Gelex

Council Decision of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (2011/866/EU)

In forceVersion 2011-12-19from 2012-01-11
Grade B

mapped from publisher markup. A grade says how a document's structure was obtained, not how reliable the law is.

Ask Gelex about this law

Address https://gelex.eu/eli/EU/decision/2011/866@2011-12-19/en

Contents
  1. Preamble

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union laid down by Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68, and in particular Article 65 of the Staff Regulations and Annexes VII, XI and XIII thereto, and Article 20 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission for a Council Regulation adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto,

Whereas:

(1) In light of a serious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social situation within the Union, on 17 December 2010, the Council requested the Commission to implement Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations by presenting an appropriate proposal for the annual adjustment 2011. The Commission, on 13 July 2011, submitted to the Council the report on the exception clause (Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations) — (the report) covering the period from 1 July 2010 to mid-May 2011. On the basis of the report, the Commission concluded that the conditions for applying the exception clause were not met.

(2) The Council did not share the Commission’s conclusions as they, in the Council’s view, did not reflect the economic and social situation within the Union.

(3) Consequently and in view of the financial and economic crisis currently taking place within the Union and resulting in substantial fiscal adjustments in a great number of Member States, on 4 November 2011, the Council repeated its request to the Commission to implement Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations on the basis of data reflecting the economic and social situation in autumn 2011 and to submit an appropriate remuneration adjustment proposal in good time to allow the European Parliament and the Council to examine and adopt it before the end of 2011.

(4) The Commission, on 25 November 2011, presented to the Council supplementary information on the Commission report on the exception clause of 13 July 2011 (the supplementary information). The conclusions drawn by the Commission remained that the conditions for triggering the exception clause were not met.

(5) In effect, the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto follows the method set out in Annex XI to the Staff Regulations. The figure for the annual adjustment 2011 proposed by the Commission is 1,7 %.

(6) The Council considers that neither of the documents submitted by the Commission, namely, the report and the supplementary information, provides for an accurate and comprehensive reflection of the current economic and social situation within the Union.

(7) Moreover, in the view of the Council, the Commission made an error in defining the time span to be covered by its analysis too narrowly. That error prevented the Commission from making a proper assessment of the situation and therefore has significantly distorted the conclusions derived from both documents, namely that there was no sudden and serious deterioration of an economic and social situation within the Union.

(8) The Council does not share these conclusions. The Council is convinced that the financial and economic crisis currently taking place within the Union and resulting in substantial fiscal adjustments, inter alia, national officials’ salary adjustments, in a great number of Member States constitutes a serious and sudden deterioration of the economic and social situation within the Union.

(9) Moreover, in the Council’s opinion, this serious and sudden deterioration of the economic and social situation could not be reflected quickly enough in the officials’ remunerations through the application of the method.

(10) With respect to the economic situation, the forecast for growth in the Union has been substantially reduced for the year 2012 from + 1,9 % to + 0,6 %. EU quarterly growth is down from + 0,7 % in the first quarter of 2011 to + 0,2 % in the second and in the third quarters of that year. As for the fourth quarter of 2011 and first quarter of 2012, no growth of GDP is foreseen.

(11) While assessing the current economic and social situation, more focus should have been put on the situation on the financial markets, in particular on distortions to credit supply and declines in asset prices, which are major determinants for the economic development.

(12) With respect to the social situation, job creation has been insufficient to remedy a major reduction in the unemployment rate. The EU unemployment rate in 2010 and 2011 fluctuated to reach 9,8 % in October 2011 and should remain constantly high.

(13) In the light of the above, the Council considers that the Commission’s position as regards the existence of a serious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social situation and its refusal to submit a proposal under Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations is based on manifestly insufficient and erroneous grounds.

(14) Since the European Court of Justice held in Case C-40/10 that, for the period of application of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations, the procedure laid down in Article 10 thereof, constitutes the only means of taking account of an economic crisis in the adjustment of remuneration, the Council was dependent on a proposal from the Commission to apply that Article in times of crisis.

(15) The Council is convinced that, in light of the wording of Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations and under the duty of sincere cooperation between the institutions as enshrined in the second sentence of Article 13(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the Commission was obliged to submit an appropriate proposal to the Council. The Commission’s conclusions and its failure to submit such a proposal are therefore in breach of that obligation.

(16) As the Council may act only on a proposal from the Commission, the Commission’s failure to draw the correct conclusions from the evidence and to present a proposal under Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations has prevented the Council from reacting correctly to the serious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social situation through the adoption of an act under Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations,

DECIDES NOT TO ADOPT THE COMMISSION’S PROPOSAL for a Council Regulation adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto. Done at Brussels, 19 December 2011. For the Council The President M. Korolec

