The results of the concours for administrators are now out, and – surprise, surprise – I did not manage to pass. Here’s the extract of the letter:
The selection board for the above competition has now finished marking the pre-selection tests in which you participated. I regret to inform you that although the marks you obtained in these tests were above or equal to the pass mark, you were not amongst the top 630 candidates.
Point B.1 of the competition notice stipulates that only those candidates with the 630 highest marks in the pre-selection tests would be asked to submit a full application with a view to their possible admission to the competition.
Your marks are as follows (1):
Test a): 38.333 /60 (pass mark 30)
Test b): 15.263 /20 (pass mark 10)
Test c): 30.769 /40 (pass mark 20)Total: 84.365/ 120
For your information, the candidates who obtained the 630 highest combined scores had at least 92.611 points.
I would add that the Selection Board’s decision does not preclude you from taking part in any future competitions organised by the European Personnel Selection Office.
It’s beyond me how one can get 15.263 / 20 when there were 40 questions, but anyway, c’est la vie. All the best to all the geeks who know who won the Sakharov prize in the year X or other equally useful everyday facts.
FILE DOWNLOADS
Blog commenter ‘viking’ has made some new test files available for download, and he had also supplied the manual for electronic Reserve Lists. Some additional test files have been provided by Sorina (see comment #1003) – download 342kb, ZIPped. Enjoy!
SOCIAL NETWORKS
If anyone is a member of Facebook there’s the ‘So I won’t be a Commission official’ Facebook Group, and the EU Integration Traveler IQ challenge (you need to add the Traveler IQ Facebook application) – a more fun way to revise for the concours…
NOTE
Due to such an enormous number of comments here I have had to divide the comments function. The latest few hundred comments are below, and all the older comments are archived here. All should work technically now.
Years ago, AST grade competitions (ex-C, i.e. secretaries) were only available to those without a university degree. This was very carefully checked and enforced; you were even not allowed to be in your final year of university studies; this was considered to be the same as having a degree.
Some bright spark decided to abolish this. One of the worst decisions EVER taken in EU recruitment!
Try now to find a SECRETARY, with work experience as a SECRETARY, who WANTS to be a SECRETARY and is happy as such! If you have five of those in a laureate list of 60 people, count yourself lucky. The rest of them are holders of various university degrees. Very bright, of course, most of them, but no secretarial experience to speak of. But they know how to do well in verbal reasoning tests, and mathematical reasoning tests. So most of the people who really would love to do the job of secretary, and would do it well, never even get to the second stage.
So they get hired, as secretaries. But of course they are not happy to stay that way. Oh no sir! Instead, they have delusions that if they get an AST 1 post in the Commission, as as secretary, they will in no time be promoted to bigger and better things.
Sorry, it doesn’t work like that. We still do need old-fashioned, traditional secretaries who are happy to handle the boss’s calendar, and prepare signataires, and book hotels, and answer the phone and take messages. What we don’t need is a PhD who knows next to nothing about PowerPoint.
So when the bigger and better things don’t materialize, they get frustrated, angry and a nightmare to work with.
In work in recruitment in the Commission, and the most awful news imaginable is when one of our trusted secretaries says that they are moving elsewhere. Because I know it will take me 10 times more time and effort to find a replacement than it would take me to find an economist or a lawyer.
I can only pray that the new-style competitions will restore some sanity to this.
Morgane,
depends how fast they want you and how much weight “they” can throw around. They’ll tell you “up to two months” to schedule this, but this can be cut back to as little as one week. After that it’s three weeks before the results are transmitted (this seems to be a constant).
Therefore, contact the person responsible for your recruitment within the unit asking how they see the timing.
Dear all,
How long do you have to wait for a medical examination after oral confirmation of recruitment to a post of contract agent?
I count especially on those of you who have been recently recruited as contract agents.
Thanks!
In principle, currently the worst candidate in the reserve list could be recruited before all the others, if the AIPN so decides and motivates.
