Skip to content
Home > Staff > Temporary Agents

Temporary Agents

Social dialogue on the rules for the hiring of temporary agents:

What have we achieved for temporary agents but also for contract agents?

Information meeting, this Tuesday, February 11 at 5:15 p.m.
online: https://u4unity.webex.com/meet/jps
or in person: meeting room 1/140 (1st floor) building J70, rue Joseph II 70

After more than two years of discussions, first in administrative consultation (with the administration) then in technical consultation (with the Director General of Human Resources), the representative trade unions are called upon to indicate next week whether they can agree to the proposal that is now on the table for a new decision on the conditions of engagement of temporary agents or whether they wish to continue the negotiation at the level of political consultation (with the Commissioner in charge of administration).
 
Before taking a position on this subject, we would like to inform you and hear from you, as we have always done, in the context of a public meeting, online or in person at our premises. As a reminder, from the start of the discussions on this subject, U4U was the first trade union to demand that the revision of the rules for the engagement of temporary agents also be an opportunity to integrate into the decision being prepared a set of provisions aimed at facilitating the transition of contract agents to temporary agent positions. These positions are indeed, as you know, more advantageous in terms of remuneration and access to internal competitions.
 
We have immediately called, in the context of this same discussion, for a more global reflection aimed at implementing the promises made in the 2022 human resources strategy – developed in communication C(2022)2229 – to offer better career prospects to temporary and contract staff.
 
Several other trade union organisations favoured “defensive” demands instead, such as the establishment of a fixed maximum threshold for the number of temporary staff hired at the Commission, in the vain hope that this would contribute to the defence of a permanent civil service whose members should be recruited by competition. This “calculation” according to which recruiting one less temporary staff member (or for a shorter period) could guarantee the recruitment of one more civil servant made little sense from the outset since the total number of civil servants who can be recruited is set out in the establishment plan. This “plan” is a budgetary decision, over which the Commission only exercises a proposal influence. Consequently, recruiting one less temporary agent will not allow the person concerned to be recruited as a civil servant, if no post is provided for this purpose, but on the contrary risks forcing a large number of people who are currently recruited as temporary agents to be recruited in the future only under the less advantageous status of contract agents.
 
Those of you who have followed this file from the beginning will remember that Generation 2004 joined us in our demands, as other organisations gradually did.
 
Now that we have received the final proposal, closing the “technical consultation” with the Director-General for Human Resources, we can see that considerable progress has been made.
 
The text thus explicitly mentions that the Commission recognises the interest in “improving career prospects (for contract staff) and “offering opportunities” to contract staff who apply for temporary staff positions. It also mentions a series of measures aimed “as far as possible” but taking into account that “the objective (is) to achieve an annual frequency”, at organising more internal competitions.
 
These elements are real victories, but we have now to transform them into concrete realisations.
 
Finally, we are pleased that the proposed decision continues to offer, in cases motivated by the needs of the services, possibilities for derogations allowing certain temporary staff contracts to be extended beyond the planned duration limits.
 
Maintaining this practice, which already exists, will probably allow some of the agents concerned to extend their term of engagement and this is something that seems to us to be going in the right direction (we have already explained how distressing it is to see colleagues who have provided quality work for six or seven years being forced to leave the institution with, beyond the personal consequences that this may have for them, negative effects on the morale of their teams and the organization of their services).
 
However, we continue to believe that what continues to fall under the derogation, even generalized, must be included in a clear and precise rule.
 
Finally, in parallel with the draft decision that was communicated to us, we also note that in a recent interview published on MyIntraComm (05-02-2025), the Director General of Human Resources, Stephen Quest, mentioned the upcoming publication of a new schedule of internal competitions that would offer career progression opportunities for assistants to administrator positions. He also mentioned competitions open to AST-SC but without mentioning in their case the possibility, for example, of moving to AST level positions (or even, for some, possibly in two stages, to AD level positions) as well as competitions open to contract agents. In principle, he also stressed his desire to open up more career prospects for the most deserving non-permanent contract agents (AC and AT).
 
These are statements that we welcome as they deserve but while keeping in mind that, as they say, we should go further. If we want to fully realize the promises made in the 2022 human resources strategy, it is urgent to extend and systematize career opportunities for all, to which we are finally beginning to timidly open the door.
 
This is why we continue to fight and demand without delay:
 
– the extension of the limits provided for non-permanent positions (by extending it beyond the 7 years currently provided for)
– the establishment of explicit rules on the frequency of internal competitions
 
We will decide with you whether we pursue these demands by moving to political consultation with the Commissioner or whether, instead, we ask the administration to quickly open new discussions, this time focusing not on temporary agents in particular but on all precarious statuses in the institution.
 
More fundamentally, we continue to believe that it is only by remaining united and supportive across all categories of staff (contract agents, temporary, SC assistants, assistants, administrators and managers) that we will best defend the European civil service.
 
