The Link n°117

For a Commission that defends its values and its “raison d’être”: meeting with Commissioner P. Serafin

The various comments from different OSPs highlight the fear felt by staff regarding the Large-Scale Review. This fear is understandable given the lack of clarity surrounding the problem and the objective, and the absence of a shared understanding between staff and management.  Staff are greatly concerned about the potential answers to the questions they have posed. U4U/USHU suggests overcoming these apprehensions by setting out the proposals put forward by staff members.

Message of U4U/USHU to the Commissioner SERAFIN

For U4U, the starting point is a pessimistic analysis of the economic and political situation. At the geopolitical level, we are witnessing a continuous deterioration.

Our budget as it stands will not give us the means to accomplish everything that would be desirable.

In this context, we shall rely on ourselves to accomplish what is essential. We are like a lighthouse in the dark night.

The LSR provides a unique opportunity to improve our functioning and increase our collective effectiveness in the service of European integration.

This will be achieved if we seek to increase the internal cohesion of our staff, as well. This will require taking their expectations into account. Effectiveness and internal cohesion go hand in hand.

Without going into detail, based on our 13 groups of proposals and the 1,500 responses to our questionnaire received to date, we can identify five main areas for action:

1. Being part of an organisation that defends its values, and its raison d’être is a position supported by 95% of respondents to our questionnaire, while only 47% believe that this is the case.
2. Better treatment of contract and temporary staff is the second area for improvement. These staff members are very useful to our institutions and deserve to benefit from career prospects and mobility. A call from 1,600 colleagues provides answers on this subject.
3. The situation of decentralised and executive agencies must be improved. The Commission should take direct responsibility for managing several of the functions of decentralised agencies (combating harassment, mediation, disciplinary investigations, organising mobility, etc.). Executive agencies could become offices within the Commission. Social dialogue should also be strengthened, as it is virtually non-existent in most agencies.
4. A fourth area for action is the improvement and diversification of recruitment, the induction of new staff, the transformation of organisational practices and the management of teleworking, which must not hinder collaborative working.
5. Finally, personnel policies aimed at enabling career progression and skills development provide the basis for a fifth project, which should also include the creation of an internal European school of administration with expanded skills and roles.
   
   

USHU represents colleagues working in delegations outside the Union, including civil servants, temporary staff, and many contract and local staff.

These colleagues are currently particularly concerned about the process of reorganising the delegations. This process is being implemented without any meaningful social dialogue, and with very limited and delayed communication.

In this regard, we would like to point out that a strike notice[1] was filed this morning by all the organisations at this meeting, precisely in the hope of finally opening the necessary dialogue.

Unfortunately, this lack of dialogue, and this disregard for the reality of the delegations, is also evident in the context of the large-scale review.

This situation is even more regrettable given that the Union needs to strengthen its presence in the world more than ever in the current political context.

However, although the large-scale review primarily focuses on central services, it will inevitably have a significant impact on delegations. Therefore, it is difficult to understand why they are not formally included in the exercise.

This exclusion appears to be part of a wider trend. In particular, I am thinking of the fact that delegation staff are also excluded from the remit of the Chief Confidential Adviser.

Therefore, we would like to make it clear that services cannot be effective without consistent decision-making and cohesion between services, whether in Brussels or elsewhere in the EU.

We therefore urge the various working groups to consider the impact of their deliberations on delegation staff.

We also insist that the measures resulting from the large-scale review should not negatively affect the delegations. Now is not the time to reduce our international presence.

Reducing staff numbers or budgets in the delegations would expose the Union to considerable risks.

Furthermore, as the work of Commission staff and the European External Action Service (EEAS) in the delegations is closely interdependent, it is crucial that the EEAS is involved in the review process.

