*Update 16.02.26: See the latest DG HR reply under references*
Many Contract Agents see internal competitions within the European Commission as an opportunity for professional advancement and greater career stability. However, in practice, both regulatory (see also point 17a of CAs FAQ) and operational obstacles often limit the effectiveness of these competitions. Contract agents encounter structural constraints rooted in the staff regulations (CEOS) as well as practical difficulties related to recruitment outcomes and job availability. These challenges risk undermining both staff motivation and the Commission’s ability to retain experienced personnel.
Regulatory restrictions governing access to internal competitions
In accordance with paragraph 7 of Article 82 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants (CEOS), contract staff in Function Groups II, III and IV may be authorised to participate in internal competitions only after completing three years of service within the institution.
Furthermore, eligibility is limited to specific grades depending on the function group: contract staff in function group II may access competitions only for grades SC1 to SC2. contract staff in function group III may access competitions only for grades AST1 to AST2, and contract staff in function group IV may access competitions only for grades AST1 to AST4 or AD5 to AD6.
Additionally, the Staff Regulations impose a quantitative limitation. The total number of contract staff members appointed to vacant posts through internal competitions must never exceed 5% of the total number of annual appointments to the respective function groups, as established under the second paragraph of Article 30 of the Staff Regulations.
What are the consequences?
Limited opportunities to participate
The requirement to complete three years of service creates significant limitations, particularly for contract agents recruited under Article 3b of the CEOS (CA3B contracts). Given that these contracts are limited in duration to 6 years, contract agents often have only a narrow window of eligibility to participate in internal competitions.
Considering the relatively low frequency of internal competitions, some contract agents may have only a single opportunity, if any, to take part before their contracts expire. To mitigate this limitation, all eligible function groups should be considered regularly when organising internal competitions.
Additionally, delays in the planning and organisation of internal competitions effectively exclude certain contract agents from participating, particularly when their contracts expire and they are required to leave the institution. In such cases, could these colleagues be granted a derogation allowing them to participate, given that the delay is beyond their control?
Restricted access to eligible grades
The restrictions on accessible grades can significantly reduce the attractiveness and practical benefit of internal competitions for contract agents.
For example, contract agents will often notice that the grades available through internal competitions do not reflect their level of experience or even their current responsibilities. In certain cases (e.g. CA3As i.e. CA engaged under Article 3a of CEOS who have already been subjects to promotions) successful participation in competitions may even result in lower remuneration or less favourable career conditions compared to their current contract agent status. This creates a disincentive to participate and undermines the intended objective of professional advancement.
Appointment quotas and limited upgrading opportunities
The 5% appointment cap set by the Staff Regulations severely restricts the number of contract agents who can ultimately be appointed as officials through internal competitions. While competitions may allow an important participation given the number of contact staff, only a very limited proportion can realistically be recruited, additionally significantly reducing the already limited career mobility prospects for contract agents across the institution.
Employment difficulties encountered by successful candidates
There appears to be no recruitment guarantees. We have been informed that contract agent colleagues who have successfully passed internal competitions have reported uncertainty regarding recruitment prospects. While reserve lists generated through external EPSO competitions are now much longer and believed as not guaranteeing employment for everybody, the expectations surrounding internal competitions remain less clear. Can each CA who succeeded in an internal competition reasonably expected to be recruited?
Many colleagues working across different Directorates-General would express a strong desire to continue their professional careers within their current services. However, there is currently limited clarity regarding whether successful laureates of internal competitions are guaranteed a post or whether institutional support exists to facilitate their transition from contract agent status to official posts within their respective “mother DG”.
Uncertainty surrounding the application of the 5% cap
Questions have also been raised concerning the practical implementation of the 5% engagement limitation. Specifically, it remains unclear whether this cap is taken into account during the planning phase of internal competitions when estimating the number of potential successful candidates, or whether it is applied only at the recruitment stage after the competitions have been completed. What would be a right moment to apply for a post by a CA who succeeded in an internal coemption to enhance the possibility of being recruited as official? Greater transparency regarding this issue would provide clarity and improve career planning for contract agents.
