Sök efter undersökningar

The case concerned how EPSO assessed the complainant’s professional experience in a selection procedure for recruiting EU staff in the field of audit.

The Ombudsman found that the selection board had examined the replies provided in the complainant’s application and assessed it against the selection criteria. The Ombudsman did not identify a manifest error in how the selection board assessed the complainant’s application, and therefore closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

The case concerned how the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) handled a selection procedure for recruiting an administrator for its Diversity Europe Group. The complainant had been informed that she was the best candidate and that she would be recruited. However the selection procedure was subsequently cancelled with no appointment being made.

The Ombudsman considered that the situation was highly regrettable and placed the complainant in a difficult situation. However, the Ombudsman’s inquiry showed that there was no maladministration in how the EESC’s general secretariat dealt with the selection procedure. Nonetheless, the Ombudsman considered that the matter raised issues concerning the communication to candidates in selection procedures and the organisation of selection procedures for EESC groups during the period around the renewal of the EESC’s term. To address this, the Ombudsman made two suggestions for improvement.

 

The case concerned a practice of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of asking job applicants to provide certain personal information, notably related to their family situation, before the EIB’s recruitment decision.

The Ombudsman recognised that the EIB had established this practice to make its procedures as efficient as possible. However, she expressed concern that the gathering of personal information was disproportionate and could negatively impact on trust in the EIB’s recruitment procedures. Not all applicants would necessarily be reassured that the personal information would under no circumstances play a role in their chances of getting the post.

The EIB replied that it had changed its practices to address the concerns raised by the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman welcomed the EIB’s constructive response, and closed the inquiry.