FICHE FINANCIERE SIMPLIFIEE
Domaine(s) politique(s): ADMINISTRATION Activité(s): PERSONAL POLICY AND MANAGEMENT |
|
Dénomination de l’action: Multi-annual
action plan on well-being at work (2006-2009) |
1. LIGNE(S)
BUDGÉTAIRE(S) + INTITULÉ(S)
26.015004
XX.010211
(training – enveloppes globales de toutes les DGs)
26.010211.00.04
(études et consultations de la DG ADMIN)
XX.010301 (infrastructures)
Budgets des offices, pour la partie du budget de fonctionnement
consacrée aux actions de ce type
2. DONNÉES
CHIFFRÉES GLOBALES
2.1 Enveloppe totale de l’action:
94,995 Mio€ en
CE
2.2 Période d’application:
2006 - 2009
2.3 Estimation globale
pluriannuelle des dépenses:
a) Echéancier crédits d'engagement/crédits de
paiement (intervention financière) (cf.
point 6.1.1) – voir fiches respectives annexées
Mio€
(à la 3ème décimale)
|
Année
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
|
Total |
Crédits d'engagement |
18,510 |
23,143 |
25,907 |
27,435 |
|
94,995 |
Crédits de paiement |
18,510 |
23,143 |
25,907 |
27,435 |
|
94,995 |
b) Assistance
technique et administrative (ATA) et dépenses d’appui (DDA) (cf. point 6.1.2)
CE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
a+b |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CE non-dissociés |
18,510 |
23,143 |
25,907 |
27,435 |
|
94,995 |
CP non-dissociés |
18,510 |
23,143 |
25,907 |
27,435 |
|
94,995 |
2.4 Compatibilité avec la programmation
financière et les perspectives financières
þ Proposition
compatible avec la programmation financière existante
¨ Cette proposition nécessite
une reprogrammation de la rubrique concernée des perspectives financières,
¨ Y compris, le cas échéant,
un recours aux dispositions de l’accord interinstitutionnel.
¨ Type de dépense : il s'agit de
définir la classification économique des dépenses en distinguant les dépenses
courantes des dépenses en capital. Cette classification permet une meilleure
articulation entre la comptabilité budgétaire et la comptabilité générale
þ Dépenses courantes : elles
sont liées aux charges de l'exercice.
¨ Dépenses en capital: elles
sont liés aux postes du bilan. Quel type d'activité, ces dépenses sont-elles
destinées à financer?
3. CARACTÉRISTIQUES
BUDGÉTAIRES
Nature de la dépense |
Nouvelle |
Participation AELE |
Participation pays
candidats |
Rubrique PF |
|
N° 5 |
|||||
4. BASE LÉGALE
Staff Regulations of
Officials of the European Communities, notably article 1e
5. DESCRIPTION ET
JUSTIFICATION
5.1 Nécessité d'une intervention
communautaire
5.1.1
Objectifs poursuivis
Amélioration de la
santé, de la réconciliation entre la vie au travail et la vie privée et de
l’environnement du travail du personnel, ainsi que les provisions pour leurs
familles telle que prévue dans le plan d’action sur le bien-être au travail.
Amélioration de la
provision des infrastructures sociales.
5.1.2 Dispositions prises relevant de l’évaluation ex ante
Ex ante evaluation
of a future well-being policy of the European Commission, launched September
2004, finalized June 2005, conducted by external consultants (Centre for
Strategy & Evaluation Services LLP, Britain), final report available under:
http://www.cc.cec/dgintranet/admin/policy/planning/docs_evaluation/projects_2004/future_well_being_policy_en.zip
Over a third of Commission staff does not feel to have achieved a
reasonable work-life balance. Whilst there is scope for individual staff to
take action to improve their work-life-balance, Commission working practices and
the management culture also need to be improved to tackle this issue. In
general, stress levels in the Commission seem to be higher than in comparable
organisations. Other issues highlighted by the ex ante evaluation include the
lack of sufficient day care facilities and the lack of social activities to
help promote integration of staff and their families.
The ex ante evaluation contains a list of 31 key well-being actions
which have been, to the extent possible, included in the multi-annual action
plan on well-being at work.
5.1.3
Dispositions prises à la suite de l’évaluation ex post
New policy to be
implemented, evaluations foreseen at mid-term and the end of the current
Commission. No new expenditure is
planned, as the policy brings together existing actions in one framework.
