CERN/FC/6526

CERN/3603
Original: English
19 November 2021

ORGANISATION EUROPEENNE POUR LA RECHERCHE NUCLEAIRE

CERN EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH

Action to be taken Voting Procedure

FINANCE COMMITTEE Simple majority of Member States

For recommendation 379th Meeting represented and voting + 51% of the
8 December 2021 contributions of all Member States

RESTRICTED COUNCIL
Simple majority of Member States
For decision 205th Session
represented and voting
9 December 2021

2021 FIVE-YEARLY REVIEW

PROPOSALS BY THE MANAGEMENT

In the framework of the 2021 five-yearly general review of financial and social
conditions, conducted in accordance with Annex A 1 of the Staff Rules, the Finance
Committee is invited to recommend to the Council, and the Council is invited to
approve the Management's proposals set out in this document relating to basic
salaries for staff members (section 2), stipends for fellows and subsistence
allowances for associated members of the personnel (section 3), and Annex A 1 of
the Staff Rules (section 5).
CERN/FC/6526
CERN/3603

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. – Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1

2. – Basic salaries ...................................................................................................................... 1

2.1 Outcome of the data collection ................................................................................... 1

2.1.1 Basic salaries for grades 1 to 3 (local survey) ................................................ 2

2.1.2 Basic salaries for grades 4 to 10 (international survey) ................................ 2

3. – Stipends for fellows and subsistence allowances for associated members of the
personnel .................................................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Outcome of the data collection ................................................................................... 3

3.1.1. Fellows ............................................................................................................. 3

3.1.2. Associated members of the personnel ............................................................. 4

3.2 Management proposals ............................................................................................... 4

4. – Diversity and inclusion-related financial and social conditions ...................................... 4

5. – Annex A 1 ........................................................................................................................... 5

6. – Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 5

LIST OF ANNEXES…………………………………………………………………………………..7

Annex 1: Summary of the Management’s proposals

Annex 2: 2021 five-yearly salary review-Local salary benchmark comparison for three CERN job
profiles (CERN/TREF/480) – dated April 2021

Annex 3: Study of salary levels for the European Organization for Nuclear Research
(CERN/TREF/479.rev) – dated 29 June 2021

Annex 4: Report on the fellows and associated members of the personnel component of the five-yearly
review (CERN/TREF/481) – dated 7 May 2021

Annex 5: Report from ISRP/OECD, entitled “Diversity and Inclusion Study” (CERN/TREF/475),
dated March 2021
CERN/FC/6526 1
CERN/3603

1. – INTRODUCTION

The 2021 five-yearly general review of the financial and social conditions of members of the personnel
has been undertaken in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Annex A 1 of the
Staff Rules (“Periodic reviews of the financial and social conditions of members of the personnel”) and
with the decision, taken by the Council in June 2020, identifying the financial and social conditions to
be reviewed in this framework (CERN/FC/6422/RA-CERN/3506/RA1).

At its June 2020 session, the Council agreed that the following financial and social conditions should be
reviewed in the framework of the 2021 five-yearly review:
1. basic salaries for staff members;
2. stipends for fellows;
3. subsistence allowances for associated members of the personnel;2 and,
4. diversity and inclusion-related financial and social conditions.

The Management’s proposals on the first three topics are set out in sections 2 and 3 below, and an
additional proposal in respect of Annex A 1 of the Staff Rules is set out in section 5.

In accordance with Chapter VII of the Staff Rules and Regulations (“Relations with the Personnel”),
these proposals were discussed with the Staff Association at the Standing Concertation Committee
(SCC) on 8 September 2021. Thereafter, the Staff Association requested the final decision
(“arbitration”) of the Director-General in accordance with Article 7 (iv) of the SCC “Revised Working
Procedures” of 26 April 1994 on two elements, which are outlined below (section 2.2). The Director-
General took a final decision thereon on 6 October 2021.

2. – BASIC SALARIES

2.1 Outcome of the data collection

As laid down in Annex A 1 of the Staff Rules, the purpose of the five-yearly review is to ensure that the
financial and social conditions offered by the Organization allow it to recruit and retain staff members
of the highest competence and integrity from all of its Member States.

In accordance with the procedure set out in Annex A 1, data related to salaries for grades 1 to 3 was
collected from “the employers established in the local region of the Organization that offer salaries that
are among the most competitive” (local survey), whilst data related to salaries for grades 4 to 10 was
collected from “the employers established in the Member States that offer the most competitive salaries
according to the data collected from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD)” (international survey).

1 CERN/FC/6422/RA CERN/3506/RA, “Five-yearly review 2021: Management's proposal identifying the financial and social conditions
to be reviewed”, dated 2 June 2020
2 The first three of these elements constitute the mandatory part of each five-yearly review
CERN/FC/6526 2
CERN/3603

In May 2020, following the identification of CERN’s main recruitment markets3, TREF agreed4 that,
for both the local and the international surveys, data should be collected from the high-technology sector
within the private sector. Both surveys were then conducted during the period from the second half of
2020 to early 2021, and the results were submitted to TREF at its meeting in May 20215. The
international survey results were presented by representatives of the ISRP6 of the OECD. An updated7
version of the international salary survey was presented to TREF at its meeting in October 2021.

2.1.1 Basic salaries for grades 1 to 3 (local survey)

Salary data was collected in the local region, geographically defined as the Cantons of Geneva and Vaud
in Switzerland, and the Departments of Ain and Haute-Savoie in France.

The results showed that the companies with the most competitive salaries are located in Geneva and
Vaud, with the high-technology market offering salaries 8% below CERN's reference salaries on
average (see annex 2).

2.1.2 Basic salaries for grades 4 to 10 (international survey)

According to the results of the data collection performed by the ISRP (see annex 3), the most competitive
salaries are offered by companies located in Switzerland, followed by companies located in Germany.
On average, high-technology Swiss-market salaries are 9 % above CERN's basic salaries.

• Administrative functions: Swiss salaries in the high technology sector, net of tax, are between
4% and 13% higher than CERN’s reference salaries and 8% higher on average.

• Technical functions: Swiss salaries in the high technology sector, net of tax, are between 6%
lower and 18% higher than CERN’s reference salaries and 6% higher on average.

• Management functions: Swiss salaries in the high-technology sector, net of tax, are between 3%
and 29% higher than CERN’s reference salaries and 17% higher on average.

2.2 Management proposal

➢ Proposal 1:

Considering
a) the results of the report on the recruitment and retention of staff members8, which show that, in
general, despite challenges in certain Member States, CERN has not experienced major
problems during the current reference period in attracting and retaining the staff members of the
highest competence and integrity, from all of its Member States, required for the execution of
its mission, and

3 Cf. CERN/FC/6419/RA CERN/3503/RA, dated 2 June 2020

4 Cf. CERN/TREF/461.Rev., dated 04 May 2020
5 Further details of the methodology applied for each survey are provided in annexes 2 and 3
6 International Service for Remuneration and Pensions, a common service platform administratively attached to the OECD
7 The ISRP report was updated in June 2021 to incorporate the results of expanded job evaluations for benchmark jobs No. 7 and 13
(principal engineer / principal applied physicist and principal legal adviser) spanning grades 9 and 10
8 "2021 Five-yearly review report on recruitment and retention of staff members” dated 4 May 2020
https://indico.cern.ch/event/916289/contributions/3852179/subcontributions/305813/attachments/2032562/3402148/TREF_460.Rev_Fiv
e-Yearly-Review_2021_recruitment_retention_final_Indico.pdf
CERN/FC/6526 3
CERN/3603

b) the results of the salary surveys,

the Management proposes that basic salaries be maintained at their current levels.

On 23 September 2021, the Staff Association requested the arbitration of the Director-General on the
following two elements:

(i) the use “as is” by the Management of the results of the international salary survey carried out
by the ISRP (International Service for Remunerations and Pensions); and,

(ii) the Management’s proposal to maintain basic salaries for staff members at their current levels
(Proposal 1 above).

By letter dated 29 September 2021, the Management provided its position on the above elements to the
Director-General.

On 5 October 2021, the Director-General met representatives of the Management and the Staff
Association and heard their respective positions.

On 6 October 2021, after due consideration, the Director-General decided that:

(i) the ISRP report does not formally come within the scope of arbitration under Article 7 (iv) of
the SCC Working Procedures, which relates to “proposals” and not to documents furnished by
external parties; and that,
(ii) the recruitment and retention report and the results of the salary surveys support the
Management’s proposal to keep basic salaries at their current levels.
Proposal 1 is thus maintained.

3. – STIPENDS FOR FELLOWS AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES

FOR ASSOCIATED MEMBERS OF THE PERSONNEL

3.1 Outcome of the data collection

Pursuant to Annex A 1, the purpose of the five-yearly review is to ensure that the financial and social
conditions offered to fellows by CERN remain attractive in relation to comparable research institutions
and, in parallel, that those offered to associated members of the personnel allow the Organization to host
them in its research facilities, taking into account the highest cost of living in the local region.

3.1.1. Fellows

As indicated in document CERN/TREF/4819, data on fellowship stipends was collected from several
institutions identified as “comparator organisations”. The data collected and the resulting analysis
demonstrate that the “financial and social conditions offered to fellows remain attractive compared to
those in comparable research institutions”.

9 See annex 4, entitled “Report on the fellows and associated members of the personnel component of the five-yearly review”, dated May
2021
CERN/FC/6526 4
CERN/3603

Although the results of the comparison suggest that a reduction in stipends could be implemented
without reducing the attractiveness of the programme, the Management does not consider such a step
appropriate as it intends to launch a substantially different graduate recruitment programme in the near
future.

3.1.2. Associated members of the personnel

As subsistence allowances applicable to associated members of the personnel have been consistently
indexed according to the Geneva cost-variation index, the Management does not propose any
adjustments in the context of this five-yearly review.

A dedicated technical working group is reviewing the financial resources for associated members of the
personnel employed by an external institute. This review will also include subsistence allowances.

3.2 Management proposals

The Management proposes:

➢ Proposal 2: to maintain fellows’ stipends at their present level while the current programme
remains in place;

➢ Proposal 3: to maintain the subsistence allowances paid by the Organization to associated

members of the personnel at their current level.

4. – DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION-RELATED FINANCIAL AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS

In a continuing effort to follow societal developments and improve diversity across the CERN
population, in particular in respect of gender as well as of under-represented Member and Associate
Member States, and to foster retention after recruitment, the Management carried out a benchmarking
exercise in 2020. The study shows that, while most comparators have made significant progress over
the last five years in terms of gender diversity, further progress is still desirable at CERN in this domain.
On the other hand, CERN is in a leading position when it comes to policies related to people with
disabilities and on-site childcare facilities. It has also improved as far as the definition of the term
“family” is concerned. The study shows that it would be appropriate for CERN to revisit the length of
maternity, paternity, parental and adoption leave, and enhance dual-career support measures. It also
shows room for improvement in the area of teleworking and flexible working hours. The Organization
is committed to continuous improvement in the area of diversity and inclusion, and the benchmarking
results will serve as a navigation map that will help to prioritise current and future activities in this area.
Since the benchmarking exercise was carried out, the Organization’s telework policy has already been
revised, and an initiative has been launched to target improvements in gender and nationality diversity.
Further improvements, in line with the priorities identified by the benchmarking exercise, are under
consideration.
CERN/FC/6526 5
CERN/3603

5. – ANNEX A 1

With respect to Annex A 1 of the Staff Rules only, the Management proposes to keep the current five-
yearly review exercise open, ideally until June 2022, in order to conduct a review of the procedures set
out therein and to make any technical updates that may be required in respect of data relevant to the
annual calculation of the basic salary and stipend index.