---

[1] Notice of strike on 30 January 2026

---

---

Call for contributions to the Commission’s large-scale review (LSR) exercise – Our survey

On 30 January, the leaders of the staff representative organisations met with Commissioner Piotr Serafin to discuss the Large-Scale Review (LSR), which was conducted by the Commission’s Directorate-General for Human Resources (DG HR) with the support of a committee of experts led by former Secretary-General Catherine Day.

One of the issues addressed by the various working groups responsible for this review is that of the values and raison d’être of our institutions.

This issue is particularly important given that 95% of our colleagues agree that ‘it is important for them to be part of an organisation that strongly defends its values and purpose’. (GRASPE survey, December 2025-January 2026 – 1,600 respondents).

However, in the same survey, only 47% of respondents said that they believed the Commission was an organisation that strongly defended its values and purpose. Just over 52% of staff personally agree with the values defended by the Commission.

When asked whether the Commission treats its staff in accordance with the values it promotes in the world of work, such as duty of care, protection against harassment and protection of health at work, only 43% of respondents said they totally or partially agreed.

Taking all this into account, our organisation played an important role in the ‘Purpose and Values’ working group organised by the Central Staff Committee, representing the staff’s point of view during the Large-Scale Review.

In this context, we proposed that the administration take the following ideas into account when working on this exercise:

• The Commission should set an example to its Member States and partners in terms of respect for fundamental values, as defined in Article 2 of the EU Treaty and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. As is the case in other areas, this aspect should be monitored by a high-level group of experts.
• The Commission should publish, alongside all its proposals and decisions, an explanation of how these proposals contribute to the promotion or development of its fundamental values.
• Social dialogue is one of the values promoted by the Commission. The Commission should assess the social dialogue practices of its Member States and adopt the best ones.
• Respect for human health is one of the Commission’s objectives and values. The Commission should adopt the highest possible health and safety standards at work.

Take part in GRASPE’s Large Scale Review survey!

Would you like to participate in our survey on the various aspects of the Large-Scale Review? There is still time to complete the questionnaire: 

https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/graspe-lsr

---

Today local staff, tomorrow contract and temporary staff?

The true face of precarious employment at the European Commission

U4U has long campaigned against the situation faced by staff on precarious contracts, particularly contract, local and temporary staff. We often highlight the limitations imposed on them in terms of the duration of their contracts (a maximum of seven years at the Commission), the consequences of these limitations for their pension rights (since pensions are generally only granted to staff with a career of at least ten years), and the trend of having contract staff perform work similar to civil servants’ work under much less favourable conditions of employment and remuneration. This is in direct contravention of the principle that two people should receive equal pay for equal work.

The recent dismissal of dozens of local staff in European Union delegations in the Western Balkans without redeployment or support measures, and without negotiation or social dialogue, is a worrying trend. It would appear that staff on precarious contracts have become a mere variable for administrative adjustments, and that it is now possible to terminate their contracts abruptly and unilaterally.

This trend is all the more worrying given that the budgetary resources required to extend several programmes included in the current MFF, such as the Recovery and Resilience Facility, InvestEU and React EU, beyond 2027 are not guaranteed. This could therefore also put the jobs of contract staff employed under these budget lines at risk.

Several hundred local and contract staff positions appear to be at risk today.

In view of this situation, U4U is calling for:

• The cancellation of collective redundancy measures against local staff in the Western Balkans.
• The immediate opening of a social dialogue to explore alternatives to redundancies in the context of the ongoing delegations restructuring.
• The opening of a broader social dialogue on the issue of the management of precarious contracts (particularly those affecting local, contract and temporary staff) within the Commission, with the aim of improving job security and career prospects for those affected.

We have filed a strike notice together with other trade unions based on these demands, which would force the administration to initiate a social dialogue process.

---

Everyone, in defence of contract and temporary staff: sign the petition

U4U supports the appeal by the Collective of Temporary and Contract Staff, which has already collected 2,000 signatures from staff in all categories. Our colleagues deserve improved career prospects, mobility and employment opportunities, too. The current Large-Scale Review at the Commission should also serve to increase staff cohesion by taking their expectations into account. Staff unity is our strength!

