At the political concertation of 21 September 2026, Generation 2004 and the Front Commun secured real concessions on the sick-leave reform, but the key points remain contested. On urgent means of communication, further safeguards were added, yet our concerns on scope and abuse were not fully met.
On 21 September, staff representatives met Commissioner Serafin, together with Mr Quest and DG HR, for the political concertation on two draft Decisions: absences due to illness or accident (sick leave) and the means of urgent internal communication. Generation 2004 was represented on both files through a long technical concertation on sick leave, and this meeting was the political stage.
Sick leave
The Commissioner confirmed four concessions and two commitments to clarify. On arbitration (Article 10), the cost-sharing mechanism for a second medical arbitration is dropped. For illness falling during annual leave, a single harmonised deadline of five days is introduced for submitting the medical certificate. On part-time sick leave (Article 18), the reference period is brought down from four years to three. And where a colleague misses a medical examination for valid reasons (Article 9), a new appointment, or a video consultation, can now be arranged: an explicit right to request rescheduling will be written into the text, and the administration will be required to reply.
Two further points will be addressed in the FAQs. The general principles of duty of care, good administration and prevention will be referenced; the distinction between teleworking and sick leave will be clarified; medical certificates will be accepted as issued under national law; and the independence of medical officers will be recalled, including the right to complain to the national medical order.
On four points, however, the Commissioner would not move, and no agreement could be reached. The first is the requirement under Article 4 to present a certificate immediately before or after leave: we argued that this is not foreseen by Article 59 of the staff regulations and that, in its new form, it would also catch flexitime, special leave and recuperation, while the administration defends it as a twenty-year practice that keeps absence rates low. The biggest sticking point is Article 15, where the administration proposes a single entitlement of 24 hours for medical appointments, presented as fairer for all; we want to keep the existing three days plus one travel day for treatment abroad, which can be needed several times a year, or else to align on the Council’s 36 hours. On prior authorisation to spend sick leave elsewhere (Article 60), the ten-working-day rule stays, whereas we pressed for five days, as at the Council, and for a genuine fast track for urgent, medically justified cases, especially for isolated colleagues and those in delegations. Finally, on part-time sick leave we asked for enough flexibility that a fresh, unrelated illness is not blocked by the six-month cap, so as to support a return to work rather than a slide into invalidity.
Throughout, we underlined that our sickness rate is low, around 3.5%, roughly half the Member States’ average, that about half of all absences are mental-health related and that burnout is rising. Low rates reflect new ways of working, not controls, and a control-heavy approach would send exactly the wrong signal. We also flagged that the FAQs are not binding and that the relevant information on MyIntracomm has become hard to find.
No agreement was reached on sick leave. The Commissioner will keep the concessions on the table and move towards adoption, while the unions took a few days to reflect and come back on the two or three outstanding points, with the possibility of conciliation.
Urgent means of communication
Two earlier rounds of technical concertation had already delivered real improvements, which we acknowledged: a reference to working-time and health-and-safety law (Directive 2003/88/EC); confirmation that staff are not on permanent stand-by; a definition of an emergency as something exceptional and unforeseen; an assurance that there are no consequences for a reasonably diligent colleague who does not answer; the option to give a private email address instead of a telephone number; and a need-to-know approach developed with the European Data Protection Supervisor.
Our concerns nonetheless remained on three fronts. On scope, recitals 1 and 2 point to security and emergencies, while recital 3 brings in business continuity; we warned that this will lead to abuse, with colleagues already reporting being contacted late at night, in one case close to midnight for an 8 a.m. briefing, and we made the distinction plainly: an emergency informs you, whereas business continuity puts you to work. On safeguards, we asked for the logging of every access to private contact details, a documented justification for each use, a clear rule that the tool is not a directory, the revocation of access when a manager changes, the no-penalty principle placed in the operative articles and not only in a recital, repeated misuse treated as a disciplinary matter, and the possibility to record such work in SYSPER. On data protection, we called for a Data Protection Impact Assessment under Article 39 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, proposed redrafting recital 3 as a double trigger, and asked that the joint committee on Hybrid Working be empowered to examine individual cases.