Just have a look to the jurisprudence…
Arrêt du 17 octobre 2002, Cocchi et Hainz / Commission (T-330/00 et T-114/01, RecFP_p._II-987) (cf. points 33, 40, 45, 52)
Fonctionnaires – Agents temporaires – Recrutement – Candidats inscrits sur une liste d’aptitude – Pouvoir d’appréciation de l’administration – Contrôle juridictionnel – Limites
L’autorité investie du pouvoir de nomination dispose d’une marge d’appréciation très large quant au recrutement des candidats inscrits sur une liste d’aptitude, en ce sens qu’elle n’a, notamment, aucune obligation de respecter l’ordre précis du classement des candidats figurant sur cette liste. Ce même principe s’applique, a fortiori, à l’engagement des agents temporaires, l’autorité habilitée à conclure des contrats d’engagement disposant d’un pouvoir d’appréciation encore plus étendu lors du choix des candidats.
Le Tribunal ne peut pas substituer son appréciation des qualifications des candidats à celle de cette dernière autorité. L’examen auquel il doit procéder se limite à la question de savoir si, eu égard aux considérations qui ont pu conduire l’administration à son appréciation, celle-ci s’est tenue dans des limites raisonnables et n’a pas usé de son pouvoir de manière manifestement erronée.
The only way to have an efficient and transparent selection procedure for the EC would be:
1. reserve lists not in alphabetical order, but on merit order (not merit groups).
2. the successful candidates should choose 10 favourites DGs.
3. every time a vacancy arises in a DG, the first on the reserve list (the one with the highest final score) should be contacted by the EC.
4. he should ACCEPT the post or RENOUNCE.
5. if he accepts, he will start working in the DG and after a succesful probation period he will become an official.
6. if he renounces, see point 4 above for the next candidates (the second on the list).
… and so on.
gian_petr2
You’re preaching to the choir, man. Everybody comes up with the same diagnosis of the problem. However, if you really really wanna play ball here, you need to come up with a back-of-the-envelope cost calculation of what this travesty is costing tax-payers….. get my drift?
Very interesting doc, Elated
However, I think it doesn’t point out the real big issue with the process…..that is not the selection procedure itself, but the way the reserve lists are used by the Institutions.
Is it possible that no-one in EU is focusing on that ?
Hi Carina,
Far be it from me to suggest you should take the number of laureates from external competitions for EU-2 MS and multiply this with 7,100 euro to calculate the potential cost to society that is at least at play here. That would be too simplistic and might make the odd tabloid headline.
Far be it from me, but a lesser man might suggest it.
Take care
http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls/portal/docs/1/2812316.PDF
“The Cour t est imates t hat, base d on budget ar y exec ut i on, t he c ost
incurred by EPSO was about 7 10 0 euro per laureate; this comprises
4 59 0 euro in direct c osts and 2 510 in indirect c osts. Fur thermore,
in order to determine the full cost to the EU budget, the cost incurred
by the Institutions (staf f par ticipating in selection boards, mar king,
inv i gilat i o n etc .) must als o b e inc lu de d, whi c h wo ul d inc r e as e t he
aforementioned amount.”
Maybe a good newspaper will be interested about the recruitment procedure in the EU, especially a British one or the EU Observer ecc… There are our money, mine, yours for a better EU administration. Does the new Commissioner-designate Maros Sefcovic (Slovakia) know about the best practice of the recruitment of his administration, about resourcing and talent planning in the EU internal competitions? Maybe not yet, but he’ll come upon it soon.
The last e-mail from my friend about the EU trade unions which decided to organize a metting ‘to correct this discrimination’ of not allowing all the Contract Agents to become permanent AD5!
Are we laureates in the reserve lists stupid?
SOLIDARITE EUROPEENNE
J79 1/30 Bruxelles
Tél.: + (32) 2-29-74886/74854
Chères et chers collègues,
Nous avons le plaisir de vous inviter à une réunion concernant les concours internes ROU/BUL (AST et AD). Nous expliquerons la procédure qui devra être suivie pour obtenir une possibilité de corriger cette discrimination.
Nous vous proposons le 03.02.2010 de 12.30 à 14.30 dans la salle Loi 80 2è étage (au-dessus de la cafeteria).
Merci de confirmer votre participation par “voting buttons”.
————
Dear colleagues,
We have the pleasure to invit you in a meeting concerning the internal competitions ROU/BUL (AST and AD). We will explain the procedure you have to follow in order to have a possibilty to correct this discrimination.