During this period of elections to the Commission Staff Committee in Brussels, the largest in terms of the number of elected representatives, we remind the colleagues concerned that by voting, they are strengthening the weight of staff representation. By voting for the organisation that best represents the interests of all our colleagues, without focusing on categorical interests, they are also giving themselves the best chance of effectively defending their future and career prospects.
 
More than ever, we need a strong Europe and this Europe needs a civil service that is up to the challenges it faces.
 
Help us make this message heard!
If you appreciate our work, please consider becoming a member of U4U.       

07/02/2025

Junior Professionals Programme – JPP

JPP Decision

On 13 December 2022, the College has adopted the JP​P Decision​, with the following main novelties to the programme: 

  • duration of the Temporary Agent contract offered to the Junior Professionals (JPs) upon selection will be 3 years, 
  • ​eligibility criteria will include candidates from​​ Executive Agencies,
  • clarified rules for accounting the PhD as professional experience,
  • strengthened preselection process.

JPP Pilot

Agents Temporaires

Pension rights in the event of a change of Agency

Does starting to work for a new post-reform agency in 2014 mean that temporary agents who started their careers before reform will be subject to the Union’s new system of pension rights?

This question is not without interest. Indeed, remember that, in the context of the last reform of the Staff Regulations, the legislator increased the retirement age and consequently reduced the percentage of annuities accumulated over the career. The new temporary agent thus contributes 1.8%/year (instead of the pre-reform 2% of 2004 and the 1.9% of the intermediate period).

We thought that the problem had been settled since the Torné judgment (T-127/17 delivered on 14 December 2018) and that the Commission would comply with the interpretation endorsed by the Tribunal. This is not the case.

One case, we hope, will have the merit of clarifying this aspect. Several agencies have shown their support for the agents by intervening voluntarily.

One of our members recently submitted an action for annulment against the decision of its AHCC to apply the new pension scheme to it. The debate mainly concerns the notion of “entry into service” within the meaning of the provisions of the RAA. This notion is indeed key in the context of the assessment of the transitional measures established during the 2014 reform.

Is it an entry into service within the Union or is it an entry into a particular institution or agency? The latter hypothesis would result in a different starting point being taken into account when, as in the case of the member currently in dispute, a staff member agrees to be transferred from one agency to another as part of the implementation of the provisions promoting inter-agency mobility.

This is a crucial temporal factor in the analysis of pension rights: should pension rights be considered to revolve around any new contract irrespective of the question of contribution to the Union’s pension system? Should we therefore exclude any element of continuity when a temporary agent continues his career in another agency, uninterruptedly, without taking account of his entry into service within the Union itself?

Neither the Staff Regulations nor the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants expressly define the concept of entry into service, a matter which the Tribunal already addressed in Case T-127/17. However, the Tribunal laid down the principle that that concept must be interpreted in the light of the objectives pursued by the rules of the Union concerned, that is to say, those relating to pension rights.

The Commission endeavours to refuse to transpose the lessons of the Torné judgment to temporary staff who analyse this concept of entry into service in the context of the assessment of the rules on recruitment and hide behind budgetary imperatives.

No consideration whatsoever can justify different treatment of a member of staff who, however, like his fellow official, has begun to contribute continuously to the Union’s pension scheme as soon as he signs his first contract in the service of an institution.

We are following this case closely and will keep you informed of the conclusions of the Tribunal.

Staff policy for temporary staff

Meeting the needs of the institution without calling into question the permanent nature of the public service and the interests of temporary or contractual staff !The Commission’s administration proposes to the staff representatives a review of the GIP Temporary Agents (TA) with a twofold concern: to better define their usage while meeting the needs of the services, which also meets our concern.On this last point, all the DGs, consulted, have just given their full agreement. In contrast, the discussions with staff representatives stalled somewhat at first because of their reluctance to conclude this issue with the current Commission.U4U considers that this new GIP must be included in the overall policy for contract and temporary staff, including clear and predictable internal competition rules:
reduce the number of contract staff by providing to the most deserving more rewarding TA career opportunities that recognize their work and their skills;
respond quickly to the need of the services when the reserve lists do not allow it, for lack of laureates, or when specialized skills are lacking;
use temporary staff on contractual terms that are more in line with the tasks to be performed;
avoid situations of professional under-classification;
be compatible with the strengthening of a permanent civil service.In the short or medium term, a new policy of non-permanent staff (TA, CA) combining the interest of the service and of the staff needs to be defined, as is the case with EUIPO in Alicante:
contract employees are hired only from function group 3,
function groups 2 are replaced by AST / SC,
all non-permanent staff (CA or TA) benefit from contracts of up to 10 years during which they may pass several general or internal competitions, or even for some to be extended,
Those who are neither prolonged nor winners of competitions, leave the institution but with the right to a minimum pension,
In this way, it avoids the turnover that hinders the services, preserving the interest of the staff in the perspective of a permanent civil service composed mainly of civil servants.Political consultation at the level of the competent commissioner is foreseen in the short term, allowing the implementation of this DGE before the new Commission takes office.11/09/2019