REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL Study on  Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations
Date: 2011-02-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European official, regulations for civil servants, report, servant (EU)

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 1.2.2011 
COM(2011) 42 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

Study on  
Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

Study on  
Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

On  16  July  2009,  the  Council  asked  the  Commission  to  undertake  a  study  on  the 
implementation  in  the  institutions  of  the  Common  Rules  laying  down  the  procedure  for 
implementing Article 45(2) of the Staff Regulations. 

In the context of the reform of the Staff Regulations, the Council decided that in future each 
official must be able to work in a third language. With a view to implementing this decision, 
Article  45(2)  of  the  Staff  Regulations  establishes  a  direct  link  between  the  requirement  to 
demonstrate  ability  to  work  in  a  third  language  and  the  securing  of  a  first  promotion  after 
recruitment.  

The  institutions  have  adopted  common  rules  for  implementing  this  paragraph.  These  rules 
apply  to  officials  whose  first  promotion  takes  effect  after  30  April  20061.  In  particular  they 
provide  for  access  by  officials  to  training  in  a  third  language.  The  rules  state  that  for  all 
promotions taking effect before 31 December 2008, the required level corresponds to level 4 
of  interinstitutional  language  training  (equivalent  to  level  A2  of  the  Council  of  Europe's 
Common  European  Framework  of  Reference  for  Languages),  while  for  promotions  taking 
effect from 1 January 2009, the required level is level 6 (equivalent to level B2 of the Council 
of Europe's Common European Framework of Reference for Languages). 

The structure of the study is based on eight questions asked at the request of the Council.  

The study covers all the institutions. To this end, each institution has provided the necessary 
figures concerning its own staff. The figures in the study therefore cover all the institutions, 
with  the  exception  of  some  statistics  whose  origin  is  indicated.  The  figures  relate  to  the 
situation at 31 December 2009 unless otherwise indicated. 

2. 

THE PERSONS CONCERNED BY THIS MEASURE 

The following people are potentially affected by the requirement to demonstrate ability in a 
third language before promotion: 

•  all the officials in the institution in active employment at 1 May 2004 who had not been 

promoted for the first time following recruitment by 1 May 2006, and 

•  all the officials recruited after 1 May 2004. 

1 

By virtue of Article 11 of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations the new obligation under Article 45(2) is 
not to apply to promotions taking effect before 1 May 2006. It must also be stated that officials who 
have passed certain competitions for lawyer-linguists, translators or interpreters automatically fulfil the 
condition relating to ability to work in a third language.  

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
The table below shows the numbers potentially affected in each institution. 

In active 
employm
ent at 1 
May 
2004 but 
not yet 
promote
d 

Recruite
d 2004 

Recruite
d 2005 

Recruite
d 2006 

Recruite
d 2007 

Recruite
d 2008 

Situation at 
1 January 
2009 

Recruite
d 2009 

Total 

EP 

COUNCIL 

271 

227 

378 

269 

469 

273 

1887 

186 

2073 

248 

187 

225 

128 

255 

289 

1332 

156 

1488 

COMMISSION 

3612 

674 

1416 

1245 

1400 

1146 

9493 

857 

10350 

ECJ 

Court of 
Auditors 

EESC 

CoR 

Total 

275 

166 

111 

54 

27 

14 

30 

30 

77 

77 

57 

50 

185 

160 

101 

964 

79 

1043 

54 

42 

25 

105 

78 

61 

43 

58 

43 

404 

57 

461 

319 

42 

361 

236 

45 

281 

4598 

1328 

2280 

1948 

2528 

1953 

14635 

1422 

16057 

3. 

LANGUAGES STUDIED AS A THIRD LANGUAGE IN CONNECTION WITH ARTICLE 45(2) 
OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS, WITH AN INDICATION OF THE NUMBER OF OFFICIALS 
WHO CHOSE EACH LANGUAGE, BROKEN DOWN BY NATIONALITY WHERE POSSIBLE 

Officials can prove their competence in a third language in three ways: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

by  providing  diplomas  which  are  examined  and  recognised  by  EPSO  (European 
Personnel Selection Office); 

by passing a language test organised by EPSO; 

by  following  an  interinstitutional  or  other  language  course  and  passing  the  final 
examination. 

In the third case, the Common Rules state that the applications for language training by the 
officials  affected  by  the  third  language  requirement  take  priority  over  other  training 
applications. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

  
 
Between  May  2004  and  December  2009,  13 394  applications  for  language  training 
(interinstitutional  courses2)  were  submitted  which  benefited  from  the  priority  relating  to 
Article 45(2).  

The  table  below  shows  the  languages  studied,  indicating  the  percentage  of  officials  who 
selected the most often chosen languages.  

