“Titanic” for some and “Proud sailboat on calm waters” for others?
R&D invites the other Trade Unions to a public debate to discuss different pension analyses and to answer your questions.
Many of you expressed your surprise, disappointment or even disgust about the state of dialogue between Unions regarding the post-2004 recruits, especially in relation to career and pension aspects.
And you have expressed your conviction that this cacophony weakens the staff – especially post-2004 colleagues – and only benefits those who, also within our institution, have always refused to recognize the serious damage inflicted to colleagues by the disastrous Kinnock reform.
R&D shares your concerns and continues its efforts so that, like in the meetings organized by the Common Front last 18 and 19 November on the post-2004 and contractual agents file, serene analyses are conducted and that genuine dialogue can take place between all players.
In particular, with regard to the catastrophic analysis of our pension system recently presented by G2004 and their proposals to impose measures to reduce the pension of our existing pensioner colleagues, R&D‘s response will not make allegations of treason, nor provide ammunition for Member States who may want dubious analyses to support their destructive approaches, nor will we claim to impose a conspiracy of silence or even make an appeal to the appointing authority to censor the views expressed…
As part of such a technically complex and essential issue for the future of our ‘young’ colleagues, the only responsible answer is to respond accurately and in detail to the issues raised.
R&D invites G2004 and the other unions to a public debate on the pension file that will allow everyone to present their vision and analysis and to ask questions that may help them to understand and address any fears they may have.
In this context, it will be necessary to reply to the challenges posed by G2004 in its communication:
– Is our pension system at risk?
– A fair system for everyone?
– Is it necessary to pass to a ‘real’ pension Fund?
R&D will present its analysis, demonstrating that many of the conclusions presented as being indisputable are in fact not technically correct and others are not even plausible.
We should remember that R&D‘s analysis, delivered as part of the Common Front, played a key role in supporting the Commission and the European Parliament in defending our pension system against attacks from certain MS and that was a substantial issue for post-2004 colleagues.
For R&D complex cases such as our pension system must be removed from the controversies, sterile speculation, and attempts to divide the staff.
All aspects should be addressed with the greatest technical rigour, in a serious and serene discussion, in order to reach conclusions as shared as possible.
Staff are entitled to expect seriousness and rigorous analysis from both its representatives and from the administration.