This meeting is planned for February 3rd from 12.30 to 14.30 in room Loi 80 – 2nd Floor (above the cafeteria).
Please confirm your participation by “voting buttons”.
Solidarité Européenne-Bxl
carina – writing to the ombudsman is not going to achieve anything unless you can show that the staff regulations have been broken. I doubt it.
you would have more influence organising a facebook campaign of EU candidates/writing to the EV, contacting your MEP, stuff like that.
Thanks to Jon Worth for this site!
Here is the internal competition notice which a good friend of mine sent to me yesterday. The requirements are al least 6 months in a Temporary Agent position inside the EC, so an AST1 can become an AD5 after this competition.
The Temporary Agents arrived in the EC with a very strange selection procedure, only a few tried an easy competition, the others sent their CVs to someone..
This competition is organized by EPSO ‘Veuillez noter que l’organisation pratique de ce concours interne est assurée par EPSO ‘.
NO COMMENT, but I sent my complain to the European Ombusdman.
‘AVIS DE CONCOURS INTERNES
ASSISTANTS AST1 (COM/INT/EU2/10/AST1)
ASSISTANTS AST3 (COM/INT/EU2/10/AST3)
DOMAINE 1 : ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIF
DOMAINE 2 : SECRETAIRE DE DIRECTION
ADMINISTRATEURS AD5 (COM/INT/EU2/10/AD5)
CHEFS D’UNITE AD9 (COM/INT/EU2/10/AD9)
CHEFS D’UNITE AD12 (COM/INT/EU2/10/AD12)
DE CITOYENNETE BULGARE OU ROUMAINE
La Commission européenne organise des tests d’accès et des concours internes destinés à nommer des fonctionnaires de citoyenneté bulgare ou roumaine.
Les inscriptions se font de manière électronique via les liens ci-dessous. Le délai pour l’introduction des actes de candidature est fixé au 22 février 2010 à 12h00, heure de Bruxelles.
Pour des informations détaillées, veuillez consulter l’avis de concours propre à chaque concours interne, publié conformément à l’article 1, paragraphe 3, de l’annexe III du Statut des fonctionnaires des Communautés européennes.
* Avis de concours interne COM/INT/EU2/10/AST1, Assistants (AST1) de citoyenneté bulgare ou roumaine (annexe 1).
Commencez ici votre inscription électronique
* Avis de concours interne COM/INT/EU2/10/AST3, Assistants (AST3) de citoyenneté bulgare ou roumaine (annexe 2).
Domaine 1 : Assistant Administratif
Domaine 2 : Secrétaire de Direction
Les candidats ne peuvent s’inscrire qu’à un seul domaine sous peine de nullité de leur candidature. Le choix du domaine doit être fait au moment de l’inscription électronique et ne pourra plus être modifié.
Domaine 1 : Assistant Administratif
Commencez ici votre inscription électronique
Domaine 2 : Secrétaire de Direction
Commencez ici votre inscription électronique
* Avis de concours interne COM/INT/EU2/10/AD5, Administrateurs (AD5) de citoyenneté bulgare ou roumaine (annexe 3).
Commencez ici votre inscription électronique
* Avis de concours internes COM/INT/EU2/10/AD9 et COM/INT/EU2/10/AD12, Chefs d’Unité (AD9 et AD12) de citoyenneté bulgare ou roumaine (annexe 4).
Chefs d’unité AD9
Commencez ici votre inscription électronique
Chefs d’unité AD12
Commencez ici votre inscription électronique
Pour des informations complémentaires, les candidat(e)s sont invité(e)s à se référer au manuel d’inscription (annexe 5). La section “Questions Fréquemment Posées” à la page “Concours/sélections” du site RH et Administration fournit également une source d’information utile.
Vous pouvez vous tenir au courant de l’évolution du concours interne pour lequel vous vous êtes inscrit(e) en consultant votre compte EPSO. NB : les informations individuelles concernant la participation aux tests d’accès et aux différentes épreuves du concours sont disponibles uniquement sur le compte EPSO des candidats.
