BETA

Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage



2009/2239(INI) Implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the institutions and organs of the EU
RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead JURI LEHNE Klaus-Heiner (EPP)
Lead committee dossier: JURI/7/01261
Legal Basis RoP 048

Activites

  • 2010/02/03 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • 2010/01/28 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • 2009/12/17 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading

Documents

  • Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0012/2010

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
activities/0
date
2009-12-01T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
    type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/0
date
2009-12-01T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
    type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/1/body
Old
unknown
New
EP
activities/1/committees
  • body
    EP
    responsible
    True
    committee
    JURI
    date
    2009-10-05T00:00:00
    committee_full
    Legal Affairs
    rapporteur
    • group
      EPP
      name
      LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
activities/1/type
Old
Annonce en plénière de la saisine de la commission, 1ère lecture/lecture unique
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
activities/2/body
Old
unknown
New
EP
activities/2/committees
  • body
    EP
    responsible
    True
    committee
    JURI
    date
    2009-10-05T00:00:00
    committee_full
    Legal Affairs
    rapporteur
    • group
      EPP
      name
      LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
activities/2/text/0
Old

La commission des affaires juridiques a adopté un rapport d’initiative de M. Klaus-Heiner LEHNE (PPE, DE) sur la mise en œuvre de l'article 2 du statut des fonctionnaires des Communautés européennes: politique de recrutement des institutions et des organes de l'Union européenne.

Le présent rapport a pour objectif principal d'évaluer la mise en œuvre de l'article 2 du statut dans le contexte du recrutement des fonctionnaires et des autres agents des institutions et organes de l'UE. Cet article stipule en particulier que « une ou plusieurs institutions peuvent confier à l'une d'entre elles ou à un organisme interinstitutionnel l'exercice de tout ou partie des pouvoirs dévolus à l'autorité investie du pouvoir de nomination, à l'exception des décisions relatives aux nominations, aux promotions ou aux mutations de fonctionnaires ». Par la décision 2002/620/CE, la sélection des fonctionnaires et des autres agents a été confiée à l'Office européen de sélection du personnel (EPSO), en vertu de l'article 2 du statut. Le rapport porte donc sur cet aspect de la politique de recrutement qui est géré par l'EPSO suite à la décision des institutions de lui déléguer cette compétence en exécution du statut.

La commission compétente félicite l'EPSO pour les efforts qu'il ne cesse de déployer afin de moderniser les procédures de sélection et, à cet égard, accueille avec satisfaction le plan d'action interne global conçu pour améliorer les procédures en vigueur au sein de l'EPSO. Elle constate que la décision 2002/621/CE et l'Accord des secrétaires généraux des institutions concernant les principes communs d'une politique de sélection et de recrutement harmonisée et les principes d'exploitation des listes d'aptitude, auraient dû faire l'objet d'un réexamen trois ans après la création de l'EPSO. Or, ce réexamen n'a pas encore eu lieu et seul le projet d'Accord (et non pas l'Accord lui-même) semble avoir été publié au Journal officiel, ce qui suscite des interrogations quant à la transparence des procédures de sélection et de recrutement. Les députés demandent la publication de l’Accord au Journal officiel.

Les députés se référent à la poursuite de la mise en œuvre du programme de développement de l'EPSO  « Feuille de route pour la mise en œuvre » (PDE), adopté par le conseil d'administration de l'Office européen de sélection du personnel le 11 septembre 2008. Ils notent qu'à certains égards, le PDE n'est pas totalement conforme aux principes communs d'une politique de sélection et de recrutement harmonisée et aux principes régissant l'exploitation des listes d'aptitude fixés dans l'Accord, notamment au regard des jurys, du contenu des concours et de l'utilisation de ces listes. Or, ces principes communs constituent la base sur laquelle le conseil d'administration doit se fonder, en collaboration avec le directeur de l'EPSO, pour mettre en place et développer un système de sélection harmonisé. En conséquence, les députés demandent à son secrétaire général et aux autres institutions qui ont créé l'EPSO d'engager d'urgence un réexamen constructif de la décision 2002/621/CE et de l'Accord, conformément aux dispositions pertinentes desdits actes. Ce réexamen devrait être axé sur les aspects interinstitutionnels de l'EPSO ainsi que de la politique et des procédures de sélection et tenir compte du PDE.

