5 European Court of Auditors' recommendations
on EU staff reforms
(a)
(34056)
11964/12
(b)
(34198)
13270/12
|
Opinion No. 5/2012 of the European Court of Auditors on the draft Regulation amending the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union
Special Report No.10/2012 of the European Court of Auditors: The effectiveness of staff development in the European Commission
|
Legal base | (a)Article 287(4) TFEU;
(b)
|
Documents originated | (a) ; (b)
|
Deposited in Parliament | (a) 2 July 2012; (b) 4 September 2012
|
Department | (a)HM Treasury;
(b)Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
Basis of consideration | (a) EM of 12 July 2012; (b) EM of 21 September 2012
|
Previous Committee Report | None
|
Discussion in Council | Not applicable
|
Committee's assessment | (a) and (b) Politically important
|
Committee's decision | (a) and (b) For debate in European Committee B
|
Document (a) - changes to the Staff Regulations
BACKGROUND
5.1 The Commission published its formal proposal for amendments
to the EU Staff Regulations on 13 December 2011. It proposes a
5% reduction of staff in each of the European Union institutions
and agencies between 2013 and 2018. To manage the effect of this
reduction and to address other staff related issues, it proposes
a number of changes to the Staff Regulations namely:
- an increase in the weekly working time to a minimum of 40
hours;
- a rise in the normal retirement age from 63 to
65 years and for early retirement age from 55 to 58 years;
- a review of the procedures for the annual adjustment
of remuneration and pensions and the annual adjustment of the
pension contribution rate;
- a change from the current special levy to a solidarity
levy of 6%;
- a redesign of the career of the assistants' function
group adding a new function group for secretaries and clerical
staff (AST/SC); and
- a limited number of other modifications which
are related to the organisation and management of staff.
5.2 The Commission's proposal estimates the financial
impact of its savings for the period 2013-2020. This consists
of:
- 1,041 million saved under
Heading V of the Multiannual Financial Framework (the MFF);
- 258 million saved outside Heading V of
the MFF;
- 30 million increase in revenue from the
special levy;
- 277 million decrease in revenue from pension
contributions; and
- 165 million decrease in revenue from tax.
5.3 In addition, savings with regard to expenditure
on pensions are expected to be in the order of 1,000 million
per annum in the long term.
5.4 The Council and the European Parliament asked
for the Court of Auditors' opinion on these proposals on, respectively,
30 January and 5 March 2012.
THE COURT OF AUDITORS' OBSERVATIONS ON THE COMMISSION'S
PROPOSAL
5.5 The Court makes the following general observations:
- the impact of the proposal
should be measured by the Commission in terms of achieving the
overall forecasted financial objective, not just by solely implementing
the reforms;
- the 5% staff reduction will result in maximum
savings only if each institution achieves a 5% reduction, rather
than just a 5% reduction overall; and
- the institutions need to consider the impact
of the staff reduction on their work, and that the proposal should
consider training, performance appraisal, promotion and grading
as ways to improve productivity of the workforce despite the cuts.
5.6 The report then makes the following observations
on specific aspects of the proposal:
- the 5% staff reduction does
not in itself mean financial savings; for example, using third
party service providers would reduce staff but not costs. The
Court therefore recommends that institutions report annually both
on steps taken to achieve the reduction, and how far they have
met the objective of reducing costs;
- the proposal for a new method for adjusting salaries
and pensions may be a faster and less complex way to calculate
the adjustment, but there needs to be consideration of the possible
financial impact of the change. The Court also notes that the
proposal increases the time-lag between Member State civil service
pay evolution, and the corresponding evolution in EU staff salaries,
and that this is not ideal;
- the proposal on flexible working-time arrangements
be extended to apply to managers, so as to make best possible
use of institutions' staff;
- the proposal for the Court of Justice to set
up a register of institutions' implementing rules is very welcome,
and the Commission should report on these rules every three years.