CONTRACT AND TEMPORARY STAFF COLLECTIVE, CALL FOR SIGNATURES

In a context of budgetary constraints, our collective aims to mobilise contract and temporary staff, a valuable human resource for our institution. Our institutions have openly declared their intention to continue using and increase the number of these staff.

According to senior Commission officials (Secretariat-General and Commissioner), these staff members make an essential contribution to the smooth running of the institution. In recognition of their contribution, they are entitled to career prospects and mobility, as well as a reasonable chance of permanent access to the civil service.

The demands below reflect this political approach and will improve the situation of those on precarious contracts and temporary staff, as well as successfully mobilising them. The aim is to propose solutions to their situation:

• On the one hand, the institution is undertaking an assessment of its functioning by establishing the high-level group led by Ms Catherine Day.
• On the other hand, the trade unions are themselves contributing to the work of this group.

We call on all staff categories to express their support. Unity among staff is the best way to defend their status and working conditions. Let us stand together!

If you agree with the following, please send us your agreement by return email to this address, whether you are a civil servant (AST-SC/AST/AD), temporary staff or contract staff:

REP-PERS-COLLECTIF-DES-CONTRACTUELS@ec.europa.eu

1. Fixed-term staff
   • Automatic reclassification, within the same function group, of all contract staff after three years of service for all contract staff, before their contract is extended for a further three years.
   • The possibility of obtaining, after a maximum of six years as a contract agent or temporary agent (or vice versa), of obtaining a pension, according to terms to be defined, i.e. a total of up to 12 years, thereby entitling the employee to.
   • Reform of the administrative rule against multiple employment, which currently limits the presence of AC and AT staff to seven years, with some exceptions, to allow for the succession of contracts from contract staff to temporary staff.
   • The organisation of three internal competitions for permanent positions over six years, for contract staff with at least two years’ service.
   • The organisation of one internal competition each year for permanent appointment for temporary staff. The seniority requirement for temporary staff is one year, meaning there will be five competitions in six years.
   • The organisation of two internal competitions for temporary staff and civil servants over five years, which will speed up promotion and, where applicable, permanent appointment.
   • The right for all children who attended European schools for at least two years to complete their current cycle (nursery, primary or secondary) free of charge, should their parent working in the institutions reach the end of their contract and be unable to renew it.
   • Improvement of mechanisms enabling interinstitutional mobility such as the establishment of an interinstitutional job market.
2. Permanent staff in offices, non-Union offices and representation offices
   • Organisation of transfers between functional groups (e.g. from GFI to GFII or from GFII to GFIII).
   • Opportunity to participate in regular internal competitions for permanent positions.
   • Organisation of transfers from AC to AT.
   • Improvement of mechanisms enabling interinstitutional mobility, such as the establishment of an interinstitutional job market.
   • Increase the length of service at headquarters for contract staff outside the union from 4 years to 6 years.
3. Executive agencies
   • Organisation of transfers from AC to AT.
   • Transformation of agencies into offices, granting contract and temporary staff the right to participate in internal competitions for permanent positions and to transfer between the Commission’s Directorates-General.
   • Improvement of mechanisms enabling interinstitutional mobility, including the establishment of an interinstitutional job market.
4. Decentralised agencies
   •  The introduction of a proportion of civil servants where this does not currently exist would encourage transfers from AC to AT, and from AT to AST or AD.
   • Transfers between categories for AC, AST-SC, AST and AD staff.
   • Establishment of central services co-managed with the Commission to oversee anti-harassment services, mobility organisation, disciplinary investigations, and so on, for all agencies.
5. Creation of Offices

This applies not only at the JRC, but also at the European Parliament, where certain contract staff are permitted:

• benefit from permanent contracts.
• Move from FGI to FGII without losing their permanent contracts, as the offices allow this.

Indeed, there are contract workers at the JRC and the EP today who could
have permanent positions in an office, but their institution or service does not create them.