6. – CONCLUSIONS

Given the results of the data collection and the recruitment and retention report, the Management
considers that the financial and social conditions that CERN offers to staff members, fellows and
associated members of the personnel should remain unchanged.

CERN’s attractiveness as an employer has been confirmed over the last twelve months, which saw a
50% increase in the number of applications for CERN staff positions10.

Concerning fellows, the Management will take due account of the benchmark data collected, as a guide,
in determining the appropriate stipend levels for the future graduate programme that is under
development, making sure that the attractiveness of the programme is maintained.

The Management will take account of the results of the diversity and inclusion-related benchmarking
exercise, as well as of future developments in this area, in the context of ongoing, continuous
improvements in line with CERN’s mission of attracting and retaining personnel of the highest
competence and integrity.

The Finance Committee is invited to recommend to the Council, and the Council is invited to approve
the Management's proposals set out in this document relating to basic salaries for staff members
(section 2), stipends for fellows and subsistence allowances for associated members of the personnel
(section 3), and Annex A 1 of the Staff Rules (section 5).

10 See CERN/TREF/482, and "CERN personnel statistics", namely 2020 and 2019:
https://cds.cern.ch/collection/CERN%20Annual%20Personnel%20Statistics?
CERN/FC/6526 7
CERN/3603

LIST OF ANNEXES

Annex 1: Summary of the Management’s proposals

Annex 2: 2021 five-yearly salary review-Local salary benchmark comparison for three CERN job
profiles (CERN/TREF/480) – dated April 2021

Annex 3: Study of salary levels for the European Organization for Nuclear Research
(CERN/TREF/479.rev) – dated 29 June 2021

Annex 4: Report on the fellows and associated members of the personnel component of the five-yearly
review (CERN/TREF/481) – dated 7 May 2021

Annex 5: Report from ISRP/OECD, entitled “Diversity and Inclusion Study” (CERN/TREF/475),
dated March 2021
CERN/FC/6526 8
CERN/3603

Annex 1

Summary of the Management’s proposals

Proposal 1: Maintain the basic salaries at their present level.

Proposal 2: Maintain fellows’ stipends at their present level while the current programme remains
in place.

Proposal 3: Maintain the subsistence allowances paid by the Organization to associated members of
the personnel at their present level.

Annex A 1: Keep the current five-yearly review exercise open, ideally until June 2022, in order to
conduct a review of the procedures set out therein and to make any technical updates
that may be required in respect of data relevant to the annual calculation of the basic
salary and stipend index.
CERN/FC/6526 9
CERN/3603

Annex 2

2021 five-yearly salary review-Local salary benchmark comparison for three CERN job profiles
(CERN/TREF/480) – dated April 2021
 CERN/TREF/480

5-Yearly Salary
review 2021
Local salary benchmark comparison
for 3 CERN job profiles

April 2021

Confidential
willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only.
 Purpose of the mission

In accordance with CERN’s Staff Rules & Regulations, the Organization has to conduct every five years a general review
of financial and social conditions of members of the personnel. The current 5-Yearly Review will be finalized by the end of
2021, and its decisions implemented as from 2022 onwards.

Consequently, in order to complete its project of the 5-Yearly Review of financial and social conditions of staff members,
CERN Human Resources Department requested Willis Towers Watson, a Global organization with strong Swiss presence,
to conduct a remuneration study for administrative and technical job profiles based in the Swiss Cantons of Geneva (GE)
and Vaud (VD) as well as the French departments of Ain (01) and Haute-Savoie (74).
Willis Towers Watson Data Services is a leading provider of compensation, benefit and employment practice information to
the global employer community. Our databases are recognized worldwide as a premier source of current data for
compensation planning.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 2
 Content

1. Introduction: WTW and benchmark trends

2. Job profiles & benchmark data included in the study

3. Statistical definitions and methodology

4. Rules & assumptions

Definitions of salary elements & fiscal and social security employee
5. contributions calculations

6. Job profiles benchmark data & comparisons

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 3
 Introduction:
WTW and
benchmark
trends

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only.
 Willis Towers Watson’s Data Services

willistowerswatson.com 5
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only.
Survey coverage: Switzerland

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 6
High Tech survey Switzerland trends

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 7
High Tech survey Switzerland trends

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 8
Survey coverage: France

2020 High Tech Compensation Survey in France

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 9
 Job profiles &
benchmark
data included
in the study

willistowerswatson.com

© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only.
 Job profiles included in the study

Job profiles included in the study

Administrative Clerk
Electronics Craftsperson
Mechanical Craftsperson

The job descriptions with details of the assignments and responsibilities for all of the above job profiles have
been provided to Willis Towers Watson by CERN in order to ensure optimum matching with benchmark data in
each one of the local markets (France and Switzerland).

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 11
High Tech benchmark data cut used for CERN’s job profiles

General considerations
Willis Towers Watson’s surveys incorporate a consistent methodology around the world to provide data on compensation
levels and practices for use by organizations in their compensation planning and reflect Willis Towers Watson’s collective
experience in serving client data and consulting needs for more than 60 years.

The benchmarking of the remuneration level has been defined with the market data from remuneration
surveys conducted in the private High Technology sector in 2020.

High Tech Benchmark data published by WTW: July 2020

CERN reference salaries considered: 2020

As CERN is located both in Switzerland and France, their reference labor market is taken in both countries using
Geneva and Vaud for Switzerland and the departments of Ain and Haute-Savoie for France.

Peer group in the High Technology sector: High Tech companies included in the WTW benchmark have been
validated by CERN, and as a result a Peer Group was created for the purpose of this study. 39 companies in total
have been retained as a comparison Group for CERN’s job profiles.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 12
High Tech benchmark cut for CERN
Companies details - data included only for Geneva, Vaud (CH) and Ain, Haute Savoie (France)

Peer Group Companies: 39 3M IBM

Peer Group Incumbents: 102,541 Agilent Technologies Ingenico
Amkor Technology Intel
Applied Materials Interxion
ARM Lam Research
Arrow Electronics Latécoère
Atos Naval Group
Bouygues Telecom Northrop Grumman
BT Global Services Orthotaxy
Cadence Design Systems Rolls-Royce
Included in peer group Safran Electronics & Defense
Canon
Based on CERN’s Cegedim Safran Landing Systems
instructions CGI - Conseillers en Gestion et Informatique SAS Institute
Computacenter SES
Corning Siemens
Dassault Systèmes Siemens Healthcare
Expedia STMicroelectronics
GE Healthcare Thales
Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Xerox
HP Inc.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 13
Statistical
definitions and
methodology

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 14
Survey methodology

Job matching
The Willis Towers Watson survey methodology is an integrated process combining elements from each of our two
proprietary leveling methodologies, Career Map and the Global Grading System (GGS). The combination yields a unique
and systematic approach to matching jobs that encompasses the concept of career progression through Career Levels
with differentiated job size as determined by Global Grades. See the Leveling section for further details.

• Career Map - The Willis Towers Watson Career Level methodology is based on a series of Career Bands, each with a number of distinct
Career Levels. Career Bands enable organizations to structure work and jobs based on progressive levels of expected contribution.
Career Levels represent discernible broad steps in a career progression, which are consistent across organizations. They reflect the
normal market progression of jobs requiring higher levels of competence and knowledge as people advance in their careers.
• Global Grading System - The Willis Towers Watson Global Grading System (GGS) measures the relative internal value of distinct jobs
within an organization according to specific dimensions and aligns those values with quantifiable differences in pay levels in the external
marketplace. Global Grades, which are linked to organization size, reflect the impact of size on job scope at higher levels, thus
enhancing data comparability across organizations of varied size. Global Grades create a single top-to bottom framework to facilitate
leveling and drive consistency across Career Bands, Functions and Disciplines. They provide the foundation, or underpinning, for both
Executive Benchmarks and the broad-based Career Levels and define the start and end points of a career progression.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 15
Statistical definitions

Median: a value separating the higher half from the lower half of a data sample. It may be thought of as "the
middle" value. In this study, the median of the market is used and compared to the CERN reference.

10th percentile 90th percentile

10% 25th percentile 75th percentile 10%

25% 25% 25% 25%

Min Max
50% Median 50%
Distribution of salaries in the benchmark (market)

CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:
Market Median x 100
CERN Reference

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 16
 Rules &
assumptions

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 17
Rules & assumptions for this study (1/2)
Remuneration components

• Salary components: To allow comparisons between CERN reference salaries and those of the private
sector, it is intended to consider, for the latter, the total cash remuneration.
• The total cash remuneration is the sum of the base salary and the actual variable cash pay on an annual
basis. The base salary includes all (taxable) fixed remuneration paid to an employee on an annual basis
which can be classified as a “vested cash benefit”. Typically included in the base salary are the monthly
salary times 12, and any “extra” payment such as 13th month, holiday bonus as well as seniority premiums,
while the actual variable cash pay typically includes performance payments.
• Examples of variable cash pay: performance bonus, exceptional advancement awards, bonus on
profitability or similar bonus.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 18
Rules & assumptions for this study (2/2)
Social security employee contributions components
• Civil status: Data shall be collected for the specific civil status “single” staff.
• Net income: To ensure that comparisons between CERN reference salaries and those of the private sector are the
most relevant possible, it is intended to convert the total cash remuneration to net basis by calculating the net income
(net of taxable salary, but before deduction of social security employee contributions). For this calculation, it is intended
to use the taxation rules of the selected country or countries.
Example:
Net Salary after Salary Net of
Target Total
CERN Total Swiss Net salary after Total Social security Taxes including
All figures shown Annual
reference social security Social security Swiss employee Social security
are in CHF Compensation
salary employee employee income contributions and employee
50th
contributions contributions tax Income tax contributions

Job profile A B C B-C E (B – C) – E [(B – C) – E] + C

Market Median [(B – C) – E] + C

x 100 x 100
CERN Reference A
• Purchasing power parities: The purchasing power parities (PPP) will be used to ensure that staff in comparable
professional and family circumstances benefit from equivalent purchasing power, irrespective of the place of
employment.
N.B. The fiscal and social security employee contributions calculations have been carried out by Ernst & Young for this study.
willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 19
 Definitions of
salary elements &
fiscal and social
security employee
contributions
calculations
willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 20
Definition of salary components for this study

• Net salary after Social security employee contributions: Corresponds to the “Annual total cash” less
the “Social Security employee contributions” and “supplementary benefits/pension contributions”.
• Income tax: Corresponds to the income tax according to tax systems applicable in France or
Switzerland. The 2020 Income tax rates applicable in Switzerland and France are used and the
calculation methodology is detailed in the next slides (p. 22-27).
• Net Salary after Social security employee contributions and Income tax: Corresponds to the Net
salary after Social security employee contributions less the Income tax.
• Salary net of Taxes re-including Social security employee contributions: Corresponds to the Net
salary after Social security employee contributions and Income tax plus the total social employee
contributions.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 21
Tax calculations: Switzerland (1/3)
Swiss social security : Geneva

Employee Contributions Rate : 2020 Items

AVS/AI/APG 5.275% 100% of Total Cash
AC (unemployment) - I 1.1% Total Cash up to CHF 148’200
AC (unemployment) – II 0.5% Total Cash from CHF 148’201
AMat (Maternity) 0.046% 100% of Total Cash
Loi Prévoyance 7.5% Based on Age assumptions
Professionnelle (mandatory)

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 22
Tax calculations: Switzerland (2/3)
Swiss income tax: Geneva
General overview

N.B. Wealth tax has not been computed for the sake of this mission.