The Court of Auditors also recommends that the Commission establish
a procedure for prior consultation to ensure equal treatment of
staff;
- any changes to address geographical imbalances
should respect the principle of equality of EU citizens and that
no post should be reserved for nationals of a specific Member
State; and
- the new category of temporary staff for agencies
created in the proposal use selection processes in accordance
with the same principles, rigour and standards as for officials.
5.7 The report makes the following additional observations:
- OLAF investigations must not
infringe the fundamental rights of institutions' staff, and current
legal provisions must be clarified to avoid confusion about OLAF's
role on cases of serious misconduct where the EU's financial interests
are not at stake;
- the Staff Regulations should reflect recent clarifications
in the rules on the selection process as organised by The European
Personnel Selection Office;
- the Commission should carry out a consultation
with other institutions with the aim of simplifying the Staff
Regulations. This study should also examine the pay and benefits
of staff at other international organisations; and
- the Commission should improve the relationship
between citizens and the European administration through considering
the adoption of provisions for an open, efficient and independent
administration as set out in Article 298 TFEU.
THE GOVERNMENT'S VIEW
5.8 In an Explanatory Memorandum dated 12 July 2012,
the then Financial Secretary at the Treasury (Mr Mark Hoban) says
that the Government welcomes the opinion of the Court of Auditors
as a useful contribution to ongoing discussions about how to ensure
amendments to the Staff Regulations have beneficial impact.
5.9 He says the Government has been clear throughout
negotiations that it wants to see significant financial savings
result from the Staff Regulations review. It is therefore particularly
valuable to see an EU institution calling for greater focus on
the financial impact of the Commission's proposal. This analysis
could lend weight to calls from Member States for a thorough financial
impact assessment from the Commission.
5.10 The Government shares the Court's opinion that
the Commission's new proposed method would make the salary adjustment
process even less responsive to the economic situation in the
Union, and that this is therefore an unacceptable amendment to
the Staff Regulations.
5.11 The Minister concludes by saying that the UK
finds the Court's opinion to be very much in line with its own,
and hopes that the Commission will heed and respond to the advice
contained in the report.
Document (b) - staff development
BACKGROUND
5.12 This document presents the findings of an audit
by the Court which sought to evaluate staff development measures
such as formal training, informal learning and job moves in the
Commission. The report is accompanied by the Court's recommendations
and the replies of the Commission, which was notified of the preliminary
findings on 7 March 2012.
5.13 The audit investigated the staff development
opportunities provided by the Commission in order to evaluate
how well these align with organisational objectives and assess
the impact of the Commission's staff development measures on staff
and organisational performance.
5.14 The audit was based on Commission staff interviews,
opinion surveys, data from the Human Resources and Security Directorate-General
and previous Commission staff development evaluations.
THE COURT OF AUDITORS' OBSERVATIONS ON STAFF DEVELOPMENT
IN THE COMMISSION
5.15 The Court defines the premise for the report
in the following way: the Commission depends upon its 33,000 staff
in order to achieve its objectives; to perform effectively, staff
need to acquire and maintain up-to-date skills through training,
informal learning and job moves; this is particularly important
in the Commission because of the long career and low turnover
of its permanent staff.
5.16 In order to examine how effectively the Commission
enables its staff to develop the Court's audit addressed the following
four questions:
(a) Does
the Commission align staff development with organisational needs?
(b) Does
the Commission provide opportunities for staff to develop?
(c) Does
the learning environment motivate staff to develop their skills
and to apply them in the workplace?
(d) Does
the Commission evaluate the effectiveness of the actions taken
to develop staff?
5.17 The Court concludes that the Commission does
not have sufficient consolidated information on the existing skills
of its staff or the skills which they need. The introduction of
a new appraisal system in 2012 and further development of the
electronic curriculum vitae (e-CV) aim to improve the information
available on staff skills. The Commission's strategy for developing
staff does not convincingly demonstrate how development actions
will contribute to achieving the objectives of the organisation.
