Contract Agents FG IV 3a in Delegations Equal qualifications, equal classification?

1. Contract Agents FG IV 3a in Delegations Equal qualifications, equal classification? Equal job, equal pay? Respectable professional career? Equal living conditions? Equal expatriation discomfort? INTRODUCTION

2. Steady, although ‘slower’ since 2004 NO CAREER AT ALL!

3. Such significant differences exist regardless of the level of experience and qualifications….which for CA are often higher ….and regardless of the fact that CA perform “core tasks” regularly….apparently, the only reason is that Officials passed an EPSO Competition whereas CAs passed an EPSO Test….

4. Example of remuneration packages of an AD8 and a CA FG IV G XIV

5. The genesis: The Kinnock “savings” reform, back in 2004, introduced the staff category of Contract Agents (CA) under title IV of chapter II of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities (CEOSEC) of the Staff Regulations (SR) Their role in theory: According to Art. 80 of the CEOSEC, CA shall be subdivided into four function groups corresponding to the duties to be performed:

6. The requirements: According to Art. 82 of the CEOSEC, recruitment as a member of the contract staff shall require at least:

7. The nature of the contract: According to Art. 85, the contracts of contract staff referred to in Article 3a may be concluded for a fixed period of at least three months and not more than five years. They may be renewed not more than once for a fixed period of not more than five years. The initial contract and the first renewal must be of a total duration of not less than six months for function group I and not less than nine months for the other function groups. Any further renewal shall be for an indefinite period. Contract staff in function group IV shall before renewal of a contract for an indefinite period be required to demonstrate the ability to work in a third language among those referred to in Article 314 of the EC Treaty. The common rules on access to training and the modalities of the assessment mentioned in Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations shall apply by analogy

8. A few statistics: Distribution of active contract agents by gender and grade (all budgets)

9. A few statistics: Distribution of active contract agents by gender and grade (all budgets)

10. Contract Agents FG IV 3a FACTS

11. AD AST Career perspectives of a CA: Flat A Function Group IV CA entering at grade XIII will do exactly the same job for his entire career. No professional career perspectives at all. Career perspectives of an official: very attractive An official recruited at AST 1 level can find his/her way right to the top grades of the AD function group through internal competitions (Art. 29 SR) and the certification procedure (Art. 45a SR).

12. AD TA LA Group I LA Group V Career perspectives of a Temporary Agent (TA): very attractive A TA can find his/her way right to the top grades of the AD function group through internal competitions (Art. 29 SR). Career perspectives of a Local Agent (LA): attractive A LA recruited at group V level can find his/her way right to the top group I level through the reclassification procedure (Art. 4 FWR) and internal recruitment possibilities.

13. EU’s Human Resources Policy in respect of CA (Analysis limited to FG IV): • According to Art. 3, Par. 10, Com. d of Annex IV of the General Provisions for Implementing (GIPs) Article 79(2) of the CEOSEC, members of the contract staff shall be graded as follows:

14. EU’s Human Resources Policy in respect of CA (Analysis limited to FG IV): • According to Art. 9 of Annex VII of the GIPs, the desired average reclassification period for each grade is:

15. EU’s Human Resources Policy in respect of CA (Analysis limited to FG IV): CA salary grids:

16. EU’s Human Resources Policy in respect of Officials: • According to latest competition notices, professional experience required for the following AD function groups is: • According to Art 45 of the SR, a minimum of only two years is required to be considered for promotion to the next higher grade in the function group to which the official belongs.

17. EU’s Human Resources Policy in respect of Officials: Salary grids for Officials and Temporary Agents:

18. Contract Agents FG IV 3a Equal qualifications, equal classification? No Equal job, equal pay? No Respectable professional career? No Equal living conditions? No Equal expatriation discomfort? No CONSEQUENCES

19. Salary entry levels CA vs Official based on applicable regulations (see slides 12, 14 and 16) :

20. Salary perspectives CA vs Official based on respective average reclassification and promotion periods (see slides 14 and 16):

21. Organizational layout inconsistencies CA vs Official: • Based on the entry requirements and career perspectives of both categories, it is very likely that an Official has less experience than the CA he/she is supervising!!!??? The most bizarre scenario happens when a neo-laureate AD 5 with no experience acts as a direct superior of a multi annual experienced CA. • Contract staff in function group IV, before renewal of a contract for an indefinite period, are required to demonstrate the ability to work in a third language while Officials only need to fulfill such requirement for promotion purposes. Such requirement not only reinforces the assumption that CA are very likely more qualified than AD5 officials, but introduces higher requirements for a CA indefinite contract compared to an Official’s indefinite contract.

