
In order to find the extra 1.5 Billion saving, the Commission proposes to freeze the salaries and pensions of all the staff employed in the EU Institutions, agencies and other bodies over the next 2 years (2013 and 2014). This means that the provision of the method that expired on 31 December 2012 to align the evolution of EU staff remuneration and pensions to that of national civil servants will not be applied for 2 years, even when the method will be reinstated following the reform.
The exact amount of purchasing power loss will depend on the combination of inflation and the evolution of national civil servants salaries during the next two years, but we expect that it will roughly correspond to one echelon. The effects of this salary freeze will be felt even after the 2 year period and when one enters retirement. We are following this point very closely but it seems that there is little that can be done to counter this perspective, the pressure of the Council on this aspect is very intense and in any case 1.5 Billion must be found within the administrative spending. During this freeze period, it is probable that the correction coefficient will be updated annually as usual.Another proposed measure is much more controversial: the negotiations in their current state foresee the introduction of a new 6% “crisis levy” in parallel with the salary freeze. We can’t accept this levy in the absence of method or if the reinstated method substantially diverges from the old one. As negotiated during the last reform of 2004, the levy was introduced in exchange for a stable and well defined method: one goes with the other. Our position is that during any salary and pension freeze, no levy can be applied. DG HR was receptive to this argumentation and will take it into account when negotiating with the Council. One point anyway seems clear: the levy cannot be retroactively applied. We will not have to pay back what we should pay now were the solidarity not having expired at the end 2012.
But there is even more!
The way the February Council conclusions are written is open to interpretation. Several members of the Council Status Working Group (with Austria as forerunner) wish to introduce in the new method after the 2 years freeze period a limitation in the salary evolution, until 2020 at least. It comprises a “dynamic cap” that consists in deducting 0.5 % from every annual salary adjustment, even if it results in a negative adjustment; and a “static cap” that limits any future positive annual salary adjustment to max. 2%.The Commission does not agree with this proposal that is not in line with the Council summit conclusions.
Since the Council summit, the Commission (DG HR) has met several times with the Council Status Working Group but discussions are difficult and the two parties don’t agree on how to implement the reform. Furthermore, the Status Working Group has no single common opinion and some of its members have a rather extreme position. The Commission requested to negotiate from now on at the COREPER level (the ambassadors of the Member States) and hopes that they will have a more realistic and reasonable approach.
The European Parliament will give its green or red light on the MFF proposal in June/early July. If the Parliament gives it OK, a trilogue will take place (Council-Commission-Parliament) to discuss the way forward to implement the MFF budget reduction, and it is thought that the Parliament will strengthen the Commission position against the Council.
To conclude, the negotiations on the reform are still in a very early stage and somewhat chaotic. Having reached an agreement for the MFF does not mean that everything is now clarified. A 2-year salaries and pension freeze seems unavoidable, but several Member States still want to attack the European public service even more.
In any case the reform won't entry into force before January 2014.
We must be very careful to defend our rights, and we need your continuing support!
R&D is here to defend your rights!
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
