|
Appraisal and Promotion 2010
Closure of the Exercise
This Administrative Notice concludes the 2010 appraisal and promotion
exercise by publishing the list of promoted officials. It also invites all
officials to consult their promotion file and take notice of the final
results.
In the appeal phase, the Joint Appraisal and Promotion Committees (JAPCs)
examined in total 3349 appeals against the appraisal report and/or the
promotion points. They attentively examined these appeals and rendered
recommendations, which in 94% of the cases were adopted by consensus. In
the vast majority of cases, the Appeal Assessor and the Appointing
Authority subsequently followed these recommendations. 44 appeals have not
yet been closed following various delays at different stages of the
procedure.
In the 2010 exercise, the Commission was able to surpass the number of
promotions achieved in 2009. In total, 5429 officials (5126 in 2009) that
met the eligibility criteria for promotion reached or passed the
threshold, which corresponds to a promotion rate of 25.1% (24.2% in 2009).
This number of promotions could be achieved while complying with the
promotion thresholds set forth in the convergence plan. In addition, the
thresholds for the end of career grades, which were announced at the
beginning of the exercise, have either been confirmed (AST10, AST6C,
AST4D) or have been greatly decreased (e.g. the threshold for AD12 dropped
from 45 to 41).
- INVITATION TO CONSULT PROMOTION FILES
Article 25 of the Staff Regulations provides that any decision relating
to an individual must be communicated to the official concerned.
Officials are hereby invited to consult their promotion files in
Sysper2.
- RESULTS OF JOINT APPRAISAL AND PROMOTION COMMITTEES MEETINGS
2.1 The main stages of the appraisal and promotion exercise
The 2010 appraisal and promotion exercise is the first exercise which
was carried out on the basis of the new General Implementing Provisions
of
Article 43 and
Article 45 of the Staff Regulations which were adopted
on 18 June 2008. However, these provisions have been modified by
Commission Decisions C(2010)2957 and
C(2010)2958 of 6 and 7 May 2010 as
far as the second exercise is concerned.
- The exercise was launched on 15 January 2010 by publication of
Administrative Notice No. 3-2010 which describes the fundamental
principles of the system in force.
- The above-mentioned modifying decisions were published in
Administrative Notice No. 27-2010 on 11 May 2010. These modifications
essentially concerned the appeal phases of the appraisal and promotion
exercise.
- As of mid May 2010, the annual appraisal report (including the
level of performance) and the promotion points were transmitted to the
staff. This offered the possibility to lodge an appeal to the JAPC
within the deadline of 15 working days.
- Officials had the possibility to ask for a dialogue with their
countersigning officer before introducing an appeal.
- The beginning of June saw the beginning of the examination of the
appeals phase by the Joint Appraisal and Promotion Committees.
In light of the experience drawn from the 2009 exercise, the stages of
the appeal phase were modified in order to ensure a greater coherence
in the work. The principle of the modification was to ensure that the
examination of the appeals against the points could not take place
unless the reports (and therefore the performance level) were final.
In this way, for appeals against the report (which are automatically
appeals against the points as well), the part on the appeal against
the points could only be examined once a decision had been taken by
the appeal assessor on the part concerning the report (and therefore
on the performance level).
- After having received the Committees' opinion on the appeals
against the report, the Appeal Assessors took the final decision with
regard to the annual appraisal report (including the performance
level);
- After having received the Committees' opinion on the appeals
against the promotion points, the Appointing Authority "Promotion"
concluded on the final number of promotion points attributed to staff.
It also decided on the list of promoted officials.
- The list of promoted officials is attached to this Administrative
Notice.
2.2 The meetings of the JAPCs
2.2.1 Handling of appeals against the report and/or the promotion
points
Officials wishing to contest their report (qualitative appraisal and
performance level) or their promotion points had the possibility to
introduce an appeal in Sysper2.
The JAPCs analysed all appeals individually and adopted an opinion with
regard to the following elements:
In the case of an appeal against the report, the JAPC recommended
to the Appeal Assessor to confirm or modify the report, including, where
necessary, the performance level.
If the opinion of the JAPCs was adopted by means of a vote, the opinion
also contains the majority and minority positions expressed.
It must be specified that the JAPCs were not supposed to take the place
of the actors. They verified whether the procedure had been respected
and consequently analysed whether the report had been drawn up fairly,
objectively and in accordance with the appraisal standards
(Administrative Notice No. 22-2008).
The opinion of the Committees was transmitted to the Appeal Assessor who
either confirmed or modified the report.
If the Appeal Assessor decided not to follow the opinion of the
Committees, he had to duly justify his decision.
Following the decision of the Appeal Assessor, the report became final.