Commission 

Council3 

European 
Commission 

Other Institutions4 

Total 

French 

English 

German 

Spanish 

Dutch 

Italian 

Other 

Total 

52 % 

18 % 

9 % 

8 % 

7 % 

4 % 

2% 

53 % 

20 % 

5 % 

7 % 

10 % 

3 % 

2% 

52 % 

24 % 

8 % 

6 % 

3 % 

5 % 

2% 

43 % 

21 % 

12 % 

7 % 

4 % 

6 % 

7% 

50 % 

20 % 

9 % 

8 % 

6 % 

4 % 

3 % 

100 % 

100 % 

100 % 

100 % 

100 % 

French and English account for almost 70% of all the languages. However, applications were 
submitted for training courses in all the Community languages. 

4. 

OFFICIALS  WHO  SECURED  THEIR  FIRST  PROMOTION  DURING  THE  TRANSITIONAL 
PERIOD WITHOUT HAVING REACHED LEVEL 6 

During  the  transitional  period,  which  ended  on  31  December  2008,  961  officials  were 
promoted without having reached level 6 of the interinstitutional language courses.  

There were three ways of demonstrating competence in a third language during this period: 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

2 

3 
4 

recognition of a certificate/diploma by EPSO (equivalent to level 4 or higher); 

passing of a test organised by EPSO (at level 4); 

passing of an interinstitutional or other language course (at level 4). 

Most officials who follow a language course to demonstrate ability to work in a third language choose 
an  interinstitutional  language  course.  This  makes  it  easier  to  gather  data  as  the  organisation  of  these 
courses is centralised. Nevertheless, it must be borne in mind that other language courses exist which 
the Commission is unable to take into account in this study.  
May 2004 - December 2008  
The Court of Justice cannot distinguish between participants following an Article 45(2) priority course 
and those following a course for other reasons. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

  
 
 
 
                                                 
Of  these  three  methods,  48%  of  officials  who,  during  the  transitional  period,  demonstrated 
their  ability  at  level  4  chose  to  do  an  interinstitutional  language  course.  The  other  officials 
chose to do an EPSO test or to have a diploma recognised, which means that they already had 
a sufficient knowledge of a third language.  

Methods of demonstrating language competence chosen by officials who secured their first promotion during the 
transitional period: 

Language courses 

% 

EPSO test 

% 

Diplomas recognised 
by EPSO 

% 

Total 

EP 

COUNCIL 

85 

58 

56% 

76% 

49 

13 

32% 

17% 

19 

5 

12% 

153 

7% 

76 

COMMISSION 

276 

40% 

250 

37% 

158 

23% 

684 

Other 
Institutions 

Total 

40 

83% 

6 

13% 

2 

4% 

48 

459 

48% 

318 

33% 

184 

19% 

961 

5. 

OFFICIALS  WHO  SECURED  THEIR  FIRST  PROMOTION  AFTER  HAVING  REACHED 
LEVEL 6 BY MEANS OF LANGUAGE TRAINING  

Following the end of the transitional period on 31 December 2008, all officials who had not 
been promoted for the first time were required to demonstrate ability equivalent to level 6. 

However,  even  though  this  was  not  compulsory,  some  officials  reached  level  6  in  language 
courses during the transitional period even though the level required was level 4. 

The table below shows:  

•  in  the  first  column:  the  number  of  officials  who  reached  level  6  by  means  of  language 

training and who were promoted during the transitional period; 

•  in the second column: the number of officials who reached level 6 by means of language 

training and who were promoted in 2009; 

EN 

5 

   EN 

  
Officials promoted after passing level 6 in language courses: 

Transitional period 

Year 2009 

Total 

EP 

Council 

147 

108 

Commission 

1672 

42 

60  

24 

17 

Court of Justice

Court of 
Auditors 

EESC 

Committee of 
the Regions 

Total 

 122 

92 

907 

28  

24  

45 

21 

269 

200 

2579 

70  

84 

69 

38 

2070 

1239 

3309 

It emerges from this that 2 070 officials were promoted after having reached level 6 by means 
of  language  training  during  the  transitional  period,  and  an  additional  1239  officials  were 
promoted after having reached level 6 by means of language training in 2009. 

6. 