Veuillez noter que l’organisation pratique de ce concours interne est assurée par EPSO et non pas par la Direction Générale Ressources Humaines et Sécurité. Tout échange de correspondance concernant le concours interne se fera uniquement via le secrétariat du concours interne. Les candidats sont priés de contacter le secrétariat du concours interne uniquement s’ils ne trouvent pas de solution à leurs problèmes en consultant les documents de référence mentionnés ci-dessus.’
I received this from a friend of mine, the European trade unions push that all the insiders, Contract Agents to take part in these internal competitions, to be promoted from AST1 to AD5. In these competitions can participate only the Temporary Agents with al least 6 months work in the EC, but the unions push for all the insiders, this is too much.
This is ridiculous and offensive for all laureates who are still waiting in the reserve lists. I decided yesterday to write to the Ombusdman and I invite all the laureates to do it too.
“Internal competitions: why are contract agents excluded ?
The Commission decided to launch INTERNAL COMPETITIONS for the Romanians and the Bulgarians under the same conditions as INTERNAL COMPETITIONS Eur. 10, by respecting the modalities planned in the article 29 b) of the Staff Regulations which stipulates:
The requests of transfer of state employees of the same rank of the other institutions and\or the possibilities of organizing a house examination in the institution opened only to the state employees and to the temporary agents mentioned in article 2 of the regime applicable to the other agents of the European Communities;
This means that the colleagues, contractual agents EUR 2 having taken the tests to enter the institution see each other excluded from this exercise.
The Staff Representatives from Solidarité Européenne who participate actively in the meetings of the joint committees fixing rules for internal competitions, asked one more time to the Administration to widen internal competitions generally to all the Contract Agents who fill the conditions of examinations in terms of prerequisites; these could so see appointing on a permanent basis civil servants in the same way as the temporary agents. The Administration has us always refused this possibility, making reference to the Staff regulations.
Solidarité Européenne decided to react firmly against this discrimination.
To correct this injustice made for our colleagues during the elaboration of the Staff Regulations made hastily and to create a case law to give to the contract Agents an additional chance to evolve positively in their careers, we ask the Contract Agents having the profile corresponding to the notices of competition to contact us immediately to present for the deadlines, an appeal in justice that Solidarité Européenne will assume.
Solidarité Européenne respects the commitments announced during the elections.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Comité exécutif :
Y. Castel; G. Dricot-Daniele; A. Walderdorff ; G. Dutrieux; E. Gillet; Ch. Kremer; D. Lewczuk Bianco; J. Fraga; B. Thysebaert; E. Gillet; JP. Segura Rodriguez; A. Seller, Brigitte Pretzenbacher”
Rules are there to TRY to carry out…
The aim of EPSO may be to deploy a fair career plan but this may require a too rigid and slow system for staff provisioning, so Institutions carry out their own selection procedures so as to be more adaptative to their need and yes, it some times may became not so fair one.
I suppose (I am not an insider, still) there is some kind of war of Titans between EPSO and the HR Units of big institutions. I also suppose it may be easier in brand new Institutions.
I am just thinking in loud voice.
In relation to the RLs a very simple question comes immediately to my mind: if the number of candidates that pass a competition is so “carefully” determined according to the needs of the Institutions, why aren’t all the successful candidates finally recruited?. It seems to me that with the annual cycles of competitions things can only get worse. That thought has already been pointed out in this Forum. It is common sense!!. They are wasting the taxpayers’ money without embarrassment!!.
Regards.
… and stop lecturing me, please. In the private sector I worked from time to time with colleagues from the new MS… these people had a cut-throat can do attitude, none of the self-pity to be read on here.
Happy troll?
With all due respect, dear Morgane, I’m afraid you got blinded by just rage to the extent that you failed to notice the underlying sarcasm of the previous entry. All people with a touch of common sense agree with the argument that internal competitions are distorting the selection system. And obviously the ones who gain from this nonsense will never admit that…
Like I said, that’s why we’d haven public comps. Enter the highest comp and like euh…. compete 😉
Or maybe you are from one of the Western countries with normal salaries and you are completely unaware of what a graduate with a good university degree can earn in public administration in some new Member States.