5.2 Actions envisagées et modalités de l'intervention budgétaire
General objective: see 5.1.1
Principal objectives:
• An
improvement of health and safety at work in all premises of the Commission
Concrete
measures: Reinforcement of health
and safety at the workplace
Reinforcement
of preventive medicine and necessary administrative adjustments
Development
of appropriate sports and leisure facilities
• Spouse
and family support
Concrete
measures: Support actions for spouses/partners
Development
of new child-care facilities
A
new policy for dependants
• A
better reconciliation between professional and private life
Concrete
measures: Commission-wide
implementation of flexi-time
Commission-wide
implementation of teleworking facilities
• A
human resources policy oriented towards an individualized assistance to the
staff member and an improvement of his/her working environment
Concrete
measures: Implementation of a
coherent policy on absence on medical reasons and invalidity
Prevention
of psychological and sexual harassment
Affected population: all Commission staff and (for certain
actions) their families
Impact assessment: The improvement of working conditions will be
continuously evaluated. Short-, medium- and long-term indicators have been
defined to evaluate the impact of the new policy on well-being (NB: Measuring
the extent of staff well-being is not straightforward – although various ‘soft’
indicators can be used based on survey work, there are few ‘hard’ indicators of
a quantifiable nature and they are essentially measures of negativity).
Examples for possible performance indicators: percentage of staff with high or
very high work-related stress, percentage of staff achieving satisfying
work-life-balance, proportion of staff using flexi-time, satisfaction with
services, etc.).
Budget: general budget, details see point 1
5.3 Modalités de mise en œuvre
Gestion directe par la Commission avec du personnel statutaire ou externe. Le cas échéant, le recours à l’externalisation n’est pas à exclure.
PROGRAMMATION PLURIANNUELLE DES
COUTS OIB |
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coûts |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
|
Crèches |
16.672.429 |
19.289.252 |
24.945.121 |
28.982.653 |
29.530.818 |
34.637.148 |
35.298.403 |
|
Garderies
post-scolaires (GPS) |
3.576.053 |
3.912.933 |
4.778.163 |
5.409.670 |
5.511.785 |
6.157.953 |
6.275.033 |
|
Garderies
aérées (GA) |
1.017.864 |
1.038.221 |
1.058.985 |
378.635 |
1.705.798 |
1.739.914 |
1.774.712 |
|
TOTAL
DES COUTS DU CPE |
21.266.346 |
24.240.406 |
30.782.269 |
34.770.958 |
36.748.401 |
42.535.015 |
43.348.148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RESTAURANTS |
982.000 |
1.123.600 |
1.146.072 |
1.168.994 |
1.192.373 |
1.216.221 |
1.240.545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
DES COUTS |
22.248.346 |
25.364.006 |
31.928.341 |
35.939.952 |
37.940.774 |
43.751.236 |
44.588.693 |
|
Centre
de la Petite Enfance (CPE): à financer par les crédits C1 du budget de la
Commission (*) |
14.461.115 |
16.483.476 |
20.931.943 |
23.644.252 |
24.988.913 |
28.923.810 |
29.476.741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(*)
- Clefs de répartition des recettes couvrant les coûts du CPE: 20% (parents)
- 80% (institutions) dont 85% proviennent de la Commission et 15% des autres
institutions. |
PROGRAMMATION
BUDGETAIRE PLURIANNUELLE OIL DONNEES DE
REFERENCE : Comité de Direction - décembre 2005 |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immeuble/objet |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
CPE 1,2 |
283410 |
291912 |
300670 |
309690 |
318980 |
CPE 3 |
184667 |
190207 |
195913 |
201790 |
207844 |
CPE 3
Extension 2596 m² brut |
|
|
64008 |
197786 |
203720 |
Foyer
HEINE |
32576 |
33554 |
34560 |
35597 |
36665 |
CPE 4 2100
m² brut |
232500 |
319300 |
328879 |
338745 |
348908 |
CPE-MAMER |
|
|
|
|
295327 |
CPE-MAMER aménagements
spécifiques |
|
|
|
|
39150 |
Total |
733153 |
834973 |
924030 |
1083609 |
1450594 |
MODE DE
CALCUL :
|
2005 (Mio EUR) |
2006 (Mio EUR) |
2007 (Mio EUR) |
2008 (Mio EUR) |
2009 (Mio EUR) |
Social activities[1] |
0,040 |
0,170 |
0,230[2] |
0,170 |
0,170 |
Social infrastructure - OIB |
15,443 |
17,607 |
22,078 |
24,813 |
26,181 |
Social infrastructure - OIL |
0,513 |
0,733 |
0,835 |
0,924 |
1,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
15,996 |
18,510 |
23,143 |
25,907 |
27,435 |
[1] NB: These figures only comprise the costs
directly linked to the concrete actions in the framework of the action plan on
well-being. It goes without saying that the costs for already existing measures
in the framework of social policy (e.g. family aid, help for disabled,
reimbursement of exceptional school fees) and their increase are not comprised
in these figures.
[2] 10 job hunting courses for spouses à 2500€ =
25.000€; 10 language courses for spouses à 5000€ = 50.000€;