Skip to content
Home > Institutions > European Commission > EU Agencies > Executive Agencies

Executive Agencies

Executive agencies: the start of a social dialogue?

Following the mobilisation at the Berlaymont on 6 June, the unions had obtained Commissioner Hahn’s readiness to negotiate, firstly on one of the main issues, namely safeguarding jobs in the EISMEA Agency. A meeting specifically devoted to this issue, with the participation of the Director General of DG RTD, identified solutions to the employment situation, in particular through the creation of an inter-agency Job Fair. Subsequently, thanks to the coordinated work of the unions and agency staff representatives, DG HR has been open to start a social dialogue on structural measures concerning career development, mobility and staff welfare.

The meeting held on 2 February between the unions and DG HR, with the participation of staff committee representatives, marked a turning point in the agencies issue. It provided an initial overview of the issues involved. Although the answers at this stage are only partial, based on objective data, the conclusions of this meeting can be grouped under three headings. 

Firstly, on career development, DG HR has informed the agencies that there will be an increase in the reclassification quotas for contract agents (3a) so that agents are treated more fairly. Apart from this one-off measure, which in no way prejudges its continuity in subsequent years, DG HR recognises that the application of art. 13 of the framework agreement, which allows competitions to be organised for contract agents – who make up around 75% of agency staff – could be a lever for access to higher function groups, and therefore a means of managing the careers of this important part of staff, while recognising its objective limitations.

On the other hand, the possibility of taking part in internal Commission competitions would be a much more important avenue. However, DG HR stressed that, despite the existing legal constraints, the issue deserved further discussion.

DG HR has also undertaken to conduct a more detailed discussion, based on an analysis of the available data, to respond to staff representatives’ request to open up management positions for temporary staff (2f) recruited in the agencies.

Secondly, on the issue of mobility – which is intrinsically linked to that of career development DG HR mentioned that the Commission had decided to increase the publication of temporary agent posts, which in principle would allow agents to access them, while stressing the fact that these posts are not open-ended. Possible adjustments to the inter-agency mobility mechanism put in place will also be discussed at a specific meeting. Related to this, the issue of workload assessment in relation to staff allocation will need to be reviewed.

Finally, on the question of staff well-being, the DG HR has undertaken to support, including through training initiatives for managers, the creation of conditions for a working environment that effectively motivates staff. In this respect, it is worth mentioning that the results of satisfaction surveys are hardly encouraging, even at very low levels, which should lead senior management to question the deep malaise that prevails, at least in some departments, and to take the necessary measures to remedy it.

In conclusion, this first meeting was conducted in a frank and constructive spirit. It is definitely an important step in the right direction. DG HR has offered to continue these discussions in the context of thematic meetings, and in order to feed into these, has undertaken analytical work to provide more precise data on certain issues raised (for example, the percentage of contract agents who have succeeded in obtaining temporary agent posts within the agencies).  It is therefore essential to carry out structured preparatory work for the next stages at the level of the unions and staff committee representation.  Our union will play its full role in close consultation with its members in the six agencies. A meeting is planned with these colleagues in the near future.

Executive agencies: the fight for constructive and renewed social dialogue continues

The situation at EISMEA is finally starting to move!

It took three rallies and several letters before a meeting was finally held with all the stakeholders: DG HR, the supervising DG, the director of the EISMEA agency, representatives of the trade unions and staff committees.  This is a step in the right direction towards the kind of social dialogue we have been calling for.

In two years, EISMEA has already undergone two reorganisations and a forced relocation. At the same time, it is facing the loss of a third of its workforce: 90 FTE are expected to be lost by 2027. In this context, staff motivation is low, and 62 colleagues have left the Agency, mostly for other agencies and Commission departments.   While the other executive agencies are stable or growing in terms of staff numbers, EISMEA colleagues feel left behind in a situation that has only worsened over the years.

The Director-General of DG RTD explained that the projections in terms of posts and distribution of tasks between the different agencies had been made on the basis of the Horizon Europe programme adopted in 2020. The UK’s future participation in this programme will provide additional funding of up to €10 billion over a number of years, resulting in an increased workload without any certainty of additional posts. Proposed measures, some of which are already in the pipeline, include: a commitment by agencies to use the inter-agency job market when recruiting; more accurate forecasting of post needs and sharing of this information with other agencies, staff and line DGs; and an inter-agency ‘job fair’ where available posts would be advertised to all interested colleagues at the end of the year. In this way, it is expected that most of the posts threatened with abolition can be reabsorbed, taking into account the capacity of the various agencies concerned.