The salaries vary between Member States of course, but in one of them a fresh graduate in the MFA gets around 250 euros per month (exact amount in euros depends on the current exchange mechanism; do not forget that due to the crisis we had an enormous exchange rate ups and down; now the exchange rate of 1 euro to our money seems to be stable again; we’ll enter into EURO zone in 2015 the earliest). For this money you can rent a poor room in the capital city and for the rest you have to rely on your parents.
Minister in MFA earns 3000 euros (plus some additional benefits). Senior staff, heads of units fall inbetween.
Is it now clear to you why AST1 posts are so attractive to M.A. holders from new member states?
Now, I agree that having PhD and working as a secretary is a bit sick and I don’t even know any case personally, but I also heard that this exist.
I smell a troll.
Anyhows, all these discussions about secretaries donning PHDs (probably in quantummechanics) … that’s exactly why they would have these public competitions…. to sort ’em out.
What a bloody mess and what a waste of public money, nothing more I can say.
It says what, Elated?
According to me there should be no exception to the rule of making everyone compete in open external competitions.
By simple fact of working people like ‘nitta’ gain experience and knowledge. It is justified to move to higher steps then AST1 to AST2, AST2 to AST3, AD5 to AD6 and so forth. If someone is delivering exceptional results the system has an answer for this too – extra points in annual evaluation and then you move quicker. E.g. you move from AST1 to AST2 is less years.
But jumping from AST1 to AD5 via internal procedure is not fair because this is equal to avoiding tough external competition.
There are hundreds of people who are outside and who were not able to take part in internal competitions and they might be uncomparably better than ‘nitta’ and other similar candidates.
@morgane
maybe this debate gets us off topic but it is a very important issue for all post 2004 AD5-7 entrants – at the moment there is no career at the institutions (in the normally understood way of the best people making it to the top).
Even if it’s a long way off, I emphatically disagree that junior officials need not worry about directors posts being all a set up. If you examine the (admittedly non-public) stats you will see that a certain number of directors, and a significant number of Heads of Unit, come from entry level. Under the post-2004 system, this is almost impossible. And you will see that more and more Head of unit posts are also occupied by outsiders.
If you accept this, then you are accepting that the ‘ideas and vision of EPSO remain empty words’ – a public service with an underclass and a superior caste of pre-2004 and national officials. Maybe we are half-way there already, but in the future we will be 100% there.
The idea of internal concours is a recognition that the current system doesn’t work (there is no skipping of grades as far as I know, just temporary to permanent, AST to AD). Of course, if it is just subverted to every special interest and not a wider corporate interest, it becomes flawed – and I agree all this TA to permanent official stuff is totally rubbish. But if your interest is just in ensuring EU12 candidates are placed throughout the system (screw the system, just give us the jobs we were promised…) then this is not a strong position.
However, what is more important than any precise proposal is that new officials need to get organised and debate this with management, because otherwise they are screwed, to the detriment of an independent, meritocratic European public service.
“Yes, I was working as a secretary for 9 months before get promoted into a better position. I took part of trainings, worked on extra projects in my directorate, had French and German lessons during the evenings and Saturdays. Based on this I reached very high points on the oral exam. (Internal AD5)”
😉
This sort of says it all.
1. don’t worry about directors’ positions – they are assigned politically and EU-12 are being given directors’ positions, it goes systematically and well
2. “in my opinion an internal competition is the only practical way to offer careers to staff who joined post-2004.” – no, it is not the only way. EU-12 have had special AD9, AD12 etc. competitions in order to make them occupy such positions in the institutions. This is a necessary and justified procedure to get senior administrators and heads of unit from new member states. The problem is that the only way to do should remain the same – external competitions for those new states. Internal competitions just to move them up e.g. from AST1 to AD5 or from AD6 to AD9 etc. should be abolished. If the EU sees that more heads of unit are needed from EU-12 (due to quotas not yet achieved) they should rely on external competitions. So all internal and external candidates who qualify for AD5, AD9 or AD12 should compete on equal conditions. If you make internal competitions, then the EU is practically closed for external candidates for those positions. And the ideas and vision of EPSO remain empty words.
in my opinion an internal competition is the only practical way to offer careers to staff who joined post-2004. mathematically, it is pretty much the only hope for most post-2004 AD staff to make it to a management position and even be in the running to reach Director.
but why to certain nationalities, and why to regularise the positions of TAs? and what is the urgent need for AST to AD competitions? what does this mean for certification (that is also misused). The mess is just baffling and just sends the message that each individual group needs to lobby for their rights. This is supposed to be a bureaucracy not a political party FFS.