La commission estime que, pour ce qui est de l'organisation et du déroulement des concours, l'EPSO doit avant tout respecter les exigences juridiques imposées par le statut et les actes d'exécution pertinents et veiller à ce que les listes d'aptitude établies permettent aux institutions de recruter leur personnel conformément à l'article 27 du statut. Le rapport constate que les besoins particuliers des institutions en matière de recrutement et les profils des candidats recherchés varient ; il souligne qu'il est indispensable que le PDE aborde plus efficacement la question de l'équilibre linguistique et géographique dans la procédure de sélection afin que les institutions puissent garantir le caractère à la fois multilingue et multiculturel de l'administration. L'EPSO est invité à procéder d'urgence à une évaluation approfondie afin d'identifier les causes des déséquilibres géographiques et linguistiques observés et les solutions qu'il est possible d'y apporter, et à communiquer ses résultats aux institutions.

Le rapport déplore également que du personnel du Parlement ne soit pas présent en permanence dans les structures de l'EPSO, notamment au sein de la hiérarchie. Une telle présence permettrait de sensibiliser l'EPSO aux besoins spécifiques du Parlement et garantirait un bon équilibre dans toutes les étapes de la planification et de la mise en œuvre des procédures de sélection. Il rappelle à cet égard que la décision 2002/621/CE prévoit que toute vacance d'emploi au sein de l'Office est portée à la connaissance des fonctionnaires de toutes les institutions des Communautés, dès que l'autorité investie du pouvoir de nomination (AIPN) a décidé de pourvoir à cet emploi.

Les députés estiment que la volonté de contribuer de façon positive au projet européen devrait constituer l'un des éléments essentiels de la description des postes occupés par le personnel de l'Union européenne. Ils regrettent par ailleurs que le PDE n'insiste pas sur les questions de transparence et d'égalité entre les candidats, questions abordées par le Médiateur en de nombreuses occasions et soumises à un examen juridictionnel actuellement en suspens.

La commission compétente se déclare également opposée à une professionnalisation des jurys passant par le détachement de fonctionnaires, à plein temps, auprès de l'EPSO. Elle estime en revanche qu'il est essentiel de continuer à sélectionner des jurys composés de fonctionnaires en activité qui soient sensibles aux besoins réels de leurs institutions. Le Parlement devrait s'engager à identifier et à présenter d'urgence des solutions qui permettront aux membres de jurys d'être plus disponibles et d'accomplir leurs tâches d'une manière efficace et rentable. L'EPSO est invité à :

  • présenter d'autres options en vue d'optimiser l'aspect de la procédure de sélection relatif au jury et d'évaluer leur impact conformément aux lignes directrices qui figureront éventuellement dans l'Accord révisé ;
  • réfléchir avec les institutions à d'autres moyens de renforcer la capacité des jurys à s'acquitter de leur tâches avec succès, notamment en leur permettant d'être aidés en permanence par des experts professionnels, en mettant à leur disposition des centres d'évaluation, en créant une base de données dans laquelle figureront les noms de membres de jurys qui ont l'expérience de ces tâches et la volonté de les accomplir et en leur offrant une formation continue.

D'une manière générale, les députés jugent nécessaire d'améliorer la coopération, la coordination et le dialogue au niveau interinstitutionnel pour les sujets relatifs au personnel.

New

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office (‘EPSO’), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( ‘the Agreement’), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme ‘Roadmap for Implementation’ adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 (‘the EDP’). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament’s Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament’s commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament’s specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament’s particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO’s plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards’ ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors’ findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court’s recommendations in this respect.