Versions

  1. 2011-12-19

Cited by

  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    By its application, the European Commission asks the Court to annul Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (OJ 2011 L 341, p. 54, the contested decision), on the ground that that decision constitutes an infringement of, inter alia, Article 65 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, set out in Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC)
  • Action brought on 9 November 2012 — ZZ v Council (Case F-136/12) Notice · Grade B
    2013/C 26/155Language of the case: French Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer) Defendant: Council of the European Union Annulment, firstly, of Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and, secondly, the salary statements for January, February and March 2012 established pursuant to that decision.
  • Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) 15 September 2016 [Text rectified by order of 28 November 2016] Judgment · Grade B
    On 3 February 2012, the Commission brought an action for the annulment of Decision 2011/866 (Case C‑63/12). It also sent the Presidency of the Council a letter dated 25 January 2012, registered at the Secretariat of the Council on 20 February 2012, calling on it to adopt, pursuant to Article 265 TFEU, the November 2011 proposal for adjustment of remuneration within two months of receipt of that letter. The Council took note of that letter.
  • Action brought on 26 April 2012 — European Commission v Council of the European Union (Case C-196/12) Notice · Grade B
    By the present action, the applicant submits that the Council has departed from the Commission’s Proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pensions of officials under Article 3 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations, despite the fact that it is apparent from the mandatory terms of that article that the method for the annual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions is an automatic procedure which leaves the Council no discretion. The abovementioned article obliges the Council to adopt the Commission’s proposal before 31 December of the cu
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    By Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (OJ 2011 L 341, p. 54), the Council decided not to adopt the [contested] proposal, inter alia on the following grounds: ...
  • Action brought on 5 March 2012 — USFSPEI and Loescher v Council (Case T-119/12) Notice · Grade B
    annul Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with the effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto;
  • Action brought on 5 March 2012 — USFSPEI and Loescher v Council (Case T-119/12) Notice · Grade B
    order the Council to pay the USF and the applicant one Euro by way of symbolic compensation for the non-material damage suffered through the wrongful act in the form of the adoption of Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011;
  • Action brought on 9 November 2012 — ZZ v Council (Case F-134/12) Notice · Grade B
    2013/C 26/153Language of the case: French Applicant: ZZ (represented by: A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal, D. Abreu Caldas and S. Orlandi, lawyers) Defendant: Council of the European Union Annulment, firstly, of Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and, secondly, the salary statements for January, February and March 2012 established pursuant to that decision.
  • Action brought on 9 November 2012 — ZZ v Council (Case F-134/12) Notice · Grade B
    Declare that Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto is unlawful;
  • Action brought on 9 November 2012 — ZZ v Council (Case F-134/12) Notice · Grade B
    Annul the response rejecting the claim of 30 July 2012 made against the salary statements for January, February and March 2012, established pursuant to Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011;
  • Action brought on 9 November 2012 — ZZ v Council (Case F-134/12) Notice · Grade B
    Order the Council to pay the applicant a symbolic EUR 1 as compensation for the non-material damage suffered as a result of the administrative error committed by the adoption of Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011;
  • Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 12 September 2013 Opinion · Grade B
    In the action in Case C‑63/12: annul Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto; order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs; and leave the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Spain, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Parl
  • Action brought on 7 February 2012 — European Commission v Council of the European Union (Case C-63/12) Notice · Grade B
    annul Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pensions of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto;
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    The Commission submits that this action for failure to act has been brought as a matter of precaution, in the event that the Council’s attitude is held to constitute a failure to act, in particular with respect to the adjustment of correction coefficients, and in the event that, in the action for annulment brought against Council Decision 2011/866, that decision is not considered by the Court to be a challengeable act.
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    In this case, the Council defined its position on the proposal for a regulation by adopting Decision 2011/866, which is an act against which an action can be brought under Article 263 TFEU, as the Court held in paragraphs 29 to 33 of the judgment of 19 November 2013 in Case C‑63/12 Commission v Council.
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    Further, the Council stated, in the recitals of the preamble to Decision 2011/866, that, in the light of the current financial and economic crisis, the Commission was obliged to submit an appropriate proposal under the exception clause laid down in Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations.
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    First, the title of Decision 2011/866 and its operative part refer to the full title of the proposal for a regulation.
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) 19 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
    Secondly, the exception clause provided in Article 10 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations and the statement of reasons in Decision 2011/866, which is based on the ground that the Commission should have submitted a proposal on the basis of Article 10 instead of submitting a proposal for a regulation on the basis of Article 3 of Annex XI, cover the annual adjustment of remuneration and pensions in its entirety, in other words both the adjustment of the general level of remuneration and pensions and the adjustment of correction coefficients, as the Court held in paragraphs 90 to 95 and 100 to 10
  • Opinion of Advocate General Bot delivered on 12 September 2013 Opinion · Grade B
    In the action in Case C‑63/12: annul Council Decision 2011/866/EU of 19 December 2011 concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Council Regulation adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pension of the officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto; order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs; and leave the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of Spain, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Parl
  • Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 November 2013 — European Commission v Council of the European Union (Case C-63/12) Notice · Grade B
    Action for annulmentDecision 2011/866/EUAnnual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European UnionStaff RegulationsArticle 65 of the Staff RegulationsMethod of adjustmentArticle 3 of Annex XI to the Staff RegulationsException clauseArticle 10 of Annex XI to the Staff RegulationsSerious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social situationAdjustment of correction coefficientsArticle 64 of the Staff RegulationsCouncil decisionRefusal to adopt the Commission’s proposal2014/C 39/05Language of the case: French Applicant: European Commission (rep