Brussels, 26 November 2001
|
Will The
Commission Survive The Kinnock Reform? Brussels, 26 November 2001 |
| Colleagues who have had a chance to read the ‘appraisal
reports’ of our Commissioners in the press (l'Expansion) will have been
shocked to see our Great Reformer slip from 8th
place in 2000 to 13th in 2001, and sent on his
way with some unflattering, not to say thoroughly offensive, comments.
In fact, the overwhelming majority of the staff (if Mr Kinnock refuses to have a ballot, the reason is quite simple: he's afraid of being disowned by his staff) are not alone in having no enthusiasm for a reform that isn’t a reform in the first place. In the European Parliament, Administration and staff had adopted a position in favour of a career structure that is similar to the present one, albeit adjusted (Type A+), and on lines of reform that are quite close to those of the trade unions that organised the last two truly representative General Staff Meetings. Our colleagues in the European Parliament are wondering why, instead of reforming practices (particularly those that led to the resignation of the Santer Commission, of which he was a distinguished member who obtained better appraisals), Mr Kinnock prefers to overhaul the Staff Regulations and risk disrupting the way all the Institutions operate. In the Council, representatives of the Member States, particularly those who have least time for the staff, gave the budgetary aspects of the reform a warm welcome, and several delegations indicated that they had no intention of being fettered by a protocol signed by the Union syndicale and Mr Kinnock. Is this unfortunate agreement going to suffer the same fate as the Framework Agreement that our great Reformer has just unilaterally denounced? Clearly, the lawyers don’t think much of it, and there is a real danger of it ending up in a cupboard full of electoral promises that will only impress people who are naïve enough to believe them. At the Commission, speed is of the essence. Not knowing what the future has in store, DG ADMIN has accelerated the production of all manner of amendments to the Staff Regulations, but only after consulting the unions that don’t have many members and are unconditionally supportive, and without taking essential legal precautions or worrying about the consequences. How much longer can this relentless pursuit of a single objective go on? Perhaps until we serve our Staff Regulations up to the Council in the hope of encouraging leniency in respect of the College’s current dysfunctioning? And lastly, what price will the staff have to pay, not only for the errors of the Santer Commission, but also for the ‘fragmented power’ of the present College? 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. |
|