This presentation focuses on the applicable tax system in the Canton of Geneva. .

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 23
Tax calculations: Switzerland (3/3)
Swiss income tax: Example of calculation – Geneva (in CHF)
Assumption: Residence in Geneva. Single. No child. Swiss social security applicable. Job profile: Administrative Assistant.

Annual Compensation: 97’276

./. Contributions AVS (5.275%) - 5’131
./. Contributions AC (1.1%) - 1’070
./. Contributions Amat (0.046%) - 45
./. Swiss pension fund (7.5%) - 7’295
Total Contributions into the Swiss social security system : - 13’541
Total Net salary after Social Security Contributions: 83’735

Applicable deduction at the cantonal / communal level : -8’867

Professional fee deduction : CHF 1’697
Health insurance premiums : CHF 7’170
Total taxable income (cantonal / communal): 74’868
• Cantonal tax: CHF 10’095.15
• Communal tax: CHF 3’510.90
• Personal tax : CHF 25
• Income tax rate applicable: 18.2067%
Total Cantonal, communal taxes: 13’631.05 ► Total Cantonal, communal and federal Swiss
Applicable deduction at the federal level : - 4’212 income taxes : CHF 15’158.65
Professional fee deduction : CHF 2’512
Health insurance premiums : CHF 1’700
Total taxable income (Federal taxes) 79’523
• Income tax rate applicable: 1.9191%
Federal tax: CHF 1’527.60

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 24
Tax calculations: France (1/3)
Detail of Employee contributions
Employee
Employee contributions
Contributions Rate:
Rate rates
: Rates applicable
applicable at 1-1-2020
at 1-1-2020 Items
Items
Intégralité du salaire brut après déduction de 1,75%pour frais
CSG déductible 6.8% professionnels. Réintégration des contributions employeur au
régimes surcomplémentaires
Intégralité du salaire brut après déduction de 1,75%pour frais
CSG/ CRDS (non deductible) 2.9% professionnels. Réintégration des contributions employeur au
régimes surcomplémentaires

Assurance vieillesse 0.4% Intégralité du salaire brut

Assurance vieillesse 6,90% Salaire brut limité à 1 plafond de la sécurité sociale

Régimes retraites complémentaires (cotisation de base tranche 1) 3.15% Salaire brut limité à 1 plafond de la SS

Régimes retraites complémentaires (cotisation de base tranche 2) 8.64% Salaire brut compris entre 1 et 8 plafonds de la SS

CEG (tranche 1) 0.86% Salaire brut limité à 1 plafond de la sécurité sociale

CEG (tranche 2) 1.08% Salaire brut compris entre 1 et 8 plafonds de la SS

Salaire brut dans la limite de 8 plafonds de la SS (exonération pour

CET 0.14%
salaires n'atteignant pas 1 plafond de la SS)

APEC 0.024% Salaire brut limité à 4 plafonds de la SS

Régimes surcomplémentaires - mutuelle maladie 2.5%on average - depends on the plan chosen by the company Salaire brut limité à 1 plafond de la sécurité sociale

Régimes surcomplémentaires - mutuelle prévoyance 0.6%on average - depends on the plan chosen by the company Salaire brut compris entre 1 et 4 plafonds de la SS

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 25
 Tax calculations: France (2/3)
French income tax: methods of taxation
Methods of taxation
French tax residents
dents French tax residents

activity physically performed in Taxable professional income: worldwide income (application of double
taxation avoidance methods on the basis of the applicable double tax treaties if
conflict of taxation)
of quarterly non-resident
tax to be operated by the
.
Means of taxation : monthly withholding tax at source to be operated by the
employer on the salary of the employee. The tax rate is communicated by the
French tax authorities to the employer. The employer has the responsibility to
calculate the right taxable basis on which to apply the percentage
communicated by the French tax authorities. Declaration and payment of the
tax withheld through a DSN/PASRAU return to be filed at the beginning of the
o be filed by the employer. Strict subsequent month
e corresponding tax (deadline: the
w. For example, deadline for the
f 2020: 15th of April 2020

tion for the employee? Yearly income tax return filing obligation for the employee?
reparation of the withholding tax
he income tax paid through the
final and as such, if the employee
Yes
thin the applicable year in review,
g obligation in France

ate Applicable tax rate

(0, 12 and 20% for income tax
Progressive income tax brackets
hholding taxwillistowerswatson.com
returns + minimum
declared in the French income tax
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 26
dy taxed through quarterly tax
e exceeding the threshold of the
ogressive income tax brackets.
Tax calculations: France (3/3)
French income tax: Example of calculation – in EUR
Assumption: French tax resident – social security contributions applicable. Job profile : Computing technician – Gross salary : 41’455 EUR.
Marital status : single without any children

Annual Compensation: 41’455

./. CSG (6,80%) - 2’881,76
./. CSG/CRDS Non-deductible part (2,9%) - 1’228,99
./. Vieillesse (0,40%) - 165,82
./. Vieillesse (6,90%) - 2’838,38
./. ARRCO (3,150%) - 1’295.78
./. AGIRC (8,640%) - 27.56
./. APEC (0,024%) - 9.95
./. CET (0,140%) - 58.04
./. Cont.CEG(0,86%/1,08%) - 357.22
./. Mutuelle Maladie/Prévoyance (2,500%/0,600%) - 1’030.31
Total deductible employee part French SSC - 8’664.82
Mutuelle Maladie (2,500%)- ER (employer contribution - to be reintegrated in net taxable) + 1’028.40
Net taxable salary 33’818.58
Marginal French tax rate 30%
Net French income tax 3’137 euros

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 27
Job profiles
benchmark data &
comparisons

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 28
CERN deviation from Market: all job profiles
Switzerland
Deviation from Market (High Tech sector 2020)
120

100
100

88 88
80

60

40

20

0
Administrative Clerk Electronics craftsperson Mechanical craftsperson
Reminder:
Market Median
CERN Reference
x 100
willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 29
Administrative Clerk
Switzerland
Net Salary Salary Net of
Target Total Total Swiss Net salary after Social Taxes
All figures CERN
Annual social after Social Total security including
shown are in reference
Compensa- security security Swiss employee Social security
CHF salary
tion 50th employee employee income contributions employee
contributions contributions tax and Income tax contributions
Administrative
Clerk 70 619 81 635 11 364.41 70 270.59 10 970.7 59 299.89 70 664.3

CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:

Market Median x 100 70664,3 x 100 = 100,06

CERN Reference 70619

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 30
Electronics Craftsperson
Switzerland
Net Salary Salary Net of
Target Total Total Swiss Net salary after Social Taxes
All figures CERN
Annual social after Social Total security including
shown are in reference
Compensa- security security Swiss employee Social security
CHF salary
tion 50th employee employee income contributions employee
contributions contributions tax and Income tax contributions
Electronics
Craftsperson 70 619 70 068 9 754.22 60 314.17 8 042 52 272.17 62 026.39

CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:

Market Median x 100 62026,39 x 100 = 87,83

CERN Reference 70 619

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 31
Mechanical Craftsperson
Switzerland
Net Salary Salary Net of
Target Total Total Swiss Net salary after Social Taxes
All figures CERN
Annual social after Social Total security including
shown are in reference
Compensa- security security Swiss employee Social security
CHF salary
tion 50th employee employee income contributions employee
contributions contributions tax and Income tax contributions
Mechanical
Craftsperson 70 619 70 068 9 754.22 60 314.17 8 042 52 272.17 62 026.39

CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:

Market Median x 100 62026,39 x 100 = 87,83

CERN Reference 70 619

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 32
CERN deviation from Market: all job profiles
France
Deviation from Market (High Tech sector 2020)
120

100

80

60

58 57 57

40

20

0
Administrative Clerk Electronics craftsperson Mechanical craftsperson

Reminder:
Market Median
CERN Reference
x 100
willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 33
Administrative Clerk
France
Net Salary Salary Net
Target Total Total after Social of Taxes
All figures CERN French Net salary security including
Annual
shown are reference social after Social Total employee Social
Compensa-
in EUR salary security security French contributions security
tion 50th
employee employee income and Income employee PPP
contributions contributions tax tax contributions (index)* In CHF
Administrative
Clerk 70 619 29 881 7 097.42 22 783.58 1 121 21 662.58 28 760 0.7048 40 805.90
*PPP for France provided by ISRP/ OECD
CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:

Market Median x 100 40805,9 x 100 = 57,78

CERN Reference 70619

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 34
Electronics Craftsperson
France
Net Salary Salary Net
Target Total Total after Social of Taxes
All figures CERN French Net salary security including
Annual
shown are reference social after Social Total employee Social
Compensa-
in EUR salary security security French contributions security
tion 50th
employee employee income and Income employee PPP
contributions contributions tax tax contributions (index)* In CHF
Electronics
Craftsperson 70 619 29 170 6 928.53 22 241.47 1 037 21 204.47 28 133 0.7048 39 916.29
*PPP for France provided by ISRP/ OECD
CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:

Market Median x 100 39 916,29 x 100 = 56,52

CERN Reference 70619

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 35
Mechanical Craftsperson
France
Net Salary Salary Net
Total after Social of Taxes
Target Total
All figures CERN French Net salary security including
Annual
shown are reference social after Social Total employee Social
Compensa-
in EUR salary security security French contributions security
tion 50th
employee employee income and Income employee PPP
contributions contributions tax tax contributions (index)* In CHF
Mechanical
Craftsperson 70 619 29 170 6 928.53 22 241.47 1 037 21 204.47 28 133 0.7048 39 916.29
*PPP for France provided by ISRP / OECD
CERN positioning: Values are expressed as a percentage showing the market deviation against CERN for
each job profile, as defined by CERN:

Market Median x 100 39 916,29 x 100 = 56,52

CERN Reference 70619

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 36
Questions &
Answers

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 37
Appendix

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 38
For information - Data from the previous study (2015) by hkp (Reference hkp report: CERN/TREF/418
8 May 2015)

• The results from the previous « 5-Yearly review 2015 – Local salary survey » should be considered
with caution, as the dataset were different.
• The studies are, therefore, not comparable.

