Dear Ms X,

On 8 January 2022, you submitted a complaint to the European Ombudsman about how the European Environment Agency (EEA) carried out selection procedures EEA/CA/2022/5 (Expert - Copernicus land monitoring services) and EEA/AD/2020/14 (Expert - Data Flow Management).

After careful analysis of all the information you provided with your complaint, we have decided to close the inquiry regarding selection procedure EEA/CA/2022/5 (Expert - Copernicus land monitoring services) with the conclusion that there was no maladministration by the EEA.

Regarding selection procedure EEA/AD/2020/14 (Expert - Data Flow Management), we concluded that there were insufficient grounds to open an inquiry.

Selection procedure EEA/CA/2022/5

You argue that it was unfair for the EEA to exclude you from selection procedure EEA/CA/2022/5 because you were not able to take the written test in the allocated time slot, and that the EEA did not reply to all your questions in your complaint under article 90 of the Staff Regulations. You are of the opinion that the written test was not mandatory, and that the EEA therefore had no grounds to remove you from the selection procedure.

The EEA clearly explained to you that, as set out in the vacancy notice, which was the legal framework for the recruitment procedure, the procedure consisted of both a written test and an interview. The written test was thus mandatory. While the EEA did not reply to all your questions, we consider the EEA’s reply overall to be reasonable and appropriate. Furthermore, we consider the time slot of six hours to do the 40-minute test to be reasonable, giving sufficient flexibility to candidates. The EEA communicated the conditions clearly to candidates sufficiently in advance, meaning that candidates had time to anticipate and make arrangements to avoid potential time clashes. The way in which the EEA handled the circumstances of your case do not constitute maladministration.  

Selection procedure EEA/AD/2020/14

You argued that the EEA shortened the time of the written test in selection procedure EEA/AD/2020/14. Although it is regrettable that the EEA sent you the test late, we note that even if you had obtained the full score for the written test, you would have not met the threshold to progress. Given that there is no indication of a systemic problem, we therefore find that there are not sufficient grounds to open an inquiry into to this part of your complaint.

I appreciate this may not be your desired outcome, but I hope you find these explanations helpful. Thank you for having contacted the European Ombudsman.

Yours sincerely, 

Tina Nilsson
Head of the Case-handling Unit

Strasbourg, 13/04/2023