Purchasing power Varese
We are sorry to inform you that our doubts about the correctness of the establishment of the Correction Coefficient (CC) for Varese
Although the yet to be established CC is still confidential and not official, we are very worried that we might see a dramatic and unjustified decrease of income for statutory staff in service in Ispra.
Our retired colleagues are covered by the CC for Italy (mainly based on the CC of Rome Parma and Turin
There is little hope that we will receive support from others to address and mitigate the problem, and although we will thoroughly review the data used, we are afraid that the current political climate won't leave much space for major improvements.
Fact is that the specific CC for Varese (as opposed to the more general CC for Italy) does exist and that according to Annex XI Chapter 4 Article 9 of the Staff Regulations the Commission is even requested to present a proposal to create a specific CC for a selected place of employment if Eurostat confirms that the difference to the CC of the Member State concerned is appreciable (more than 5%) and sustainable.
So even if a CC for Varese
The same article in the Staff Regulations foresees that a local CC already in place can only be repealed if the difference compared to the CC of the Capital of the Member State
Conclusion: our statutory possibilities are very limited.
R&D will now seek legal advice in order to study the options and possibilities to start a legal action on two subjects:
a) If the CC for Varese were to drop dramatically, ISTAT data should confirm that this constitutes "deflation" for Varese
b) There is a major discrimination between active and retired staff living in the same place by awarding them different CCs. This fact alone already demonstrates in our opinion the blatant incorrectness of the system in place.
We would like to thank you for being a member of our Trade Union and we hope that you do agree that we will use a part of our financial reserves to finance legal action if decided so by our R&D Committee.
Please don't shoot the messenger...
Clarifications on the future of the JRC
We are convinced that this video message is a clear indication of our Commissioner's commitment to the JRC and her willingness for a constructive dialogue.
R&D is pleased to see the important role of the JRC as a Directorate General at the centre of the European Science Policy explicitly confirmed and we consider it a welcome support to our strategy of insisting on the organising new Open Competitions in order to give more colleagues with temporary contracts the possibility to become Civil Servants. R&D is confident that the scientific AD competitions will be published in September.
We expect big changes within the entire research sector over the coming weeks. However we also have to draw your attention that the most painful part of the current reorganisation still has to come, especially in those units where a staff reduction has been foreseen and big installations are at risk.As you can see, our efforts to strengthen the position of DG JRC within the European Commission have led to tangible results. We really welcome the video presentation of our Commissioner, to a certain extent repeated also today in "Die Welt".
R&D BXL message "JRC: Could you become a Director some day?"
and you might have tried the links. Unfortunately due to the high number of colleagues trying to click the links, the server went down. We would like to apologise for this inconvenience and ask you to try it again.
JRC: Pourriez-vous un jour devenir Directeur? (FR) http://www.renouveau-democratie.eu/fr/2010/06/jrc-pourriez-vous-un-jour-devenir-directeur/
JRC: Could you become a Director some day? (EN) http://www.renouveau-democratie.eu/2010/06/jrc-could-you-become-a-director-some-day/
Newsletter 2/2010
R&D Federal
Retirement DG
Appointment of Deputy DG JRC as DG RTD
CDR
Corporate Strategy
Training courses, books and simulations EPSO TEST
Retirement DG
Appointment of Deputy DG JRC as DG RTD
CDR
Corporate Strategy
Training courses, books and simulations EPSO TEST
Barroso II, false start?
As you know we have once again lost a Deputy Director General. After Mrs. Pauli being transferred to DG RTD this is the second time within a very short period and it makes us wonder how DG JRC is supposed to be the most important scientific advisory organisation to the policy making process of the European Commission when having been already for several years without a well functioning senior management structure. For too long now we have either had a Deputy DG acting as a Director General or a DG acting also as a Deputy DG.
This is very worrying and we cannot accept that JRC staff will be presented the bill for this lack of support one day. Political declarations on the importance of Research in Europe are followed by practical decisions against the Commission's most important and only real research activity, DG JRC.
We would like to invite our Commissioner Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn to meet up with the Trade Unions as soon as possible in order to establish a solid JRC strategy 2010-2020.