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 39
Summary of salary survey 2015 (1/4)

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 40
Summary of salary survey 2015 (2/4)

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 41
Summary of salary survey 2015 (3/4)

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 42
Summary of salary survey 2015 (4/4)

willistowerswatson.com
© 2021 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 43
CERN/FC/6526 11
CERN/3603

Annex 3

Study of salary levels for the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN/TREF/479.rev) –
dated 29 June 2021
 CERN/TREF/479Rev

Paris, 29 June 2021 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SALARY LEVELS

FOR THE
EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH

FINAL REPORT
(Updated June 2021)

Study by:
International Service for Remunerations and Pensions (ISRP)

MOA reference: SIRP/MOA/CERN(2020)08

 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

ABOUT THIS STUDY

This report outlines the main findings of the ISRP comparative study on salary levels carried out on behalf of the
European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN). It summarises the competiveness of the remuneration for
technical, administrative, and managerial functions in grades 4 to 10, compared against the remuneration of
employees who have similar responsibilities working in high technology private sector companies in Switzerland
and Germany.

This report was updated in June 2021 following discussions with CERN to incorporate the results of job
evaluations for benchmark jobs No. 7 and 13 (Principal engineer / Principal applied physicist and Principal legal
adviser) including also grade 10, and consequently spanning grades 9 and 10.

For further information, please contact:

Ms. Elizabeth ALBARRAN (Elizabeth.ALBARRAN@oecd.org)

Mr. Ross DELORAS-PALMER (Ross.DELORAS-PALMER@oecd.org)

Mr. Gastone GUGLIELMINA (Gastone.GUGLIELMINA@oecd.org)

2
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Contents
Page
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 5

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 6

Methodology and basis for calculations ............................................................................................................ 7

Recruitment markets ..................................................................................................................... 7

Profiles covered by the study ........................................................................................................ 8
Job profile benchmarking approach .............................................................................................. 8
Market line for comparisons .......................................................................................................... 9
Reference salary for comparisons .................................................................................................. 10
Cost-of-living adjustment ............................................................................................................... 11

Comparisons for the high technology private sector market ............................................................................ 12

Technical functions ........................................................................................................................ 12

Administrative functions ................................................................................................................ 13
Management functions ................................................................................................................. 13
Analysis and conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 15

Results ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Market trends ................................................................................................................................ 16
CERN salary trends ........................................................................................................................ 16
Overall conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 17
Annexes
Annex I. Comparisons for the general private sector market ..................................................................... 18
Annex II. Methodology for cost-of-living adjustments ................................................................................. 21
Annex III. Ageing factors used to project private sector market salaries on 1 January 2021 ........................ 22
Annex IV. Size of the sample .......................................................................................................................... 23
Annex V. List of companies in the high technology sector per country ...................................................... 24

Annex VI. List of companies in the general private sector market per country ............................................. 26

3
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Executive Summary

Introduction

This report outlines the main findings of the CERN Comparative Study on salary levels at 1 January 2021 and
presents a comparison of CERN’s staff members' remuneration for grades 4 to 10, covering seventeen
representative technical, administrative, and managerial reference profiles against the remuneration of employees
who have similar responsibilities in high technology private sector market companies in Switzerland and Germany.

The analyses found within this report are based on the following assumptions:

• According to CERN’s recruitment needs, the main recruitment market has been identified as being that of the
private sector market, and predominantly the high technology sector, which includes companies belonging to
the high and medium-high research and development (R&D) intensity sectors as defined by the “2019 EU
Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard”;

• The International Service for Remunerations and Pensions (ISRP) identified Switzerland and Germany as the
Member States where the employers offer the most competitive salaries 1;

• With a view towards recruitment and retention of staff with the highest competence, CERN comparisons with
the private sector market have been carried out against the seventy-fifth percentile (P75) market line;
• CERN reference salaries applicable on 1 January 2021 have been compared against the private sector market
values as per 1 April 2020, collected by Willis Towers Watson, and updated at the reference date of 1 January
2021 by means of relevant forecast figures;

• Private sector market values have been adjusted to account for the existing cost-of-living differential between
Germany and Switzerland, the base country where CERN’s headquarters is located. The instrument used for such
adjustments, which allow salary amounts in a given country to be converted to salary amounts in the base
country to ensure equivalent purchasing power, are the Purchasing Power Parities (PPP)2. The PPP used in the
study were provided by the ISRP.

• All comparisons are based on net income (i.e. net of tax remuneration, without deduction of social
contributions) for a single staff member, resident of the relevant country for tax purposes;

• As in previous five-yearly studies, best practice methodology has been applied.

Overall results

The overall results of this study show that from the two surveyed geographical markets, the Swiss High Technology
private sector market is the most competitive across all the selected profiles. The German High Technology private
sector market is less competitive than CERN for the Technical and Administrative functions but overall competitive
for the Management functions.

The increased competitiveness of CERN salaries in comparison to past studies is mainly due to the following factor.
On the one hand, over the past six years the cost of living in Germany has increased steadily as part of PPP

1
Choice of Comparators for CERN’s five-yearly review 2021, SIRP(2020)061
2
SIRP(2020)031 Methodology used in salary surveys and in the calculation of Purchasing Power Parities (PPP)

4
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

calculations, while on the other hand, the cost of living in Switzerland has comparatively decreased at a faster rate
relative to the increase seen in Germany.

Technical Functions

The results for this group of functions within the high technology sector are varied; net reference salaries in the high
technology sector for single employees in Switzerland show levels that exceed CERN reference salaries for most of
the studied technical functions:

- Swiss net of tax salaries in the high technology sector range from 6% below to 18% above the reference
salaries of CERN.

After cost-of-living adjustments, net reference salaries in the German high technology sector show levels that are
below CERN reference salaries for all of the studied technical functions:

‐ German net of tax salaries in the high technology sector range from 3% to 13% below the reference salaries of
CERN.

Administrative Functions

‐ In Switzerland, net reference salaries in the high technology sector show levels that exceed CERN reference
salaries for all of the surveyed administrative functions. Swiss net of tax salaries for administrative functions
range from 4% to 13% above the reference salaries of CERN.

‐ In Germany, net reference salaries for administrative functions range from 2% to 20% below those of CERN.

Management Functions

- For single employees, net of tax salaries for management functions in the high technology sector in Switzerland
range from 3% to 29% above the reference salaries of CERN.

- The German high technology sector net of tax salaries show a mixed picture for the same functions; after cost-
of-living adjustments, salaries range from 3% below to 21% above the reference salaries of CERN.

5
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

1. Introduction

1.1. In accordance with its Staff Rules and Regulations, CERN is required to undertake every five years a review
of the financial and social conditions of members of its personnel. In this context, pursuant to Annex A1 of the CERN
Staff Rules, data on salaries for grades 4 to 10 has been collected by the International Service for Remuneration and
Pensions (ISRP), attached to the OECD.

1.2. The ISRP provides a wide range of services such as in-depth salary studies and statistics, surveys,
remuneration and pension management, legal advice and job market analysis of the public and private sector
markets for the six Co-ordinated Organisations (CoE, ECMWF, ESA, EUMETSAT, NATO and OECD) and for a number
of Associated Organisations. The Compensation and Benefits Unit of the ISRP, which conducted this study, is
composed of Statisticians, Compensation and Benefits experts, and IT specialists.

1.3. The framework of CERN’s five-yearly review specifies that the data collection for grades 4 to 10 should be
carried out from “employers established in the Member States that offer the most competitive salaries”, in order to
ensure that the financial and social conditions offered by the Organization will allow the recruitment and retention
of staff of the highest competence from all its Member States. For this purpose, and based on a preliminary study of
market data for basic salaries in the private sector market, the ISRP identified Switzerland and Germany as the most
competitive countries amongst CERN’s Member States.

1.4. Based on the analysis of CERN’s recruitment clusters, the main recruitment market has been identified as
being the high technology sector within the private sector market, which includes companies belonging to the high
and medium-high research and development intensity sectors3.

1.5. After a market consultation in accordance with OECD procedures where the offers of three consultancy
companies (Mercer, Willis Towers Watson, and Korn Ferry) were carefully examined, the ISRP mandated the firm
Willis Towers Watson (WTW) to undertake the collection of private sector market salary data. The choice of the
consultancy firm relies on the fact that WTW offers the largest datasets for the countries and main recruitment
market covered by the present study, along with a solid methodology on job profile evaluation.

1.6. The present report aims to provide a comparison, as of 1 January 2021, of CERN reference salaries
covering seventeen different profiles in grades 4 to 10, against net of tax remuneration in the high technology
private sector. It enables CERN to assess the competitiveness of their salary levels against the relevant employment
markets to which CERN compares.

3
2021 Five-yearly Review Data Collection Process for Salary Comparison and Related Mandates, CERN/TREF/461.REV

6
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

2. Methodology and Basis for Calculations

Recruitment Markets

2.1. The high technology sector, in the context of this study, includes companies belonging to the high and
medium-high research and development (R&D) intensity sectors as defined by the “2019 EU Industrial R&D
Investment Scoreboard” and published within the context of the Global Industrial Research & Innovation Analyses
(GLORIA). These activities are carried out jointly by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre Directorate
Innovation and Growth and the Directorate General for Research and Innovation - Directorate F, Prosperity; this
market covers:

• High R&D intensity sectors (above 5% of net sales spent in R&D) include, for example, pharmaceuticals;
biotechnology; medical equipment; technology hardware and equipment; aerospace and defence; computer
hardware; electronic office equipment; internet; semiconductors; and telecommunications equipment, as well
as software and computer services.

• Medium-high R&D intensity sectors (between 2% and 5% of net sales spent in R&D) include, for example,
electronic equipment; electrical components and equipment; automobiles; auto parts; industrial machinery;
personal goods; household goods and home construction; and diversified industrials, as well as support
services.

2.2. Because CERN’s employment conditions should enable it to recruit and to retain staff with the highest
competence from all Member States, including those where the salaries are the highest, only companies from the
most competitive geographical markets and with relevant R&D expenditure in the high technology sector were
retained as part of the present benchmark.

2.3. For this study, an improved method has been applied to map companies from WTW databases to the high
and medium-high R&D intensity sectors of the high technology sector market. The method included a detailed
assessment of the following two central elements: relevant R&D expenditure and identification of the industry
sector of the listed company in accordance to the 2019 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard.

2.4. Based on a preliminary study presented to the TREF in October 2020 [SIRP(2020)061], where net average
salary data obtained from two recognised consultancy firms (Willis Towers Watson and Korn Ferry) was examined;
the ISRP identified Switzerland as the geographical market offering the most competitive salaries amongst CERN’s
Member States. Germany was then identified as the second most competitive market based on the remuneration
levels, as well as due to the fact that it has the largest number of high-technology companies in the EU, according to
the 2019 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard.

2.5. With the aim of corroborating the results from the selected high technology sector, salaries related to the
general private sector market for the two selected geographical markets have also been examined. The general
private sector market includes salary data from all industries and in all regions within the selected countries.