activities/2/type
Old
Vote en commission, 1ère lecture/lecture unique
New
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/3/body
Old
unknown
New
EP
activities/3/docs/0/type
Old
Dépôt du rapport de la commission, lecture unique
New
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
activities/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=FR
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=EN
activities/3/type
Old
Dépôt du rapport de la commission, lecture unique
New
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2009-10-05T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
  • group
    EPP
    name
    LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
other/0
body
EC
dg
commissioner
ŠEFČOVIČ Maroš
procedure/Base juridique
Règlement du Parlement européen EP 048
procedure/Base juridique modifiée
Règlement du Parlement européen EP 138
procedure/Dossier de la commission parlementaire
JURI/7/01261
procedure/Etape de la procédure
En attente de la 1ère lecture du Parlement / lecture unique / 1ère phase du budget
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
procedure/Référence de procédure
2009/2239(INI)
procedure/Sous-type de procédure
Rapport d’initiative
procedure/Type de procédure
INI - Procédure d'initiative
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
JURI/7/01261
procedure/legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
procedure/stage_reached
Old
En attente de la 1ère lecture du Parlement / lecture unique / 1ère phase du budget
New
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
procedure/subject
  • 8.40.09 European officials, EC servants, staff regulations
procedure/subtype
Initiative
procedure/sujet
  • 8.40.09 Fonctionnaires, agents des communautés, statut, tribunal administratif
procedure/title
Old
Mise en œuvre de l'article 2 du statut des fonctionnaires des Communautés européennes: politique de recrutement des institutions et des organes de l'Union européenne
New
Implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the institutions and organs of the EU
procedure/type
Old
INI - Procédure d'initiative
New
INI - Own-initiative procedure
activities/0/body
Old
EP
New
unknown
activities/0/date
Old
2009-12-01T00:00:00
New
2009-12-17T00:00:00
activities/0/docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
    type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
activities/0/type
Old
Committee draft report
New
Annonce en plénière de la saisine de la commission, 1ère lecture/lecture unique
activities/1/body
Old
EP
New
unknown
activities/1/committees
  • body
    EP
    responsible
    True
    committee
    JURI
    date
    2009-10-05T00:00:00
    committee_full
    Legal Affairs
    rapporteur
    • group
      EPP
      name
      LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
activities/1/date
Old
2009-12-17T00:00:00
New
2010-01-28T00:00:00
activities/1/text
  • La commission des affaires juridiques a adopté un rapport d’initiative de M. Klaus-Heiner LEHNE (PPE, DE) sur la mise en œuvre de l'article 2 du statut des fonctionnaires des Communautés européennes: politique de recrutement des institutions et des organes de l'Union européenne.

    Le présent rapport a pour objectif principal d'évaluer la mise en œuvre de l'article 2 du statut dans le contexte du recrutement des fonctionnaires et des autres agents des institutions et organes de l'UE. Cet article stipule en particulier que « une ou plusieurs institutions peuvent confier à l'une d'entre elles ou à un organisme interinstitutionnel l'exercice de tout ou partie des pouvoirs dévolus à l'autorité investie du pouvoir de nomination, à l'exception des décisions relatives aux nominations, aux promotions ou aux mutations de fonctionnaires ». Par la décision 2002/620/CE, la sélection des fonctionnaires et des autres agents a été confiée à l'Office européen de sélection du personnel (EPSO), en vertu de l'article 2 du statut. Le rapport porte donc sur cet aspect de la politique de recrutement qui est géré par l'EPSO suite à la décision des institutions de lui déléguer cette compétence en exécution du statut.

    La commission compétente félicite l'EPSO pour les efforts qu'il ne cesse de déployer afin de moderniser les procédures de sélection et, à cet égard, accueille avec satisfaction le plan d'action interne global conçu pour améliorer les procédures en vigueur au sein de l'EPSO. Elle constate que la décision 2002/621/CE et l'Accord des secrétaires généraux des institutions concernant les principes communs d'une politique de sélection et de recrutement harmonisée et les principes d'exploitation des listes d'aptitude, auraient dû faire l'objet d'un réexamen trois ans après la création de l'EPSO. Or, ce réexamen n'a pas encore eu lieu et seul le projet d'Accord (et non pas l'Accord lui-même) semble avoir été publié au Journal officiel, ce qui suscite des interrogations quant à la transparence des procédures de sélection et de recrutement. Les députés demandent la publication de l’Accord au Journal officiel.

