G2004, Generation, Generation 2004: what does it mean?

We realise that our name is not as transparent as it could be. The ‘2004’ in Generation 2004 is a reference to the 2004 Kinnock reform of the rules for staff across all EU institutions, the staff regulations. This reform process was then repeated in 2014 and could potentially be repeated in the future. While the reopening of the staff regulations is not obligatory, it is always a possibility and will inevitably happen at some point.

Explosion in categories of staff

Many of the issues we have currently stem from that those two reforms of the staff regulations: they increased the number and variety of categories of staff. For example some of the lowest-paid staff, Contract Agents, come from the 2004 reforms and the  lowest of all the function groups, AST/SC, was created by the 2014 reform. This diversity of type of staff makes it increasingly difficult for colleagues to know which rules apply to them and to exercise their rights. It also fragments the staff: statutory staff can be officials (AD, AST or AST/SC), temporary agents (2a, b, c, d, e or f), contract agents (3a or b), local agents, among others.

Outdated and no-longer applicable nomenclature

We also see obsolete rules refuse to acknowledge that the game has changed. The division of ADs as graduates, ASTs and AST/SCs as those who did not go to university has long since changed. Highly qualified staff are now recruited to increasingly lower grades (‘juniorisation’) meaning that ‘entry level’ grades are in no way entry level.

EU enlargement and staff with diminished rights

These staff regulation reforms have further led to generational and geographical differences where different rules apply  depending on the date staff were recruited and the corresponding EU enlargements. Staff from the ‘new’ countries enjoyed reduced rights when compared to those of staff from the EU-15. Three (so far) coexisting cohorts of staff members have different rights.

• pre-2004 (EU-15)
• 2004-2014
• Post 2014
• further divisions?

The rise in pension age, reduction in pension accrual rates, increase in the length of the working week to 40 hours, reduction and limitation of the annual travel payment and ongoing replacing of officials with non-permanent staff all came from these reforms of the staff regulations (see the ECA reports below). All of this together makes the modern-day EU institutions a much less attractive place of work. These changes have also generated situations where colleagues have had no other recourse than go to court, in court some reforms have been considered illegal and can no longer be applied.

Money, the number one priority

The reasoning behind the two reforms which have taken place so far is the Multiannual Financial Framework budget: heading 7 relates to European public administration costs. The Member States push for budget savings via the Council and generalised reworkings of the staff regulations have, so far, been one part of the outcome.

Those savings have been made by reducing working conditions for everyone in general and then further by reducing specific benefits for those who are recruited after each reform. In short, with each reform staff have lost out, with those recruited later losing out most.

‘Since the 2014 reform of the Staff Regulations, the share of active staff members falling under the pre-2004 rules decreased from 36% to 19% whilst active staff members falling under the rules in place since 1 January 2014 represent almost 48% of active staff members …’ (8319/23, Brussels, 14 April 2023) 

This means that there are differences between staff and the rights they acquired. While this inevitably complicates our role, we are here for all of you!

Where does Generation 2004 fit in?

Generation 2004 was created in 2012. Our purpose was (then as now) to try to avoid a repetition of the previous reforms where the most-recently-recruited staff bear a disproportional part of the burden of the reform, in addition to the work of countering a general reduction in working conditions.

And the evaluation of those reforms?

Unfortunately, in the 2014 reform again working conditions in general were reduced and again the salaries and pensions those recruited after 01.01.2014 were even further reduced. In fact, with the 2014 staff regulations reform, the Commission went above and beyond what was originally asked for, so much so that the European Court of Auditors (ECA) cautioned against further changes without doing the necessary groundwork and impact assessments.

‘All in all, the direct budgetary impact of pay and pensions savings on the 2014-2020 MFF is likely to reach around €4.2 billion — more than what was planned.’ (Point 17, Special report no 15/2019)

 ‘Assess needs and potential impacts before any further revision of the Staff Regulations’ (Recommendation 3, Special report no 15/2019)

‘… the impact of the 2014 reforms package on HR management has been Mixed … Raising the retirement age and reducing recruitment is contributing to an ageing workforce. The Commission is placing greater reliance on contract staff to cope with increased workloads and fewer recruitment opportunities, although the impact on the Commission’s departments varies considerably. Finally, less favourable conditions of employment have reduced the attractiveness of working for the EU at a time when it is struggling to attract sufficient staff from a number of Member States.’ (Point VI, Special report no 15/2019)

The future?

Now, in 2023, the Council is again pushing for savings: Council request to further reduce spending on staff, Council request to further reduce spending on staff II

Please read about the reforms and do all you can to keep yourselves informed

• European Commission, 2011, Report to the European Parliament and the Council equivalence between old and new career structures, Article 6 of the staff regulations COM(2011) 171/2
• European Commission, 2021, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council assessing the functioning of the Staff Regulations of officials and the Conditions of employment of other servants of the European Union (COM(2021) 439 final)
• European Court of Auditors, 2019, Special report no 15/2019: Implementation of the 2014 staff reform package at the Commission – Big savings but not without consequences for staff
• European Court of Auditors, 2024, Special report 24/2024: EU Civil service–A flexible employment framework, insufficiently used to improve workforce management
• European Court of Auditors, 2020, Special Report 23/2020: The European Personnel Selection Office: Time to adapt the selection process to changing recruitment needs.

As always, if you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact us.