Note that the article below is now obsolete. It predates the cancellation of EPSO/AST/154/22 [1]). We have not yet agreed on collective or Common Front [2]action on the cancellation itself [3].
Original article:
We are asking all of you who had any problems with EPSO competitions EPSO/AST/154/2022[1] and EPSO/AST/155/2022 to please email [4] us to participate in a shared legal challenge.
On the changes to the EPSO testing model, everyone here is asking the same questions! It is a concern for all of us!
On 31 January 2023, the EPSO Management Board (an interinstitutional body) met to approve the new EPSO model [5]. Which, in fact, was already tested in a few previous competitions.
The question is: Is it really new or just a modified old model?
At first glance, the new competition model looks completely different from what was used in the last 10 years. However, when taking a closer look, it is more like old wine in a new bottle. It hails back to the selection process used before the big 2010 overhaul: the assessment centre has been completely removed from the selection phase – BUT is not totally gone. It will be offered as an EPSO competency-testing service by EPSO to the EU institutions.
Why this new approach?
In fact, the main justifications given for this reform are to enable the Commission to:
- attract more diverse Europeans from the Member States (especially those that are less represented in the EU institutions) also by offering equal opportunities to different social categories;
- speed up the process of selection, because in the view of EPSO the length of the competitions could be shortened to 6 months or even less;
- make savings to the EU budget, by eliminating certain expenditures that were before covered by the EPSO and now they must be provided by the candidates.
EPSO claims that these changes will make the whole process become more efficient, modern and transparent, while ensuring equal opportunities and a more diverse pool of candidates based on qualifications[2].
The reality is unfortunately different!
According to our evaluation this new model will lead to:
- Reinforcing the acknowledged lack of social diversity [6] and equality because there continues to be a cost barrier to participation, just at there was for those having long journeys (e.g. over 400km) to the nearest test centre. The people able to afford their own computer (not just any PC can do the magic) which complies with the given spec will already have a certain income and living conditions. Those with reduced financial means might ultimately find themselves excluded from these competitions. Unfortunately, the new system brings neither diversity nor equality! Consequently, if you do not comply with the requirements of having access to the equipment or necessary environment suitable for the required test setting, you might be excluded [7][3].
- The process of the selection will indeed be faster but the recruitment will in fact take longer. The tests will be organised in 1 day and only in an online setting. EPSO will perhaps shorten the time at the level of selection procedure, which will also exclude one of the most important components of the selection – the interview with the candidate. It will be directly followed by the recruitment phase, which will be pushed on the services. What does this mean exactly? After succeeding the tests, being declared a laureate and being put on the (now much longer) reserve list, then the interviews happen. Services will have at their disposal a much larger pool of candidates to choose from: finding the ideal candidate from among them might take longer than anticipated. At the same time, it will remain at the discretion of the services who gets to be invited. The transparency and fairness of this process remains a huge concern.
- Making savings to the EU budget is in fact a joke because so far, the Commission paid almost EUR 29 million to secure Prometric [8]’s services, how does this compare with the costs in the old system? We do not know any details outlining which services are to be provided and for how long. We find no comparison or evaluation. This is only the beginning. Additional expenditure will be required for different software and various tests e.g. testing the IT literacy skills (competence 3 of the updated framework [9]) unless the CBT and its technical difficulties is that test! We would like to understand what the concrete savings to the EU budget will be with this new model. EPSO proposes to the services to take on extra tasks for recruiting candidates when they are already lacking human resources – the so called “doing more with less” – under heavy budgetary constraints.
Although the new model has not yet been fully implemented, EPSO together with Prometric have faced many problems and complaints from the candidates. In fact, they were fixing the issues during the process. No wonder candidates were outraged.
In the long-term this could bring even more work to Commission services and cause serious damage to the reputation of the EU institutions. Potentially, more money could be spent from the EU budget, given the fact that many candidates are preparing to join a common action against EPSO by launching Article 90 complaints, a path which leads ultimately to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
In conclusion, we demand that EPSO thoroughly test any changes before subjecting candidates to them. In order to do this retrospective testing EPSO should,
- stop the publication of new competitions in the frame of the new model
- allow the candidates to resit the tests for the last 2 competitions (154/2022 and 155/2022)
- improve the new model and reintroduce the assessment centres and interviews
Quo vadis EPSO, quo vadis European Civil Service?
As always, feel free to contact [10] us if you have questions: we’re here for you!
[1] We have sent notes as Generation 2004 and also as part of the Common Front [2] (25.01.2023 [11]) and the Central Staff Committee [12]:
| 15/12/2022 (2022)8710389 |
Serious problems related to competition EPSO/AST/154/22 [13] + Annex [14] | EPSO 17/01/2023 |
| 31/01/2023 (2023)704508 | Nouveau modèle de concours EPSO [15] | HR 22/02/2023 |
| 29/03/2023 (2023)2273159 | Extraordinary meeting of EPSO Management Board – EPSO/AST/154/22 competition and next steps [16] | HR 08/05/2023 |
| 11/05/2023 (2023)3298624 | Note for the Attention of The European Ombudsman [17] + Annex1 [18]+ Annex2 [19] |
[2] We find it curious that, while the Junior Professionals Programme (JPP) has the stated intention [20] of addressing perceived shortcomings of EPSO recruitment, EPSO has chosen not to take the JPP as a model for its changes, suggesting that it does not endorse the path chosen by the JPP.
‘The main objectives of the [JPP] pilot programme … are: (1) diversifying sources for recruiting highly talented staff (II) contributing to a balanced mix of staff in terms of gender, age, skills and nationalities (III) equipping participants with a better understanding of the Commission and with the necessary knowledge and skills needed by the Institution (IV) developing a European and Commission spirit among participants and (V) modernising recruitment at the Commission.’ (p.3 JPP Evaluation Report [21] )
[3] Politico [22] provides additional odd exclusion examples.