Despite the assurances given by HR and the supervising DG, a number of issues remain unresolved (in particular the legal and budgetary aspects) or need to be the subject of more concrete proposals. Firstly, there is no guarantee that sufficient posts will be available. In this respect, it should be noted that if the utilisation rate has fallen and posts have therefore become available, this is due to the mass departure of colleagues who have left EISMEA. Management is closely monitoring these movements, but in reality, is counting on further departures of colleagues who, faced with the prospect of staff cuts, will look for jobs elsewhere. This is an enormous waste of skills that could be put to good use within the Agencies and more generally within our institution.

Secondly, the job fair is one way of facilitating inter-agency mobility, but for this mechanism to work more or less optimally, EISMEA colleagues should be given preferential access. In addition, it should be complemented by other ‘vertical’ mobility processes, the legal compatibility of which needs to be ensured in terms of contract types for CAs and TAs.

It is therefore important to continue the discussion in order to put the proposals on the table into practice, even if this means supplementing them with other, more ambitious proposals in the context of a constructive social dialogue.

Social dialogue

The struggle for constructive and renewed social dialogue continues

Following the mobilisation at the Berlaymont on 6 June, the unions won an opening from Commissioner Hahn to negotiate on one of the main issues, namely the protection of jobs in the EISMEA agency.

It faces a worrying situation in that almost a third of its staff (i.e. 90 posts) are under direct threat. In the letter sent by the Commissioner at the beginning of August, he states that “DG HR and DG RTD, as the main partner DG, have held discussions with the Agencies, which have confirmed their solidarity and willingness to implement and evaluate concrete measures to support EISMEA staff”. It has to be said that these discussions took place without the participation of the agencies’ trade unions and staff representatives.

Despite assurances from the authorities, there is no guarantee that concrete solutions will be found in the near future. Meanwhile, EISMEA staff remain concerned about their future, having recently been forced to move to the North Light building in the Gare du Nord district in an unprecedented haste and unpreparedness.

Three other branches will move into the same building in the coming months. Because of its political weight, the ERCEA is the only agency that will remain in the Covent Garden building. This demonstrates the incoherence of the buildings policy and its mistakes – widely reported in the press – in relation to the terms of the agreement signed between the European Commission, the Brussels-Capital Region and the Federal Government. The agency’s staff are aware that they are, in the end, no more than an adjustment variable in this agreement, which the Belgian authorities are dubiously using for urban marketing purposes to repopulate a troubled neighbourhood. 

Against this background, staff continue to express their dissatisfaction with the precariousness of their status, in particular the limited opportunities for career development and mobility, as well as the unfavourable pay conditions compared to colleagues in central services.

It is therefore essential to lay the foundations for a constructive social dialogue to address the concerns of agency staff in the context of renewed governance involving all stakeholders, human resources, supervisory DGs, agency management and staff representatives.

Executive agencies: what’s next?

Executive Agencies: the mobilisation of staff has borne fruit, but the problems are far from being resolved

The joint mobilisation on 6 June 2023 in front of the Berlaymont building was undoubtedly a success. At the initiative of the trade union Common Front, it presented a platform of demands for the executive agencies, incorporating all the open questions, from buildings to working conditions and its essential corollary, career development, agency restructuring, including the critical situation of the EISMEA agency, which could lose a quarter of its staff.

It also highlighted the shortcomings of agency governance, which operated on an “à la carte” basis and disregarded the principles of accountability and transparency worthy of a modern civil service.

In the absence of any real social dialogue, we put forward the need for comprehensive negotiations with all the players involved: agency directors, staff representatives, the Directors-General of the supervisory DGs and the Commission’s central human resources departments.

To this end, on 6 June we sent a letter to Commissioner Hahn in charge of budget and personnel, to which we received a reply on 20 July. In his letter, Commissioner Hahn delivers three main messages beyond the usual rhetoric on the commitment to offer attractive career prospects to agency staff.

Firstly, while recalling some relatively symbolic new initiatives (integration of agency staff into the JPP, pilot exchange programme between the Commission and the Agencies), he recognises the need for “more flexibility in terms of career and mobility between the Commission and the Agencies”.