Art. 90/2: Complaint for Salary Adjustment
Wednesday you might have received a flyer of a trade union in Ispra about a so called article 90/2 complaint regarding the salary adjustment.
R&D Ispra will not join this proposed Art.90/2 procedure for both the content and the form.
Regarding the content we want to stress that in this case there is no point submitting a complaint against the Commission. An art.90/2 complaint can be only submitted to the appointing authority (and in our case it is the Commission) against an act affecting us adversely, either where the said authority has taken a decision or where it has failed to adopt a measure prescribed by the Staff Regulations. As already communicated many times, based on a Commission proposal, it is the Council that decides (and not the Commission). For these reasons it might be clear that an art. 90/2 complaint on annual adjustment of remuneration should not be submitted to the Commission but to the Council, which is not possible for Commission staff.
Regarding the form we consider that submitting a complaint against the Commission is the wrong strategy. This is a burden for the Institution that went to Court to defend our interests. It is similar to suing your own lawyer before a court case is held in which he will defend you free of charge.
We believe that the current strategy of a combined effort of all unions of European Institutions will have much more impact than the proposed propaganda of a small and local trade union. In this respect we want to remind you of the by all trade unions signed letter of January 11 addressed to President Barroso: it was proposed to create a group composed by the trade unions of all institutions and the Commission in order to jointly pursue the issue (http://rd.jrc.it/IT/Dossier/1/RD/20100111_Note%20unitaire%20Ã %20M.%20BARROSO.pdf). Though we are impatient as well, we still believe that this common approach is the best and for the moment we'll have to wait for the Court case.
Reflection:
For further information go to http://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/hr_admin/en/appeals/Pages/index.aspx. (Special attention for: "However, officials filing such requests and complaints often do so because they are not familiar with the applicable law...").You might consider that signing the art. 90(2) complaint doesn't harm. Attention: it is not just a petition but indeed a formal complaint.
R&D Ispra will not join this proposed Art.90/2 procedure for both the content and the form.
Regarding the content we want to stress that in this case there is no point submitting a complaint against the Commission. An art.90/2 complaint can be only submitted to the appointing authority (and in our case it is the Commission) against an act affecting us adversely, either where the said authority has taken a decision or where it has failed to adopt a measure prescribed by the Staff Regulations. As already communicated many times, based on a Commission proposal, it is the Council that decides (and not the Commission). For these reasons it might be clear that an art. 90/2 complaint on annual adjustment of remuneration should not be submitted to the Commission but to the Council, which is not possible for Commission staff.
Regarding the form we consider that submitting a complaint against the Commission is the wrong strategy. This is a burden for the Institution that went to Court to defend our interests. It is similar to suing your own lawyer before a court case is held in which he will defend you free of charge.
We believe that the current strategy of a combined effort of all unions of European Institutions will have much more impact than the proposed propaganda of a small and local trade union. In this respect we want to remind you of the by all trade unions signed letter of January 11 addressed to President Barroso: it was proposed to create a group composed by the trade unions of all institutions and the Commission in order to jointly pursue the issue (http://rd.jrc.it/IT/Dossier/1/RD/20100111_Note%20unitaire%20Ã %20M.%20BARROSO.pdf). Though we are impatient as well, we still believe that this common approach is the best and for the moment we'll have to wait for the Court case.
Reflection:
For further information go to http://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/hr_admin/en/appeals/Pages/index.aspx. (Special attention for: "However, officials filing such requests and complaints often do so because they are not familiar with the applicable law...").You might consider that signing the art. 90(2) complaint doesn't harm. Attention: it is not just a petition but indeed a formal complaint.
Newsletter 1/2010
New buildings
Meeting with Director General Mr. Roland Schenkel
New website
General Assembly R&D
Meeting EPSO DG JRC
GT CCR
Training courses
CDR
Situation Salary Adjustment
Meeting with Director General Mr. Roland Schenkel
New website
General Assembly R&D
Meeting EPSO DG JRC
GT CCR
Training courses
CDR
Situation Salary Adjustment
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