7
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Profiles covered by the study

2.6. CERN identified a cross-section of job profiles to benchmark against the private sector market amongst
their technical, administrative and management functions. They cover the seventeen profiles at specific grades (4 to
10) listed below, within the CERN salary structure.

Technical functions
N° Grades Profiles
1 3-4-5 Technician (mechanical, electromechanical, electrical, electronics)
2 3-4-5 Computing technician
3 4-5-6 Technical engineer (mechanical, electromechanical, electrical, electronics)
4 4-5-6 Computing technical engineer
5 6-7-8 Engineer (mechanical, electromechanical, electrical, electronics ) / Applied physicist
6 6-7-8 Computing Engineer
7 9-10 Principal engineer / Principal applied physicist

Administrative functions
N° Grades Profiles
8 3-4-5 Administrative Assistant (personal/team/process/services)
9 4-5-6 Financial support officer
10 4-5-6 Human resources support officer
11 6-7-8 Financial professional
12 6-7-8 Human resources professional
13 9-10 Principal legal adviser

Management functions
N° Grades Profiles
14 9 Group leader
15 9-10 Head of a large project
16 9-10 Department head
17 10 Director

Job profile benchmarking approach

2.7. CERN benchmark functions were evaluated by applying Willis Towers Watson’s survey methodology, an
integrated process combining elements from two proprietary levelling methodologies, Career Map and the Global
Grading System (GGS). This combination yields a unique and systematic approach to matching job profiles that
encompasses the concept of career progression through Career Levels with differentiated profile size as determined
by Global Grades.

8
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

2.8. The salary levels in the selected private sector market were determined through evaluations based on the
following main criteria:

a) Career Map: based on a series of Career Bands, each with a number of distinct Career Levels. Career Bands
enable organizations to structure work and profiles based on progressive levels of expected contribution.
Career Levels represent discernible broad steps in a career progression, which are consistent across
organizations. They reflect the normal market progression of profiles requiring higher levels of competence
and knowledge as people advance in their careers.

b) Global Grading System: measures the relative internal value of distinct profiles within an organization
according to specific dimensions and aligns those values with quantifiable differences in pay levels in the
external marketplace. Global Grades enhance data comparability across organizations of varied size and
create a single top-to bottom framework to facilitate levelling and drive consistency across Career Bands,
Functions and Disciplines. They provide the foundation, or underpinning, for both Executive Benchmarks
and the broad-based Career Levels, and define the start and end points of career progression.

2.9. CERN functions have been evaluated through WTW methodology and have been matched according to the
following three steps:

Step 1: Determination of CERN’s Global Grade

Step 2: Alignment of CERN’s levels to survey levels

‒ Assignation of Global Grades to executives

‒ Assignation of Career Bands, Career Levels and Global Grades to non-executive profiles

Step 3: Matching of CERN’s profiles to WTW Functions and Disciplines

Market Line for Comparisons

2.10. With a view towards recruitment and retention of staff with the highest competencies and skills, the
comparison of CERN’s salaries against the high technology sector were carried out at the seventy-fifth percentile
(P75) market line. At this market line, 75% of the salaries in the selected private sector market are lower and 25%
are higher.

2.11. According to best practices, the selected private sector market salaries were compared with the
corresponding CERN average (mean) salary of the grades applicable to the respective benchmark job profiles. The
identified reference salaries correspond to a seasoned professional experience ranging from 20 to more than 35
years, depending on the benchmark profiles. Therefore, similar work experience was also considered for the job
profile evaluation in determining the equivalent salary with private sector market job profiles.

9
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Reference Salary for Comparisons

2.12. Market comparisons have been conducted on the basis of total cash remuneration at 1 January 2021. For
the private sector market, total cash is the sum of base salary and actual short-term variable pay on an annual basis.
The Base Salary includes all (taxable) fixed remuneration paid to an employee on an annual basis and which can be
classified as a “vested cash benefit”. Typically included in the base salary is the monthly salary, multiplied by 12, and
any effective “extra” payment such as a 13th month, holiday bonus and any seniority premiums. The actual short-
term variable cash includes all (taxable) cash amounts paid to an employee that can vary year over year. Most
typically, these refer to incentive payments that are contingent on discretion, performance, or results achieved.

2.13. For CERN, the reference remuneration is the sum of Base Salary (equal to 12 times the midpoint monthly
basic salary of the grades applicable to the respective benchmarked profiles as of 1 January 2021). CERN’s reference
salary is equivalent to the net income before social contributions.

2.14. To allow for meaningful comparisons of CERN reference remuneration against those of the high technology
and general private sector markets, total cash remuneration in these markets was transformed to net of taxes.
Therefore, the net income taken into account for the benchmark equals the total cash after deduction of taxes, but
without deduction of employee social security contributions. An illustration of the net income calculation is shown
below.

Example of Net Income Calculation

a. Gross salary 109,250

b. Employee social security contributions 11,934

c. Income Tax 18,325

d. Net salary after social security contributions & taxes 78,991

e. Net income e=(a–c) 90,925

2.15. The taxation rules applied for the gross to net calculations are those that are compulsory and officially in
use by tax authorities in Switzerland and in Germany. However, taxation rates in Switzerland differ amongst
existing cantons and communes; given that CERN headquarters is located in Geneva, this location has been retained
as the reference canton and commune for taxation purposes. Net of tax income calculations assume that the
employee family situation is that of a single staff member with fiscal residence in each one of the two countries
covered by the study; and, specifically the commune of Geneva for Switzerland.

10
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Cost-of-living adjustment

2.16. To allow for comparisons of CERN reference salaries with those of the private sector market in Germany,
the annual net income was adjusted to take into account the cost-of-living differential between Switzerland and
Germany by means of the purchasing power parities (PPP). The PPP calculated by the ISRP as of 1 July 2020
(applicable on 1 January 2021 in the CO system), to convert German salaries with reference to Switzerland is
0.6020.

2.17. The use of the PPP factor to convert German salaries to Swiss francs (CHF) indicates what the comparators’
salaries would be “worth” if they were paid in Switzerland, once the cost-of-living difference between the two
locations is neutralised. Accordingly, if a person in Germany earns 6,020 EUR, that same person would require
10,000 CHF if working in Geneva (CERN headquarters) in order to have an equivalent purchasing power.

2.18. PPP factors are a robust indicator of cost of living as they avoid misleading international comparisons that
can arise when introducing the volatility of exchange rates. The PPP methodology is described more in detail in
Annex II.

11
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

3. Comparisons for the High Technology Private Sector Market

3.1. The high technology sector results are presented in the form of graphs for each function; they show the
positioning of CERN for each profile against the selected high technology sector in which CERN is equal to 100. A
value under 100 means that CERN is above the market and a value exceeding 100 means that CERN is below the
market.

3.2. To provide a comprehensive presentation of results, tables grouping the market comparative ratios,
hereafter referred to as compa-ratios, used in the construction of graphs are also displayed. The compa-ratios show
the relationship of the CERN reference salary to the salary of an equivalent profile within the high technology
private sector market.

Graph 1: Technical Functions

Technical Functions - Single

High Technology Market
CERN = 100
150

100

50

0
CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE
Technician Computing Technical Computing Engineer / Computing Principal
Technician Engineer Technical Applied Engineer Engineer /
Engineer Physicist Principal
Applied
Physicist

Switzerland (CH) CERN

Germany (DE)

12
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Graph 2: Administrative Functions

Administrative Functions - Single

High Technology Market
CERN = 100
150

100

50

0
CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE
Admin. Financial Support HR Support Officer Financial HR Professional Principal Legal
Assistant Officer Professional Adviser

Switzerland (CH) CERN

Germany (DE)

Graph 3: Management Functions

Management Functions - Single

High Technology Market
CERN = 100
200

150

100

50

0
CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE
Group Leader Head of a large project Department Head Director

Switzerland (CH) CERN

Germany (DE)

13
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Table 1: Total Cash Compa-ratios, Single Staff.

High Technology Market

CERN = 100
No. Technical Functions Switzerland Germany
1 Technician 99 95
2 Computing Technician 115 87
3 Technical Engineer 97 97
4 Computing Technical Engineer 118 92
5 Engineer / Applied Physicist 103 92
6 Computing Engineer 115 92
7 Principal Engineer / Principal Applied Physicist 94 91
Administrative Functions
8 Administrative assistant (personal/ team/process/services) 104 94
9 Financial Support Officer 107 94
10 HR Support Officer 113 92
11 Financial Professional 104 87
12 HR Professional 107 80
13 Principal Legal Adviser 113 98
Management Functions
14 Group Leader 103 101
15 Head of a Large Project 116 97
16 Department Head 121 109
17 Director 129 121

14
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

4. Analysis and Conclusions

4.1. CERN reference remuneration as of 1 January 2021 has been compared against net of tax total cash
remuneration in the high technology sector, within the Swiss and German geographical markets, for staff whose civil
status is single and who reside fiscally in the relevant geographical market.

4.2. To complete the analysis and to corroborate the results from the selected high technology sector, the net
of tax remuneration for the general private sector market in Switzerland and Germany was also examined (for
results, please refer to Annex I – Comparison for the general market).

Results

4.3. Upon examination of the high technology private sector market total cash remuneration and after net
income calculations and cost-of-living adjustments, Switzerland was found to be the most competitive
geographical market for all of the studied CERN functions. The Swiss high technology sector is, on average of all of
the observed functions, 9% above CERN reference salaries.

4.4. For most of the studied technical functions in the high technology private sector market, net reference
salaries for single employees in Switzerland show more competitive levels than the CERN reference salaries. While
CERN is competitive for the Technician and Technical Engineer profiles, it should be noted that the “Computing”
profiles in the high technology sector are consistently more competitive, i.e. Computing Technician vs. Technician,
Computing Technical Engineer vs. Technical Engineer, and Computing Engineer vs. Engineer. For the studied
technical functions in the high technology sector, German net reference salaries adjusted for cost-of-living, are
lower than CERN reference salaries.

4.5. These trends are confirmed for the administrative functions in the high technology private sector market.
On the one hand, net reference salaries for single employees in Switzerland are more competitive than CERN
reference salaries (4% to 13% higher). On the other hand, German net reference salaries for the administrative
functions, after cost-of-living adjustment, are 2% to 20% lower than the respective CERN functions.

4.6. Swiss net salaries for the managerial functions in the high technology private sector market are 3% to 29%
more competitive than the CERN functions; the position of Group Leader is almost on par with the high technology
sector, while the Director position shows the largest difference. German net reference salaries for the managerial
functions, after cost of living adjustments, are between 3% lower and 21% higher than the CERN functions, with the
position of Group Leader on par and that of the Head of a large project nearly on par with CERN.

4.7. When analysing the Swiss market results, it is important to note that the high technology sector is, on
average, as competitive as the general private sector market. This is true for all functions except for most of the
selected managerial functions; on average, the general private sector market pays 32% above CERN functions for
these positions while the high technology sector pays 17% above CERN functions on average.

4.8. The difference in remuneration trends in the high technology sector, for the Technical and Administrative
functions, when compared to the general private sector market, reflects the importance of these profiles within the

15
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

high technology sector; consequently, the higher levels of salaries correspond to the high importance given to these
key positions in this sector.