    Les députés se référent à la poursuite de la mise en œuvre du programme de développement de l'EPSO  « Feuille de route pour la mise en œuvre » (PDE), adopté par le conseil d'administration de l'Office européen de sélection du personnel le 11 septembre 2008. Ils notent qu'à certains égards, le PDE n'est pas totalement conforme aux principes communs d'une politique de sélection et de recrutement harmonisée et aux principes régissant l'exploitation des listes d'aptitude fixés dans l'Accord, notamment au regard des jurys, du contenu des concours et de l'utilisation de ces listes. Or, ces principes communs constituent la base sur laquelle le conseil d'administration doit se fonder, en collaboration avec le directeur de l'EPSO, pour mettre en place et développer un système de sélection harmonisé. En conséquence, les députés demandent à son secrétaire général et aux autres institutions qui ont créé l'EPSO d'engager d'urgence un réexamen constructif de la décision 2002/621/CE et de l'Accord, conformément aux dispositions pertinentes desdits actes. Ce réexamen devrait être axé sur les aspects interinstitutionnels de l'EPSO ainsi que de la politique et des procédures de sélection et tenir compte du PDE.

    La commission estime que, pour ce qui est de l'organisation et du déroulement des concours, l'EPSO doit avant tout respecter les exigences juridiques imposées par le statut et les actes d'exécution pertinents et veiller à ce que les listes d'aptitude établies permettent aux institutions de recruter leur personnel conformément à l'article 27 du statut. Le rapport constate que les besoins particuliers des institutions en matière de recrutement et les profils des candidats recherchés varient ; il souligne qu'il est indispensable que le PDE aborde plus efficacement la question de l'équilibre linguistique et géographique dans la procédure de sélection afin que les institutions puissent garantir le caractère à la fois multilingue et multiculturel de l'administration. L'EPSO est invité à procéder d'urgence à une évaluation approfondie afin d'identifier les causes des déséquilibres géographiques et linguistiques observés et les solutions qu'il est possible d'y apporter, et à communiquer ses résultats aux institutions.

    Le rapport déplore également que du personnel du Parlement ne soit pas présent en permanence dans les structures de l'EPSO, notamment au sein de la hiérarchie. Une telle présence permettrait de sensibiliser l'EPSO aux besoins spécifiques du Parlement et garantirait un bon équilibre dans toutes les étapes de la planification et de la mise en œuvre des procédures de sélection. Il rappelle à cet égard que la décision 2002/621/CE prévoit que toute vacance d'emploi au sein de l'Office est portée à la connaissance des fonctionnaires de toutes les institutions des Communautés, dès que l'autorité investie du pouvoir de nomination (AIPN) a décidé de pourvoir à cet emploi.

    Les députés estiment que la volonté de contribuer de façon positive au projet européen devrait constituer l'un des éléments essentiels de la description des postes occupés par le personnel de l'Union européenne. Ils regrettent par ailleurs que le PDE n'insiste pas sur les questions de transparence et d'égalité entre les candidats, questions abordées par le Médiateur en de nombreuses occasions et soumises à un examen juridictionnel actuellement en suspens.

    La commission compétente se déclare également opposée à une professionnalisation des jurys passant par le détachement de fonctionnaires, à plein temps, auprès de l'EPSO. Elle estime en revanche qu'il est essentiel de continuer à sélectionner des jurys composés de fonctionnaires en activité qui soient sensibles aux besoins réels de leurs institutions. Le Parlement devrait s'engager à identifier et à présenter d'urgence des solutions qui permettront aux membres de jurys d'être plus disponibles et d'accomplir leurs tâches d'une manière efficace et rentable. L'EPSO est invité à :

    • présenter d'autres options en vue d'optimiser l'aspect de la procédure de sélection relatif au jury et d'évaluer leur impact conformément aux lignes directrices qui figureront éventuellement dans l'Accord révisé ;
    • réfléchir avec les institutions à d'autres moyens de renforcer la capacité des jurys à s'acquitter de leur tâches avec succès, notamment en leur permettant d'être aidés en permanence par des experts professionnels, en mettant à leur disposition des centres d'évaluation, en créant une base de données dans laquelle figureront les noms de membres de jurys qui ont l'expérience de ces tâches et la volonté de les accomplir et en leur offrant une formation continue.

