Österreich 2006  Präsidentschaft der Europäischen Union Austria 2006  Presidency of the European Union Autriche 2006  Présidence de L‘Union européenne Cross-border mobility of public sector workers Karin Thienel Presidency Karin Thienel Presidency

Job-to-job mobility According to the labour force survey of 2003, 8.2% of the EU’s total employed labour force had moved to another job after one year (yearly job-to-job mobility). Workers in the EU stay in the same job for an average of 10.6 years, compared to 6.7 years in the US. Geographical mobility Approximately 1.5% of EU-25 citizens live and work in a different Member State from their country of origin. Every year on average 7.2% of EU citizens change their place of residence, of which 15% refer to a change in job as the main reason for the move. This compares to 16.2% of US citizens moving home each year, 17% for occupational reasons. m?id_page_category=FFhttp://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/workersmobility_2006/index.cf m?id_page_category=FF Facts and Figures

Eurobarometer on geographical and labour market mobility 2005 Despite being attached to their region of origin, 1/3 of EU citizens have moved from their home region and are happy to have done so EU citizens strongly believe in the right to free movement EU citizens know that geographical mobility can improve their job prospects Europeans value employment stability but, in some Member States, job mobility has proven positive and become well accepted Mobility should not put workers‘ sense of security at risk Both stability and mobility are important: stability helps workers build on their experience and changing jobs improve their adaptability Information available on: cfm?id_page=51 cfm?id_page=51

Cross-Border Mobility of Public Sector Workers Intensive preoccupation with the issue of legal specificities of cross-border mobility of public sector workers by EPAN- Human Resources Working Group Information on Mobility gathered during several Presidencies and regrouped during Danish Presidency (2002) Austrian Presidency has taken the initiative to update and complement the information previously collected now including information provided by EU-25 Member States

Study on Cross-Border Mobility of Public Sector Workers Questionnaire forwarded on 4 January 2006 to all 25 Member States as well as to the Accession States Romania and Bulgaria Member States were asked to check and to update the specific information already existing if need be; new Member States and Accession States contributed for the first time (100% response rate) Expert advice and support by the European Commission Contribution of EPAN to the European Year of Workers’ Mobility 2006 as well as to the Social Dialogue

Study on Cross-Border Mobility of Public Sector Workers The study deals with the following topics: Nationality condition Recognition of professional experience and seniority Other legal specificities of cross-border mobility of public sector workers Other aspects of cross-border mobility of public sector workers

Nationality Condition Exhaustive lists / exemplary lists Rules provide for a general opening of all public sector posts; in order to restrict posts to nationals additional application rules are still necessary On the basis of presumptions/criteria and/or guidelines on sectors/posts provided by specific rules the posts reserved for nationals are decided on a case-by-case basis Specific rules on the public sector posts which are reserved for nationals exist in most Member States; all other posts are open to EU nationals.

One Member State does not have special rules on this issue, but applies directly Article 39 (4) EC and the jurisprudence on a case-by-case approach One Member State opened to EU nationals only the sectors identified in the European Commission‘s 1988 action Nationality Condition for all posts in the public administration exists in one Member State

CONCLUSIONS The information provided by the Member States shows that: during the recent past, Member States have opened up large parts of their public sectors to EU nationals the interpretation of Art 39 (4) EC, the relevant jurisprudence and their application in practice varies strongly between the different Member States a number of Member States still have to adapt their national rules in order to bring them into line with Community law

Recognition of Professional Experience and Seniority Professional experience / seniority play a role during a recruitment procedure in many Member States In one Member State professional experience /seniority are formal conditions for access to a recruitment procedure for some positions Working conditions (e.g. salary, grade) are often determined on the basis of previous professional experience / seniority Some Member States also take into account experience acquired in the private sector In only one Member State professional experience and seniority do not play any role for access and working conditions

CONCLUSIONS The information provided by the Member States shows that: many Member States have already adapted their national rules in order to take into account professional experience / seniority acquired in another Member State they have now to monitor whether these rules are applied correctly in practice some Member States still have the necessary reforms under way or to begin there is still a need for action – either reforms or monitoring of their application

Other legal specificities of cross-border mobility of public sector workers In many Member States specific language requirements exist. Conclusions: Member States are allowed to require the level of language which is necessary for the job in question They can neither require only a specific qualification as proof nor that the worker has a mother tongue level of a certain language

Other aspects of cross-border mobility of public sector workers Opportunities provided by national rules for staff in order to spend some time in the public sector of other Member States, European and International Organisations and training institutes: Short term exchange programs for European Integration Training Bilateral and mulitlateral exchange schemes between Member States Twinning Special leave Placement / Secondment / Transfer

FINAL CONCLUSIONS Member States have made or initiated reforms in order to bring their specific rules into line with Community law on free movement of workers Member States are encouraged to finalize the ongoing and to initiate the planned reforms as soon as possible Member States are encouraged to monitor that the application of new rules abolishes legal obstacles to cross-border mobility of public sector workers Member States are encouraged to keep up or to create opportunities for their staff to spend some time in another Member State, European Institution or International Organisation

Thank you for your attention!