¿Tiene una reclamación contra una institución u órgano de la UE?

Consultar investigaciones

Caso
Límites de fecha
Palabras clave
O pruebe palabras clave antiguas (anteriores a 2016)

Mostrando 1 - 20 de 1003 resultados

Decision on incorrect information about a candidate’s status in the contract agents selection database (CAST) managed by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) (case 2090/2021/VB)

Viernes | 25 noviembre 2022

The case concerned the status of an individual on the Contract Agent Selection Tool database (CAST database), from which EU institutions, bodies, offices or agencies may recruit contract agent staff. The complainant had passed the selection tests and was included in the database, which is administered by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO), but she was mistakenly indicated as ‘recruited’ for a period of more than four years.

The Ombudsman found that the complainant may have lost out on the opportunity to be recruited by EU institutions using the CAST database during that period. The Ombudsman proposed to EPSO, as a solution, that it extend the validity of the complainant’s status in the database for the same amount of time as the time during which she had been mistakenly marked as recruited. EPSO accepted the proposal.

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with the conclusion that EPSO had settled the issue. To prevent such issues occurring in the future, she suggested that EPSO take action to ensure that, every time a candidate’s status in the CAST database is changed, they receive an automatic email informing them of the change.

Decision on alleged irregularities in how the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) carried out a staff selection procedure for recruiting a ‘command and control support officer’ (case 882/2021/PL)

Martes | 22 noviembre 2022

The complainant took issue with how the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) carried out a staff selection procedure for the recruitment of a ‘command and control support officer’. In particular, he was concerned that the selection criteria had been set to favour the recruitment ofa specific candidate. The complainant also disagreed with the use of the ‘reserve list’ of successful candidates from the selection procedure to recruit a service desk manager, arguing that this did not correspond to the expertise that the selection procedure had evaluated.

The Ombudsman opened an inquiry into these concerns and inspected Frontex’s internal documents. The Ombudsman found that how Frontex carried out the selection procedure ensured equal treatment of candidates. The Ombudsman also found that it was reasonable to recruit a service desk manager from the reserve list in question. The Ombudsman therefore closed the case with a finding of no maladministration.

Decisión sobre la forma en la que la que la Comisión Europea gestiona los movimientos de «puerta giratoria» de su personal (OI/1/2021/KR)

Jueves | 17 noviembre 2022

A medida que se confieren mayores competencias a la UE en ámbitos como la defensa o la asistencia sanitaria, es esencial contar con la confianza del público en la administración. Resulta muy perjudicial, por tanto, cualquier percepción de que los funcionarios públicos persigan intereses privados que entren en conflicto con su trabajo para el sector público. La defensora del pueblo europeo hace tiempo que ha identificado el fenómeno de las puertas giratorias como dañino para la confianza del público si no se gestiona de forma adecuada. Incluso un número reducido de movimientos de gran repercusión puede generar considerable preocupación pública y daño a la reputación. Esta investigación estratégica analizó 100 expedientes de «puertas giratorias» para detectar aspectos susceptibles de mejora y para orientar al resto de las administraciones de la UE en el futuro.

La investigación de la defensora del pueblo europeo encontró verdaderas mejoras desde que examinó el asunto por última vez, incluso orientación sobre cómo llevar a cabo análisis más rigurosos en cada caso.

Dicho esto, en algunos casos, la Comisión aprobó solicitudes de antiguos miembros de su personal para llevar a cabo actividades, a pesar de sus reservas acerca de si las condiciones impuestas al traslado reducirían los posibles riesgos (tales como conflictos de intereses y acceso a conocimiento o contactos dentro de la administración). La defensora del Pueblo considera que tales casos deben autorizarse únicamente si la actividad se puede someter a limitaciones que reduzcan de forma adecuada los riesgos y que se puedan vigilar y aplicar de modo fiable.

En caso de no poder aplicar tales limitaciones, la Comisión debe prohibir con carácter temporal a su antiguo personal que acepten los trabajos solicitados. No hacerlo conlleva el riesgo de subestimar los efectos corrosivos a lo largo del tiempo de que esos funcionarios lleven sus conocimientos y redes a ámbitos afines del sector privado, y ocasionen el consiguiente daño a la reputación de la UE.

Al aprobar una actividad con medidas de mitigación, la Comisión debe explorar todas las medidas disponibles. Por ejemplo, la Comisión podría aprobar un nuevo trabajo a condición de que el nuevo empleado del exmiembro del personal se comprometa a hacer públicas en su sitio web las limitaciones impuestas por la Comisión. Como mínimo, la Comisión debe exigir al (antiguo) miembro de su personal que presente pruebas de que las medidas impuestas se comunicaron al nuevo empleador.