Likewise, individual training maps were not sharply focused on
them. Some skills gaps are not sufficiently addressed and managers
consider that some development actions, such as some language
courses and job moves, do not result in greater workplace effectiveness.
5.18 The Commission provides a wide range of opportunities
for staff to develop through training, informal learning and job
moves. In 2010, staff attended an average of 6.9 days' formal
training and spent an estimated four days on informal learning.
Each year between 2005 and 2010 on average 6% of staff moved to
another Directorate-General (DG). Staff also have considerable
opportunities to change jobs within the same DG. Nonetheless,
for the following reasons the Court concludes that the Commission
has not created a sufficiently strong learning environment to
capitalise on the extensive learning offer:
- Commission systems do not closely
monitor whether staff participate in planned development actions.
In 2010, staff attended only 35% of the courses planned in their
training maps;
- although Commission staff participated in an
average of 6.9 days' training in 2010, 30% of staff participated
in less than two days' training. Older staff on higher grades
generally participate in less training;
- there are high absence and dropout rates from
language courses;
- the Commission's own staff and managers deliver
some training courses (16% of general and IT training) but not
enough to demonstrate that the organisation attaches a high value
to staff development;
- there is only limited support to apply new skills
in the workplace.
- the appraisal and promotion system in place until
2011 did not sufficiently distinguish between good performers
who develop their skills and poor performers who do not. The new
system introduced in 2012 aims to make a clearer distinction and
not to promote those whose performance is below average.
5.19 The Commission measures the satisfaction of
staff with development actions. However, it does not assess whether
staff have attended necessary training. Nor does it assess whether
they have acquired new skills (with the exception of language
and certification training). There are some attempts to evaluate
the utility of development actions in the workplace. However,
these are mainly based on the opinions of staff. Managers are
rarely asked for their opinion on the effectiveness of training
undertaken by their staff and there is little use of objective
indicators. The Commission does not evaluate the impact of development
actions on organisational results. Consequently, it does not have
the information necessary to demonstrate the contribution of development
actions to achieving organisational objectives or to inform decisions
on where to target learning and development resources.
5.20 On the basis of these observations the Court's
main recommendations are that the Commission should:
- ensure it has sufficient consolidated
information on existing staff skills and on those needed to meet
future challenges and prepare a strategy which convincingly demonstrates
how learning and development will contribute to the achievement
of organisational goals;
- support this process through improvements to
the systems for planning training and job moves;
- develop its systems for monitoring participation
in development actions;
- address the issue of underperformance and encourage
greater participation in the wide range of development opportunities
available while recognising staff who develop their skills and
those of others;
- test and certify the acquisition of new skills
where practicable, and support their application in the workplace
by providing follow-up activities; and
- evaluate how effectively development actions
provide staff with new skills which they are able to apply in
the workplace.
THE GOVERNMENT'S VIEW
5.21 In a brief Explanatory Memorandum dated 21 September
2012 the Minister for Europe says that the findings within this
report support the UK's view that further reforms to career structures
and supporting systems within the Commission would be beneficial,
both in terms of attracting high quality applicants to the EU
institutions, and in promoting general staff effectiveness and
efficiency. The Government will keep the Commission's response
to this report under review within wider discussions on staffing,
and will encourage the Commission to make use of the report's
findings wherever possible. In addition, it will continue to share
information on UK approaches to non-statutory systems such as
appraisals and training with Commission representatives, in order
to promote further modernisation of EU career structures.
Conclusion
5.22 Although no formal legislative or financial
consequences flow from these helpful reports from the European
Court of Auditors, we note their relevance to the current negotiations
on EU staff reforms and salary increases. We therefore recommend
them for debate in European Committee B, together with the Commission's
report on the 2012 salary adjustment for EU staff (document 13327/12)
reported in the following chapter.
|