I suppose the real problem, as already pointed out, derives from the fact that internal competitions are solely produced for a handful of candidates, thus denying all the others beyond that circle from this particular challenge. I do not doubt that those ast colleagues upgraded to ad internally are all worthy experts, but talking about the fair nature of this practice is a ridiculous hypocrisy on their part.
@ Pseudo Nym
EPSO mentioned about a linear career system which consists of 16 levels (grades), not about a ‘Jumping career’ using the internal concours…
http://europa.eu/epso/discover/careers/grades_system/index_en.htm
Civil servants in the Institutions are divided into two functions groups – administrators and assistants. In parallel, there is a linear career system which consists of 16 levels (grades).
* The administrator function group (AD) covers grades 5 to 16. New staff generally enter this group at grade 5.
* The assistant function (AST) covers grades 1 to 11 (overlapping with Administrators in grades 5-11). New staff usually enters at grades 1 or 3.
I guess it depends if you think AST profile posts are just a junior version of AD profile ones, in which case its no problem to jump up easily via an internal contest. Or, are they two different professional groups, each one requiring different sets of skills, that may not necessarily overlap. In that case the AST should have to pass just as tough a competition as any outsider.
One more word: if I would be AST1 in an EU institution at the moment and would be offered the opportunity to jump to AD5 via this ridiculous internal exam of course I would do it. I would find myself lucky. But I would still think that this was just a matter of luck resulting from an unfair procedure – something that contradicts the logic of EPSO as presented on their website (“search for the best and most skillful staff…”).
The point with jumping from AST1 to AD5 through internal procedure is the following:
Most AST1 laureates have also tried AD5 competitions in the past. They were not successful because they were not good enough. Others were better and got the place on the AD5 list and eventually got an AD5 job. So those who failed in AD5 concours made the AST1 competition saying to themselves “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush”.
There is of course nothing wrong with the AST1 staff competing again in an AD5 competition. But why on earth in an internal competition? That is not fair! Let everyone compete in a normal open (“external”) competition.
Some of those AST1 – when they would have to compete in an “external” competition – would never be successful. They are successful in an internal AD5 concours just because the competiton was limited to a minimum level. That is why internal competitions are not fair, violate the EPSO vision of recruting the best people for the EU civil service, and should be abolished.
@Nitta
Congratulations for your position as a secretary! I know that a huge number of EU_12 secretaries have a Univeristy degree or a PhD. When I was offered a FGII secretary position for the EU and I declined it, I considered myself I could have more opportunities as an AD5 laureate, you know, being part of the Cabinet of a EU-10 President and going to Brussels for an AST1 CA position is not the maximum.
I understand your point, to take the short path as an AST1 and then to pass as an internal one to an AD5 position. I know that these days the Commission has opened internal competitions for Romanians/ Bulgarians AST1 to become an AD5.
Do not misunderstand me, I am not waiting for the red carpet of the EU institutions, I am waiting for a correct employment status of an AD laureate. I played fairly and I am still doing it. This is me!
Nova,
I am EU10 but I get your point.
I do consider it fair. Why? I think I put something on the table. I did not stay at home waiting for the big AD5 job which would suit my degrees (International Relations and Political Strategy) and work experiences better than an AST1 job.
Yes, I was working as a secretary for 9 months before get promoted into a better position. I took part of trainings, worked on extra projects in my directorate, had French and German lessons during the evenings and Saturdays. Based on this I reached very high points on the oral exam. (Internal AD5)
I do understand the frustration but I think I deserved it. Instead of talking about working for Europe I took a job – regardless the function. I never hoped to “jump” the external competition but – forgive me- I cannot feel sorry for the people who refuse to work as an assistant. Many of us are here to work for the Europe we pictured and don’t need people to come here only for the money. (Almost half of the internal competition AD5 lists are assistants)
Nitta is from EU-10 and not EU-2.
anyways, of course it is a circus with all this jumping from AST1 (or maybe AST2 cause people might have got promotion of one step in the meantime) to AD5
“‘betes de concours’ – College of Europe types who know how to pass the competitions but don’t necessarily have the skills/experience that the institutions are looking for. ”
They’re the first to get off the list…. there’s a pretty effective alumni network in place. Only thing is, they will disproportionately aim for an EPA profile and if there’s one thing there’s enough of, it’s that.
