Brussels, 8 October 2001
|
Brussels, 8 October 2001 |
What’s Lurking Behind Option C? After long, gruelling, negotiations, the Commission is about to approve a package of measures on the REFORM on 30 October. Quick update: in the wake of an unprecedented mobilisation against the directions taken by the Commission on 28 February 2001, a conciliation agreement concluded on 31 March 2001 between the trade unions and the Commission put in place a bargaining structure involving the High-Level Body (IHN). Under the terms of this agreement, the work of the IHN should have been completed in July 2001 but, thanks to the trade unions’ interventions, it soon became clear that the directions adopted by the Commission on 28 February were inapplicable. That is why the IHN’s work has continued until now, and was supposed to finish on 12 October after receiving the opinions of the other Institutions on 10 October. R&D acknowledges at this stage that the new proposals put on the table represent a great improvement, and are a good starting-point, but greatly regrets the generally over-negative spirit of the Reform, and the Commission’s wish to introduce excessive competition into the European public service. It also emerges that Option C, as the central axis of the reform, is the lever being used to apply a series of changes (less important, if seen in isolation) that could nonetheless jeopardise the independence of the European public service. In fact, there is a danger that certain measures could make our public service very vulnerable: they include a priori determining lower-performing officials at 10% so as to block step-advancement, premium payments for Heads of Unit (but also their reversibility), the introduction of ‘fast-track’ careers, centralising in the hands of the hierarchy of all powers over career advancement and remuneration, and the wide-ranging powers given to Directors-General in nomination and promotion procedures. R&D takes the view that the reform can only succeed if it has the support of staff: it must reconcile both the interests of the Institution and those of the staff. R&D also regrets the decision of the Commission to respect budgetary neutrality: for example, if some members of staff do well out of it, others have to pay the consequences. Unlike Robin Hood, the Commission wants to rob the ‘poor’ and give to the ‘rich’. R&D wants to know how the Commission will react if the Council rejects reform measures that are more favourable to staff (e.g. introduction of the method of adapting our remuneration into the Staff Regulations, abolition of crisis levy and writing the annual average rates of promotion for each Grade into the Regulations), and accepts all of those that are unfavourable. In the meantime, after carrying out an in-depth examination of the two options that were adopted unanimously (i.e. by the leaders of all the political groups, the Administration, and all the trade unions), the European Parliament has adopted a position opposed to Option C and in favour of a re-jigged Option A+, on the grounds that "the upheavals brought about by Option C cannot guarantee continued industrial peace". "Option C pursues a logic that might be described as private enterprise management, without taking account of the imperatives of public service." There is a danger of Option C "jeopardising the independence of the European public service". During this extremely critical phase of negotiations, R&D will endeavour to keep you fully informed, and explain the issues, while at the same time urging you to be vigilant, and to mobilise when the time comes. The Executive Committee |
Pour adhérer à R&D/To join R&D : envoyez ce talon à/send this stub to: Marina OGLE L
102 7/12 |
Membres du Comité Exécutif: Ianniello Franco, Adurno Giuseppe, Zorbas Gerassimos, Ravagli Alessandra, Uguccioni Bruno, Docherty Michael, Vassila-Souyoul Erica, Bochu Claude, Drevet Jean-François, Napolitano Raffaele, Crespinet Alain, Sybren Singelsma, Paul Frank, Panarisi Edi, Sperling Christiane, Domingos Dias. |