BOLETÍN 1849: Agenda 60 Aniversario, Recruitment Head ICT,

Published since 1964

COMITE DU PERSONNEL STAFF COMMITTEE PERSONALRAT

ECOLES EUROPEENNES EUROPEAN SCHOOLS EUROPÄISCHE SCHULEN

Bulletin 1849

Budgetary Committee meeting, 6 and 7 November, Brussels

Chair: Mr S Dupré (Belgium)

I ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA (2012-09-D-66-en-6)

In answer to the parents the SG agrees to discuss the 60^th anniversary of the ES under Other Business

The Commission regrets that the Reform of the Secondary is not foreseen as an information point. The SG offers to give information under Other Business. He also offers to give an explanation of the rules for SWALS since the Commission has received complaints from parents

II ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

SG: have inaugurated 4 new ES inaugurated in recent weeks (Lux II, Bx IV, The Hague, Bad Vilbel) and Type II schools in Copenhagen and Tallinn in the pipeline. 

Budget: likely to end 2012 “with dignity”; awaiting ECJ decision on salaries. If there is a positive decision soon then “we have the funds to pay”, if it comes in 2013 then need another mechanism to pay,

Interpretation at BoG. Now found a new solution. Will offer then languages of countries hosting Type I schools.

► Recruitment of the Head of the ICT Unit 

Only one possible candidate from Sweden at present. Appeal to delegations for more candidates.

► Reflection on the Brussels European Schools and on their structure

It is difficult to present a document before getting an answer from Belgium about Bx V and this has been promised for the near future.. There was 42% take up rate for cat I four years ago and this is now 48%. Need a solution by 2018. 

Desperately need nursery and primary premises. Considering a school by phase approach. Need for a third Spanish section and maybe a second Greek one; a second Polish section has been requested. Need a Rumanian section from 2013.

Parents: Is there a plan B if the 5^th school is not made available as foreseen in the reflections.

SG: we have space at Laeken and will use that but need a solution for 2018 – there is no plan B...

III WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

Use of fees for the processing of higher education applications of European Baccalaureate candidates (2012-10-D-5-en-1)

A question of how to enter the income – it will be entered on the budget line for Overtime. In reply to a question the DSG informs the BC that schools have been asked to exercise as much flexibility as possible regarding a deadline for students to express their intention to apply.

IV CONCLUSIONS AND MINUTES

• a) Approval of the draft conclusions of the meeting of 14 and 15 March 2012 and follow-up at the meeting of the Board of Governors (2012-03-D-30-en-2)
• b) Approval of the draft minutes of the meeting of 14 and 15 March 2012 (2012-08-D-1-en-1)
•      Correction of Italy’s position on school fees

V  REPORTS

Report of the Chair of the Budgetary Committee for 2011-2012 (2012-10-D-29-en-1)

Introduced by its author: short report focussing on main issues under consideration. The cost sharing issue remains unresolved and the BoG must take a decision this year.

Chair: cost sharing debate still open and would like to conclude the debate under Belgian presidency.

SG: Cost sharing WG exists. The BoG discussed its proposals in April and there was a total lack of consensus. But the idea of cost sharing is not dead. Awaiting outcome of the 2014-2020 budget discussions. Idea is that the BoG should give the WG a clear mandate as to which way to go. (“Wait one month for the outcome of the budget framework debate”...)

• Report of the Court of Auditors for 2011 and replies of the Secretary-General of the European Schools (2012-09-D-47-en-1)
• Introduced by the Financial Controller:  Accounts reliable (despite several criticisms). Seven recommendations with replies from OSGES to each.
• Commission: Disappointed by the position on accruals accounting. Welcomes memorandum on purchasing policy; regrets only 3 of last year’s recommendations implemented
• Parents: ask about the company providing new COBEE; on recruitment: on local level there has to be a degree of flexibility to be able to respond to an emergency situation.
• SG: drastic decisions taken on ICT (“spent €2M for nothing”...)  the new school management software is developing very well; realistic hopes that new COBEE will be in first 4 schools by Jan 2013 and by mid February all the schools will have it, including the inventory module. The BC has discussed accruals accounting and decided not to go that way.  The pressure increases for it to be introduced and when new COBEE is available will have to analyse the costs involved as well as the consequences. On recruitment: have clear rules for AAS staff but there is a “big black hole” for recruitment of CdC. Guidelines to be found in the proposed new Staff Relations for CdC (“one of our top priorities this year!”).In the field of  ICT “we are starting to be compatible with the rest of the world....”
• VII ITEMS REQUIRING A DECISION FOR THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS

1) Reorganisation of the General Secretariat of the European Schools (2012-09-D-35-en-2)

Because of challenges resulting from an increase in workload in the pedagogical and legal affairs areas and difficulties with recruitment for ICT. The document proposes the creation of a new seconded post of Head of Pedagogical Development Unit, the conversion of a post of assistant to one of secretary, the creation of legal assistant post and approval to temporarily create an AAS post of Head of ICT unit. The DSG energetically defends the proposal for the new seconded post.

Commission: proposal not a good response to the problem; the answer to an increased workload cannot always be to create a new post; misses a list of current resources in the OSGES; cannot believe there is a need for 60 WGs. The ICT post is a seconded post and the MS must accept their responsibilities so against an AAS post. Germany: cannot deal with this request outside the normal budgetary procedure and agrees with the Commission on need for establishment chart; asks how Type II and Type III would contribute to the cost of a post... UK supports Commission and DE – 40% reduction in UK administration (“look for necessary resources elsewhere in the Bureau”) France and Luxembourg support these positions. Idem ES, NL (strongly opposed to any increase in the budget...) Greece asks about the possibility of using external legal services. The parents find it difficult to support new posts in the OSGES against the background of ever more stringent cuts in the schools and comments that “cost-sharing was an enormous flop until now”

SG: understand it is no on head of PDU and transformation of post; will provide an establishment chart; “should stop doing things which are not so useful” (like preparing the 153 page document on the derogations from chapter XIX !!) and focus on priorities instead of doing everything for everybody. The ES needs a Head of ICT.

A Beckmann on the legal assistant post: easy to reorganise distribution of tasks in a ministry with 1200 people. In an office of 50 with only 6 in senior posts it is not possible. With the ever increasing number of appeals the workload of the Complaints Boards will increase significantly. Also pleads “please don’t tie our hands on the Head of ICT.

SG: Concludes “understand there will be no new posts” and need to discuss in the framework of the budget. Points to the risk of being without a head of ICT in the middle of the biggest ever ICT changes and asks that the door be left open for the BoG to decide if there are no candidates for a seconded post. Will provide an establishment chart of the OSGES for the next meeting.

Continued in BI 1850