    D'une manière générale, les députés jugent nécessaire d'améliorer la coopération, la coordination et le dialogue au niveau interinstitutionnel pour les sujets relatifs au personnel.

activities/1/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote en commission, 1ère lecture/lecture unique
activities/2
date
2010-01-28T00:00:00
text
  • The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

    The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office (‘EPSO’), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( ‘the Agreement’), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

    Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme ‘Roadmap for Implementation’ adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 (‘the EDP’). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament’s Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

    The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament’s commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament’s specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

    The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament’s particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

    With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

    Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO’s plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

    Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

    ·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

    ·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards’ ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

    Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors’ findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court’s recommendations in this respect.

body
EP
committees
  • body
    EP
    responsible
    True
    committee
    JURI
    date
    2009-10-05T00:00:00
    committee_full
    Legal Affairs
    rapporteur
    • group
      EPP
      name
      LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
type
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/2/body
Old
EP
New
unknown
activities/2/docs/0/type
Old
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
New
Dépôt du rapport de la commission, lecture unique
activities/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=FR
activities/2/type
Old
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
New
Dépôt du rapport de la commission, lecture unique
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2009-10-05T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
  • group
    EPP
    name
    LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
other/0
body
EC
dg
commissioner
ŠEFČOVIČ Maroš
procedure/Base juridique
Règlement du Parlement européen EP 048
procedure/Base juridique modifiée
Règlement du Parlement européen EP 138
procedure/Dossier de la commission parlementaire
JURI/7/01261
procedure/Etape de la procédure
En attente de la 1ère lecture du Parlement / lecture unique / 1ère phase du budget
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
procedure/Référence de procédure
2009/2239(INI)
procedure/Sous-type de procédure
Rapport d’initiative
procedure/Type de procédure
INI - Procédure d'initiative
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
JURI/7/01261
procedure/legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
New
En attente de la 1ère lecture du Parlement / lecture unique / 1ère phase du budget
procedure/subject
  • 8.40.09 European officials, EC servants, staff regulations
procedure/subtype
Initiative
procedure/sujet
  • 8.40.09 Fonctionnaires, agents des communautés, statut, tribunal administratif
procedure/title
Old
Implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the institutions and organs of the EU
New
Mise en œuvre de l'article 2 du statut des fonctionnaires des Communautés européennes: politique de recrutement des institutions et des organes de l'Union européenne
procedure/type
Old
INI - Own-initiative procedure
New
INI - Procédure d'initiative
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
procedure/legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
procedure/legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
procedure/legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
procedure/legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 138
activities/2/text/0
Old

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office ('EPSO'), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( 'the Agreement'), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme 'Roadmap for Implementation' adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 ('the EDP'). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament's Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament's commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament's specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament's particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO's plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards' ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors' findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court's recommendations in this respect.

New

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office (‘EPSO’), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( ‘the Agreement’), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme ‘Roadmap for Implementation’ adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 (‘the EDP’). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament’s Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament’s commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament’s specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament’s particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO’s plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards’ ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors’ findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court’s recommendations in this respect.

activities/2/text/0
Old

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office ('EPSO'), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( 'the Agreement'), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme 'Roadmap for Implementation' adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 ('the EDP'). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament's Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament's commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament's specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament's particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO's plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards' ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors' findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court's recommendations in this respect.

