JRC Implementation Review 2017 – Request for a detailed discussion after the COCO-JRC meeting
Dear Mr Šucha,
At the recent
COCO-JRC meeting with staff representatives you expressed your great
satisfaction with the positive JRC Implementation Review 2017, and invited us
to pass this positive message to staff. Indeed, staff representatives were also
pleased to find the JRC being seen in such a positive light externally, and are
also ready to publicly make such recognition.
At the same
time, the review must be read in its entirety. In the context of the COCO-JRC,
time was too limited to allow for an in-depth discussion of concerns contained
in the report that are also shared by us and many staff members. The overall
concern may be summarised in a fear of losing scientific credibility in JRC's
core business in the rush to Knowledge Management. This is aggravated by an
excess of 'micro-management' and stifling bureaucracy.
The promises of
the Strategy 2030 document are not being fully met. R&D representatives, amongst others, drew
your attention to parts of the Implementation Review that should not be brushed
aside. In particular, staff continue to be confused about Knowledge Management
(c.f. p.14 paragraph 4 of the review), and the JRC risks losing credibility as
a world-class scientific institution (c.f. p.14 paragraph 6). The target for
the subdivision between research projects in the Strategy aims for a 80/15/5
breakdown (core business, improvement of core business, and exploratory
research) which still adds up to 100% research.
As the panel also observes, "Unless
the JRC maintains its credibility as a world-class scientific institution, its
mission as the science-for-policy service of the Commission will be
compromised."
The report also says
"The JRC can be complimented on
maintaining this good record in producing scientific results that are highly
ranked for their science as well as being relevant to policy". It
should however be noted that the bibliometric analysis on which this excellent
result is based refers to the period before the reorganisation. Due to the
concerns above, there may be a risk that we will not be able to maintain the same
or a better level in the future.
We kindly request
a further opportunity to address these issues with you, for an open and constructive
exchange, before the JRC gives its formal reply to the review panel.
Gianfranco Selvagio
President R&D Ispra
Contractual Agents – duration of initial contract
we wish to express our strong
satisfaction and support for the decision regarding contractual agent
recruitments you communicated to staff representatives during the most recent
social dialogue meeting (COCO-JRC of 20th October).
Following a longstanding request from
our side, in order to increase the attractiveness of the JRC and be able to
retain the best possible candidates, within the boundaries of Staff
Regulations, the longest possible initial contract should be offered to
contractual agents. As a positive side-effect the administrative burden on AMC8
is also reduced.
Your decision to go in this direction
and offer initial contracts of the maximum possible duration (3 years) as
standard fully matches expectations of services and staff. Of course we recognise that, in cases where
projects or service needs have clearly demonstrated shorter timeframes, shorter
durations may be sometimes offered as an exception. We expect the same policy
to be applied to existing contractual agents such that any extension will also
be as long as possible.
To ensure that the implementation of
this new very welcome approach, leading to a happier and healthier working
environment for all, is applied consistently and fairly across the whole JRC,
we urge you to give as soon as possible clear guidance to all Directors, Unit
Heads and BC/AMC8.
Thank you again for your openness and
collaborative spirit on this matter.
JRC Implementation Review 2017
You will have seen on Connected@JRC the post of our Director General about the
independent JRC Implementation Review 2017. The
external panel was under the chairmanship of Patrick Cunningham, former Chief
Scientist to the Irish Government, and they completed their report this summer.
The DG posted under the title 'Very positive evaluation of the JRC'. Indeed the report is
positive about many aspects of the JRC, and we welcome the appreciation of the
work that is done by all JRC staff. However, we would also have liked to see
more attention being paid to the parts of the report that were less positive.
A critical self-examination is essential in order to improve any organization. The opinion of staff about how they see the current status and future direction is also essential to obtain the full picture.
A critical self-examination is essential in order to improve any organization. The opinion of staff about how they see the current status and future direction is also essential to obtain the full picture.
This review also made headlines in the science journal Nature in an
editorial entitled 'Europe’s Joint Research Centre, although improving, must
think bigger' and it is rewarding
for the JRC to get such international exposure. The title says it all - there are a
lot of positive points for the JRC, which we should welcome, but it is also
important to pay attention to suggestions for improvements.
From the Nature editorial:
"…It also notes that the JRC has significantly increased its presence in the world’s top-cited literature. But it says that the centre still does too little exploratory research — such research engages only 3.5% of JRC staff, well below the target of 10% that it set itself in 2015..."
"…It also notes that the JRC has significantly increased its presence in the world’s top-cited literature. But it says that the centre still does too little exploratory research — such research engages only 3.5% of JRC staff, well below the target of 10% that it set itself in 2015..."