OFFICIALS  WHOSE  PROMOTION  WAS  DELAYED  BECAUSE  OF  FAILURE  IN  A 
LANGUAGE TEST

5

The promotion exercise is different in each institution. At the Commission and Parliament, the 
system  involves  the  accumulation  of  points:  officials  are  promoted  when  they  reach  the 
threshold  for  promotion.  It  is  therefore  possible,  in  this  kind  of  system,  to  identify  officials 
who  have  reached  the  threshold  but  have  not  yet  demonstrated  their  ability  in  a  third 
language, and whose promotion was delayed as a result. However, in some other institutions, 
such  as  the  Council,  there  is  no  points  system.  Officials  who  do  not  comply  with  the 
requirement laid down in Article 45(2) are included on the list of those eligible for promotion 
(officials  who  have  acquired  the  necessary  seniority  to  be  promoted)  but  are  automatically 
excluded  from  promotion  without  any  examination  of  their  merit.  The  number  of  such 
officials is easy to calculate but one cannot be certain that they have been promoted if they 
complied  with  the  requirement  in  Article  45(2)  because  promotion  is  granted  after  a 
comparative examination of merit. Other institutions have still different systems. Therefore it 
is not possible to conduct a full comparison of "delayed" promotions.  

5 

Or failure to demonstrate competence by another means. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

  
 
  
                                                 
The  table  below  therefore  shows  the  number  of  cases  of  non-promotion  or  the  number 
excluded from the list of those eligible for promotion, for each year.  

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

EP 

Council 

Commission 

Court of Justice 

Court of Auditors 

EESC 

Committee of the 
Regions 

Total 

0 

0 

17 

0 

 0 

 0 

3  

20 

4 

17 

20 

0 

0 

3  

1  

45 

4 

9 

30 

0 

2  

0  

 2 

47 

Total 

17  

45 

 173 

12 

 26 

6  

97  

 9 

19 

106 

12 

2  

3  

5  

156 

268 

7. 

RESOURCES AND MEANS USED TO MEET SPECIFIC TRAINING NEEDS WITH A VIEW TO 
OBTAINING  THE  QUALIFICATIONS  LAID  DOWN  IN  ARTICLE  45(2)  OF  THE  STAFF 
REGULATIONS,  INCLUDING  THE  TIMETABLES  (ORGANISATION  OF  NEW  LANGUAGE 
COURSES,  APPLICATIONS  SATISFIED  BY  MEANS  OF  EXISTING  LANGUAGE  COURSES, 
ETC.) 

The institutions essentially use existing interinstitutional language courses. As basic language 
courses  were  already  offered  in  2004  in  all  23  official  languages,  no  new  interinstitutional 
courses  were  developed  after  the  introduction  of  the  new  Staff  Regulations;  however,  the 
number  of  groups  was  increased.  Level  1  to  level  6  courses  are  provided  in  the  23  official 
languages in both Brussels and Luxembourg. 

It should be emphasised that a third language is learned not solely with a view to promotion, 
but  in  response  to  the  needs  of  the  service.  Article  45(2)  has  merely  created  an  additional 
individual  motivation  in  order  to  promote  a  policy  of  linguistic  diversity  within  the 
institutions. Given the choice of languages, most of the courses concerned would have taken 
place even in the absence of Article 45(2). Even within the framework of Article  45(2), the 
language to be studied must be chosen in response to the interests of the service. 

6 
7 

At the Court of Auditors, this was the same two people for 2008 and 2009. 
At the Committee of the Regions the total number of officials concerned was nine because two officials 
were  in  the  same  situation  in  that  they  were  eligible  for  promotion  in  2009  but  had  not  fulfilled  the 
requirements in Article 45(2) in 2008. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Interinstitutional language courses consist of three sessions per year lasting an average of 60 
hours (one level can be acquired in each session): 

•  twice-weekly courses from March to July (1 hour 50 minutes per class); 

•  twice-weekly courses from September to January (1 hour 50 minutes per class); 

•  intensive summer courses in July or August (4 hours per day). 

Monitoring of the application of Article 45(2) in each institution is usually carried out by two 
AST  officials  who  spend  between  15%  and  50%  of  their  working  hours  doing  this.  In 
addition,  three  officials/contract  staff  members  at  EPSO  work  on  analysing  diplomas  and 
organising  language  tests  for  those  not  following  interinstitutional  language  courses8.  The 
interinstitutional courses are organised by 16 members of staff9. 

The courses taken on the basis of an Article 45(2) priority account for 19.7% of the total. It 
can thus be calculated that three officials/contract staff members10 are involved in organising 
courses pursuant to Article 45(2) and that, on the basis of the following table, the cost for the 
period from 2004 to 2009 was approximately €3 130 000 11. 

The annual cost in euros of all interinstitutional language courses, including those taken for 
the purposes of Article 45(2) (19.7%). 

Annual cost of 
interinstitutional 
language courses 

 BRUSSELS12 

 LUXEMBOURG13 

2004 * 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

701.142 

1.915.782 

2.201.553 

2.049.209 

2.760.097 

2.558.344 

Total 2004-
2009 

12.186.127 

3.708.756 

185.818 

569.148 

624.427 

683.351 

851.415 

794.597 

Total 

886.960 

2.484.930 

2.825.980 

2.732.560 

3.611.512 

3.352.941 

15.894.883 

* the period from 30 April 2004 to 31 December 2004 comprised one weekly course 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  addition  to  the  interinstitutional  courses,  several  institutions 
organised internal courses and courses in places other than Brussels and Luxembourg mainly 
for officials encountering problems in demonstrating the required language ability.  