The purpose of this list of demands is to inform the social dialogue. These demands are compatible with the current Staff Regulations and do not require any reform. Such a reform would not guarantee that the demands would be met, and there is a high risk of a downward revision of the current provisions relating to pensions, promotions and remuneration.

We believe that any reflection on the functioning of our institutions must involve staff, which is why we have taken this approach.

Regardless of their department or particular situation, we believe that AC and AT staff should benefit from career prospects and mobility, as should all staff.

We ask all staff to show solidarity and sign this appeal.

Our strength lies in staff unity and solidarity across categories.

---

Nurseries in Brussels are less accessible during the summer?

During its plenary meeting on 13 January 2026, the Brussels Local Staff Committee examined a proposal submitted to COCEPE at the request of U4U. COCEPE is the joint interinstitutional committee responsible for issuing opinions on matters relating to interinstitutional nurseries and kindergartens.

The proposal aims to amend the rules applicable to early childhood facilities in Brussels. Notably, it would permit nurseries and kindergartens to close during European Commission holidays and “any other periods in line with the practices of Belgian nurseries and kindergartens in Brussels”, provided these are communicated to parents in advance.

The objective is to facilitate the integration of Belgian early childhood care system nurseries into the services coordinated by the OIB through tendering processes. This approach is of real interest as it could enable many staff members to access childcare solutions closer to home.

However, this development raises several major questions. Staff members have expressed concerns about an increased risk of temporary closures and greater difficulty accessing childcare services, particularly during the summer months. The fear is that, taken together, these periods of closure will effectively reduce the continuity of the service offered to families.

Furthermore, the proposal appears to remove the obligation for the OIB to consult the COCEPE before deciding to close a facility. This raises questions about the governance of the system and the role of joint bodies in decision-making processes that directly impact the professional and family lives of staff.

In this context, we must not forget the important social function of interinstitutional crèches and nurseries, and the need to provide them with adequate funding.

If certain nurseries run by private providers were to close during Belgian public holidays, the Council or Parliament would have to propose adequate alternative solutions. These could include access to Council- or Parliament-organised nurseries for Commission staff, for example.

Finally, the central role of COCEPE in managing and orienting childcare policies must be emphasised, as must the fact that this body should be systematically consulted in advance on any decision affecting childcare service organisation.

---

The statutory elections in Luxembourg have finished

The elections to appoint the new Commission Staff Committee in Luxembourg have just finished. U4U has emerged stronger.

In these elections, we were able to present a more complete list of 13 pairs out of 20. Almost one in ten voters supported us. Two pairs of candidates were elected (two full members and two alternates). One of these representatives will join the Central Staff Committee.

This evolving result cements our presence in Luxembourg. Our presence is not limited to the Commission. We have also strengthened our position in the European Parliament. We have also recently applied for recognition by the Court of Auditors, where we have four elected representatives. Our representative within this institution also chairs the Staff Committee.

What is important for us now is that the Staff Committee starts its work. It must start working quickly. During these elections, the voters sent us a strong signal when the voting period had to be extended for the first time in order to reach a quorum.

U4U has proposed that the R&D/FFPE, USF and Generation 2004 lists work together on a project defending, among other things:

•  The continuation of the housing allowance, as well as its extension to other categories who are currently deprived of it.
• Improving the situation of contract staff, which requires reforming the anti-cumulation rule that limits the length of their contracts.
• The rejection of the new status reform, which poses a danger to all staff.
• Finally, there has been an improvement in working and living conditions in Luxembourg.

We will keep staff informed about the outcome of this process.

---

Towards a Harmonised System for the Prevention and Monitoring of Psychological and Sexual Harassment in Decentralised Agencies?

In December last year, the Assembly of Agency Staff Committees (AASC) wrote to Commissioner Piotr Serafin, requesting the appointment of a senior confidential adviser for all agencies. U4U supports this initiative, considering it essential for guaranteeing an equal level of protection against all types of harassment for all staff members, regardless of their place of work.

