In a decision handed down on 9 July 2002, the Court of First Instance rescinded for the first time the appointment of a Director-General on the grounds that in reaching this decision, the AIPN did not scrupulously abide by the conditions (particularly the fourth and fifth) set out in the vacancy announcement, and in so doing, used its discretionary powers in a manifestly incorrect way, and ignored the interests of the service as articulated in Article 7 of the Staff Regulations.

As far as appointments to middle management posts are concerned, new procedures have been put in place to put a stop to ‘friend of a friend’ and 'back-door entry' promotions. These new procedures, which are based on broad-based decentralisation, call on Directors-General to become real chefs de file in appointing Heads of Unit; respect for the procedures will normally be guaranteed by a panel including, among others, a representative of DG ADMIN and a member of another Directorate-General.

In practice, though, Directors-General will continue to take arbitrary decisions even more than they did in the past – as long as they keep up appearances. Using evidence it has itself put together, R&D offers readers the following examples of best reform practice:

• identify the ‘good candidate’ in advance, and draft the vacancy announcement on the basis of his/her qualifications, rather than the skills required for the job;

• draw up a shortlist that shows the ‘good candidate’ in a good light (all you have to do is eliminate the most qualified candidates, and select others who are not in a position to pose a threat);

• invite onto the selection panel the Director with responsibility for Human Resources from another DG that may be in need of the same service at some point in the future.

On some panels, candidates have even been asked to demonstrate that they were ‘politically correct’ – that is to say in favour of the Kinnock reform.

Mind, there's nothing new about these practices. They’ve simply become much more common, and a lot more hypocritical than the old technique of parachutage, a system to which R&D has always been opposed. With the number of management posts falling away, competition is becoming more intense, and instead of taking advantage of the circumstances to select the best, the senior hierarchy is demonstrating a greater tendency to appoint their favourites, or people from the responsible cabinet. As the present College approaches the end of its mandate, this tendency is likely to become even more marked.

By going about things in this way, the Commission is losing heavily on mobility (it is becoming very difficult to be appointed in a DG where one does not already work), efficiency (appointments are deriving increasingly from the personal choices of Directors-General, who are not required to provide any justification for their actions) and credibility (choices based on skills and merit – something that the Commission has never defined objectively – are being replaced by a system of feudal co-opting in which personal relations are decisive).

R&D has contacted the Commission at the highest level, going straight to the President and sending him a letter calling on him to take the necessary measures.

R&D has already come up with a number of simple, concrete proposals:

1. the Commission must put a stop to the practice of simultaneously publishing vacancies internally (Article 29.1 of the Staff Regulations) and externally (Article 29.2 of the Staff Regulations). This reversal would make it possible not only to return to the spirit of the Staff Regulations, but also take better account of the legitimate expectations of a workforce increasingly demotivated by the curtailment of genuine career opportunities;

2. staff representatives must take part in all procedures for appointing staff to managerial posts in order to ensure compliance with the rules and transparency. Respect for such a procedure would also invest the successful candidate with a greater degree of legitimacy;

3. the Commission must strengthen the regulatory role of DG ADMIN, which must once more efficiently carry out its mission as guardian of the Staff Regulations.

The Executive Committee

Pour adhérer à R&D/To join R&D :
NOM/NAME :

Address adm.

envoyez ce talon à/send this stub to: Marina OGLE L 102 7/12
Pour avoir plus d’informations sur R&D/To receive more information on R&D :
Le secrétariat politique : O. PROFILI/C. SEBASTIANI/S.VINZEK-BERLINGIERI (55656/99239/64162)
CDR, à Sybren SINGELSMA (ARD 613, tél. 282.21.87)
CES, à Charles POTIER, 2 rue Ravenstein, 1000 Bruxelles (546.93.31)