Dear Ms X,

On 6 November 2019, you submitted a complaint^[1] to the European Ombudsman against the Research Executive Agency (REA) regarding how it dealt with queries and complaints concerning your employment relationship as a researcher at an Italian university, which is a beneficiary of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks (MSCA ITN) grant awarded by REA.

The Ombudsman has asked me to deal with your complaint and reply to you on her behalf.

In dealing with your complaint, we reviewed the documents you sent to our Office in the context of complaints 1996/2017/HK and 97/2018/HK as well.

The Ombudsman must follow certain rules for dealing with complaints^[2]. One of these rules^[3] is that the European Ombudsman can investigate only complaints that concern the administrative work of the European Union institutions and bodies.

In your complaint to us, you contended that the project coordinator at the university psychologically harassed you and plagiarised your work, while the university treated you wrongly and unfairly.

Therefore, insofar as your allegations relate to the actions of the university and its project coordinator, they fall outside the Ombudsman´s mandate, and we cannot deal with them.

In your complaint, you also raised several issues against REA. In particular, you alleged that:

(1) REA wrongfully agreed to the allegedly unfair termination of your contract as a Marie Skłodowska-Curie fellow by the beneficiary;

(2) REA treated you wrongfully by acting politically and requiring you to provide proof of every allegation without requiring the same from the project coordinator;

(3) REA treated you unfairly by being biased, racist and ignorant of your complaints; and

(4) REA curtailed your freedom of expression by asking you not to submit any more complaints despite your issue not having been resolved.

Rules governing the Ombudsman’s work^[4] require that the complainant must first have contacted the EU body concerned with a view to resolving the problem, before complaining to the Ombudsman. In this way, the EU body in question will have an opportunity to deal with the problem at an early stage and without the need to involve the Ombudsman.

It appears from the information and documents you have sent us that, at the time of lodging a complaint with the Ombudsman, you had not yet raised with REA the above allegations 3 and 4. Unfortunately, this means that these aspects of your complaint are inadmissible and the Ombudsman cannot deal with them at this stage^[5].

Only allegations 1 and 2 fall thus within the Ombudsman´s mandate, and comply with the admissibility requirements.

After a careful analysis of all the information you provided with your complaint and additional correspondence registered in your previous complaints, we have decided to close this inquiry with the following conclusion:

The information provided in the complaint does not give reason for concluding that the Research Executive Agency acted with maladministration.

With regard to your first allegation that REA wrongfully agreed to your dismissal, we note that in its reply to your complaint, REA informed you that MSCA ITN grants are awarded to beneficiaries, who then are in charge of recruiting and employing researchers according to the provision of the Grant Agreement.^[6]

As REA further explained to you, direct employment relationship exists between the host institution and the researcher only, and is subject to national labour law. As such, your employment contract and its terms and conditions fall outside REA’s remit, and REA does not play any role in the dismissal of fellows.

Consequently, based on the analysis of the documents submitted to the Ombudsman, your allegation is unsubstantiated as there is no evidence that REA agreed to your alleged unfair dismissal.

Moreover, it is clear the REA investigated your complaint by gathering information from the project coordinator before taking a reasoned decision on your complaint. In this context, REA’s reply appears thorough, correct and reasonable.

Concerning your second allegation on the collection of proof, you argue in essence that REA requested you to provide proof of the alleged plagiarism of the project coordinator. Whereas when you complained that the university did not provide you with a health insurance during your employment, REA accepted the university´s explanations without requiring any proof.

Starting with the plagiarism issue, we note that REA explained to you that it needed proof of the alleged plagiarism to be able to investigate the complaint. Since you failed to submit this proof, despite its explicit request, REA could not follow on the complaint and closed it due to lack of supporting evidence. This was a reasonable approach to take.

 Turning to the issue of health insurance, we note that REA’s replies of 15 March and 28 June 2018 clearly state that the university informed it of your registration with the National Health Service as of 2018, which it processed upon your explicit request. REA also obtained clarifications that, when you arrived in Italy, you were already in possession of an appropriate health coverage, the cost of which was reimbursed to you. This shows that REA inquired into this issue adequately by taking contacts with the coordinator and requesting the relevant information. Your statements are thus insufficient to call into question the appropriateness of REA’s actions.

Based on the above findings, we have concluded that there was no maladministration in the Research Executive Agency´s conduct in this case. We therefore close your case.

Although we understand you will be disappointed with this reply, we nevertheless hope you find these explanations helpful.

Yours sincerely,

 

Marta Hirsch‐Ziembińska 

Head of Inquiries and ICT ‐ Unit 1 

Strasbourg, 04/12/2019

 

[1] Full information on the procedure and rights pertaining to complaints can be found at https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/document/70707.

[2] These are set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and in the Statute of the European Ombudsman.

[3] Set out in Article 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

[4] Set out in Article 2(4) of the Statute of the European Ombudsman.

[5] Full information on the procedure and rights pertaining to complaints can be found at https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/document/70707 .

[6] https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/guides_for_applicants/h2020-guide-appl-msca-itn_en.pdf - see points 2.1 and 3.2.