Case T‑547/18
Raivo Teeäär
v
European Central Bank.
Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber), 26March 2020
(Civil service— ECB Staff— Programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB— Rejection of an application to take part in that programme— Eligibility conditions— Different lengths of service required depending on whether a member of staff is in a single salary band or a salary broadband— Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment— Equal treatment— Proportionality— Manifest error of assessment)
1.Officials— Staff of the European Central Bank— Staff Rules— Pilot programme of support for a career transition outside the European Central Bank (ECB)— Eligibility conditions— Different length of service required for single salary bands and salary broadbands— ECB’s discretion— Limits— Interests of the service— Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment— Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of the principle of proportionality— None
(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 21; European Central Bank Staff Rules, Art. 2.3.1)
(see paragraphs37-43, 48, 49, 51-58, 63-65)
2.Officials— Staff of the European Central Bank— Staff rules— Pilot programme of support for a career transition outside the European Central Bank (ECB)— Eligibility conditions— Different length of service required for single salary bands and salary broadbands— ECB’s discretion— Limits— Interests of the service— Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment— Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age— None
(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 21; Council Directive 2000/78; European Central Bank Staff Rules, Art. 2.3.1)
(see paragraphs70-72, 75-77, 80-82)
Résumé
In the judgment in Teeäär v ECB (T‑547/18), delivered on 26March 2020, the General Court dismissed the action brought by a member of staff of the European Central Bank (ECB) against the decision by which the ECB rejected his application for the pilot programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB (‘CTS’), dismissed his claim for compensation and ordered him to pay the costs.
The applicant took up his duties at the ECB in 2004, at the age of 50, and was allocated to the F/G salary band (salary broadband), within which the role in respect of which he was employed fell, at a step corresponding to the length, level and relevance of his professional experience.
In 2012, the Executive Board of the ECB set up a pilot programme for CTS. The applicable provision laid down a difference in treatment between ECB staff members depending on whether they were in a salary broadband or a single salary band, by providing that staff in a salary broadband, who represented a large part of the staff, would be eligible for that programme after 12years’ service in their salary band, whereas the years of service required for staff in a single salary band would be only 8years.
As his principal argument, the applicant relied on the unlawfulness of that provision, alleging, first, infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of the principle of proportionality and a manifest error of assessment and, secondly, infringement of Article21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and of Directive 2000/78,(1) as a result of discrimination on grounds of age.
As regards, first, the plea alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of the principle of proportionality and manifest error of assessment, the Court observed, first of all, that the objective of establishing the CTS pilot programme was to deal with a number of risks likely to undermine the proper functioning of the ECB in the near future, by creating early vacancies of posts so as to enable new persons to be recruited and to increase opportunities for internal promotion of existing staff. Since that measure was such as to contribute to maintaining, or even improving, the quality of the services provided as part of the performance of the ECB’s tasks, it was objectively justified and linked to the interests of the service. Next, the Court noted that the purpose of the CTS pilot programme was to prompt the voluntary early departure of some of the members of staff who had worked for a certain number of years within the ECB whilst remaining in the same salary band, by favouring that departure in the form of support for a career transition outside the ECB, in particular financial support, while distinguishing between members of staff in a single salary band and those in a salary broadband. In that regard, the Court considered that the situations of the two categories of persons concerned were not comparable because they could be distinguished by an essential element from the point of view of the interest of the service, namely that they corresponded to different types of roles, some of which the ECB had wanted to be performed by a more permanent staff. The Court also held that, in any event and for the same reasons, the difference in treatment consisting of the fixing of an eligibility criterion of 12years, instead of 8, for members of staff performing the type of duties falling within a salary broadband was objectively justified and, in addition, that the manner in which the duties in the salary broadbands had been taken into account by the ECB was proportionate, in so far as that difference of four years corresponded approximately to the difference in salary progression between a single salary band and a salary broadband. On that point, the Court pointed out that, since it had to introduce rules of general application in an area in which it has a wide discretion and a wide autonomy, the ECB could rely on standard situations, without, in addition, being required to provide for a system of exceptions to take account of atypical situations, such as that of the applicant who, in the light of his previous professional experience, had been allocated from the time of his appointment to a step at a high level in the F/G salary broadband.
The Court also noted, first, that when the ECB lays down rules relating to matters concerning the arrangements applicable to the staff it employs, it enjoys broad autonomy on account of its functional independence and that, secondly, the institutions enjoy a wide discretion in determining the interests of the service, judicial review being limited to verifying whether the choices made are not the result of a manifest error. In that context, the Court observed that the criterion based on years of service adopted for the CTS pilot programme was objective and consistent with the career structure within the ECB based on the type of employment. The Court also held that the fact that that criterion was part of a pilot programme which was required to undergo an ex post evaluation was not irrelevant in assessing the proportionality of that criterion.
As regards, secondly, the plea alleging discrimination on grounds of age, the Court considered that the conditions of eligibility for that programme did not contain any direct reference to the age of members of staff and that the distinction made between them according to the type of salary band which they were in had no bearing on their age. In that regard, the Court noted that years of service in any salary band depended solely on when a person was recruited or, possibly, promoted to a salary band. In addition, the Court found that it followed from the summary drawn up after the closure of CTS that, in practice, the contested length-of-service criterion had not favoured or disadvantaged members of staff in a particular age bracket.
1Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L303, p.16).