“I don’t know the statistics, but you can be sure a reasonable percentage on each list will not be recruited. ”
Used to be 80% or something recruited from AD lists… used to be. I even have an email from epso stating “in our experience the vast majority”. Check out the ec doc once posted on here plotting vacancies vs laureates with a three-year advance… pretty clear to me that the planned depletion rate for AD EU12 RL was 80%ish… only when you looked at the EU15 laureates it droppes dramatically to below 50%.
High variability in depletion rates between RLs, especially when RLs are based on elements beyond the laureate’s control such as nationality, are to me a sign of bad management (and in the US a few class action litigator would probably try and get some money out of it in court).
Nitta,
It’s not your fault, it’s Commission’s fault to allow AST 1-3 to take part into internal comps for AD. My institution for instance allows AST 5 only to participate in. As far as I remember, your are from the AST/14/06 competition for Bulgarian secretaries. How do you expect to “jump” from AST1 to AD5, since there are still Bulgarians from the reserve lists of AD 5 EPSO comps who are not hired yet and even not contacted so far for interview?! Do you consider it fair?
carina – just telling it like it is.
Errata: And I need to point out I’m speaking from my generlist (EPA) experience – obviously some general competence needs to be demonstrated if you are a lawyer, economist or a doctor.
Now, now, passing a concourse is only the first step – it’s a baseline which serves to demonstrate you’re competent in general EU matters, can add and multiply, know what a percentage is, and can draft a note. Implicitly it also serves to demonstrate determinatio and motivation to work for the EU institutions (unless you’re a masochist that is). From there on your CV, character, professional experience, education, etc. are the deciding factor (as with any other job out there).
@fd
>>people – one of the reasons the reserve lists are so large is because the competitions are known to produce ‘betes de concours’ – College of Europe types who know how to pass the competitions but don’t necessarily have the skills/experience that the institutions are looking for.
These ‘betes de concours’ passed a competition with the imposed EPSO/EU rules, duties, skills which were required in the OJ of each competition.
Does not seem to you a paradoxical situation? They impose the competition rules, you pass all the steps and then you are not qualified…this is too much.. to tell that people in the reserve lists do not have the skills/experience for the EU institutions.
Have you ever tried to pass a EPSO competition? The second step after the preselection tests was to have analyzed your file with all your experience/ skills as they required. If you are not an engineer or a doctor how can you take place in a competition for these positions?You are out and I know candidates excluded because they missed 2 or 3 years of experience in a specific field.
Are you joking me?
people – one of the reasons the reserve lists are so large is because the competitions are known to produce ‘betes de concours’ – College of Europe types who know how to pass the competitions but don’t necessarily have the skills/experience that the institutions are looking for.
I don’t know the statistics, but you can be sure a reasonable percentage on each list will not be recruited.
On the other hand, you would think the commission could at least design its own internal competitions properly. But as others have said, why have them at all? And why only for some nationalities? Do they think existing staff respect this sort of personnel management?
Makes me wonder how many new staff the EU institutions actually need to hire in one year. Seems like not many, if even internal candidates cannot find jobs!
@Nitta,
If you would not had participated in the internal competition you would not have a problem now!
By the way those internal exams allowing people to get AD permanent post without the competition that others have to face are ridiculous and should not be allowed. They give a simple message to the outside world: instead of participating in tough external competitions, get a short term contract and the EC will let you pass an internal exam if you are lucky. So why organize external competitions at all? Why provide all this circus if laureates just stay on the lists for years?
Hi
I passed the internal competition for AD5 (public admin) and found myself in the same situation as most of you. :))
I have access to sysper and sent in 5 application so far. As I am AST1 now, HR says they will not consider my application on equal feet with the internal AD candidates as I am not in the same grade. If there is a post with no interest from inside, they can have a look at the reserve list.