ASSEMBLY OF AGENCY STAFF COMMITTEES (AASC)

THE SECRETARIAT

Note for the Attention of Mr Piotr Serafin,

Commissioner for Budget, Anti-Fraud, and Public Administration

Subject: Chief Confidential Counsellor’s role in Decentralised Agencies.

Dear Commissioner Serafin,

The Assembly of Agency Staff Committees represents via its members more than 16 000

colleagues of the Decentralized and Executive Agencies of the European Union. During its last

General Assembly held at ENISA in Athens, on 27-28 November, we discussed the development

and design of a harmonised, effective, and independent system for preventing and addressing

psychological and sexual harassment.

We consider it of particular importance to safeguard a uniform approach for all agencies aligned

with the standards and practices of the European Commission. Ensuring an equal level of

protection against all types of harassment for all staff, irrespective of their place of employment,

is a core concern for us. The existence of an external and independent supervisory function, such

as the Chief Confidential Counsellor, is key to ensuring such equal protection across agencies.

Moreover, the appointment of a common Chief Confidential Counsellor for all agencies will allow

detection of systemic problems and enable us to address potential mal- functioning in a more

strategic way. Given the willingness of the current Commission’s Chief Confidential Counsellor,

Ms. Næsager, to extend her services to decentralised agencies, the AASC would like to advocate,

on behalf of its members, for her role to be extended, without exception, to all agencies. The

Model Decision, currently being drafted, should not allow for alternative solutions whereby

individual agencies would be allowed to create stand-alone systems. From experience, we know

that any system within the agencies that does not rely on external resources when it comes to

addressing harassment, is destined to fail.

We firmly believe that cooperation between the Commission’s Chief Confidential Counsellor

and the Decentralized Agencies, inspired by the agreements that have already been reached with

the Executive Agencies, will be a valuable step towards institutional harmonisation, better

protection mechanisms, and operational efficiency.

We trust this input will contribute constructively to the broader interinstitutional dialogue and

remain at your disposal for further exchanges on this important matter.

Yours sincerely,

Gregor Schneider	Isidoros Tsouros	Paul Wouters
AASC Chairperson	Member of  AASC Secretariat	AASC Secretary General
[e-signed] [e-signed] [e-signed]	[e-signed]	[e-signed] [e-signed]

---

OIL at the FISR: what is the assessment after three months in this building?

We would like to express our gratitude to our colleagues at OIL (approximately 380 people), whose service and dedication to the other Directorates-General in Luxembourg is greatly appreciated! Their working conditions deserve attention and care. Since last November, some 240 of them have been working in the Fischer building. This building was chosen at short notice due to the contractual obligation to vacate the previous building (Ariane A) quickly, combined with the delay in the availability of JMO2. However, staff should have access to a high-quality working environment.

We have identified several challenges, which we have communicated to the OIL and reiterate here.

The usual feedback exercise after 100 days in a new workspace will soon be launched, and we hope that it will lead to concrete solutions.

The various areas of concern are as follows:

Insufficient parking spaces

Due to the nature of their work, our colleagues at the ILO need to come to the office more regularly than those in other directorates-general, with some attending daily. However, parking seems to be a major challenge for them. While the Where2Park app is useful for requesting a parking space, spaces are very limited. FISR has 40 spaces for 170 workstations (to be shared by around 240 colleagues), which equates to a ratio of 24%. It should be noted that the nearby MERCIER-POST (MERP) building has an even lower ratio of parking spaces: 18% (118 spaces for 650 workstations).

The narrow entrance to the car park at both the FISR and the MERP can cause fear of damaging one’s car, thus discouraging some people from driving to the office, even though the use of a car is necessary for many colleagues. It should also be remembered that the high cost of housing in Luxembourg often prevents people from living closer to their workplace, resulting in public transport commutes that often exceed an hour. Added to this are family obligations: some colleagues have to drop their children off at nursery or school before going to the office, which reduces the capacity of public transport.

