Dear Mrs S.,
On 14 April 1998 you lodged a complaint with the European Ombudsman concerning the alleged refusal of the European Commission to consider your applications for a contract as an auxiliary or as an interim since December 1997.
On 25 May 1998, I forwarded the complaint to the President of the European Commission. The European Commission sent its opinion on 27 July 1998 and I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished. I received your observations on 14 August 1998.
I am now writing to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

Between 1988 and 1995 the complainant has on various occasions worked as a typist for the European Commission through a temporary employment agency. In 1997 the complainant was hired for a three month period as an auxiliary agent. At the end of that contract, in December 1997, she was informed that for budgetary reasons, and despite a positive appraisal of her work, it would not be possible to renew her contract.
Since the end of her contract at the European Commission in December 1997, the complainant had registered in various temporary employment agencies.
In her letter to the Ombudsman of 14 April 1998, the complainant claims that since the end of her contract, the European Commission has consistently refused to accept her applications for a new working contract as an auxiliary agent, or to hire her through a temporary employment agency, even though she has a 12-month "working credit" left at the Commission. The complainant puts forward that the Institution never explained the reasons for these refusals. Further, she declares that the attitude of the European Commission towards some temporary employment agencies has prevented them from proposing her any contract at the Commission. The complainant in particular names the agency "Avenue Louise Interim", and recounts several anecdotes about other agencies which according to her are significant for their unusual behaviour towards her.

THE INQUIRY

The Commission's opinion
In its opinion the European Commission, in order to explain what the complainant meant under "working credit", briefly mentioned the periods in which the complainant has worked for the European Commission, both as auxiliary (60 days) and as interim (350 days). The Commission put forward that according to internal rules, in the case of the aforementioned employment status, a person can only work for the European Commission during a maximum period of 660 days. As a consequence, the complainant still had the possibility to work for a period of 250 days. However the Commission stated that it merely constitutes a possibility and that it does not give the complainant any right to be hired. As far as the contract as auxiliary agent is concerned, it was signed for a period of three months without foreseeing any obligation of extension.
Concerning the alleged refusal of the European Commission to accept the complainant's applications for a new working contract, the Commission stresses that no application has been refused and that the complainant is still likely to be appointed as interim or auxiliary agent.
Eventually the European Commission reminded that it cannot be held responsible for the relations between some temporary employment agencies and the complainant, in particular in the present case, since the evoked agency is not among the three agencies the Institution is working with pursuant to the results of a tender procedure. In its opinion forwarded to the Ombudsman, the European Commission advised the complaint to register in at least one of those agencies.
The complainant's observations
The complainant maintained her claims, stating that in the framework of a phone call, an official of the European Commission has indeed refused her application by advising her to register in some temporary employment agency while in fact she was asking for the possibility to work as an auxiliary agent again. She considers that advice as a demotion. Nevertheless, she had registered in the agencies working with the European Commission many years ago.
Further she claims that if the European Commission considers someone as a persona non grata, the employment agencies scrupulously abide by the opinion of their client.

THE DECISION

1 The remaining "working credit" at the European Commission
1.1 The complainant claims that after her three months contract as an auxiliary typist in 1997, the European Commission has not given her any opportunity to use the 12 months "working credit" which she still has at the European Commission. The Commission stated that pursuant to internal rules, the complainant indeed has the hypothetical possibility to work for a remaining period of 250 days at the European Commission, but that this possibility does not confer the complainant any right to be hired.
1.2 The European Ombudsman notes that as far as the complainant's working status is concerned, statutory(1) and internal rules(2) of the European Commission foresee limited periods of employment. As the European Commission correctly pointed out, these limitations cannot be considered equivalent to an obligation for the Institution to employ the concerned agents until these time-limits are reached and until the hypothetical working time potential at the Commission is fully exhausted. The Ombudsman has therefore concluded that there is no evidence of maladministration as regards this aspect of the case.
2 The alleged refusal to explain the rejection of the complainant's applications
The complainant puts forward that the European Commission has not given any reasons for the refusals of her applications. The European Commission replied that no application of the complainant has been rejected so far, and that the complainant may still apply for a contract at the European Commission.
The complainant alleges that the European Commission implicitly refused her application by advising her to register in a temporary employment agency while she was asking for available posts as auxiliary agent. The Ombudsman notes that there is no element in the complaint which establishes that the complainant has ever applied directly to the European Commission for any particular available post, and for which the Commission would have rejected her application without a reasoned decision. Thus, there appears to be no instance of maladministration concerning this point of the complaint.
3 The attitude of the European Commission towards temporary employment agencies
3.1 The complainant alleges that the attitude of the European Commission towards some temporary employment agencies has prevented these agencies from offering her a contract at the European Commission. Moreover, according to the complainant, the behaviour of the agencies towards her has been unusual. The European Commission pointed out that it cannot be held responsible for the relations between the complainant and the agencies.
3.2 The European Ombudsman notes that the complainant has not offered any tangible evidence proving that the European Commission has asked some temporary employment agency to reject her applications, nor has the complainant explained why the European Commission would have acted wrongfully by setting up recruitment criterions she may not have met.
3.3 It must be recalled that as far as the behaviour of the temporary employment agencies is concerned, Article 2.1 of the European Ombudsman's statute provides that the role of the Ombudsman is "to help to uncover maladministration in the activities of the Community institutions and bodies (...)", and that "No action by any other authority or person may be the subject of a complaint to the Ombudsman". As a consequence, the activities of the employment agencies are outside of the Ombudsman's remit.
3.4 As regards this allegation of the complainant, and on the basis of the information collected by the European Ombudsman, no instance of maladministration has been found.
4 Conclusion
On the basis of the European Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Commission. The Ombudsman has therefore decided to close the case.
Yours sincerely
Jacob SÖDERMAN

---

(1) Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities - Regulations and Rules applicable to officials and other servants of the European Communities.

(2) Code of Conduct of the European Commission - 5 October 1994 (Overall measures governing the relations between the services of the European Commission and certain personnel categories) (SEC(94)1573 et 1573/3).