8 

9 

10 
11 
12 

13 

With the help of an assessment committee consisting of three permanent members from the institutions 
and  46  language  advisors  who  are  consulted  by  means  of  the  written  procedure  for  the  purpose  of 
evaluating diplomas. The committee meets six times a year. 
We estimate that account needs to be taken not only of the staff at centralised level but also of 0.1 AST 
per  DG/service  at  decentralised  level  to  administer  the  statutory  requirements  in  connection  with  the 
third language. 
19.7% of 16 people. 
19.7% of the total cost of the courses in the period from 2004 to 2009. 
NB: the annual cost covers four semi-intensive courses, four intensive courses (February-July-August-
September) and two twice-weekly courses (March-July & September-January). 
NB:  the  annual  cost  covers  one  semi-intensive  course  (February),  one  intensive  course  (July-August) 
and two twice-weekly courses (March-July & September-January). 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
8. 

AVERAGE NUMBER OF PAID HOURS WHICH OFFICIALS SPEND PREPARING THE THIRD 
LANGUAGE TEST 

The officials affected by the third language requirement take part in an average of 100 hours 
of  interinstitutional  language  courses  in  order  to  demonstrate  their  knowledge  of  a  third 
language.  We  are  unable  to  count  the  number  of  courses  organised  internally  by  the 
institutions. This figure comprises an average of 200 hours for those who have taken a course 
and  is  negligible  for  those  who  have  demonstrated  their  knowledge  of  a  third  language  in 
some other way. 

The standard interinstitutional language courses are, in general, organised at such times – that 
is to say, in the morning, during the lunch hour or in the evening – as to minimise the impact 
on the officials’ everyday work. In many cases, the staff in practice work additional hours in 
order both to manage their work and to take language courses. 

9. 

TOTAL  NUMBER  OF  OFFICIALS  REQUIRED  TO  DEMONSTRATE  KNOWLEDGE  OF  A 
THIRD LANGUAGE AND THE NUMBER OF OFFICIALS WHO HAD NOT COMPLIED WITH 
THIS REQUIREMENT AT 1 JANUARY 2009 (LEVEL 4) 

At  1  January  2009,  14 635  officials  were  potentially  affected  by  the  requirement  to 
demonstrate knowledge of a third language (see section 2).  

The  number  of  officials  who  still  had  to  demonstrate  such  knowledge  stood  at  3 560  at 
1 January 2009. Of these officials, 47 were not promoted during the transition period because 
they had not demonstrated the required level 4. These 47 officials must now reach level 6.  

Institution 

EP 

Council 

Commission 

Court of Justice 

Court of 
Auditors 

EESC 

Committee of 
the Regions 

Total 

Total number of officials still 
required to demonstrate third-
language competence at 1 January 
2009 

Number of officials not promoted at 
1 January 2009 because of failure to 
demonstrate level 4 

418 

267 

2275 

212  

49  

288  

51  

3.560 

4 

9 

30 

0 

2 

0 

2 

47 

% 

0,96% 

3,37% 

1,32% 

0,00% 

4,08% 

0,00% 

3,92% 

1,32% 

EN 

9 

   EN 

10. 

NUMBER  OF  OFFICIALS  USING  IN  THEIR  WORK  THE  THIRD  LANGUAGE  REQUIRED 
FOR PROMOTION 

The  institutions  do  not  have  any  computerised  tools  that  allow  them  to  quantify  the  use  by 
officials in their work of the third language acquired for the purposes of promotion. 

It must be pointed out, however, that in choosing the third language account must be taken of 
the needs of the service and the institution. 

It  can  be  seen  that  English  and  French  accounted  for  70%  of  requests  for  training  made  in 
accordance with the Article 45(2) priority by 31 December 2009 (see section 3). Learning of 
the other languages also meets the needs of the service in specific areas. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

11. 

CONCLUSION 

The languages most often chosen as third languages were French (50%) and English (20%). 
Slightly more than half of officials already knew a third language, a fact they demonstrated 
with the help of diplomas awarded or tests organised by EPSO. The other half of the officials 
chose interinstitutional language courses as a way of demonstrating their ability to work in a 
third language. The cost for the institutions amounted to approximately 20% of the language 
training budget, and an average of 100 hours was spent in language courses. Nonetheless, the 
greater  portion  of  the  costs  would  have  arisen  even  in  the  absence  of  a  provision  such  as 
Article 45(2). Most officials were able to demonstrate ability to work in a third language, and 
few had their promotion delayed because of failure to do so.  

EN 

11 

   EN