Questions about the scarcity of parking spaces:

• Is it possible to rent parking spaces in a secure car park near the FISR building? For example, is there one on Fort Wedell Street?
• Is it possible to implement a more flexible management system for parking space reservations to free up spaces where no-shows are detected?

Notice to FISR colleagues: always check the Where2Park app to see if there are any spaces available at MERP. Even though colleagues working there have priority, you may sometimes find a space.

Catering

Apart from a few coffee and snack machines (which are not ideal for healthy eating), the old cafeteria is used as a lunch area. Admittedly, the MERP canteen is a 5-minute walk away, but sometimes colleagues’ busy schedules mean that the ten-minute walk there and back is not possible.

Questions :

• Would it be possible to set up a cafeteria offering sandwiches at lunchtime? This would improve comfort and well-being in the workplace?
• Also, would it be possible to reopen the old passageway between the FISR building and Rue du Fort Wedell to shorten the distance between the two buildings?
• Why not organise an exchange with OP colleagues who have worked in this neighbourhood for years and have more experience? This would allow you to share tips and best practices?

A feeling of insecurity in the neighbourhood
Safety in the workplace is a major concern. Colleagues’ feelings of insecurity are exacerbated by regular encounters with people using illegal substances near the main entrance, visible prostitution in the surrounding streets, and constant attempts at pickpocketing and bag snatching. In fact, these issues can deter people from leaving the building to visit the MERP canteen.

Questions :

• Why not organise an exchange with OP colleagues who have worked in this neighbourhood for years and have more experience? This would allow you to share tips and best practices?

• Finally, could we organise information and exchange sessions with the local police? These sessions could be used to raise concerns, provide training and reassurance to OIL and possibly MERP colleagues about insecurity and the perception of insecurity in the Gare neighbourhood?

Concentration and distraction: the challenges of shared workspaces

The FISR building housed training rooms for many years. The current offices are located in these former training rooms. These workspaces accommodate between four and ten colleagues per room. Despite the presence of sound-absorbing panels, noise persists, increasing distraction and fatigue.

               Question :

• Would it be possible to study the acoustics in these offices and install additional sound-absorbing panels, if necessary? This would significantly help everyone to stay focused?

These concerns, which have been repeatedly expressed by our colleagues, require appropriate solutions so that all employees can work in suitable and peaceful conditions.

These spaces must be transformed into functional workspaces and pleasant living spaces through concrete initiatives.

Let us work together to create positive change in our working environment by remaining united.

Your suggestions and contributions are an invaluable driving force in improving our workspaces.

---

U4U provides high-quality preparation for both European Union and internal competitions

In 2025, the Union for Unity (U4U) continued to provide training and information to its members and to individuals interested in European Union competitions.

In this context, U4U collaborated with the National Institute of Public Service (formerly the ENA), a recognised EPSO preparatory centre.

Together, they organised 33 training sessions and several webinars on EPSO, internal AD5 and AD6, and internal European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and European External Action Service (EEAS) competitions.

Nearly 1,200 people took part in a training session or webinar.

The evaluations collected at the end of these activities show an overall satisfaction rate of 4.7/5. A total of 98% of participants said that they would recommend these training courses.

The training programme offered includes:

• self-study online modules;
• face-to-face and distance learning courses;
• thematic webinars dedicated to the various competitions;
• individual support, tailored to participants’ needs.

These measures are designed to support candidates in preparing for European Union competitions. In addition, U4U provides coaching sessions for oral exams, assistance with mobility and certification, and more.

---

BREAKING NEWS EPSO

Testing Times: The EU’s Recruitment Nightmare Continues

For those dreaming of a life in the Berlaymont, the path to becoming a European civil servant has long been paved with more than just rigorous logic puzzles and multilingualism. Increasingly, it is paved with “Error 404” messages and frozen screens.