In the case of an appeal against the points, it should be pointed
out that there are two types of appeal against the promotion points:
- an appeal introduced solely against the promotion points (the
appraisal report, including the performance level, had already been
accepted by the official):
The JAPCs verified whether the criteria for the attribution of
promotion points were correctly applied. The tasks of the JAPCs were
principally focussed on examining cases of manifest errors during the
establishment of the formal intentions on promotion points or
examining cases of discrimination.
After examining each appeal, the JAPC issued an opinion which either
rejected the appeal or recommended to the Appointing Authority to
assign a higher number of promotion points within the range available
in the performance level assigned to the official.
- an appeal against the promotion points following an appeal against
the appraisal report:
If the Appeal Assessor decided to increase the performance level on
the basis of a comparison of the merits of officials in the grade
concerned, the JAPCs proposed to the Appointing Authority to assign a
number of promotion points within the range of points available in the
new performance level.
If the Appeal Assessor decided to confirm the performance level on the
basis of a comparison of the merits of officials in the grade
concerned, the JAPCs recommended to the Appointing Authority to
confirm or modify the number of promotion points within the range of
points available for the performance level assigned.
If the opinion of the Committees was adopted by means of a vote, the
opinion also contains the majority and minority positions expressed.
2.2.2 Handling of appeals against the rucksack and the transition
points (appeals outside Sysper2)
- Appeals against the rucksack
- In the 2009 promotion exercise (the first exercise under the
current system), officials were able to contest the result of the
conversion of the total points accumulated in their rucksack to the
present system by lodging an appeal with the JAPC.
This possibility to appeal was maintained for the 2010 exercise. It
was reserved for officials who were not in service in 2009 and who
had not yet been able to contest the conversion of their rucksack.
These appeals could not be introduced via Sysper2; officials were
invited to send their appeal by email to the functional mailbox "HR
CPEP – JAPC SECRETARIAT.
During the 2010 promotion exercise, no appeals were introduced
against the conversion of points accumulated at the end of 2008 into
the current system. However, some officials introduced an appeal
against the number of points contained in the rucksack at the end of
2010 as well as against their situation with regard to promotion.
- appeals against the transition points
Officials transferred to the Commission in the course of 2009 were
attributed a number of additional promotion points in order to account
for the merit accumulated in the same grade in the institution or
agency of origin.
All appeals against the number of additional promotion points were
also introduced by email to the functional mailbox "HR CPEP – JAPC
SECRETARIAT".
The JAPCs carried out a detailed analysis of the appeals against the
rucksack and against the number of transfer points. For each appeal,
the JAPCs issued a recommendation, which the Appointing Authority
followed.
The officials whose appeals have been considered justified, see in
their promotion file in Sysper2, under the heading "adjustment
points", the number of points attributed to them by the Appointing
Authority.
The officials whose appeals have been considered not justified, will
be notified individually that their appeal has been rejected.
2.3 Selection of ex aequo officials
In order to respect the budgetary constraints with regards to
promotions, a selection among ex aequo officials having reached the
promotion threshold needed to be made in 2010 for the grades AST10,
AST6/C and AST4/D.
The criteria decided for the selection of ex aequo officials by the JAPC
AST was firstly, seniority in the grade and secondly, equal
opportunities as mentioned in Article 2, Paragraph 3 of Annex II of the
GIPs of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations:
"…the Joint Appraisal and Promotion Committee shall adopt a
substantiated proposal, aimed at deciding between the officials with a
number of accumulated points equal to the threshold (ex aequo
officials), taking into account factors such as, in particular,
seniority in the grade and factors relating to equal opportunities."
The selection of ex aequo officials having reached the threshold was in
the end based on a single criteria of seniority in the grade, this being
sufficient to set them apart.
- DEFINITIVE PROMOTION THRESHOLDS
3.1 All grades except the end of career grades (AD12, AST10, AST6/C,
AST4/D)
All officials who have a number of points superior or equal to the
promotion threshold and who meet the eligibility criteria are promoted.
| |
2010 promotion thresholds |
| AD13 |
30 |
| AD11 |
27 |
| AD10 |
24 |
| AD09 |
24 |
| AD08 |
18 |
| AD07 |
18 |
| AD06 |
18 |
| AD05 |
18 |
| AST09 |
30 |
| AST08 |
28 |
| AST07 |
24 |
| AST06 |
24 |
| AST05 |
24 |
| AST04 |
18 |
| AST03 |
18 |
| AST02 |
18 |
| AST01 |
18 |
| AST5/C |
31 |
| AST4/C |
27 |
| AST3/C |
24 |
| AST2/C |
24 |
| AST3/D |
27 |
3.2 Grades AD12, AST10, AST6/C, AST4/D
The JAPCs fixed the promotion thresholds at the levels indicated below.
