Showing posts with label Strategy 2030. Show all posts

Our Concerns Regarding Possible Staff Cuts and Future of the Ispra Site

17/10/2022 , , , ,

               


                                                                                    

REPLY RECEIVED BY MR QUEST, DG OF THE JRC on 13/12/2022 - FOLLOWING THE NOTE SENT BY R&D DATED 14/12/2022 

 

Ispra,14th October 2022 

NOTE TO THE ATTENTION OF
MR S. QUEST - DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE JRC

Subject: Our Concerns Regarding Possible Staff Cuts and Future of the Ispra Site 

Dear Mr Quest,

R&D Ispra would like to draw your attention to some concerns regarding the JRC’s budgetary situation. We are aware of the current difficult situation of the overall Commission, and particularly the JRC’s, budget caused by a conjunction of the following factors:

•    Impact on EU budget due to the annual update of the remuneration 2022;
•    Impact on budget of high energy costs;
•    EURATOM cuts;
•    Missing participation of the UK and Switzerland in Horizon Europe.

Additionally, within the JRC, we have clearly noticed that the staff policy implemented in recent years has already  lead to a low level of replacement of retired staff (especially AST scientific staff) and the ratio between permanent and non-permanent staff has worsened significantly.

The acute ongoing crisis is therefore exacerbating an already difficult situation. We are disappointed that ambitious scenarios1 for improving the energy efficiency of the Ispra site have only been partially implemented in recent years (e.g. substantial increase of solar PV, installation of heat pumps and smart meters, building renovation and insulation, and demolition of obsolete buildings, etc.). These measures would have greatly reduced the impact of the excessive energy costs we are now facing.

We are concerned that the fact that the JRC budget includes its infrastructure and operating costs, unlike other DGs, may penalise the JRC’s staff and its research objectives and also makes the Ispra site less attractive.

The above-mentioned budgetary pressures are now leading to additional real concerns about further pressures on permanent staffing levels, the possible non-extension of CA contracts and an uncertain situation concerning external staff (crucial for specific scientific projects due to the reductions of statutory staff). This would lead to a loss of talent in many scientific fields, which could in turn negatively affect many scientific projects. We are also concerned about reductions in investments for scientific and social infrastructures exacerbated by the reduction in Ispra infrastructure and maintenance staff.
Our main aspiration is the preservation of the integrity of the Ispra site, which is threatened by the above mentioned risks. R&D Ispra would therefore like to contribute with an open and transparent discussion on the future of the JRC Ispra site. We take the opportunity to list a number of measures that we believe essential to be considered immediately:

•    Ensure that the JRC defends its correct functioning as an essential service of the Commission by negotiating all additional budgetary measures that can avoid it is treated unfavourably vis-à-vis other DGs. This is consistent with, but additional to, the recent promise from Commissioner Hahn’s Head of Cabinet that the Commission intends to ask the European Parliament and the Council for additional human resources in order to ensure the existing budget is more productive and we can successfully face the current challenges.
•    Agreeing energy saving measures for all the JRC sites, additionally taking advantage of the recent Commission Decision on Working Time and Hybrid Working fully involving the staff representatives;  
•    Investment in additional infrastructure energy efficiency measures within the limit of the budget available;  
•    Moving from the JRC budget line all the infrastructure investments related to the well-being (e.g. new canteen/new garderie, projects for which we understand are currently blocked due to budgetary reasons);
•    Prioritisation of the JRC scientific projects in order to ensure full compliance with EU policy, and in particular the European Green Deal as a new growth strategy;
•    Regular targeted open scientific competitions to ensure the JRC has the talents to meet its future scientific needs.
•    We believe this would be the right time to focus on creating a dedicated Office for infrastructure management (OII – Office Infrastructure Ispra or OIJ – Office Infrastructure JRC sites), in this way the infrastructure/operational costs would not continue to be a burden on the JRC budget, and at same time will give the possibility to stabilise concerned Contract Agents.   

Returning to the immediate energy crisis, while all staff must make their own efforts in its own energy saving behaviour, and we offer our help in promoting awareness, fundamental structural changes must be put in place. We hope that appropriate action can avoid the need for any cuts in staff or investments, but where any savings do become necessary, we request that the Ispra site does not carry an unfair burden.

We trust that you will act in every possible way to defend the JRC Ispra site as well as its staff who play a fundamental role in supporting Commission policy making as well as the international scientific community. We look forward to the possibility of fruitful discussions about all these critical issues.

Yours Sincerely, 

Gianfranco Selvagio                        Salvatore Tirendi 

       President, R&D Ispra                  Vice-President, R&D Ispra

Cc. Bernard MAGENHANN, Sabine HENZLER, Philippe DUPONTEIL

 

 1 Maschio, I., Bavetta, M. and Paci, D., JRC Ispra site energy transition: Energy transition scenarios to 2030 for JRC Ispra site, European Commission,
Ispra, 2018, JRC113368


Ref. Ares(2022)7118351 – 14/10/2022

Promoting JRC Scientific Excellence – some case studies

24/11/2020 , , ,

 






Promoting JRC Scientific Excellence - some case studies

On 23 November 2020 R&D sent our Director General, Mr Quest, a note with some comments and questions on three topics that we believe are of fundamental importance for the JRC.