4.9. It should be noted that although salaries in the German high technology and general private sector markets
are less competitive for all of the observed functions, the lack of competitiveness is in part linked to the cost-of-
living differentials between Germany and Switzerland at the time of the present study.

Market trends

4.10. Switzerland remains the most competitive market amongst CERN’s Member States, with salaries on
average 9% above those of CERN.

4.11. When comparing net of tax salaries for the German private sector market after cost-of-living adjustments,
the trend shows opposite results than those for Switzerland: German salaries are below those of CERN for most of
the surveyed profiles, largely due to cost-of-living differentials, which have a negative effect on the competitiveness
of the German market when compared to the Swiss market.

4.12. At present, less Swiss Francs are required to buy the equivalent basket of goods in Germany; this is mainly
due to the very dynamic growth of the German economy, which has seen rising house and rental prices, which are
collected for use in PPP calculations. These larger costs, which also include higher energy costs and other fees, have
increased the cost-of-living in Germany. In parallel, the cost-of-living in Switzerland has decreased with respect to
Belgium (as base city in PPP calculations carried out by the ISRP for salary adjustment purposes), mainly due to a
stagnant or decreasing rental market covered. This divergence in housing and rental prices, which are an integral
part of PPP calculations, has had a significant impact in the overall cost-of-living in Germany, when compared to that
in Switzerland.

4.13. The cost-of-living differential between the two countries has thus narrowed since the past study; when
comparing the PPP factors over time, the PPP of Germany, when rebased to Geneva, has increased from 0.5854 in
July 2014 to 0.6020 in July 2020. Concretely, this means that at present about 3% less per Swiss Franc would be
needed to pay an equivalent cost-of-living salary to an individual working in Germany in comparison to the last
study.

4.14. Further details of cost-of-living differentials measured by PPP factors can be found in Annex II.

CERN salary trends

4.15. Since the last study in 2015, CERN has revised its career structure and salary grid. The main changes
included the streamlining of the salary structure, four levels of performance qualification, with financial rewards
strictly linked to the level of performance and performance based financial rewards comprising two aspects: a salary
increase and a lump sum performance payment.

4.16. CERN’s salary grid has been simplified and passed from 8 career paths and 21 salary bands to 10 grades;
the broader granularity of the grid has been paired with a classification system of benchmark profiles in order to

16
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

classify roles per benchmarked profile covering multiple grades. The changes in the salary structure intend to better
reflect the new career structure.

4.17. It is worth noting that for the present study only CERN base salary has been considered. Therefore, other
elements of the current package have been excluded, such as the Performance bonus (representing on average
1.15% of the Reference Salary), and the Responsibility awards (given to certain Managerial posts in grades 9 and 10
and which range between 5% – 10% of the base salary).

Overall conclusions

4.18. When comparing the high technology sector levels against those in the general private sector market, the
net of tax salaries in the general private sector market in Switzerland are on average on par with salaries in the high
technology sector. This hides differences, however, in the different functions for the two markets. Salaries for
technical and administrative functions are lower in the general private sector market than in the high technology
sector, as explained above. However, the higher salaries in the general private sector market for the managerial
functions brings the average of all functions in both markets to 9% above CERN’s salary levels.

4.19. When observing in parallel the high technology sector levels against the general private sector market
results for Germany, it is noted that, on average, net of tax salaries adjusted for cost-of-living are higher in the
general private sector market than in the selected high technology sector.

4.20. CERN’s overall salary levels against the private sector market in Switzerland and in Germany are
summarised in Table 2 below.

Table 2- Average cash compa-ratios, all functions, single staff.

Private Market Comparison

CERN = 100
Switzerland Germany

High Technology General High Technology General

109 109 95 99

17
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Annex I – Comparisons for the General Private Sector Market

I.i The below results from the general private sector market are presented only to corroborate the results
from the selected high technology sector. The graphs for each function show the positioning of CERN for each
profile, against the general private sector market, in which CERN is equal to 100. A value under 100 means that
CERN is above the general market, while a value exceeding 100 means that CERN is below the general market. To
complete the presentation of results, the tables grouping the market compa-ratios used in the construction of
graphs are also provided.

Graph I: Technical Functions

Technical Functions - Single

General Market
CERN = 100
150

100

50

0
CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE
Technician Computing Technical Computing Engineer / Computing Principal
Technician Engineer Technical Applied Engineer Engineer /
Engineer Physicist Principal
Applied
Physicist

Switzerland (CH) CERN

Germany (DE)

18
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Graph II. Administrative Functions

Administrative Functions - Single

General Market
CERN = 100
150

100

50

0
CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE
Admin. Financial Support HR Support Officer Financial HR Professional Principal Legal
Assistant Officer Professional Adviser

Switzerland (CH) CERN

Germany (DE)

Graph III. Management Functions

Management Functions - Single

General Market
CERN = 100
200

150

100

50

0
CH DE CH DE CH DE CH DE
Group Leader Head of a Large Project Department Head Director

Switzerland (CH) CERN

Germany (DE)

19
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Table 1: Total Cash Compa-ratios, Single Staff.

General Market
CERN = 100
No. Technical Functions Switzerland Germany
1 Technician 99 95
2 Computing Technician 115 101
3 Technical Engineer 96 96
4 Computing Technical Engineer 101 97
5 Engineer / Applied Physicist 103 93
6 Computing Engineer 105 92
7 Principal Engineer / Principal Applied Physicist 94 91
Administrative Functions
8 Administrative assistant (personal/ team/process/services) 104 92
9 Financial Support Officer 102 97
10 HR Support Officer 105 95
11 Financial Professional 93 87
12 HR Professional 98 82
13 Principal Legal Adviser 115 101
Management Functions
14 Group Leader 125 114
15 Head of a Large Project 116 97
16 Department Head 133 115
17 Director 155 138

20
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Annex II – Methodology for cost-of-living adjustments

II.i The purchasing power parities (PPP) for salary purposes are calculated by the ISRP in collaboration with the
Statistical office of the European Union (Eurostat), in accordance with the methodology approved by decision-
making bodies of the EU, through a Working Group of statistical experts from Member States, who have endorsed
the method being used by the CO and the European Commission.

II.ii The PPP, also known as economic parities, aim at ensuring that international staff in comparable
professional and family circumstances enjoy equivalent purchasing power, irrespective of the place of employment.
These specific PPP are currently used for salary adjustment purposes by several international organizations, notably
the CO (OECD, NATO, ESA, Council of Europe, ECMWF, and EUMETSAT), the European Commission and the
European Patent Office (EPO).

II.iii PPP calculations are based on price comparisons between a basket of goods and services for private
consumption in a base location with matching goods and services in the reference location in each of the compared
duty countries. These economic parities make use of price surveys data, collected by National Statistical Institutes
(NSI) within the framework of the Eurostat-OECD programme on PPP.

II.iv With reference to Switzerland, the PPP factor used to ensure equity of purchasing power against the
country included in this study, applicable as of 1 January 2021, is 0.6020.

II.v PPP may also be used to convert salaries earned abroad into equivalent salaries in the base country of the
calculations. Accordingly, for the purposes of this study, when the comparator’s salaries are divided by the PPP
coefficient indicated above, the resulting amount in Swiss Francs indicates how much the comparators’ salaries
would be “worth” if they were paid in Switzerland, by neutralising the cost-of-living difference between Switzerland
and Germany.

II.vi For instance, a person working in Germany and earning an annual salary of 50,000 EUR would require a
salary of 83 056 CHF if that person were to enjoy an equivalent purchasing power; i.e. 50,000 ÷ 0.6020 = 83 056
(0.6020 corresponding to the PPP for Germany, rebased to Switzerland equal to 1).

21
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Annex III - Ageing factors used to project private sector market salaries on 1
January 2021

III.i CERN reference salaries applicable on 1 January 2021 have been compared against the private sector
market values, collected by Willis Towers Watson (WTW) as per 1 April 2020. In order to ensure “like with like”
comparison, private sector market values have been updated by WTW to the reference date of 1 January 2021 by
means of the below forecast figures.

Base Salary Forecast April 2020 to January 2021

Germany Switzerland

2.90% 2.00%

III.ii The above forecast figures used by WTW to update salaries to the reference date of this study are
generated using salary budget planning data reported by the companies participating in their annual surveys. The
forecast figures are calculated using the overall 2020 foreseen salary increase by employee group; the forecast
includes salary freezes anticipated after the first COVID-19 wave.

22
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Annex IV - Size of the sample

IV.i The total number of companies and individual observations in Willis Towers Watson’s databases for the
two selected countries in the general private sector market and in the selected high technology sector are indicated
in the tables below:

High Technology Sector - 2020 database

Number of companies Number of incumbents

Germany 468 411 191

Switzerland 265 81 275

General Private Sector Market - 2020 database

Number of companies Number of incumbents

Germany 768 632 974

Switzerland 399 153 128

IV.ii The number of companies and individual observations involving the seventeen benchmarked profiles for
the general private sector market and the selected high technology sector are indicated in the tables below:

High Technology Sector - 2020 database

Number of companies Number of incumbents

Germany 370 17 993

Switzerland 182 4 068

General Private Sector Market - 2020 database

Number of companies Number of incumbents

Germany 603 24 564

Switzerland 276 11 017

23
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Annex V – List of companies in the high technology sector per country

