(click on graph to enlarge)
As the majority of you probably noticed the Election of the new Local Staff Committee of Brussels (LSC BXL) took place at the end of October with a turn-out of 66% (14 391 votes casted out of 21 586 eligible voters). Generation 2004 scored some 30.23% of list votes and 23.76% of the preferential votes, which translates into 7 seats out of 27 in the LSC Brussels and continuous climb on the representative charts (line in green). Continue reading Brussels Local Staff Committee Elections
For the first time in the short existence of Generation 2004 the colleagues based in the EC delegations outside the EU have been able to choose Generation 2004 candidates on their ballot. Traditionally, the delegations have been a stronghold of the established unions. Thus, many (not us!) were surprised with Generation 2004’s good result of about 15% of the votes. This result, because of the electoral system which is different from the one in Brussels and most probably needs to be updated, translates only into 1 seat out of 14 in the Staff Committee of the delegations. Nevertheless, now that we are in the “stronghold”, we are going to do our best to reform it, as we have done in Brussels for the past 3 years.
Generation 2004 would like to thank to all who voted for us and invites the others to engage with us to work in favour of the delegations’ staff.
Internal competitions should be conceived as a challenge and an opportunity, rather than as a source of problems. Obviously, it should be a tool to motivate staff at all levels and to retain the most talented and motivated employees from different categories. Internal competitions should provide an opportunity for staff to apply their skills and knowledge to areas beyond of their current jobs, should give the feeling that the institution is concerned about staff growth and at the same time provide avenues to reach individual career goals.
However, like any weapon, internal competitions need to be handled with care!
This time, again, the recently announced Internal Competitions show how the public institution treats and consequently demotivates talented and qualified staff. It seems that big EU slogans like Talent management and Career development are just empty words without any meaning. Continue reading The Commission still does not believe in the intelligence of its staff!
First we would like to congratulate once again those of you who received their well-deserved promotion during the 2018 promotion exercise. If you were one of the promoted colleagues, then it means you were lucky not to be penalised by a leaving Head of unit, by a restructuring of your DG or by many other factors which have nothing to do with merit and performance but that often negatively influence the outcome of the promotion exercise.
Yet, even not considering those unexpected factors, year after year most of us feel the uncertainty and injustice of the Commission’s very opaque and arbitrary promotion system and, unsurprisingly, many of you have contacted us for support on their intended Article 90 complaint concerning non-promotion. To that end, we have created an Article 90 template for you to use (deadline to submit is 10 February 2019). Continue reading Promotions (Article 90)
*Update 28.06.2023, note that if you do get the 7th ‘unicorn’ year (well done!), you may have to redo the 9-month probation period. Yes, after 6 years of employment you will have to repeat this step: 9 of your last 12 months in a 7-year career will be spent on probation. Consider how this impacts requests for annual leave or the ability to push back when your workload exceeds what is humanly possible.*
Original article: Generation 2004 has clarified the new provisions following the social dialogue with HR and trade unions! The 7-year rule applies to non-permanent staff for specific tasks or for specialised tasks (if the skills are not already available within the institution):
- temporary agents (TAs)
- contract agents (CAs)
- agency staff (‘intérimaires’) (up to 3 years of services are not taken into account for the 7-year rule)
Continue reading 7-year rule for non-permanent staff – What does it imply?
During the 2014 reform of the staff regulations, all the unions of the European Union institutions, including Generation 2004, established a platform in order to help the EU staff challenge the reformed measures before the General Court of the European Union (as far as annual leave, pensions, career, annual travel payment or travelling time are concerned).
One of the challenged measures was the reformed Article 6 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations, which provides for a reduced number of annual leave days (24 instead of 42 per year) of staff members posted in a third country (Judgment Francisco Carreras Sequeros and Others v European Commission (CaseT-518/16)). On 4 December2018, the General Court issued a judgment, in which it declared the provision illegal. Continue reading Shorter annual leave for officials posted in a third country violates their fundamental right to paid annual leave