Las dificultades a las que se ha enfrentado la Comisión para vigilar el cumplimiento han llevado a la defensora del pueblo europeo a reiterar su sugerencia de que la Comisión haga pública con mayor prontitud la información sobre todas las actividades posteriores al servicio en las instituciones de antiguos miembros del personal que evalúe. Esto mejoraría el escrutinio público de estas decisiones, que es imprescindible a efectos de vigilancia.

 

Decision on how the European Commission dealt with a request to extend the deadline for a retired staff member to request the ‘resettlement allowance’ (complaint 1428/2021/FA)

Lunes | 07 noviembre 2022

The case concerns the European Commission‘s refusal to extend the time limit for a retired staff member to request the resettlement allowance in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The complainant argued that due to the outbreak of the pandemic, she was not able to organise her resettlement to her place of origin within the prescribed time limit and asked the Commission to grant her an extension. 

The Ombudsman found that the decision of the Commission is in line with the Staff Regulations and EU case-law. The Ombudsman therefore closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

Decision on how the European Central Bank (ECB) deals with ‘revolving door’ cases (OI/1/2022/KR)

Viernes | 28 octubre 2022

The European Ombudsman has long identified ‘revolving doors’, whereby public officials move to the private sector, as a phenomenon that can potentially damage public trust if not managed properly.

This own-initiative inquiry sought to look at how the European Central Bank (ECB) deals with revolving door moves of its staff members.

Given the ECB's role in ensuring price stability and supervising financial and credit institutions, any moves by (former) ECB staff members to private financial or credit institutions, in particular those that fall under the ECB’s supervision, can pose conflict of interest and reputational risks, and cause public disquiet.

The Ombudsman’s inquiry assessed one specific case, which had raised public concerns, and also reviewed 26 cases of requests by staff members to take up occupational activities, either while on unpaid leave or after finishing work with the ECB. In all but one of the files reviewed ECB staff members moved to the private sector, including entities and banks that are under ECB supervision.

The Ombudsman concluded that the ECB should apply a more robust approach in relation to revolving door moves of its (former) middle ranking and senior staff to private sector jobs, in particular in the financial industry.

To address shortcomings that arose in the individual case and more generally in how the ECB tackles this challenge, the Ombudsman set out a series of suggestions on how the ECB can strengthen its rules, including in the context of the ongoing revision of the ECB’s Ethics Framework.

Specifically, the ECB should widen the scope of those staff who are subject to stricter notification and/or cooling-off requirements or opt for a general minimum requirement for all staff akin to the provisions of the EU Staff Regulations related to post-service occupational activities.

The ECB should also lengthen, from six months to one year, the prohibition on former senior ECB staff members lobbying their former colleagues.

The ECB should further improve its monitoring of the compliance of (former) staff members with their ethics obligations and conditions imposed by the ECB, for example by making public the conditions for authorising the post-employment activities of former senior staff members so that alleged breaches can be flagged.

The Ombudsman furthermore suggested that, where the ECB considers that a request from a staff member to take up an occupational activity while on unpaid leave poses risks that cannot be adequately mitigated by restrictions or when restrictions cannot be effectively monitored or enforced, it should not authorise such a request.

 

Decision on how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) addressed concerns about language discrimination in a selection procedure for EU staff in the field of international cooperation (case 761/2021/PL)

Jueves | 20 octubre 2022

The case concerned the language requirements set by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) in a selection procedure for recruiting EU staff in the field of international cooperation. The complainant considered that these requirements discriminated against candidates whose first language is English, French, Portuguese or Spanish.

The Ombudsman found the explanations given by EPSO reasonable as to why it had chosen the language requirements, in particular, its explicit intention to prevent discrimination on the basis of language knowledge. She therefore found no maladministration in how the language requirements were set.

However, the Ombudsman understood how the complainant perceived that the language requirements placed at a disadvantage candidates with specific knowledge of a certain set of the required languages. To avoid such a perception in future selection procedures with similar specific language requirements, she therefore made a suggestion to EPSO on how it presents in the competition notice the language requirements and the rationale for choosing such requirements. 

Decision on how an EU civilian mission dealt with the appeal of a seconded staff member’s performance evaluation (case 95/2022/NH)

Lunes | 10 octubre 2022

The case concerned a negative performance evaluation that an EU civilian mission gave to a seconded staff member. The staff member complained that the evaluation had been unfair because her line managers had not warned her that her performance at work had been poor. She also said that the evaluation report failed to take into account the fact that she had been absent for a long period of time. She claimed that the mission did not handle her appeal against the evaluation fairly.

Based on the inquiry the Ombudsman found nothing to suggest that the evaluation was unfair. She also found that the mission handled the complainant’s appeal in line with the applicable procedures. She therefore closed the inquiry with the conclusion that there was no maladministration.