The background to the complaint

1. The complaint concerns the handling of the admission test phase of open competition EPSO/AD/230/12. The complainant applied for the competition in question but was excluded from participation because he did not book a date to sit the admission tests within the booking period notified to him.

The subject matter of the inquiry

2. In his complaint to the Ombudsman, the complainant alleged that EPSO's procedure for booking a date to sit the admission tests in open competitions is not in line with good administration.

The inquiry

3. The Ombudsman opened an inquiry on 30 May 2012, by asking the complainant to clarify the complaint before deciding whether to contact EPSO. The Ombudsman received clarifications from the complainant on 31 May 2012.

The Ombudsman's analysis and conclusions

A. The allegedly flawed procedure

Arguments presented to the Ombudsman

4. The complainant argued that the period for booking a date to sit the admission tests in open competitions is too short. He stated that in order for a candidate to comply with the condition of having to book a date for the admission tests within the short period given, the candidate has to constantly log on to his or her EPSO account, because no notification e-mail is sent. In the complainant’s view, the procedure does not take into account bank holidays or other periods during which candidates may have limited access to the internet.

The Ombudsman's preliminary assessment

5. In his preliminary assessment of the complaint, the Ombudsman noted that the procedure for the admission test phase of competitions appeared to be the following: Once a candidate's application has been registered (online), the candidate is informed, on the screen, that within 48 hours, more information will be posted in his or her EPSO account relating the booking period for the admission tests. The "booking letter" that is posted in the EPSO account gives the candidate a five day booking period within which the candidate has to book a date for the tests. The booking letter states that a failure to book within the specified period will lead to disqualification from the competition.

6. The Ombudsman noted that in response to the complainant's concerns about the above procedure, EPSO replied, in summary, that it is clearly indicated that candidates must consult their EPSO accounts at least twice a week, that the booking process is independent of office hours, and that access to computers is independent of holiday periods as there is "an abundance of possibilities to access Internet world-wide".

7. The Ombudsman pointed out that he has already concluded, in the decision following his own-initiative inquiry OI/9/2010/RT[1], that the short booking period is proportionate and necessary to achieve the general objective of reducing the duration of the whole selection procedure.

8. The Ombudsman noted that candidates are indeed instructed to consult their EPSO accounts at least twice a week. The complainant did not appear to have done so.

9. In respect of EPSO's reply to the complainant's concerns, the Ombudsman considered it reasonable to assume that candidates should be able find a place with Internet connection to check their EPSO accounts twice a week. The Ombudsman agreed that it could be useful for candidates to receive notification e-mails, but that candidates would need an Internet connection also to check their e-mails.

10. On the basis of the above, the Ombudsman drew the preliminary conclusion that EPSO's procedure for booking a date to sit the admission tests in open competitions is reasonable. The Ombudsman therefore initiated his inquiry by asking the complainant to clarify the reasons why he considered that the procedure for booking a date to sit the admission tests in open competitions is not in line with good administration.

The arguments presented to the Ombudsman after his request for clarifications

11. In his response to the Ombudsman's request for clarifications, the complainant acknowledged that EPSO's guide to open competitions indeed advises candidates to check their EPSO accounts at least twice a week. He also acknowledged that after having finalised the registration, the candidate is informed that new information will be posted within 48 hours. The complainant argued, however, that no information is given that after this new information has been received, the candidate will only have five days to book a date for the admission tests. The complainant stated that a fast procedure is in everyone's interest, but in his view the five day deadline is arbitrary and designed to exclude candidates.

12. The complainant also pointed out that another problem with the procedure is that in addition to entering an online profile, which in his view makes sense, EPSO asks candidates to enter all the details of their CV for each application. The complainant asks why this is necessary, given that the information is already stored online.

The Ombudsman's assessment after having received clarifications

13. Addressing the complainant's clarifications, the Ombudsman again points out that he has found a short booking period to be proportionate and necessary to achieve the general objective of reducing the duration of the whole selection procedure[2]. In addition, EPSO explicitly advises candidates to check their EPSO accounts at least twice a week and also informs them individually that, within 48 hours from registration, more information will be posted in their EPSO accounts relating the booking period for the admission tests. The Ombudsman considers it reasonable for EPSO to expect candidates to take act on the basis of such explicit advice and information.

14. In respect of the requirement that candidates have to enter the details of their CV for each application, the Ombudsman notes that the complainant does not appear to have brought this concern to EPSO's direct attention, as is required before making a complaint to the Ombudsman[3]. The complainant could consider making a new complaint to the Ombudsman if he does not receive a satisfactory response to any future approaches to EPSO regarding the matter.

15. On the basis of the above, the Ombudsman does not find any instance of maladministration by EPSO in respect of the present complaint.

B. Conclusions

On the basis of his inquiry into this complaint, the Ombudsman closes it with the following conclusion:

There has been no maladministration.

The complainant and EPSO will be informed of this decision.

 

P. Nikiforos Diamandouros

Done in Strasbourg on 25 June 2012

---

[1] Available at: http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/decision.faces/en/10428/html.bookmark#hl4

[2] The Ombudsman’s decision following his own-initiative inquiry OI/9/2010/RT, see paragraph 7 above.

[3] See Article 2(4) of the Ombudsman's statute, available at: http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/resources/statute.faces