Generation 2004 asks that the Commission invests in the human capacity of its staff, giving particular attention to mental health awareness and burnout prevention in the Large-Scale Revie process. Instead of introducing a continuous AI supported ‘brain gym’ into the fabric of our daily work as indicated in the 2nd Recommendation on Innovation and AI of the Large-Scale Review, the Commission should invest in the mental resilience of staff. The Commission must first ensure that staff can be functionally proficient and recover quickly when exposed to unexpected crises before expecting it to be agile.  If the Commission really cares about its people, then it should actively invest in developing the staff’s mental capacity, ensuring that personal skills, competencies, attitudes, insight, patience, resilience and self-reliance are developed and not depleted by heavy workload, poor management, or psychologically unsafe working environments. Burning through its own resources is not only unsustainable, but also self-destructive!  Generation 2004 therefore asks that the Large-Scale Review is used to shift from a responsive reaction to burnout to a preventive one which can ensure that there still is a Commission left for the future.   

 The elephant in the room: BURNOUT. Officially it does not exist, and even if it does, it is considered insignificant and unimportant 

From presentations made in the Social services administrative board (CASS) it seems that since May 2024 the Medical Absences unit provided statistics to all DGs on the causes of medical absences. Approximately 80 % of long-term illnesses are mentally related and 65 % of them are burnout. Furthermore, from 2025 HR statistics presented in the Committee for prevention and protection at work in Brussels (CPPT)  it is known that 56% of the121 invalidity procedures launched in 2025 by HR D6 were psychiatric disorders. Despite having this information, the Commission did not address mental health in the Large-Scale Review.   

The Large-Scale Review seemed to be the proper venue to address working conditions, and especially the psychosocial risks that can lead to burnout and other stress related disorders. Imagine the disappointment after reading the Workstreams’ recommendations. There was nothing on mental health or burnout prevention! The word burnout appears only twice in the report. First in the context of the first Recommendation on Leadership at page 26 where ‘observable behaviours’ for good leadership have been enumerated. Here, the organisation, shifts prevention on the individual leader who should protect the team and shield staff from burnout. The second appearance of the burnout syndrome is in the problem statement of the 2nd Recommendation on Discontinuation and Deprioritisation, on page 167, where it is recognised that when DGs take on new tasks without shedding old ones, it creates bottlenecks and burnout. In addition, during the presentation of the People and Culture Workstream recommendations of15 September, it was confirmed that mental health was not considered in the scope of the Large-Scale Review (minute 56) but was indirectly discussed when workload pressure was addressed.  

 

Burnout is a structural capacity risk, not just an individual health issue 

Everybody agrees that the Commission’s most valuable asset are its people. The fast-paced rhythm in which we jump from one urgency to another, while trying to multitask and slalom through conflicting priorities is not news to us. It has become our daily routine. In recent years, a culture of exhaustion and overworking seems to have been normalised inside the Commission. Staff are expected to do more with less at the cost of their physical and mental health: too much work; too few resources; understaffing; high work pace; continual and short deadlines; constant urgency; poor relationships; conflicting work priorities; no space to recover, but the unspoken expectation to push through. Burnout does not come from one difficult week but from prolonged overload without enough rest, support or control. There is personal responsibility, but there is also the responsibility of the workplace. Burnout is more than being tired or overwhelmed. It’s a systemic, physiological, and psychological breakdown that happens when inputs outweigh outputs.  

 Resilience cannot compensate for a culture that is exhausting people. Burnout does not start with the person. It is not an individual failure, but a systems problem. Real burnout prevention requires not only individual strategies but also structural change.  The consequences are easy to be spotted: we’ve all seen at least one colleague that went on long medical leave. We’ve also all noticed the quick fixes used to fill in personnel needs with temporary contracts.   

 Burnout is a consequence of unaddressed psychosocial risks as they are defined by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (OSHA): “psychosocial risks arise from the poor design, organisation and management of work, as well as from a poor socio-professional context, and can have negative psychological, physical and social consequences”. If we look at the examples given by the agency on the working conditions most likely to lead to psychosocial risks, we can easily tick all of them inside the Commission: 

• Excessive workloads; 

• Conflicting demands and lack of clarity about the employee’s role; 

• Lack of involvement in decisions affecting the worker; 

• Lack of influence over the way work is done; 

• Poor management of organisational change; 

• Job insecurity; 

• Ineffective communication; 

• Lack of support from peers or management; 

• Psychological and sexual harassment 

Burnout prevention should therefore be taken seriously, and the Commission should shift from a reactive approach to a preventive one, actively investing in the mental health of its staff.  