At the same time temp AD5 get offers from the internal lists (not their jobs) already:)
very strange:)
Hi there,
I was wondering whether someone who has some inside knowledge in recruitment at RELEX can help me out. I am in the reserve list for CASTRELEX2008. I was recently been contacted by a Delegation that I had put in my choice of countries (randomly, I wasn’t keen on going!!) about a year ago. I had a phone interview (I didn’t want to miss the opportunity!) and finally they offered me the job! The problem is that I don’t want to go! 🙁 What are the consequences if you decline a job offer? Do they flag you somehow? How many times can you refuse offers? What is the best and more diplomatic way to say politely “no, thank you” ??
Many thanks for your time!! 🙂
Regards.
It would be great if you could send me too the Sysper vacancies.
Please, e-mail me: mloplop8080{at} yahoo(.)es
Thanks a lot!!
Pseudo Nym,
yes.
The new recruitment system is invented for epso to jusitfy it’s current size. They’re not really liked by the auditors and there’s constant pressure on overall resources… so they needed to come up with some form of pseudo-activity lest some-one would suggest cutting their numbers back…. there’s a huge backlog of laureates and on any account annual comps are a travesty, a three-annual periodicity makes more sense (implicitly acknowledged by epso as it requires the EC HR projections feeding into it’s scheme to have a 3-year time horizon).
Only thing I can say is that there’ a bright future for HR consultants at the commission ;-). All these secondary activities are putting way too much overhead on the core activities… a real mess.
Breach wrote: “the moment we announce a position we’re practically bombarded within days with CVs of people from the reserve lists”
Wow. What you say is the similar to rumours I have heard as well- concours laureates with “wrong nationality” wait ages on the reserve lists and never get called for a job. “Don’t structure your life around getting in to the EU, I was told” But if there are already so many candidates on the reserve lists desperate for jobs, why would EPSO bother modernising its recruitment system and holding contests annually? Won’t that just lead to even more candidates passing the tests and expecting jobs?
After being on the inside for a couple of months now and attending interviews at the other end of the barrel let me tell you this – the moment we announce a position we’re practically bombarded within days with CVs of people from the reserve lists. Though we do have to give preference to internal candidates in practice this means that most of the times we do not even have to go and look at the reserve lists ourselves.
Good luck to all of you.
@ A
Last time I checked my “place” had an EU-2 quota raised again. This has definite effects on which people HoU will consider hiring. A new internal concours to regularize TAs for EU-2 is announced… all TAs in my unit are from new MS, even British AD laureates that came through over the last few years had lag times of 2/3 years…. please remember that, proportionally to population, the UK is heavily underrepresented, way below most of the new MS, etectera, etcera
Trust me, this is not a myth. There is no equal treatment, forget about that. I’m wondering what will happend once the transitional period has ended. Traditionally, it has always been an advantage to physically be in the vicinity of Brux-Lux (to have informal interviews). On average the new MS are pretty peripheral geographically speaking… this means it will be very hard for new MS laureates in the future to get a foot in the door unless they have some insider network… I’m guessing quite a few succesful dynasties have been founded over the last few years… will be interesting to monitor that evolution.
@Morgane
“So I guess that people like elated knew in advance how hard it might be to get in, but they anyways wanted to get an eu place, so they kept trying. But why frustration along the way?”
How can you say that?
I didnot know about the EU-12 quota. That only perspired gradually as rumours were published on the web. What I got was a letter ending with the statement “I should point out, however, that it could be several weeks or months before you are contacted.” “several weeks”, that’s what I said… 😉 Just lay back and relax, you will be contacted 😉 I didnot say “it will take years of sending letters, begging, lobbying, being on eternal stand-by,…”
I didnot know shit about RL flagging procedure… that took downloading a manual some IT department had lost on the web. Next, epso had to be reminded that laureates should have real-time access to their own personal data… before people were told to mail every three months.
I didnot know that, as a rule, HoU do not have the HR units screen RLs for key words… they just expect you to come knocking on their door, hence the importance of having access to the SYSPER vacancies…
etcetera etcetera
All of this we had to find out and yes we got quite frustrated in the process. But guess what, it’s all posted on here… so now I guess the new recruits are no longer entiteld to frustration… we expect them to be cynical from the start on 😉