The Commissioner responded with further safeguards: a reinforced need-to-know principle and an explicit statement that the tool is not a general directory; a new recital on a spirit of trust; practical clarification in the implementation guidance, with an informal exchange with the unions before it is finalised; and consultation of the Joint Committee on Hybrid Working in the evaluation after the trial period. DG HR maintained, however, that no impact assessment is required for a telephone number or an email address, as confirmed with the EDPS, that manager sanctions cannot be written into the decision, that the committees deal only with generic and not individual cases, and that the three triggers, security, safety and business continuity, are independent, so the double trigger was not accepted.
The Commissioner concluded that the file could be finalised on this basis. Some organisations accepted the text; Generation 2004 kept its reservations on the business continuity scope and on the abuse safeguards.
Our overall message, and next steps
Throughout, our line was the same: the institution and its staff share the same interest, namely healthy colleagues who can work well. Reform must respect the duty of care, be proportionate and be legally sound. social dialogue continues: on sick leave we will come back within days on the outstanding points, and on urgent communication we will be involved both in the guidance and in the review. Generation 2004 will keep defending a balance that protects both the service and the health, dignity and private life of staff.
toolTips('.classtoolTips19','
Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union (\'Staff Regulations [1] (SR)\') are rules stating:
• fundamental conditions of service
• basic rights, duties and obligations of staff.
The SR have been reformed x 2 (so far):
• 2004 (Kinnock White paper)
• 2014 (Regulation 1023/2013 [2])
For a summary of stated intentions and real outcomes of those two reforms check out: European Court of Auditors, 2019, Special report no 15/2019 [3]: Implementation of the 2014 staff reform package at the Commission – Big savings but not without consequences for staff
'); toolTips('.classtoolTips24','Formal negotiations and meetings between the representative trade unions and staff associations (OSPs [4]) [Organisations syndicales et professionnelles] and HR.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips26','A committee whose members are from two or more different organisations. In the context of the staff representation at the Commission this means that the committee members are:
- 50% HR (\'the administration\')
- 50% trade unions and staff associations (OSPs).
Joint Committees at the Commission can be attached to the Central Staff Committee (CSC [5]) or to the Local Staff Committee (LSC): Brusels, Luxembourg, Ispra/Seville, Karlsruhe, Petten, Geel, France and Outside the Union (\'hors Union\'/\'CLP-HU\').'); toolTips('.classtoolTips27','Formal negotiations and meetings between the representative trade unions and staff associations OSPs (Organisations syndicales et professionnelles) and HR.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips30','
The Common Front/Front Commun describes collaborative action across the list of trade unions and staff associations (including us!).
This is not an entity that stands in elections. \'Common Front/Front Commun\' is the name given to the majority of trade unions and staff associations (OSPs) together when we work on common action (‘Front Commun’). For more information [6].
We can find no set configuration of OSPs corresponding to the title \'Common Front\' nor is there a place where notes/collaboration are shared.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips34','A new Procedural Handbook for Invalidity Committees was published 25.11.2022 de [7] | en [8] | fr [9]
See also Special Report No 3/2003 on the invalidity pensions scheme of the European institutions, together with the institutions’ replies [10]
See also Staff Matters - Corporate - Invalidity [11] (Home [12]>Staff Matters [13]>Health [14]>Specific events [15]>Invalidity) and the calculation of the allowance [16].
Under certain circumstanaces you can work elsewhere while in receipt of an invalidity allowance:
\'Persons in receipt of an invalidity allowance may not engage in gainful employment without the prior authorisation of the Appointing Authority. Any income from such gainful employment which, in combination with the invalidity allowance, exceeds the final total remuneration received while in active service as determined on the basis of the salary scale in force on the first day of the month in which the allowance is to be paid shall be deducted from the invalidity allowance.\' Staff Regulations, VIII Pension scheme [17], Article 13(2)
');