In our previous Newsletter, we asked you to participate in a survey on professional mobility. Here is our analysis of the contributions we have received.
Let us start with the gist of it. In general, job mobility seems to be a positive thing (chart 1) while at the same time it seems to be difficult to achieve (chart 5): around 3 quarters think that the impact of a move is neutral to very positive while the same share of respondents find it neutral to very difficult to move.
With this in mind, Generation 2004 would like to call on the Commission’s Human Resources services to launch an official and thorough survey on the subject of job mobility. The goal of this exercise would be to better understand why something viewed as positive and so obviously important for anyone’s career path is considered as difficult to achieve, and, as appropriate, take corrective action on its job mobility policy.
The contributions per DG, age range (chart 2) and location were not very insightful. They gave an even distribution across the ranges, locations and DGs, showing that these are not major factors influencing mobility. An exception arises in the oldest age segment (more than 60 years old) where mobility seems to be very low. Colleagues also seem to find it more difficult to move when they grow older. Contributions per gender tells more or less the same story, but with a twist. Men represented the largest segment with 50% of participants, followed very closely by women at 47%, which in principle is a good thing as it shows that both men and women are equally engaged in job mobility, nevertheless one shouldn’t forget the Commission employs more women; therefore, in being nominally even this result does show some imbalance. The missing 3% went to colleagues who reported as belonging to other gender. Female respondents faced less difficulties than male respondents to change jobs, with well over 50% of male colleagues saying it was difficult or very difficult to do so (chart 3).
When we look at the contributions per status (chart 4) we find that almost two thirds of participants were ADs. This suggests that AD colleagues tend to move much more than any other category of staff. We also found that the relation between AST staff (ASTs + AST-SCs) vs. AD staff is 25% to 75%. However, DG HR official numbers show that the staff distribution between ASTs vs. ADs is around 40% to 60%, which fuels our findings that AD staff does tend to move considerably more than the other categories. Maybe the compulsory mobility imposed on some AD colleagues plays a role in this matter. It also appears to be easier to move for AD colleagues, while it seems almost impossible for CAs. This does not surprise us much given the rather poor conditions of the General Implementing Provisions (GIPs), which does not foster for professional mobility among this group of staff.
In general, colleagues that want to change jobs find it to be difficult (chart 5 blue columns). This chart shows an even distribution in the middle of the scale. However, since the “Very difficult” option was clearly the most selected and the “Very easy” option the least selected, the overall result clearly leans towards the difficult side with more than 50% of colleagues finding it difficult or very difficult to change jobs.
Finally we find, or rather confirm what we already suspected: respondents find it is easier to change inside the same DG (red) than across DGs (green) or through transfer from another institution, which respondents seem to find to be the most difficult modality.