Recruitment practices affecting CAs who succeeded in internal competitions
Following the publication of job offers in Sysper, several recruitment practices concerning AST SC posts have been reported that appear confusing and potentially inconsistent with internal talent retention objectives.
Colleagues (CA who succeeded in internal competitions) have reported situations in which, following a successful interview for official post, were instead offered temporary agent (TA) position. Such practices raise concerns, why candidates who have already succeeded in internal competitions are offered yet another non-permanent contact? Cannot they reasonably expect directly official posts? Could it be potentially linked to the 5% cap?
Instances have been reported where interviews for internal selection procedures for officials were cancelled shortly before selection, with justification that the posts needed to be re-advertised externally through EPSO, which means republished externally as a TA post. At that stage, it was difficult to conclude that no suitable internal candidates were available from internal competitions (or even external EPSO reserved lists). Such practices appear inconsistent with institutional objectives of retaining internal talent.
Some candidates who succeeded in internal competitions who applied for vacancies advertised in Sysper were later requested to re-apply using alternative procedures after posts were re-advertised externally. These requirements create unnecessary administrative burdens and undermine recognition of successful candidates from internal competitions as priority candidates.
Generation 2004 believes that internal priority should be granted to colleagues who succeeded in internal competitions over external recruitment.
Need for stronger employment guarantees and talent retention measures
To ensure fairness and maintain staff motivation, clearer recruitment guarantees should be considered for contract agents who succeed in internal competitions. Institutional support mechanisms should be developed to facilitate smoother transitions from (contract agent positions to official posts, particularly within the candidates’ current Directorates-General when operationally feasible.
Additionally, recruitment practices should prioritise internal talent from internal competitions before posts are advertised externally, in line with institutional talent retention strategies.
Additional measures to improve career development for contract agents
Apart from the limitations mentioned above, the current regulatory framework additionally excludes contract agents in FG I from the access to career advancement through internal competitions. As such, beyond improvements to internal competitions, broader structural measures, not requiring any changes to the Staff Regulations, could enhance career development opportunities for all contract agents.
A possible solution would be the introduction of a Commission-wide development programme inspired by the Junior Professionals Programme. Such a programme could allow contract agents and other interested staff categories with sufficient professional experience and educational qualifications to compete based on their knowledge, competencies, and performance rather than their staff category.
Opening career opportunities more broadly would strengthen institutional fairness, improve staff engagement, and enhance the overall talent pool within the Commission. The current framework governing internal competitions for contract agents contains significant regulatory and practical limitations that restrict career development and institutional mobility. Service duration requirements, grade eligibility restrictions, appointment quotas, and unclear recruitment practices collectively create uncertainty and discourage participation.
CONCLUSIONS
To address these challenges, there is a clear need for more frequent internal competitions for contact staff, clear recruitment guarantees for successful candidates, smoother integration of successful candidates within their current Directorates-General and greater transparency in recruitment procedures.
Given the regulatory restrictions, Generation 2004 additionally advocates for additional measures. We believe that in line with the Political Declaration of the Commissioner Serafin, temporary agent contracts should be more accessible to contract agents before they even engage in internal competitions which alone have no potential to improve the current situation of contract agents.
We also advocate for other advancement possibilities: a reinforced screening (for those eligible) which remains widely unused and a career development programme inspired by the Junior Professional Programme, accessible to all contact agents above 3 years of experience (and other staff categories).
Let everybody compete!
We have contacted the administration concerning the application of the 5% cap, recruitment guarantees and practices. You will find our notes under ‘References’ below:
References:
Generation 2004 note of 7.01.2026: Recruiting internal competition laurates from CA staff category
Generation 2004 note of 13.01.2026: Unclear recruitment practices of internal candidates
DG HR note of 2.02.2026: Reply: Recruiting internal competition laurates from CA staff category