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO), the body tasked with staffing the EU’s machinery, is currently embroiled in a digital transformation that is proving to be less of a streamlined leap forward and more of a clumsy stumble.

The new guard

In June 2025, EPSO sought to turn the page on years of IT failures by signing a framework contract with Open Assessment Technologies (OAT) S.A. as its primary provider for remote testing. Supported by Prometric Ireland Ltd as a secondary “cascade” supplier, this transition was heralded as a “candidate-centric” revolution aimed at enhancing security and user experience. The goal was a robust, flexible platform that would finally put an end to the “testing nightmare” following significant delays in 2025 caused by previous system unreliability.

A Parliament at loggerheads

The optimism was short-lived. By late 2025, the European Parliament issued a scathing resolution (2025/2880(RSP)) condemning “repeated technical, organisational and procedural shortcomings”. MEPs cited candidates suffering from “substantial mental distress” and a “loss of trust” in the recruitment process. The resolution demanded that the Commission propose fair solutions, such as “flexible and swift retesting options,” and urged the reintroduction of physical test centres to ensure a standardised environment.

The Official Line

EPSO, however, has remained largely defensive. Officials recently told the press that complaint volumes were “not alarming” and remained within industry standards. Instead of systemic failure, EPSO and its software providers have often pointed the finger at candidates, suggesting many difficulties result from “non-compliant environments”—specifically outdated hardware or insufficient RAM. For candidates who followed every instruction only to see their exams vanish into the digital ether, this response has felt less like support and more like an institutional shrug.

Disaster in the Field: The AD7 Experience

If the new provider was meant to be the “critical milestone” for stability, the AD7 Building Management competition suggests the system is still in cardiac arrest. Far from the promised “user-friendly interface,” the experience on 27 January 2026 was defined by “Total Crashes”:

Frozen Progress: Candidates reported being blocked for 10 to 15 minutes between test segments, such as between the numerical and abstract reasoning tests.

Vanishing Sessions: Many applicants encountered “Page Not Found” errors or were kicked out of the system entirely. Upon refreshing or rebooting, their exams were prematurely marked as “completed” or “finished,” preventing any further access.

Interface Absurdities: The “candidate-centric” platform delivered a jumbo-sized online calculator and scratchpad that filled the entire screen and could not be minimized.

Input Failures: Some candidates were forced to use their mouse to draw notes or click calculator buttons because their keyboards were unresponsive or deleted numbers instead of calculating them.

The Reporting Paradox: While many accept that IT glitches occur, the minimum expectation is a functional way to report them.

Conflicting Instructions: EPSO’s official complaint policy points toward a candidate contact form, yet those who reached the provider, TAO, were told to fill out a request on the “Single Candidate Portal” with proof of the failure.

The Helpdesk Void: Many spent 20 to 60 minutes on hold with TAO without an answer. Some waited over an hour only to have the call disconnected

Left in the dark, candidates resorted to asking one another in online forums whether an email would suffice as “proof” of their attempt to contact support, or if they were required to record their failed phone calls. Some even recorded their screens on speakerphone to prove the assistance line was non-responsive.

The testimony of one aspirant in the AD7 race serves as a poignant summary of the day’s systemic failure. Having prepared for the transition to the new platform, the candidate watched in horror as their computer froze during the very first test segment. Upon a desperate reboot, the system coldly informed them that the session was already “completed,” effectively disqualifying them before they could even begin. Despite possessing a high-specification machine and a stable connection—the very “compliant environment” EPSO frequently cites—they were left to languish on hold for nearly 40 minutes before finally reaching a representative. “I had heard the whispers of past technical glitches,” the candidate noted, “but I never expected the ‘fresh start’ to be so indistinguishable from the old nightmare”. For the EU’s recruitment arm, the crisis has moved beyond the server room; it is now a question of whether any talented candidate will bother to risk their professional future on a system that seems fundamentally designed to fail them.

---

---