Secondly, with regard to the situation of EISMEA, and in particular the planned reduction in staff numbers between now and 2027, it simply notes that “DG HR, in consultation with DG RTD, the main supervisory DG, has had discussions with the Agencies, which have confirmed their solidarity and willingness to implement and evaluate concrete measures to support EISMEA staff”. This overture is to be welcomed, and would probably not have been possible without the unitary mobilisation. In essence, it means that there will be no redundancies in this agency, but that staff will be redeployed to other agencies or to the supervisory DGs.

Finally, on the subject of buildings policy and the choice of North Light, the errors of which we had repeatedly denounced, the Commissioner confined himself to recalling the general principles and justifying such choices in terms of flexible working arrangements (with the generalisation of Dynamic Collaborative Space) and greening. Despite the resistance of the staff, the relocation of the three agencies concerned will take place according to the pre-established timetable, without any real preparation having been put in place (except at the REA agency). Despite certain openings that have yet to materialise, the problems are far from resolved. Mobilisation continues.

Executive agencies : The 6 June mobilisation was a great success, but our action must continue

After two unified rallies in Covent Garden, Place Rogier, on 13 December 2022 and 31 January 2023, the long-awaited Berlaymont rally finally took place on 6 June 2023. This was the result of a lot of hard work, accompanied in the home stretch by visits to workplaces in all branches and numerous discussions to mobilise colleagues around concrete demands. The Common Front’s united call for this demonstration was actively supported by the representatives of the staff committees of the executive agencies.

It was a success in many ways. Not only because of the number of colleagues present, around 450, but above all because the mobilisation focused on the real issues affecting working conditions and staff welfare. During the rally at the Berlaymont building, a trade union delegation handed the member of Hahn’s cabinet a file containing a letter to Commissioner Hahn with our main demands.

Firstly, we insist on a reform of the governance of the social dialogue in the agencies. The forced move to the North Light building has highlighted the shortcomings of a system in which the responsibilities of the main decision-makers (the directors of the executive agencies, the directors general of the supervisory DGs, the OIB) are not clearly defined, to the point of asking who is ultimately responsible for the action in question and for the use of public money. If the legal basis is unclear, how can Community money be spent and be accountable to the budgetary authority and therefore to the European taxpayer? The operation was carried out by the OIB in conditions of financial opacity and without any real consultation of the staff concerned. The staff representatives have consistently expressed their dissatisfaction with this move, which we have always denounced as a political operation with no real economic or even environmental justification, as well as with its direct consequence – the Dynamic Collaborative Space or DCS – whose declared aim is not well-being at work but short-term budgetary savings. In order to avoid any resistance, the OIB is speeding up the process for the three sectors concerned, at least two of which are unprepared for such short deadlines.  It is therefore essential that the social dialogue now involves all the actors concerned, including DG HR and the supervisory DGs.

Secondly, job security. This is an issue that concerns all agencies, even if only one is currently affected. In this one agency alone, EISMEIA, 13 staff have been transferred to the parent DG following an IAS report and 90 jobs are at risk of being lost by 2027, i.e. almost a third of the total staff of 350. This is an unacceptable situation, especially as the agency faces an increased workload and a large budget (including the flagship €10 billion European Innovation Council programme) to manage with fewer staff. Hence the stress and anxiety among staff wondering about their future. Solutions need to be found in the framework of the social dialogue to ensure that there are no net job losses, in particular through inter-agency mobility, but also with the supervisory DGs.  This is also in the interest of the Commission, which will benefit from qualified staff in its services.  At the same time, colleagues who are transferred to DG RTD, albeit on a voluntary basis, should benefit from more favourable conditions in terms of status and rights.

Finally, career development. At present, these opportunities are very limited, as the reclassification rates are very low – for example, a GFII contract agent has to wait 8 years to be promoted to a GF III post. In addition, contract and temporary agents do not have access to the Commission’s internal competitions. Here too, we need to examine and propose a range of viable solutions – including the possibility of internal competitions based on objective criteria – to meet the legitimate aspirations of the staff concerned in the executive agencies.

We therefore want to participate in comprehensive negotiations on working conditions and welfare as part of a real and constructive social dialogue involving all stakeholders, including DG Personnel and the supervising DGs.  We are also defending the entire European civil service and its future by fighting for the rights of our colleagues in the executive agencies.

Deteriorating working conditions in executive agencies: mobilisation is needed

There are six executive agencies of the European Commission. They represent a steadily growing number of staff, now totalling 3,300 employees.