High Technology Companies

Switzerland
3M CNH Industrial GE Capital MSD Santen Pharmaceutical
Abbott Laboratories Coesia GE Healthcare Merck KGaA Santhera Pharmaceuticals
AbbVie Cofra Holding GE Aviation Merz Sarepta Therapeutics
ACI Worldwide Cognex General Electric Merz Pharma (Anteis) SAS Institute
Acronis Cognizant GE Digital Microsoft Schneider Electric
Adecco Group CommScope Fieldcore MongoDB Seattle Genetics
Adecco CooperVision GE Renewable Energy MSA Safety Sensient Technologies
Alcon Corning GE Power - Gas Power GLOBALFOUNDRIES SES
Alexion Pharmaceuticals Corteva Agriscience GE Power Portfolio Mundipharma SGS
Align Technology Crealogix Gilead Sciences Mylan Siegwerk Druckfarben
Allianz Technology CSL GlaxoSmithKline National Instruments Siemens
Amazon.com Curtiss-Wright Glory Global Solutions NCR Siemens Healthcare
Amgen Sunrise Communications Google Nestlé Health Science Siemens Energy
Apellis Pharmaceuticals Daiichi Sankyo Grünenthal Pharma NetApp Siemens Industry
Apple Danaher Haemonetics Nissan Europe Siemens Mobility
Applied Materials Pall Corporation Harley-Davidson Nissan Corporate SITA
AptarGroup X-Rite Heritage B Nissan Motor Smith & Nephew
Arrow Electronics Leica Microsystems Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Nokia Socar Energy
Ascensia Diabetes Care Videojet Technologies Hitachi Vantara Norgine Solvay
Astellas Pharma Esko Honeywell Novartis Pharma Somfy
AstraZeneca Molecular Devices HP Inc. Novo Nordisk Sony
AT Kearney Beckman Coulter HSBC Bank Oerlikon Steris
Avanade Radiometer IBM Olympus STMicroelectronics
Bain & Company Leica Biosystems ICON Clinical Research ON Semiconductor Stryker
Baker Hughes Hach IDEXX Laboratories Oracle Syneos Health
Basilea Pharmaceuticals Sciex IHS Markit Ortho-Clinical Diag Takeaway.com
Bausch Health Companies Phenomenex & Agela Illumina Otsuka Pharmaceutical Shire
Baxter Dassault Systèmes Ingenico Panasonic System Com. Talend
Bayer Crop Science Debiopharm Insight Direct PAREXEL Tecan
Bayer Dell Integra Lifesciences PayPal Tech Data
Becton Dickinson DuPont Intel Pearson Tempur Sealy
BIAL DXC Technology International Game Technology Perrigo Teva Pharmaceutical Ind
Biogen Dyson International Olympic Co. Pfizer Thermo Fisher Scientific
Bio-Rad Laboratories Eastman Chemical Intuitive Surgical Swiss Precision Diag. Thomson Reuters
Biotronik Eaton IQVIA BICS TomTom
Blueprint Medicines eBay Jenoptik Qualcomm Trivadis
Boeing Edwards Lifesciences Covagen Rackspace Technology Twitter
Bombardier Eisai Actelion Pharmaceuticals Recordati Uber
Boston Scientific Electronic Arts Ethicon Refinitiv UCB
Celgene Eli Lilly Johnson & Johnson Medical RELX Group Underwriters Laboratories
Bristol-Myers Squibb Emergent BioSolutions Johnson & Johnson Vision Resideo Univar
Brunswick Endress+Hauser Medos Rheinmetall Air Defence Varian Medical Systems
BT Global Services Epson Janssen Vaccines & Prev. Ricoh Vectura
Cabot Ericsson Janssen Pharmaceuticals Roche Pharmaceuticals Verizon
Canon Everis Johnson & Johnson Roche Pharma (Sales) Vifor Pharma
Catalent Pharma Solutions Facebook Synthes Roche Diagnostics Faiveley Transport
Caterpillar Financial Services FANUC Johnson Outdoors Roche Diagnostics Waters
CDK Global FCA Bank Covance Rockwell Automation White & Case
Cellnex Ferring Pharmaceuticals Lam Research Sage Workday
CGG Flex Lexmark salesforce.com Worldline
Cimpress Fujitsu Lundbeck Samsung Xylem
Cisco Systems Galapagos Medline Industries Harman International Ind. Yandex
Citrix Systems Garrett - Advancing Motion Medtronic Sanofi Zimmer Biomet

24
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

High Technology Companies

Germany
3M Broadsign Sciex GE Healthcare Surgical Process Institute Northrop Grumman LITEF Scout24 ThoughtWorks
Abbott Laboratories Brunswick Trojan Technologies GE Power - Gas Power Synthes Novartis Pharma Seattle Genetics TietoEvry
AbbVie BT Global Services Videojet Technologies GE Power Portfolio Johnson Outdoors Novo Nordisk Sensient Technologies TomTom
ACI Worldwide Cadence Design SystemsX-Rite GE Renewable Energy Kantar Group Oerlikon Servier Toyota Kreditbank
Acronis CAE Dassault Systèmes General Electric Kaspersky Olympus SES Trimble
Adecco Group Camurus Datev Gerson Lehrman Group Kelly Services Omron Healthcare SGS - Société Générale de
Trivadis
Surveillance
Aenova Canon Dell Gilead Sciences Kerry Group ON Semiconductor SICK Group TSI
Agilent Technologies Canon Production Deutsche Bank GKN Aerospace Keysight Technologies Oracle Sidley Austin LLP TÜV Nord
Airbus Group (EADS) Catalent Pharma Sol. DWS Investments GlaxoSmithKline Kiadis Ortho-Clinical DiagnosticsSiegwerk Druckfarben TÜV Rheinland
Alcon Caterpillar Financial Services
Dexcom Glory Global Solutions Kirkland & Ellis LLP Otsuka Pharmaceutical evosoft Twilio
Alexion Pharmaceuticals CDK Global Diebold Nixdorf Goodyear Dunlop Tires Guardian Industries OVH Flender Twitter
Align Technology Cegedim DigitalRoute Google Kohler Oxford Instruments Omnetric Uber
Allianz Technology CGG Dow Chemical Graco TSK Prüfsysteme Oxford Policy Mgmt Siemens UCB
Allnex CGI Drägerwerk Grifols Kongsberg Automotive Panasonic System Com Siemens Bank Underwriters Laboratories
Amadeus Charles River Lab DuPont Groz-Beckert Kyocera Fineceramics Panduit Siemens Finance/ LeasingUniCredit Bank AG
Amazon.com Lummus Novolen Tech HOMAG Group Grünenthal Pharma Covance PAREXEL Siemens Financial UniCredit Direct Services
American Tower Chiesi DXC Technology Guerbet Lam Research PayPal Siemens Fonds Invest UniCredit Services
Amgen Cimpress Dyson Haemonetics Latham & Watkins LLP Pearson Siemens Healthcare WealthCap
Apple Cisco Systems Eastman Chemical Harley-Davidson LEO Pharma Perrigo Siemens Healthcare 1&1 Internet
Applied Materials Citrix Systems Eaton Haworth Lexmark Pfizer Siemens Healthineers Univar
AptarGroup Clinigen Group eBay Teka Littelfuse Pharming Siemens Mobility Valeo
Aptiv CNH Industrial Edwards Lifesciences Hewlett-Packard Enterprise SAGA Group Phoenix Contact Siemens Postal, Parcel & Varian
Airport Medical
LogisticsSystems
Arrow Electronics Coesia Electrolux Hexcel Lockheed Martin Incora Siemens Power Generation
Vectura
Service
Ascensia Diabetes Care Cofra Holding Electronic Arts Hill-Rom L'Oréal - IT Division Plexus Sykatec Velatia
ASM International Cognex Elementis Hirose Electric Lundbeck Pluralsight Trench Verint Systems
AB Enzymes Cognizant Eli Lilly Hitachi Europe Mallinckrodt BICS - Belgacom International
Sierra
Carrier
Wireless
Services Verivox
Astellas Pharma Comdirect EnPro Industries Hitachi Vantara Mambu QinetiQ Sinch Verizon
AstraZeneca Commerz Real Epson Honeywell Medline Industries Qualcomm Sirtex Medical Vertiv
ASUSTeK Computer Commerzbank Equal Experts HP Inc. Medtronic Rackspace Technology SITA Vetter Pharma
AT Kearney CommScope Ericsson Hycom Megaport Recordati Sky Vifor Pharma
Avanade Computacenter ERT - eResearch Tech Hyundai AutoEver MSD Red Bull Media Smith & Nephew Visteon
Avanos Medical Confluent Esaote ICON Clinical Research Merck KGaA Refinitiv Snow Software W.R. Grace
Avira Conmed Establishment Labs IDEXX Laboratories Merz RELX Group Solvay Faiveley Transport
Bain & Company Continental Eumedica IDT Biologika Micronit MicrotechnologiesRenesas Electronics Sony Waters
Baker Hughes CooperVision Evotec IFS LinkedIn Resideo Sony Pictures Webasto
Baker McKenzie CoorsTek Exact IHS Markit Microsoft Rexel Utimaco Safeware West Pharmaceutical
Bausch Health CompaniesCorning
Inc. Exide Technologies Illumina Miltenyi Biomedicine Ricoh Spotahome Westlake Chemical
Baxter Corteva Agriscience Experian Indra Mollie Ricoh Corporate Spotify White & Case
Bayer CPA Global Mgmt Facebook Infineon Technologies Momentive Performance Materials
Rite-Hite SPX Corporation Woodward
Bayer Crop Science Crealogix FANUC Infobip MongoDB Roaming Networks Steris Workday
Becton Dickinson CSL FCA Bank Ingenico MorphoSys Robert Half STMicroelectronics Xilinx
BIAL Curtiss-Wright Ferring Pharmaceuticals INNIO Jenbacher Morrison & Foerster LLP Roche Diagnostics Stryker Yandex
Biogen Daiichi Sankyo First Solar Insight Direct Moxa Roche Pharmaceuticals Sumitomo Corporation Yanfeng Global
Biologische Heilmittel HeelDaiichi Sankyo (HQ) Flex Integra Lifesciences MSA Safety Rockwell Automation SUMUP Yazaki Europe
BioNTech Athlon Car Lease Flughafen Düsseldorf Intel GLOBALFOUNDRIES Rohde & Schwarz SupplyOn Zambon
Bio-Rad Laboratories AVT Fresenius Medical Care International Game Technology
Mundipharma ROHM Syneos Health Zenuity
Biotronik Beckman Coulter Freudenberg Intuitive Surgical Mylan Rolls-Royce Shire Zimmer Biomet
Bitdefender Cepheid FTI Consulting Ion Beam Applications National Instruments NatWest Markets Takeda Pharmaceuticals
BiZZdesign Danaher Fujitsu Iponweb NCC Safran Helicopter EnginesTalend
Blueprint Medicines Esko Galapagos Ipsen NCR Sage TE Connectivity
Boehringer Ingelheim Hach Games Workshop IQVIA Nestlé Sakura Tecan
Boehringer Ingelheim Animal
HemoCue
Health Gates (Aachen) ITT Inc. NetApp salesforce.com Tech Data
Boeing Integrated DNA Technologies
Gates Eifeler Maschinenbau
Jacobs Engineering NetCologne Harman International Industries
Technology Nexus
Bombardier Leica Biosystems Gates Mectrol Jenoptik Newstore Samsung Electronics Tempur Sealy
BorgWarner Leica Microsystems GCP Applied Tech Ethicon Nexteer Automotive PKC Group Tenneco
Delphi Technologies Mammotome Current & GE Lighting Janssen Pharmaceuticals Nissan Corporate Sanofi Terumo BCT
Boston Consulting Group Molecular Devices Fieldcore Johnson & Johnson Nissan Motor Santen Pharmaceutical Dunnhumby
Boston Scientific Pall Corporation GE Aviation Johnson & Johnson Med Nokia SAP Teva Pharmaceutical
Bristol-Myers Squibb Phenomenex & Agela GE Capital Johnson & Johnson Vision Norgine SAS Institute Thermo Fisher Scientific
Celgene Radiometer GE Digital Mentor Northrop Grumman Schneider Electric Thomson Reuters

