Open letter to Mr V. Šucha, our Director General 21 May 2014

Dear Mr Šucha,

Among the "Important messages" published in the Director General's Corner, there is one on Staff allocation at JRC which has, in particular, captured our attention, because we think that Staff requires some additional information and clarifications. You state that " Indeed, in light of the economic and financial crisis, all Commission Services have to reduce their permanent staff each year with 1% (for 5 years); an additional 1% of posts are placed into a central reserve. The ability of the JRC to continually recruit new competitive staff is therefore now limited. There is for the first time an absolute ceiling on the number of JRC staff and we need to carefully manage this…//…." What Staff needs to know is that the mechanism of redeployment you are referring to, i.e. the placement of the "additional 1% of post" into a central, institutional reserve, follows the Screening follow-up report "Planning and optimizing Commission Human Resources to serve EU Priorities" and aims at: "identifying all possible efficiency gains, notably by moving staff away from administrative support and coordination functions to concentrate on political priorities and frontline activities". Moreover, the mentioned report provides information about the political priorities to be considered. When during a central-level meeting, notably in the context of COCORE, the Liaison Committee for the Research Sector, we heard that in 2013 the JRC has lost 2% of its posts (1% by reduction + 1% by redeployment), we expressed our concerns and criticisms towards this decision, and asked the JRC Administration to ensure that the so-called "redeployment" is implemented with respect to the JRC as real redeployment, which means with exchange of posts, and not as an additional reduction. Following up that request, the JRC Administration informed us in relevant meetings about the plan to continue in the JRC the reduction of 1%+1%, on a yearly basis.

First of all, we reiterate our concerns and firm criticism towards this operation, which is doubling for the JRC the target of the Reform: instead of 5% over a 5-years period, the JRC will be affected by a reduction of 10% over the same time span, if the practice will be continued until 2017. Moreover, what Staff needs to know, is that the reduction of 2 % per year means a loss of about 40 posts per year, which is the equivalent of a big unit (with reference to the Establishment Plan posts) and the equivalent of an Institute over a 5-years period. From a budgetary point of view, the Commission has the "budget fonctionnement" and the "budget recherche" that are two separate things. Does this 1%+1% reduction of posts apply to both budgets? Can posts removed from the "budget recherche" be redistributed elsewhere in the Commission as "budget fonctionnement" posts? If yes, how is this possible? Further, staff is wondering which DGs are benefiting from the post removed from DG JRC. This loss of resources is for us, for many services, as it should also be for you, a major source of concern, considering that it is endangering the capacity of DG JRC to fulfil its institutional engagements and its mission conferred by the Treaties. Moreover, we find surprising that the redeployment exercise subtracts resources to the JRC for distribution elsewhere, because it seems to be inconsistent with your communication to our Staff on the 15th of April 2014. In fact, that message testifies your attention to: "…the priorities that JRC should focus on over the coming months in order to be fully aligned with our evolving political context…" in view "…to reinforce the role of JRC in the wider Commission context…". We also recall that you have inherited from your predecessor a DG already well placed in the political context; and, moreover, on the 15 April 2014, you have informed staff that:"…JRC has recently successfully reinforced its profile with customer DGs and increased its visibility. This puts us into a good starting position in the context of the incoming new Commission." Having said that, it is legitimate to ask why a DG focused since time on aligning on the political priorities, which was already well placed in the political and scientific context, is assisting to the depletion of its posts following the screening exercise. Such a situation is extremely surprising and, in this respect, Staff definitively needs more information about, in order to able to understand the logic behind such massive changes. Many thanks in advance

For Union Syndicale Ispra/Séville Mr Crivelli, Président

For Union Syndicale Petten JP Schosger, President