"...As well as keeping the JRC relevant, a wider focus on the cutting
edge would allow it to flag up hot topics to policymakers earlier..."
The message is clearly that more investment, not less, in Knowledge
Production is essential in order to keep the JRC relevant.
On Friday 20th October we'll meet with our DG and this review will be discussed. Like us, we are
sure you have strong opinions regarding the current status of the JRC Strategy
2030. We also understand that many colleagues prefer not to express themselves
in Connected@JRC, so if you have comments that you would like us to bring to
the attention of the DG please let us know
by calling the R&D secretariat at 9645 or by e-mail.
A strong and effective European civil service
Brussels, 28 September 2017
NOTE TO COMMISSIONERS
Günther OETTINGER, Budget and Human Resources
Corina CRETU, Regional Policy
Subject: Your position for a strong and effective European civil service, counteracting the perverse effects of staff reduction and the deterioration of working conditions following the statutory reforms
On behalf of all the colleagues who have spoken to us in this regard, we would like to thank you for the clarity of the position you adopted in your “Reflection paper on the future of EU finances” (read):
« Finally, the sound implementation of EU policies relies on a strong and efficient European civil service. Since 2013, the EU institutions have been fulfilling their commitment to reduce their staffing level. This happened despite the addition of new responsibilities, for example in handling the refugee crisis or dealing with security threats, or in the EU delegations abroad. The future EU budget should therefore make provision for a strong European civil service, attractive to talented young people from across the Union, and capable of delivering on the priorities that result from this reflection process. Decisions on future policies and instruments should take account of the impact on human resources.
A further reduction in staff levels could jeopardise the good functioning of the EU institutions. Similarly, previous reforms have reduced salaries and increased working time and pension age. There is clearly a declining interest among young people from Member States with relatively high per capita incomes in joining the EU institutions. While working conditions may only be one factor in such decisions, the trend is clear. (p 24 « Reflection paper on the future of EU finances» )
Finally, a clear position in favour of staff! For the first time, the institution, at its highest level, recognizes the disastrous effects of statutory reforms and staff reduction.
Since 2013, the services are faced with staff reduction while assuming additional tasks and responsibilities. These irresponsible and drastic decisions to abolish and freeze posts have led to an overload of work for colleagues, and consequently to a lack of motivation among staff.
For several years, within several Directorates-General, the watchword and the real priority have been to “pay” to DG HR to whatever condition, the various taxations imposed.
In particular, the services were also subjected to the “excesses of zeal” of DG HR which operated almost exclusively with the calculator, by applying a blind method with an iron fist and by blocking not only the publication of posts and a genuine mobility of colleagues, but also their career development.
On the one hand, it is pretty clear that, in this context, all the propaganda efforts deployed by DG HR with regard to career management policy, talent management, the commitment to always put the right person in the right place, the well-being of staff, fit@work , etc., not to mention the increasingly pathetic articles of self-congratulation in “Commission en Direct”, were perceived by colleagues as real provocations. It is not surprising that in the last “Staff Survey”, only 35% of colleagues confirmed that they believed the institution was concerned with their well-being.
On the other hand, as you rightly acknowledge, it is only thanks to the dedication of staff that, despite this very difficult context, EU policies have continued to be implemented for the benefit of European citizens.
Moreover, the staff deeply appreciated your recalling that it has also been the victim of successive statutory reforms which have led to an undoubted deterioration of working conditions with regard to wages, pensions, the extension of working hours, the increase of retirement age and the wage freeze for two consecutive years…
The consequences of this thoughtless degradation, particularly for new colleagues, have led to a loss of attractiveness of the European civil service to such an extent that, as you rightly recall, it has now become very difficult to attract the interest of the best candidates, particularly in several Member States.
In view of the above, and thanking you again for the clarity of your position, we would kindly ask you:
- to oppose, with the utmost determination, any further attempt to reduce and degrade the working conditions which the Council will not fail to implement in the framework of the MFF (multiannual financial framework), in order to further penalize our staff;
- to request DG HR to abandon, once and for all, empty slogans, which have no useful effect, in order to put in place genuine policies for staff and improve working conditions and career opportunities.
We do not want words, we want facts.
Facta non verba: let us make our institution a model and innovative employer by urgently reforming the personnel policy, including a genuine policy for risk prevention .
Cristiano Sebastiani
President
Copy:
Mr J-C JUNCKER, President of the European Commission
Members of the College
M. A. ITALIANER, Secretary-General
Ms I. SOUKA, Director general DGHR
Commission staff
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
No comments :
Post a Comment