22. Organizational layout inconsistencies CA vs Official: • AST Officials with less qualification requirements (level of post-secondary education Art. 5(3) SR) supervise CA FG IV and perform validation functions denied to CAs; • It is common and a matter of fact that CAs act as Head of Section ad interim, manage sub-offices in Delegations, perform same tasks as AD or AST colleagues and go well beyond their non-core “administrative, advisory, linguistic and equivalent technical tasks”. Obviously such additional responsibilities and competencies assigned to a cheaper staff category represent an undisputable windfall for the EU; • All statutory staff categories have an opportunity to take on a professional career, except CAs. Not only, CAs are denied access to internal competitions (Art. 29 SR), a possibility unreasonably allowed to TA;

23. Financial inconsistencies between CA and Official: • In substance the SR are adopting double standards, example: • A CA FG IV G 13 with 7 years of experience corresponds to a basic salary level of Euro 3,145.45; • A AD7 official with 6 years of experience corresponds to a basic salary level of Euro5,568.11; • On average, it will take a CA FG IV G13 27 years to earn (Euro 5,832.42) what an AD5 will earn after just 5 years of service; • A CA FG IV with between 8 and 21 years of experience corresponds to an entry level of Grade 14 (see slide 15), which equals to a salary level of Euro 3,558.90; • An Official with 16 years of experience corresponds to an entry level of AD 11 (see slide 16) which equals to a salary level of Euro 9,124.87

24. Financial inconsistencies between CA and Official: • Allowances • Allowances such as Living Conditions Allowance, Expatriation Allowance, Household Allowance calculated on a percentage of the staff basic salary (Annex VII SR) should be converted into a lump sum as the living conditions, expatriation discomforts and household needs do not depend of the amount of a person’s salary level;

25. Contract Agents FG IV 3a CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

26. Conclusions: • The EU’s HR policy reform, which introduced the category of CAs, was obviously inspired by the only pressing need to save funds. 9 years later, the EU institutions can not deny that such short-sighted and monochromatic policy has, besides significant savings, introduced a number of unjustified and intolerable incongruities among different staff categories. • The EU has to abandon its current source of policy inspiration and recognize the fact that a respectable HR policy can not neglect essential elements such as: • A professional fulfilling career for every staff member; • A professional career based on seniority levels or objective meritocratic assessments equal to every staff member; • Equal opportunities to all staff members; • Equal job, equal pay principle;

27. Recommendation: • The EU should abolish the wording “under the supervision of officials or temporary staff” in the duty description of Art. 80 of the CEOS as the current exploitation of CA is in violation of the provisions set forth in such Art.; • The EU should introduce a provision allowing CA access to internal competitions; • The EU should introduce a provision putting Temporary Agents and CA on an equal footing; • The EU should reduce the manifest and unreasonably high remuneration differences between TA/Officials and CA, not necessarily by increasing CA salary levels;

28. Recommendation: • The EU should introduce a provision establishing a rotation system and the possibility for CA to work in HQs; • Given the aforementioned discrepancies (lack of career perspectives, job insecurity, lower salary levels compared to equal job, etc.) the imminent financial savings measures should not affect all staff across the board in the same way: • Given the higher salary of officials, the cut of lump sums (travel), the reduction of leave days (6), the increase of working hours (40) will definitely have a greater impact on CAs. CAs by definition already represent the result of the biggest HR savings measure put in place so far by the EU. If the EU considers CAs a “different” staff category, it should keep such consideration even for it’s smart savings exercise. • Allowances such as Living Conditions Allowance, Expatriation Allowance, Household Allowance calculated on a percentage of staff basic salary (Annex VII SR) should be converted into a lump sum as the living conditions, expatriation discomforts and household needs do not depend on the amount of a person’s salary level;

29. Recommendation: • Such measures may represent significant savings, as the allowance amounts currently received by CA (being considered reasonable) would be allocated to officials as well. • The EU should introduce a provision abolishing the third language requirement as a pre-requisite for CA indefinite duration contract;