Since the beginning of their existence, they have been able to demonstrate with each new multi-annual financial framework their great agility and adaptability, both structurally and in terms of their staff. Demonstrating their high added value and efficiency in programme management, with each new framework programme they have received additional delegations. However, these new delegations have not always been accompanied by measures to ensure equal treatment with the Directorates General, or even between the agencies themselves.

This raises 4 specific issues for the staff of the Executive Agencies:

1. The recurrent and permanent issue for their staff has always been the very limited career progression;

2. The second issue is the lack of mobility opportunities;

3. Thirdly, the staff of the Agencies do not have the opportunity to access higher promotions at the statutory level;

4. Finally, the exclusion of their staff from internal competitions and other career development programmes (certification).

These issues have been raised in the framework of the European Commission’s social dialogue, to which the agencies’ staff committees and all the trade unions have been invited since this year 2022. However, they have already been discussed at length in the framework of the social dialogue established since January 2019 between the directors of the agencies and the trade union representation organisations.

Moreover, over the last two years, with the introduction of the last multi-annual financial framework and the resulting programme reforms, the working lives of staff have been profoundly affected. The working conditions of colleagues in the Executive Agencies have continued to deteriorate and the workload has increased disproportionately to the resources allocated.

A situation that U4U, like other trade unions, has never ceased to denounce. But today we are witnessing an unprecedented and unacceptable accumulation of decisions that are deteriorating in a very alarming way the working conditions of colleagues in the Agencies.

In particular:

1/ A reduction in posts, which for some agencies such as EISMEA can amount to 20% of the full-time equivalent, while the budgets to be managed are ever larger.

The EISMEA agency will lose 83 full-time equivalents (FTEs) by 2027 (331 FTEs) out of 408 FTEs in 2022.

This is a historic downsizing, which has a very significant impact on the workload of the teams as well as on the possibilities for mobility and career progression (promotion system) within the agency.

2/ In addition, the OIB is planning to force three of the four agencies (EISMEA, REA, HaDEA, ERCEA) to move from their current premises at Covent Garden, Place Rogier in Brussels (+/- 2,500 colleagues) to the North Light building at the Gare du Nord. This is despite the fact that the directors of the three agencies concerned have proposed an alternative plan, more ambitious in terms of compression of square metres than that of the OIB, asking to remain in Covent Garden. This proposal was defended in the CPPT and in social dialogue at the Commission. It is supported by the staff committees, the unions and the parent DGs. The Agencies’ staff committees have launched a petition to ask the OIB and the Commission to listen to this request. More than two thirds of the staff in the Agencies have signed the petition.

Despite all these proposals and requests for conciliation, the whole thing was dismissed out of hand by the OIB. The OIB does not listen, does not take seriously the arguments and figures put forward, imposes and forces its way through, with the Commission’s approval.

3/ Mention should also be made of the non-reopening of the very popular canteen in the Convent Garden building. Closed since the COVID, it is essential for the quality of working life of colleagues who are returning to the building in large numbers because of the sharp rise in energy prices. It is equally important for the proper functioning of the agencies’ work, with the reception in the best conditions of the many experts who come to do their evaluation work. The price of a decent and balanced lunch is now more than €20 around Rogier Square, while many shops have closed due to the crisis. The hundred or so valuation experts who visit the buildings every month cannot eat in a short time and at affordable prices either. They are disturbed and slowed down in their work; the efficiency of the agencies’ work is endangered.

All this despite the fact that the staff committees, the joint staff committee, the CPPT and the directors have repeatedly called for the reopening of this canteen.

4/ The request for a fixed monthly contribution (lump sum) to cover part of the costs incurred for telework is currently being postponed by the administration.

This option is provided for in Article 13 of the Commission’s decision on the hybrid working arrangements. The staff of the Executive Agencies is composed of CAs and TAs whose remuneration is significantly lower than that of the Commission. Thus, the decision to authorise the lump sum foreseen becomes an urgent matter. It should be noted that such a monthly lump sum of 50 euros exists in the European Parliament.

5/ Because of budget cuts, we are witnessing a desire on the part of management to limit these PCCs – despite the rights of staff guaranteed by the Staff Regulations and the GIPs. While management’s reasoning may also be linked to a better functioning of the Executive Agencies, such a gain should never be at the expense of the health and well-being of staff.

6/ Finally, it is the new human resources strategies that have been steadily eroding the rights of agency workers to progress in their careers more quickly and to impose the arrival of colleagues from central services.

