R&D BXL message "JRC: Could you become a Director some day?"
and you might have tried the links. Unfortunately due to the high number of colleagues trying to click the links, the server went down. We would like to apologise for this inconvenience and ask you to try it again.
JRC: Pourriez-vous un jour devenir Directeur? (FR) http://www.renouveau-democratie.eu/fr/2010/06/jrc-pourriez-vous-un-jour-devenir-directeur/
JRC: Could you become a Director some day? (EN) http://www.renouveau-democratie.eu/2010/06/jrc-could-you-become-a-director-some-day/
Newsletter 2/2010
R&D Federal
Retirement DG
Appointment of Deputy DG JRC as DG RTD
CDR
Corporate Strategy
Training courses, books and simulations EPSO TEST
Retirement DG
Appointment of Deputy DG JRC as DG RTD
CDR
Corporate Strategy
Training courses, books and simulations EPSO TEST
Barroso II, false start?
As you know we have once again lost a Deputy Director General. After Mrs. Pauli being transferred to DG RTD this is the second time within a very short period and it makes us wonder how DG JRC is supposed to be the most important scientific advisory organisation to the policy making process of the European Commission when having been already for several years without a well functioning senior management structure. For too long now we have either had a Deputy DG acting as a Director General or a DG acting also as a Deputy DG.
This is very worrying and we cannot accept that JRC staff will be presented the bill for this lack of support one day. Political declarations on the importance of Research in Europe are followed by practical decisions against the Commission's most important and only real research activity, DG JRC.
We would like to invite our Commissioner Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn to meet up with the Trade Unions as soon as possible in order to establish a solid JRC strategy 2010-2020.
Art. 90/2: Complaint for Salary Adjustment
Wednesday you might have received a flyer of a trade union in Ispra about a so called article 90/2 complaint regarding the salary adjustment.
R&D Ispra will not join this proposed Art.90/2 procedure for both the content and the form.
Regarding the content we want to stress that in this case there is no point submitting a complaint against the Commission. An art.90/2 complaint can be only submitted to the appointing authority (and in our case it is the Commission) against an act affecting us adversely, either where the said authority has taken a decision or where it has failed to adopt a measure prescribed by the Staff Regulations. As already communicated many times, based on a Commission proposal, it is the Council that decides (and not the Commission). For these reasons it might be clear that an art. 90/2 complaint on annual adjustment of remuneration should not be submitted to the Commission but to the Council, which is not possible for Commission staff.
Regarding the form we consider that submitting a complaint against the Commission is the wrong strategy. This is a burden for the Institution that went to Court to defend our interests. It is similar to suing your own lawyer before a court case is held in which he will defend you free of charge.
We believe that the current strategy of a combined effort of all unions of European Institutions will have much more impact than the proposed propaganda of a small and local trade union. In this respect we want to remind you of the by all trade unions signed letter of January 11 addressed to President Barroso: it was proposed to create a group composed by the trade unions of all institutions and the Commission in order to jointly pursue the issue (http://rd.jrc.it/IT/Dossier/1/RD/20100111_Note%20unitaire%20Ã %20M.%20BARROSO.pdf). Though we are impatient as well, we still believe that this common approach is the best and for the moment we'll have to wait for the Court case.
Reflection:
For further information go to http://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/hr_admin/en/appeals/Pages/index.aspx. (Special attention for: "However, officials filing such requests and complaints often do so because they are not familiar with the applicable law...").You might consider that signing the art. 90(2) complaint doesn't harm. Attention: it is not just a petition but indeed a formal complaint.
R&D Ispra will not join this proposed Art.90/2 procedure for both the content and the form.
Regarding the content we want to stress that in this case there is no point submitting a complaint against the Commission. An art.90/2 complaint can be only submitted to the appointing authority (and in our case it is the Commission) against an act affecting us adversely, either where the said authority has taken a decision or where it has failed to adopt a measure prescribed by the Staff Regulations. As already communicated many times, based on a Commission proposal, it is the Council that decides (and not the Commission). For these reasons it might be clear that an art. 90/2 complaint on annual adjustment of remuneration should not be submitted to the Commission but to the Council, which is not possible for Commission staff.
Regarding the form we consider that submitting a complaint against the Commission is the wrong strategy. This is a burden for the Institution that went to Court to defend our interests. It is similar to suing your own lawyer before a court case is held in which he will defend you free of charge.
We believe that the current strategy of a combined effort of all unions of European Institutions will have much more impact than the proposed propaganda of a small and local trade union. In this respect we want to remind you of the by all trade unions signed letter of January 11 addressed to President Barroso: it was proposed to create a group composed by the trade unions of all institutions and the Commission in order to jointly pursue the issue (http://rd.jrc.it/IT/Dossier/1/RD/20100111_Note%20unitaire%20Ã %20M.%20BARROSO.pdf). Though we are impatient as well, we still believe that this common approach is the best and for the moment we'll have to wait for the Court case.
Reflection:
For further information go to http://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/hr_admin/en/appeals/Pages/index.aspx. (Special attention for: "However, officials filing such requests and complaints often do so because they are not familiar with the applicable law...").You might consider that signing the art. 90(2) complaint doesn't harm. Attention: it is not just a petition but indeed a formal complaint.
Newsletter 1/2010
New buildings
Meeting with Director General Mr. Roland Schenkel
New website
General Assembly R&D
Meeting EPSO DG JRC
GT CCR
Training courses
CDR
Situation Salary Adjustment
Meeting with Director General Mr. Roland Schenkel
New website
General Assembly R&D
Meeting EPSO DG JRC
GT CCR
Training courses
CDR
Situation Salary Adjustment
AUX-AC-AT: Decision
We regret to inform you that our legal action has had a
negative result.
You can find the complete text of the judgement at the
following address
First hearing: 15th January 2009
We are organising a bus for those
interested in attending the first hearing of the AUX-AT-AC legal action (15th
January 2009 – Civil Service Tribunal, Luxembourg).
As stressed by our lawyer, the participation
of a large number of agents is extremely important to pass the judges a strong
message aiming at keeping our action into the utmost consideration.
For this reason R&D and US-I decided to
cover the whole amount of the journey back from Ispra to Luxembourg by coach
for the first 60 subscriptions.
This is the programme:
- Departure on 14th January 2009
around 22.00 from the car parking outside the JRC;
- Arrival in Luxembourg during the morning;
- Hearing;
- Journey back on 15th January – arrival at
Ispra late in the evening.
As a confirmation of your enrolment, a
deposit of € 50 is mandatory. This amount will be refunded once left for
Luxembourg.
Deadline
for the deposit: 19th December 2008.
Thank
you all in advance for your large participation!
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