 The misalignment between what is said and what is being done  

It is easier to ask the individual to become more resilient, set better boundaries, take a break and look after themselves, rather than establish a corporate prevention action plan to help staff develop mental health fitness. In an email that we all received in the first days of October within the Be prepared campaign, it is acknowledged that mental health is as important as physical health and that it should be made a priority and given equal care. (Tip #41: Mental Health at work – we all have a role to play)  

It is nice to see slogans like Mental Health at Work – A Shared Responsibility, but when will these beautiful phrases become reality? On Tuesday 13th of October, the Commission organises the Mental Health Day with various online and in person activities in Berlaymont. On the same day, the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work will launch the EU-wide Healthy Workplaces Campaign on psychosocial risks and mental health at work. Again, the Commission is applying double standards requiring that Member States adopt practices that are not even considered inside the house. Together for mental health at work inside the Commission is implemented by creating more online courses and lunch seminars to raise awareness. How many times did you have to cancel training because of unexpected urgencies that forced you to prioritise work and abandon your development? How can staff participate in the Mental Health Day events if proper time and space are not created to ensure that participation is even possible?   

The current institutional response to burnout looks good on paper. There are various services presented on the intranet. There are also online courses and other wellbeing activities to which staff can rarely find the time to attend because of the many conflicting work priorities. We all filled in the question ‘I feel that this Institution cares about my wellbeing’ in the last Staff Survey. The message was clear: more than 50% of the staff did not feel like their wellbeing was taken seriously, but there wasn’t any concrete follow up. How can it be expected to have an agile Commission when there is no consideration for the basic human needs of staff, who feels treated like a replaceable resource? Physical health cannot exist without mental health that degrades because of the stress that staff faces daily. How can the Commission become agile if the corporate approach to burnout is still reactive, and if creating healthier, safer and more supportive workplaces is not even considered in the Large-Scale Review?   

Burnout does not discriminate, nor does it request permission to creep in 

We’ve all heard about burnout, and we all hope to never experience it. Burnout does not discriminate, nor does it request permission to creep in. It comes unannounced and it can touch anyone, anytime, especially after intense stress and heavy workload. Burnout is a syndrome resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed, characterized by exhaustion, mental distance from work, and reduced professional efficacy, as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO).  It is not classified as a medical condition, but as a serious occupational phenomenon, marking it as a set of symptoms linked to stress.  

 Stress is a temporary response to extreme pressure or a perceived threat. In small doses, it can be motivating, and most of us can push through. But poorly designed or managed work can create constant exposure that pushes stress levels beyond what one can handle. Throwing unrealistic demands while denying time to mentally recover ensures that stress becomes burnout.  At this point, one becomes unable to function or imagine things improving. Struggling at work can also make one feel like their job is at risk, which often triggers feelings of despair and self-loathing.  

 Every time we face stress, our nervous system returns to the survival mode of functioning, meaning fight/flight/freeze.  We therefore operate under high alert with a dysregulated nervous system, focusing only on getting through the crisis. But when the body and mind stay in high alert for too long, it becomes harder to recover. Functioning under stress from a survival brain in the long-term, without breaks can affect our physical health (fatigue, sleep problems, headaches, weakened immunity), mental health (anxiety, irritability, numbness, low mood, burnout), thinking and decision-making (difficulty concentrating, forgetfulness, reduced patience) and relationships with people (withdrawal, conflict, reduced ability to connect).  

 Staff that went through burnout and found little institutional support, decided in 2024 to set up the  Burnout Support Network, a grassroots initiative whose aim is to raise awareness and offer support to colleagues who face this contemporary threat.  

Concerning burnout, Generation 2004 will stand for: 

• treating it as a workplace issue rather than an individual one; 

• creating an action plan to prevent burnout and reduce work stressors by addressing causes, not symptoms;   

• improving the way work is organised, by ensuring manageable demands, clear roles, adequate resources as well as psychological safety; 

• promoting supportive leadership where managers lead by example and encourage open and honest dialogue; 

• introducing corporate training for mental health fitness and resilience.