These thresholds were confirmed by the Appointing Authority.
| |
2010 indicative thresholds |
2010 final thresholds |
| AD12 |
45 |
41 |
| AST10 |
53 |
53 |
| AST6/C |
41 |
41 |
| AST4/D |
54 |
54 |
- ARTICLE 45, PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS (CAPACITY TO
WORK IN A THIRD LANGUAGE)
All officials are required to demonstrate the ability to work in a third
language before their first promotion. Most officials concerned by this
provision of the Staff Regulations this year have already made this
demonstration.
A relatively small number of officials have not yet demonstrated their
capacity to work in a third language but are allowed to do so up to 31
December 2010. All those who succeed in the demonstration before 31
December 2010 at the latest, will be subject of a separate promotion
decision at a later stage. The list of these promoted officials will
also be published later.
Since 2009, the required level is level 6 of the interinstitutional
language courses corresponding to level B2 of the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEF) (see Administrative Notice No 10-2010 of 3
February 2010).
- LIST OF PROMOTED OFFICIALS
The JAPCs' proposals were submitted to the Appointing Authority. Each
Appointing Authority adopted decisions on promotions, taking into
account:
- the provisions of Article 45(1) of the Staff Regulations on the
minimum seniority in the grade required to qualify for promotion;
- the principle that officials may be promoted only if they are in
active employment at the Commission in the relevant grade at the time
the promotion decision is adopted, seconded in the interests of the
service or on parental or family leave;
- Article 4 of Annex I of the GIPs of Article 45 of the Staff
Regulations according to which any decision on the promotion of an
official who is the subject of disciplinary proceedings is suspended
until the results of those proceedings are known;
- Article 45, Paragraph 2 of the Staff Regulations concerning the
ability to work in a third language before a first promotion.
Article 8, Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the GIPs of Article 45 of the Staff
Regulations provides that:
"3. The Appointing Authority shall decide on the list of officials to be
promoted. All officials with a number of accumulated promotion points
equal to or above the relevant promotion threshold shall be promoted.
4. The list of promoted officials shall be published to the attention of
all officials of the Commission. Each official shall be invited to
consult his promotion file."
The list of promoted officials is published as an annex
 to this
Administrative Notice. As explained above, at point 4, an additional
residual list will be published at a later stage.
- IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROMOTION DECISIONS
The 2010 promotion exercise has been conducted under the Staff
Regulations in force since 1 May 2004.
Promotion decisions will take effect on 1 January 2010. The promotion of
officials who do not have the minimum seniority required, will take
effect on the first day of the month following the month when the
minimum seniority is obtained.
Under Article 46 of the Staff Regulations, officials who are promoted to
a higher grade are placed in the first step of that grade. The seniority
in this step is identical to the date of effect of the promotion.
For officials who were recruited before 1 May 2004 and whose basic
salary is subject to a multiplication factor, two scenarios should be
taken into consideration:
- If it is the first promotion since the entry into force of the new
Staff Regulations (1 May 2004):
The basic salary is increased by a percentage which depends on the
category and step in which the official was classified before his
promotion. The percentages can be found in Article 7, paragraph 5 of
annex XIII of the Staff Regulations.
The multiplication factor applied to the basic salary is recalculated.
It is the result of the ratio between the basic salary calculated
following the promotion and the salary which is listed in the salary
scale for this new grade.
- If it is a subsequent promotion:
The basic salary after promotion will be that listed in the salary scale
for the new grade multiplied by the multiplication factor applied to the
official on the date of effect of promotion. This multiplication factor
is not recalculated. The salary increase is in the order of 13%.
The promotion decisions are currently being encoded and will be in place
to allow inclusion in the December 2009 salary transfers.
- COMPLAINTS
Under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations, “Any person to whom these
Staff Regulations apply may submit to the Appointing Authority a
complaint against an act adversely affecting him or her, either where
the said authority has taken a decision or where it has failed to adopt
a measure prescribed by the Staff Regulations. A complaint must be made
within three months.”
Any complaint may be submitted to the Appeals and Case Monitoring Unit
(HR.D.2) within three months as from the date of the publication of this
Administrative Notice, by one of the following means:
- By electronic mail, preferably in .pdf format, to the functional
mailbox
"HR MAIL D2";
- by mail to the address SC11 4/57 or by depositing the complaint at the
same address (from 9 am to 12 am and from 2 pm to 5 pm);
- by fax to the number (32-2) 295.00.39.
The practical modalities on how to introduce a complaint are further
explained in the Administrative Notice N° 28-2006 of 18th June 2006.
|
