*Update 11.08.2023, September training offered by HR for those who passed written tests.* Original article: Firstly, our EPSO survey is still open: we eagerly await your responses. The more data we have, the clearer the picture we can paint of the exam experience and the more difficult it is to dismiss the evidence as not representative/urban legends/hearsay. Please participate! Now, onto the latest update on the ongoing EPSO issues. The bad news is that nothing has changed so far and everyone who should take action to address the problem has not yet done so. This in spite of the specific actionable issues raised by Generation 2004, all the trade unions and staff associations together (‘Common Front/Front Commun’) as well as the Central Staff Committee. Nevertheless, we do not give up: we continue fighting for your rights and for a robust, fair system that will work, ensure equal opportunities and not push the entire responsibility of known technical failings on the candidates. Continue reading EPSO update – the show must go on!
*Update 26.05.2023, EPSO published a note with figures on complaints.* *update 21.04.2023, thanks to the colleague who told us about the French court’s suspension of remote-proctoring software TestWe as ‘unreasonable and invasive’.* Here’s the story so far on the revamped, updated and not-quite-ready-for-general-release rollercoaster ride of recruitment to the European institutions that was AST/154/22. From the launch of this competition (22.09.2022) to the opening of an ombudsman inquiry (OI/1/2023/VS, 15.03.2023) and on to the unexpected (and abrupt) decision of the EPSO director to cancel the whole thing (31.03.2023), Generation 2004 and all OSPs have been inundated with requests for help on the many and various issues encountered by candidates (covering everything from technical aspects to poor instructions to odd and alarming experiences), and it’s not finished yet! Continue reading EPSO competition cancelled – is this really the least-bad option?
*Please see 27.01.2021 update*
In the wake of the announcement by DG HR of yet another very discriminatory internal competition (IC), Generation 2004 organised a conference to debate the matter. According to our analysis, this IC excludes over 16 000 potentially eligible candidates. Although other institutions allow anyone who meets the education and experience criteria to take part, the Commission is definitely doing it differently. Continue reading Internal competitions – Time for collective action!
Since its inception in 2012, Generation 2004 has been constructively critical of the Commission’s promotion exercise. We believe this exercise is flawed in several ways and that it should be reviewed and updated to a more transparent and fair system. We feel so strongly about this that we have taken the Commission to court over the matter. The court agreed with the Commission and issued a negative ruling for Generation 2004 Continue reading The old guard and the Commission promotion exercise
To start with, lets clear the air and get this out in the open: the discussions between the administration and the staff (‘social dialogue (SD)’) via the elected representatives (‘staff representation (SR)’) and the trade unions and professional staff associations (OSPs), are necessary. As DG Human Resources and Security (DG HR) puts it on the Staff Matters website, the social dialogue: Continue reading On career unionism and the fallacy of irreplaceability (long read)
The Renouveau & Démocratie (R&D)-controlled majority in the Central Staff Committee (CSC) has rejected proposals from Generation 2004 to make the work of the Central Staff Committee more efficient, transparent and inclusive.
Under the guise of business continuity, it voted for the status quo, and to address none of the pressing problems that have hampered the work of the CSC for years. Continue reading Central Staff Committee voted to continue Business as Usual
Existing rules provide for the Commission to ensure sufficient resources for staff representation activities. This includes a number of reserved posts outside of the DGs dedicated for full-time staff representation activities – the so-called detachments or secondments. At present, there is a well justified limit to a maximum of 6 years to occupy such a post after which one must return to a regular job in a DG (There is no limit to how many times you may be elected as Staff representative though!). There are in total 41 Full Time Equivalents available for staff representation secondments, distributed to each staff organisation proportionally to the percentage of votes received in staff elections (only the organisations that pass the 5% threshold benefit from these secondments, which explains why organisations tend to merge just before the elections). Continue reading Who represents the staff and for how long: Staff representatives secondments and the 6-year rule