Such an inter-agency HR strategy is currently being developed. Although it was conceived with the idea of being innovative and addressing the rights of the staff of the Executive Agencies (75% CA and 25% TA), it is constantly hamstrung by the imposition of provisions and rules that are supposed to apply to the seconded staff of the Commission. Thus, a specific HR strategy is needed in view of the constant development of the Executive Agencies and their high-performing staff.

Given all the efforts that have been made by all the staff, their representatives in the staff committees, by the trade unions, but also by the directors of the executive agencies, and the general systematic tendency not to listen to them and to impose budget cuts with dramatic effects on the working conditions of the staff of the agencies, we are working with other trade unions on the organisation of a unitary response. We will come back to this.


OIB briefing note on the North Light building (March 2023 – FR)

See the Appeal

Building policy

General meeting of U4U members of the European Commission’s executive agencies

Let’s fight together against the deterioration of working conditions in executive agencies

Let’s work for a united and inter-union mobilization of all staff through general assemblies in executive agencies

See the appeal

Social dialogue in executive agencies

The last quarter of 2020 saw the start of a social dialogue within the Commission’s executive agencies, which will be restructured and whose work will rise in strenght.

This should provide an opportunity for a social dialogue covering not only the ongoing restructuring but also the management of staff in terms of workload (the Commission transfers part of its activities to the agencies while wishing to make savings in terms of human resources), and in terms of career development. This dialogue, in order to be productive, must use all the opportunities provided by the Staff Regulations, since we want act in the framework of the current staff regulation.

U4U advocates a number of measures for the staff of executive agencies: Organisation of mobility between agencies, between agencies and central Commission departments, and between agencies and other inter institutional services. This mobility is positive both for the agencies and for staff who can diversify and enrich their career paths. In addition, it will allow CAs in mobility within the central services of the Commission to have even limited access to internal competitions for CAs. Finally, U4U advocates an increase in promotion rates (reclassification) and a route enabling the CAs to access temporary staff positions at the end of a period to be determined. We will come back on all our demands and on the conduct of the social dialogue in a near future.


Note à l’attention de la DG HR : Les conditions de travail au sein des Agences Exécutives – le projet de départ du « Covent Garden » (Avril 2021)

Closure of CHAFEA

Restructuring of implementing agencies: CHAFEA closes in Luxembourg

The central services are working on the mapping of the executive agencies for the 2021-2027 financial programmes. Plans are now close to being finalised and will have many implications for colleagues in the parent DGs concerned and for our colleagues in the executive agencies. In particular for CHAFEA, in Luxembourg, whose director announced to its staff last Friday that it will be closed in 2021 (provided the scenario and the MFF are approved by then).

The executive agencies, all located in Brussels, should be created or restructured to allow for synergies and efficiency gains, and to have a set of executive agencies more balanced in size with more focused portfolios.

On 28 April, the College is expected to give its opinion on the envisaged new architecture before submitting it to the Executive Agencies for a final decision. This is therefore a large-scale restructuring which will not be without consequences for the staff who have only just been informed. This restructuring will affect the Commission DGs working with the Executive Agencies, since a significant part of their staff will be led to join them.

However, in January 2020, 6 executive agencies signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Commission’s trade union organisations, including CHAFEA. This agreement stipulates that any decision concerning staff is first discussed with staff representatives. The Director of CHAFEA is a signatory of this agreement, and his signature is a commitment on his part.

The restructuring in progress is therefore carried out without consulting the staff involved or their representatives: this is degree zero of social dialogue.

Without going back over the brutal way in which the agency’s staff was informed of its closure, which it is hoped will be the last of its kind, U4U asks that full information be presented to staff representatives prior to a social dialogue.

U4U calls for the opening of immediate negotiations in order to guarantee the defence of the rights of the staff who will be affected by these changes. In a context of health crisis which already favours an anxiety-provoking environment, U4U asks that our employers show exemplary behaviour in the conduct of these restructurings and the social dialogue necessary for their implementation.

U4U will play its role in protecting the rights and defending the interests of all staff affected by these restructurings, especially those who are most vulnerable due to their status as contract or temporary staff. It will contact other unions to promote action in unity.

BACKGROUND : The CHAFEA director yesterday announced to staff the closure of CHAFEA by 2021. CHAFEA, based in Luxemburg, is the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency.

