The Large-Scale Review is not just another administrative exercise. It will shape how careers evolve in the Commission for years to come and under which conditions we work.  

Colleagues are not afraid of change. The Commission has evolved before and it will evolve again. What creates concern today is not reform itself, but uncertainty about direction, safeguards and long-term consequences. 

At this stage, the Review is organised through internal administrative workstreams in which staff organisations are not formally represented. We have been encouraged to provide written contributions, and we will do so. However, meaningful contribution requires access to the analyses and documents produced within those workstreams. Transparency is not a procedural detail. It is a condition for trust. 

In this context, Generation 2004 met Commissioner Serafin and DG HR to seek clarity on scope, objectives and safeguards. 

We went to this meeting with one objective: to say clearly what many of you have been telling us. 

The experience of the 2004 and 2014 reforms continues to shape perceptions across the institution. These episodes remain part of the Commission’s collective memory. 

The Political Reality Behind the Review 

We asked directly whether this exercise is primarily budget driven. 

The Commissioner acknowledged the financial context. He confirmed that the Large-Scale Review takes place under budgetary pressure linked to the ongoing Multiannual Financial Framework negotiations and that budgetary savings form part of the broader discussion. At the same time, he clearly reassured us that there is no intention to reopen the staff regulations. 

This clarification is significant. In the current politically sensitive context across several Member States, reopening the Staff Regulations could create significant uncertainty for the European civil service. The objective of the Review, as explained during the meeting, is therefore within the existing framework rather than risk renegotiation under potentially less favourable political conditions. 

The Commissioner also confirmed that he will personally be the final penholder of this review. He will take a political responsibility for the outcome of the LSR. 

In the draft MFF, the Commission requested and increase of approximately 2,500 additional posts to cope with expanded responsibilities. This figure is now publicly contested by several Member States in the context of the next MFF. 

This is not an abstract institutional discussion. It directly affects workload, career prospects and service capacity.  

Since Covid and even more since the war in Ukraine, the Commission has taken on additional responsibilities at unprecedented speed and scale. Crisis management, sanctions, energy security, recovery instruments, enlargement related files and geopolitical coordination are no longer temporary crisis responses.  They have become long-terms, embedded responsibilities of the institution. At the same time, trade tensions, competitiveness pressures and industrial policy challenges are increasing the regulatory and coordination workload across services. 

These responsibilities have accumulated over time. They are not temporary spikes but reflect a structural expansion of the Commission’s role. 

Meanwhile, in several areas including delegations, staff reductions or redeployments continue. Modernisation exercise in the context of EU delegations’ efforts are ongoing, but modernisation often means transition pressure and reorganisation. Burnout is no longer isolated. It is increasingly reported across services and reflected in staff surveys and internal feedback. 

If the Commission is expected to deliver more, faster and under growing geopolitical and economic pressure, while staff levels remain constrained or decline in several services or redeployments in certain areas, the resulting gap will translate into sustained pressure on services and reduced delivery capacity.  

If the additional 2,500 posts are not granted, the question is straightforward. How will the institution cope with the workload that stems from the long-term responsibilities already embedded in its mandate. 

Efficiency cannot mean permanent overload. 

Careers – The Core Issue for Staff 

If there is one issue that concerns colleagues above all others, it is careers. 

Meaningful career perspectives must exist for all staff categories, officials, temporary agents and Contract Agents. Internal competitions must be regular and predictable. Cross-category mobility must be real. Career systems must recognise responsibilities that colleagues already exercise in practice. 

We explicitly called for reform and simplification of the certification procedure. The current system is widely perceived as overly complex, uncertain and disproportionate. Many colleagues already perform responsibilities comparable to AD functions, yet face a procedure that is often experienced as more demanding than other internal pathways. Certification reform is not a marginal adjustment. It is central to restoring confidence in career development. 

Retention is equally critical. Colleagues on limited contracts, in particular CA 3B, represent expertise and institutional investment. Losing them without transition to more stable contracts means losing knowledge the institution has already invested in. 

If this review does not bring improvement in career perspectives across categories of staff, it will be difficult for staff to see its added value. 

Digital Transition and Artificial Intelligence 

We also addressed digital transformation and Artificial Intelligence. 

AI is not simply an ICT matter. It affects work organisation, skill requirements and workload distribution. Digital transition must be accompanied by serious investment in upskilling and reskilling. Productivity expectations must be calibrated realistically, especially during transition phases when pressure often increases before efficiencies materialise. 

Technology must support staff. It cannot become a silent substitute for proper workforce planning or an excuse for structural understaffing. 

This links directly to our electoral manifesto theme, FUTURE. We anticipated that digital transformation, talent retention and sustainable working conditions would become central structural challenges for the Commission. The current debate confirms that these challenges are very real. 

Working Conditions and social dialogue 

It is striking that there is no dedicated workstream on working conditions. 

Workload sustainability, hybrid work, tools and work environment directly affect wellbeing, performance and institutional attractiveness. These issues cannot remain secondary. 

Equally concerning is the absence of staff representation in all workstreams, including collaboration. If collaboration is an objective, social dialogue must be embedded structurally in the process. 

What Comes Next 

The Commissioner committed to meeting again within six months. 

On February 26, we will also meet Catherine Day in her capacity as President of the High-Level Group to continue the discussion. 

Given the limited time available during our exchange, we could not address every workstream in detail. This does not diminish the importance of other topics. We will continue to engage actively and provide concrete proposals before draft recommendations are finalised. 

The Large-Scale Review will shape careers, working conditions and internal balance between responsibilities, staffing and delivery capacity for years to come. It is unfolding in a real political and financial context, and that context must be clearly understood. 

The credibility of this Review will ultimately depend on whether it aligns ambition with capacity and reform with fairness.