Dear Mr Quest,
Firstly we wish to congratulate the JRC management for its overall good handling of the difficult ongoing coronavirus crisis. While urgent, we don’t wish that this distracts us from other important topics of importance to the JRC.

We observe that the JRC sometimes takes impromptu decisions without sufficient consultation with the staff who find their work subsequently affected. A lack of supporting evidence leads to tensions which could have been avoided - especially unfortunate when aspects of the changes do have some merits and considering that our work at the JRC is precisely to provide evidence-based policy support.

We wish look more closely at decisions surrounding these three topics:

  • JRC Editorial Review Board
  • JRC's role in indirect actions under Horizon Europe
  • Knowledge Management

Read more


UPDATE 17/12/2020

REPLY RECEIVED FROM MR QUEST, GENERAL DIRECTOR JRC, TO THE ABOVE NOTE

JRC Implementation Review 2017 – Request for a detailed discussion after the COCO-JRC meeting

27/10/2017 ,

Dear Mr Šucha,

At the recent COCO-JRC meeting with staff representatives you expressed your great satisfaction with the positive JRC Implementation Review 2017, and invited us to pass this positive message to staff. Indeed, staff representatives were also pleased to find the JRC being seen in such a positive light externally, and are also ready to publicly make such recognition.

At the same time, the review must be read in its entirety. In the context of the COCO-JRC, time was too limited to allow for an in-depth discussion of concerns contained in the report that are also shared by us and many staff members. The overall concern may be summarised in a fear of losing scientific credibility in JRC's core business in the rush to Knowledge Management. This is aggravated by an excess of 'micro-management' and stifling bureaucracy.

The promises of the Strategy 2030 document are not being fully met.  R&D representatives, amongst others, drew your attention to parts of the Implementation Review that should not be brushed aside. In particular, staff continue to be confused about Knowledge Management (c.f. p.14 paragraph 4 of the review), and the JRC risks losing credibility as a world-class scientific institution (c.f. p.14 paragraph 6). The target for the subdivision between research projects in the Strategy aims for a 80/15/5 breakdown (core business, improvement of core business, and exploratory research) which still adds up to 100% research.  As the panel also observes, "Unless the JRC maintains its credibility as a world-class scientific institution, its mission as the science-for-policy service of the Commission will be compromised."

The report also says "The JRC can be complimented on maintaining this good record in producing scientific results that are highly ranked for their science as well as being relevant to policy". It should however be noted that the bibliometric analysis on which this excellent result is based refers to the period before the reorganisation.  Due to the concerns above, there may be a risk that we will not be able to maintain the same or a better level in the future.

We kindly request a further opportunity to address these issues with you, for an open and constructive exchange, before the JRC gives its formal reply to the review panel.

Yours Faithfully,
Gianfranco Selvagio
President R&D Ispra

JRC Implementation Review 2017

13/10/2017 ,

You will have seen on Connected@JRC the post of our Director General about the independent JRC Implementation Review 2017. The external panel was under the chairmanship of Patrick Cunningham, former Chief Scientist to the Irish Government, and they completed their report this summer.


The DG posted under the title 'Very positive evaluation of the JRC'. Indeed the report is positive about many aspects of the JRC, and we welcome the appreciation of the work that is done by all JRC staff. However, we would also have liked to see more attention being paid to the parts of the report that were less positive.
A critical self-examination is essential in order to improve any organization. The opinion of staff about how they see the current status and future direction is also essential to obtain the full picture.


This review also made headlines in the science journal Nature  in an editorial entitled 'Europe’s Joint Research Centre, although improving, must think bigger' and it is rewarding for the JRC to get such international exposure. The title says it all - there are a lot of positive points for the JRC, which we should welcome, but it is also important to pay attention to suggestions for improvements.


From the Nature editorial:
"…It also notes that the JRC has significantly increased its presence in the world’s top-cited literature. But it says that the centre still does too little exploratory research — such research engages only 3.5% of JRC staff, well below the target of 10% that it set itself in 2015..."

"...As well as keeping the JRC relevant, a wider focus on the cutting edge would allow it to flag up hot topics to policymakers earlier..."


The message is clearly that more investment, not less, in Knowledge Production is essential in order to keep the JRC relevant.


On Friday 20th October we'll meet with our DG and this review will be discussed. Like us, we are sure you have strong opinions regarding the current status of the JRC Strategy 2030. We also understand that many colleagues prefer not to express themselves in Connected@JRC, so if you have comments that you would like us to bring to the attention of the DG please let us know by calling the  R&D secretariat at 9645 or by e-mail.

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )