Langue:   nl | fr | en | de
Adhésion

CONTRACT STAFF, WHO IS FOOLING WHO? - 2012, juillet 10

CONTRACT STAFF, WHO IS FOOLING WHO?

CONTRACT STAFF, WHO IS FOOLING WHO?

We have behind us a long list of actions taken to defend contract staff. And it's far from being over! We will continue to defend you, seriously and honestly! However, as we support transparency, we inform you of the positions taken by the administration.

At the meeting of May 4, 2012 concerning the staff regulations reform, particularly the "package IV", we questioned the administration and submitted constructive proposals such as, for example, the mobility between Agencies / Offices / Commission as a transitional measure.

The administration turned down this proposal for mobility and told us that the inter-institutional mobility or mobility between the EC and the Agencies and / or Offices cannot be a systematic solution and that "... the databases required by the Staff Representation have never established because …too expensive."

Regarding the competitions, we indicated that we must also consider the contract staff of Executive Agencies as they have indefinite contracts, albeit limited to the lifetime of the Agency (example of the ERCEA limited to 2017).

The administration responded that, "... as far as competitions are concerned, the Staff Regulations are quite clear, staff must be in active employment to be allowed to participate in these competitions.  No derogation from this provision is possible. Currently, the Staff Regulations do not allow CA to do these competitions. When the amended Staff Regulations shall enter into force, this opportunity will be offered to CA as well, provided that they are in active employment. The internal competition is unique to the institution hosting it; it has to be clarified whether they can be open to CA in Executive Agencies as they are "emanations" of the EC. "

Regarding the duration of contracts, we want contracts of at least six years. The administration points out that "... As for the amendments introduced by the JURI Committee in EP, especially the reduction from 6 to 5 years of the contract duration of CA, the administration underlined that the EC maintains its position in favour of 6 years. However, within the co decision procedure, the role of the EC has changed: if the Council agrees to 5 years, the EC can't but agree. "

The administration also mentions that the institution has no interest in loosing the talents of the CA provided that they can be kept on board.  However, we should not overlook the fact that the administration faces both budgetary and statutory constraints.

The administration will consider our proposals but ... let's face it, there will be a long fight, and we fear that the new measures might create further discrimination between CA.

Remain united! Vote for those who do not promise the moon but work to defend you!

Retour
Webdesign Sanmax