New

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office ('EPSO'), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( 'the Agreement'), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme 'Roadmap for Implementation' adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 ('the EDP'). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament's Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament's commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament's specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament's particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO's plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards' ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors' findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court's recommendations in this respect.

activities/1
body
EP
date
2009-12-10T00:00:00
type
EP officialisation
activities/3
body
EP
date
2010-01-08T00:00:00
type
Deadline Amendments
activities/0/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
activities/5/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=EN
activities/5/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=EN
activities/0/docs/0/url
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
activities/0
date
2009-12-01T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
    type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/0
date
2009-12-01T00:00:00
docs
  • type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/5
date
2010-02-03T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-12&language=EN
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    title
    A7-0012/2010
body
EP
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
activities/5
date
2010-02-03T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-0012&language=EN
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    title
    A7-0012/2010
body
EP
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
activities/0
date
2009-12-01T00:00:00
docs
  • type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/0
date
2009-12-01T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
    type
    Committee draft report
    title
    PE430.827
body
EP
type
Committee draft report
activities/5/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/6
date
2010-02-03T00:00:00
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-0012&language=EN
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    title
    A7-0012/2010
body
EP
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
other/0
body
EC
dg
commissioner
ŠEFČOVIČ Maroš
other/0
body
EC
dg
Human Resources and Security
commissioner
ŠEFČOVIČ Maroš
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
activities/2/committees/0/committee_full
Old
Legal Affairs
New
Legal Affairs
activities/4/committees/0/committee_full
Old
Legal Affairs
New
Legal Affairs
activities/5/body
Old
EP
New
 
activities/6/body
Old
 
New
EP
committees/0/committee_full
Old
Legal Affairs
New
Legal Affairs
activities
  • date
    2009-12-01T00:00:00
    docs
    • url
      http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE430.827
      type
      Committee draft report
      title
      PE430.827
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee draft report
  • body
    EP
    date
    2009-12-10T00:00:00
    type
    EP officialisation
  • date
    2009-12-17T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    committees
    • body
      EP
      responsible
      True
      committee
      JURI
      date
      2009-10-05T00:00:00
      committee_full
      Legal Affairs
      rapporteur
      • group
        EPP
        name
        LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
  • body
    EP
    date
    2010-01-08T00:00:00
    type
    Deadline Amendments
  • date
    2010-01-28T00:00:00
    text
    • The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (EPP, DE) on implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the Institutions and organs of the EU. The principal objective of the report is to look at the implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations in the context of the recruitment of officials and other servants of the EU institutions and organs. That Article provides in particular that one or more institutions may entrust to any one of them or to an inter-institutional body the exercise of some or all of the powers conferred on the Appointing Authority, other than decisions relating to appointments, promotions or transfers of officials. By Decision 2002/620/EC, the selection of officials and other servants was entrusted to European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) pursuant to Article 2 of the Staff Regulation. It is therefore that aspect of recruitment policy, which is managed by EPSO as a competence delegated to it by the institutions in implementing the Staff Regulations, which is at the heart of the report.

      The committee congratulates the European Personnel Selection Office ('EPSO'), on its continuing efforts to modernise the selection procedures but points out at the same time that on the external, i.e. interinstitutional, level EPSO has to comply with all the conditions imposed by the Staff Regulations on the institutions as appointing authorities and, at the same time, with the implementing acts concerning EPSO. It notes that Decision 2002/621/EC setting up EPSO and the Agreement between the Secretaries-General of the institutions setting out the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists ( 'the Agreement'), should have been reviewed three years after the creation of EPSO. This has not been done, nor has the Agreement itself been published in the Official Journal, which calls into question the transparency of the selection and recruitment procedures. The committee requests publication of the Agreement in the Official Journal.

      Members refer to the EPSO Development Programme 'Roadmap for Implementation' adopted by the Management Board of EPSO on 11 September 2008 ('the EDP'). They note that in certain respects the EDP is not in conformity with the common principles for a shared selection and recruitment policy and the principles for managing reserve lists set out in the Agreement, in particular with respect to selection boards, the content of competitions and the use of reserve lists. Those common principles are, however, the basis on which the Management Board, in collaboration with the Director of EPSO, has to set up and develop a shared selection system. Accordingly, Members call on Parliament's Secretary-General and the other institutions which founded EPSO to initiate an urgent and constructive review of Decision 2002/621/EC and the Agreement pursuant to the relevant provisions of those acts. This review should focus on interinstitutional aspects of EPSO and selection policy and procedures and take the EDP into account.