The DG of SANTE announced the closure today, with relocation of staff to Brussel’ based agencies (REA, EASME, …). To all staff, this comes out of a sudden, this option of closing CHAFEA has never been discussed as a realistic option for the next MFF. Therefore, you can imagine the astonishment of staff, even more given the current situation of lockdown and teleworking.
Also the CHAFEA staff committee has not been involved at any stage of this process.


Common Staff Committee of the Executive Agencies : Open letter to Dr von der Leyen (President of the European Commission) and Dr Hahn (Commissioner for Budget and Administration) regarding the proposal on the future delegation of portfolios to Executive Agencies under the next MFF

New delegation of programs to executive agencies: a total lack of transparency, respect for colleagues and even a semblance of social dialogue!

Answer by Gertrud Ingestad and Gert Jan Koopman to the above note (12/06/2020)

Major changes announced in the field of research (17/09/2020)

Agencies Horizon Europe

Draft document

Delegation of implementation tasks to executive agencies for the 2021-27 EU programmes (April 2020)

The Court of Justice extends the powers of agencies.

In January 2014, the Court of Justice handed down a ruling that gives a broader interpretation of the “Meroni” case law. This case law drastically limited delegations of powers to clearly delimited executive powers, to avoid any shift of responsibility from the bodies provided for in the Treaties to delegating authorities. The Court now recognizes the legislator’s right to delegate its powers to legally established entities, provided that particular professional and technical expertise is required and that a reactive capacity is needed.

See the judgment and commentary.

Program management delegated to executive agencies

Conference-debate of November 8, 2013: boards presented during the session

DG HR information: IntraComm Agencies website

Attractiveness of working in the Executive Agencies – discussion paper – March 2013
NEASC reaction to the discussion paper – March 2013

Note “chapeau” (Sept 2013)

Document: Focusing on Policy Development and Impact – Re-defining the profile of DG RTD (26/10/2012)

Le 13 juillet 2012, la DG HR a annoncé une inflexion de politique concernant la gestion des programmes européens.

Le prochain cadre financier pluriannuel 2014-2020 actuellement en discussion au Parlement et au Conseil prévoit une augmentation importante des budgets alloués à certains programmes européens (50 milliards d’euros sont actuellement demandés pour Connecting Europe Facility…), dans le cadre du budget global qui, lui, ne sera qu’en faible augmentation.

La Commission propose de recourir davantage aux agences exécutives. En effet, l’évaluation de leurs performances est très positive, elles sont considérées comme un instrument de succès pour gérer ces programmes efficacement. Ceci n’induirait pas la création de nouvelles agences, mais un développement de l’action des agences existantes.

Bien entendu, il faut un accord législatif pour ce faire ainsi qu’une décision concernant le cadre financier pluriannuel, ce qui reporte à janvier 2014 la mise en œuvre de ces décisions. Néanmoins, la Commission prépare ce mouvement en :

  • providing for a cost/benefit analysis
  • proposing a common framework for agency management in the draft reform of the Staff Regulations
  • preparing a program for the secondment of civil servants to the agencies. This program would affect DGs CLIMA, CONNECT, COMM, DEVCO, EAC, ELARG, ENER, ENTR, ENV, MOVE, RTD and SANCO.

the increased use of executive agencies will lead to changes in the organization of the services concerned. Some functions will simply be transferred to the agencies, others will be reshaped or abolished, while supervisory functions will have to be introduced. As a result, some posts will be eliminated in return for a substantial increase in the number of agency staff (from 50% to 60%).

No civil servant will be forced to accept a secondment, but this could constitute a career opportunity.

This announcement by the Commission, immediately confirmed by an e-mail from C. Day and I. Souka to all staff, poses a major challenge. Souka to all staff, raises several questions:

  • Will staff be involved, in accordance with the principles of participative management, in studies to review processes and structures?
  • What are the real career prospects for seconded officials? How will their eventual return to the Commission be organized?
  • How can agency staff be represented on the Central Personnel Committee?
  • How can we better manage the inter-agency and inter-institutional mobility of CAs, while preserving the benefit of their grade and seniority?
  • What is the boundary between program execution and the political definition of that same program? There is an obvious interaction between these two aspects, particularly in terms of feedback from the field, which must feed into periodic policy adjustments.
  • Similarly, we need to organize staff rotation to ensure that the two worlds (policy definition and execution) are not totally separated, and that expertise is as comprehensive as possible.

This is an essential debate. Until now, employee consultation on these subjects has been very weak, when it has taken place at all.