MEPs urge European Personnel Selection Office to review testing methods

MEPs condemn repeated technical, organisational and procedural faults in EPSO’s functioning over the past two years

Urge EPSO to review testing methods and reintroduce certified on-site facilities

Digital technology and AI tools must always remain under human oversight

The Petitions Committee calls for urgent measures to restore integrity, transparency and credibility of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO).

In a resolution adopted unanimously on Tuesday, MEPs from the Committee on Petitions strongly condemn the repeated technical, organisational and procedural failures that have affected EPSO selection procedures over the last two years, causing reputational damage to the EU civil service and distress to affected candidates.

Unreliable remote testing

Since the introduction of remote testing during the COVID-19 pandemic, EPSO’s selection procedures have been marked by repeated platform deficiencies and inconsistent communication to candidates on technical issues. MEPs call on the Commission to conduct an independent assessment of EPSO’s management, IT systems, outsourcing practices to external contractors, and handling of candidates’ complaints.

They urge EPSO to restore certified on-site test facilities, which have previously proven reliable, and to offer them as an alternative to remote testing. MEPs also warn that full reliance on computer-based exams risks creating new forms of discrimination linked to varying levels of digital proficiency.

Petitions’ MEPs rejects any attempt to automate procedures that affect candidates’ fundamental rights and urges EPSO to review its testing methods to ensure that all digital technology and AI tools are subject to continuous human oversight.

Candidates’ selection and feedback

Recognising the negative impact of EPSO’s mismanagement on candidates’ psychological well-being and financial situation, MEPs ask the Commission to find appropriate solutions, including retesting, for all those affected by test cancellation, IT issues or technical delays.

The resolution also criticises the current system, which requires candidates to pass generic computer-based tests before demonstrating subject-specific knowledge. MEPs warn this may exclude qualified candidates for specific posts within the EU institutions.

The increased reliance of temporary staff and contract is a direct consequence of EPSO’s inefficiency, MEPs argue, and urgent measures are needed to reverse this trend and guarantee dignified and secure working conditions within the EU.

Quote

“The Committee on Petitions decided to draft this short motion for resolution in response to petition No 0525/2025 on alleged organisational issues faced by candidates taking part in European Personnel Selection Office competitions. Specifically, the petitioner complained about recurring issues in the organisation of several competitions by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) in the last years. Having analysed the petitioner's complaints and taking into account the relevant decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as several decisions of the Ombudsman and her relevant suggestions, the Committee on Petitions put forward concrete proposals to improve the personnel selection procedure for the benefit of candidates and the EU public administration” said committee chair Bogdan Rzońca (ECR, PL).

Background

EPSO is the body responsible for selecting staff for EU institutions, bodies and agencies. In several enquiries, the European Ombudsman concluded that EPSO committed maladministration in its handling of cases concerning remote testing procedures, platform deficiencies and inconsistent communication regarding technical issues.Between 2019 and 2023, 35% fewer EPSO competitions were launched and 38% fewer were completed compared to the previous five years. During the same time frame, the number of temporary staff employed in permanent post as increased significantly - 192% increase at the Commission, 256% in the Council and 89% in Parliament.