      The committee considers that first and foremost EPSO must respect the legal requirements imposed by the Staff Regulations and the relevant implementing acts with respect to the organisation and conduct of competitions and ensuring that the reserve lists produced enable the institutions to recruit in compliance with Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. Members note that the recruitment needs of individual institutions vary, and they stress that the EDP must better address the issue of linguistic and geographical balance in the selection process so as to allow the institutions to ensure that the administration is both multilingual and multicultural. Parliament's commitment to common selection procedures conducted by EPSO is dependent on fulfilment of Parliament's specific needs as a fully multilingual institution. Accordingly, Members call on EPSO to carry out an urgent in-depth appraisal so as to identify the reasons for the geographical and linguistic imbalances observed and possible remedies, and to communicate its findings to the institutions.

      The committee goes on to deplore the lack of a permanent presence within EPSO structures, in particular the hierarchy, of staff from Parliament: such a presence would provide EPSO with the necessary understanding, awareness and expertise about the specificities of Parliament as an institution, give it the necessary sensitivity to Parliament's particular needs and ensure proper balance in all the steps of planning and implementation of the selection procedures. It also recalls in this context Article 7(4) of Decision 2002/621/EC, which requires that officials of all Community institutions be informed of posts vacant within EPSO as soon as the appointing authority decides to fill them.

      With regard to staff quality, the committee considers that one of the essential elements of the job description of EU staff should be to contribute positively to the European project. It regrets that the EDP does not dwell on the issues of transparency and equality of candidates that have been addressed on a number of occasions by the Ombudsman and are subject to pending judicial review.

      Moving on to selection boards, the committee refers to EPSO's plan to professionalise Selection Boards proposing as one of its elements that 27 officials are seconded to EPSO on a full time basis for between 2 and 4 years in accordance with the conditions and procedures to be set out in conjunction with the institutions and the Staff Committees. The committee objects to the professionalisation of selection boards through the secondment of officials on a full-time basis to EPSO, on the grounds that it is contrary to the Staff Regulations and therefore illegal, affords no guarantees of independence and objectivity and is neither an effective nor an efficient option. It considers instead that it is vital to maintain the input to the selection process of selection boards composed of officials in active service who are sensitive to and keenly aware of the actual needs of their institutions and that this is the best way of guaranteeing the independence, impartiality and integrity of recruitment. The committee undertakes to identify and introduce as a matter of urgency solutions which will make for better availability of members of selection boards and enable them to perform their duties as members of those boards in an effective way, and requests the other institutions to join it in this endeavour.

      Members further call on EPSO to do the following:

      ·        present alternative options for optimising the selection board aspect of the selection procedure and to assess their impact in line with possible guidelines to be contained in the reviewed Agreement;

      ·        together with the institutions, to reflect on alternative ways of strengthening selection boards' ability successfully to perform their tasks, such as permanent assistance by professional assessors, assessment centres, the creation of a database of selection board members with the experience and willingness to perform this task, and continuous training.

      Lastly, the committee is concerned by the Court of Auditors' findings about the determination of costs of competitions and urges EPSO to implement the Court's recommendations in this respect.

    body
    EP
    committees
    • body
      EP
      responsible
      True
      committee
      JURI
      date
      2009-10-05T00:00:00
      committee_full
      Legal Affairs
      rapporteur
      • group
        EPP
        name
        LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
    type
    Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date
    2010-02-03T00:00:00
    docs
    • url
      http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-0012&language=EN
      type
      Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
      title
      A7-0012/2010
    body
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date
    2010-02-03T00:00:00
    docs
    • url
      http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-0012&language=EN
      type
      Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
      title
      A7-0012/2010
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
committees
  • body
    EP
    responsible
    True
    committee
    JURI
    date
    2009-10-05T00:00:00
    committee_full
    Legal Affairs
    rapporteur
    • group
      EPP
      name
      LEHNE Klaus-Heiner
links
other
  • body
    EC
    dg
    Human Resources and Security
    commissioner
    ŠEFČOVIČ Maroš
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
JURI/7/01261
reference
2009/2239(INI)
title
Implementation of Article 2 of the Staff Regulations of the European Communities: the recruitment policy of the institutions and organs of the EU
legal_basis
  • Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048
stage_reached
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
subtype
Initiative
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject
  • 8.40.09 European officials, EC servants, staff regulations