25
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

Annex VI – List of companies in the general private sector market per country
General Market Companies
Switzerland
3M Biogen Molecular Devices Fieldcore Lam Research Pfizer Sony
Abbott Laboratories Bio-Rad Laboratories Beckman Coulter GE Renewable Energy Lastminute Group Pictet & Cie STA Travel
AbbVie Biotronik Radiometer GE Power - Gas Power Lexmark Swiss Precision Diagnostics
Starbucks
Accenture Blueprint Medicines Leica Biosystems GE Power Portfolio LGT BICS - Belgacom International
SterisCarrier Services
Acer Boeing Hach Gilead Sciences Liberty Global M&G STMicroelectronics
ACI Worldwide Bombardier Sciex GlaxoSmithKline Liberty Specialty Markets QIC Global Services Stryker
Acronis Boston Scientific Phenomenex & Agela Glory Global Solutions Liechtensteinische Landesbank
Qualcomm Sun Chemical
Adecco Group Celgene Danone Google Lonza Rackspace Technology Sunstar
Adecco Bristol-Myers Squibb Dassault Syst Grünenthal Pharma Lululemon Athletica Ralph Lauren SWIFT
Adidas Brooks Sports Debiopharm Haemonetics Lundbeck Recordati Swiss Life
Novelis Brunswick Dell Harley-Davidson MasterCard Refinitiv Swiss Reinsurance
Aesop BT Global Services DHL Express Hauck & Aufhäuser Medicines for Malaria Venture
RELX Group Swisscom
AIG Burberry T-Systems Heritage B Medline Industries RenaissanceRe Holdings Syneos Health
Alcon Cabot Discovery Hewlett-Packard Ent Medtronic Resideo Takeaway.com
Alexion Pharm Canon Drees & Sommer Hitachi Vantara MSD Restaurant Brands International
Shire
Align Technology Capri Holdings DuPont HolidayCheck Group Merck KGaA Retraites Populaires Talend
Transatlantic Holdings Cargill DXC Technology Honeywell Meritor Rheinmetall Air Defence Tecan
Allianz Global Investors Catalent Pharma Dyson HP Inc. Merz Ricoh Tech Data
Allianz Global Corp Catalina Holdings DZ Privatbank HSBC Bank Merz Pharma (Anteis) Roche Pharmaceuticals Tempur Sealy
Allianz Caterpillar Financial IPConcept IBM Microsoft Roche Pharma (Sales) Teva Pharma
Allianz Technology Cathay Pacific Air Eastman Chemical ICON Clinical MS Amlin Roche Diagnostics (Rotkreuz)
The LYCRA Comp
Amazon.com CBRE Group EasyJet IDEX Corporation MoneyGram Roche Diagnostics Thermo Fisher Sci
AmerisourceBergen CBRE Advisory Eaton IDEXX Laboratories MongoDB Rockwell Automation Thomson Reuters
Amgen CDK Global eBay IHS Markit MSA Safety S&P Global Thyssenkrupp
Apellis Pharm Cellnex Ecolab Illumina GLOBALFOUNDRIES Sage TMF Group
Apple Cembra Money Bank Edmond de Rothsch. Ingenico Mulberry SAKK TomTom
Applied Materials CGG Edwards Lifesciences Insight Direct Mundipharma salesforce.com Trane Tech
AptarGroup Chubb Eisai Integra Lifesciences Mylan Samsung Travelex
Arrow Electronics Cimpress Electronic Arts Intel National Instruments Harman International Industries
Trivadis
Ascensia Diabetes Cisco Systems Eli Lilly International Game Tech NCR Sanofi Twitter
Aspen Insurance Citigroup Emergent BioSol IOC Nestlé Health Science Santen Pharmaceutical Uber
Astellas Pharma Citrix Systems Endress+Hauser International Paper NetApp Santhera PharmaceuticalsUCB
AstraZeneca CNH Industrial Epson Intuitive Surgical New Reinsurance Comp Sarepta Therapeutics Underwriters Lab
AT Kearney Coca-Cola Ericsson IQ-EQ New Work SE SAS Institute Unisys
AT&T Coesia Estée Lauder Corp IQVIA Newell Brands Schmolz + Bickenbach Univar
Atradius Cofra Holding Euronet Worldwide JELD-WEN Nike Schneider Electric Varian Medical Sys
Avanade Cognex Everis Jenoptik Nissan Europe Schroders Vectura
Avery Dennison Cognizant Expedia Covagen Nissan Corporate SCOR Services Verizon
Avis Budget Group Columbia Sportswear Facebook Actelion Pharma Nissan Motor Sealed Air Vice
AXA XL NBC Universal FANUC Ethicon Nokia Seattle Genetics Vifor Pharma
AXA Group Operations CommScope FCA Bank Johnson & Johnson Med Norgine Sensient Technologies VP Bank
AXA Group CooperVision Ferring Pharma J & J Vision Northern Trust SES Faiveley Transport
Bain & Company Corning Fidelity Int Medos Novartis Pharma SGS - Société Générale de
Walt
Surveillance
Disney
Baker Hughes Corteva Agriscience Flex Janssen Vaccines Novo Nordisk SICPA Wander
Ball Crealogix Flowserve Janssen Pharma Oerlikon Siegwerk Druckfarben Waters
Baloise Bank CIC (Schweiz) Freemont Manage Johnson & Johnson Olympus Siemens WestRock
Bank for Int Settlem. Swisscard Fujitsu Synthes ON Semiconductor Siemens Healthcare White & Case
Bank Vontobel CSL Galapagos Johnson Controls Oracle Siemens Energy Wolters Kluwer
Banque Cantonale Vaud Curtiss-Wright Galderma Johnson Outdoors Orange Business ServicesSiemens Industry Workday
Barclays Sunrise Comm Garrett - Advancing Julius Baer & Co. Ortho-Clinical DiagnosticsSiemens Mobility World Bank
Basilea Pharm Daiichi Sankyo Jet Aviation Kennametal Otsuka Pharmaceutical SITA Worldline
Bausch Health Comp Danaher General Dynamics ELS Keurig Dr Pepper Panasonic System Communications
SIX Wyndham Hotels
Baxter Pall Corporation GE Capital Kimberly-Clark PAREXEL SMCP Group Xylem
Bayer Crop Science X-Rite GE Healthcare Georgia-Pacific PayPal Smith & Nephew Yandex
Bayer Leica Microsystems GE Aviation KONE Pearson Socar Energy Zimmer Biomet
Becton Dickinson Videojet Tech General Electric Nagravision Pernod Ricard Solvay Zürcher Kantonalbank
BIAL Esko GE Digital Covance Perrigo Somfy Zurich Insurance

26
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

General Market Companies

Germany
3M AstraZeneca BorgWarner Coface Deutsche Pfandbriefbank
FM Global Hilton Worldwide Kerry Group
Abbott Laboratories ASUSTeK Computer Delphi Technologies Computacenter DHL Express FMS Wertmanagement
Hirose
Servicegesellschaft
Electric Keysight Tech
AbbVie AT Kearney Bose Confluent Deutsche Telekom Franklin Resources Hiscox KfW Bankengruppe
ABN AMRO Frankfurt AT&T BCG Conmed T-Systems Fresenius Medical Hitachi Europe KfW IPEX-Bank
Accenture WarnerMedia Group Boston Scientific Continental Dexcom Freudenberg Hitachi Vantara Kiadis
Acer Atos Bristol-Myers Squibb CooperVision Diebold Nixdorf FTI Consulting HolidayCheck Group Kimberly-Clark
ACI Worldwide Atradius Celgene CoorsTek DigitalRoute Fugro Honeywell Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Acronis Atradius Collections Broadsign Core Laboratories Discovery Fujitsu HP Inc. Klarna
Action Holding Automattic Brooks Sports Corning Douglas Holding Galapagos Hycom Klosterfrau
Adecco Group Avanade Brunswick Corteva Agriscience Dow Chemical Galderma Hyundai AutoEver Guardian Industries
Adidas Avanos Medical BT Global Services CPA Global Mgmt Drägerwerk Games Workshop ICON ClResearch Kohler
Adient Avery Dennison Bunge Crealogix DuPont Gates (Aachen) IDEX Corporation TSK Prüfsysteme
Novelis Avira Bunge (Hilter) Amundi Asset Mgmt HOMAG Group Gates Eifeler Maschinenbau
IDEXX Laboratories KONE
Aenova Avis Budget Group Burberry CreditPlus Bank DXC Technology Gates Mectrol IDT Biologika Kongsberg Auto
Aesop AXA Group Op C & J Clarks Targobank Dyson Gazprom Germania IFS Kontoor Brands
Agilent Technologies AXA Partners Cadence Design Sys CSL Eastman Chemical GCP Applied Tech IHS Markit Korian
AIG AXA XL CAE Curtiss-Wright EasyJet General Dynamics European
Illumina Land Systems Kyocera Fineceram
Airbus Group Axpo Cambridge Assess. CushmanWakefield Eaton Jet Aviation IMG Covance
Airwair International BAE Systems Camurus Daiichi Sankyo Ebase Current & GE LightingIndra Lam Research
Alcon Bain & Company Canon Daiichi Sankyo eBay Fieldcore Infineon Tech BW Equity
Alexion Pharma Baker Hughes Canon Pro Printing Athlon Car Lease Ecolab GE Aviation Infobip Immobilien BW
Alfred Ritter Baker McKenzie CapitaLand Dana eDreams Odigeo GE Capital ING DiBa LBBW
Align Technology Ball Cargill PIV Drives Edwards LifesciencesGE Digital Ingenico LBBW Asset Mgmt
Allianz Bank of NY Mellon Catalent Pharma AVT Electrocomponents GE Healthcare INNIO Jenbacher LBBW Gastro Event
Allianz Asset Mgmt Bank Vontobel Caterpillar Financial Services
Beckman Coulter Electrolux GE Power - Gas Power
Insight Direct LBBW Service
Allianz Deutschland BarclayCard Cathay Pacific Air Cepheid Electronic Arts GE Power Portfolio Integra Lifesciences Süd Beteiligungen
Allianz Global Corp Barclays CBRE Advisory Danaher Elementis GE Renewable EnergyIntel SüdFactoring
Allianz Global Inv Bausch Health Inc. CBRE Group Esko Eli Lilly General Electric Intercontinental Hotels SüdLeasing
Allianz Partners Baxter CDK Global Hach EnPro Industries Gerson Lehrman Group
Interhyp Frankfurter Sparkasse
Allianz Technology Bayer Cegedim HemoCue Epson Gilead Sciences Int Game Tech Lastminute Group
Euler Hermes Bayer Crop Science Celanese Integrated DNA Tech Equal Experts GKN Aerospace International Paper Latham Watkins LLP
Allnex Bayern Labo Centrica Leica Biosystems Ericsson Glanbia Group Services
Intuitive Surgical L-Bank
Amadeus BayernLB CGG Leica Microsystems ERT - eResearch GlaxoSmithKline Ion Beam App LEO Pharma
Amazon.com Real I.S. CGI Mammotome Esaote Glory Global SolutionsIponweb Lexmark
AMC Networks BBC Charles River Laboratories
Molecular Devices Establishment Labs Goodyear Dunlop Tires
Ipsen Rheinkalk
American Tower Becton Dickinson Lummus Novolen Pall Corporation Eternit Google IQVIA Liberty Spec Markets
AmerisourceBergen Believe Digital Chiesi Phenomenex Agela Etex Building Graco Ista Lincoln Electric
Amgen Belron International China Mobile Inter Radiometer Eumedica Greif ITT Inc. Littelfuse
AO World Berenberg Chubb Sciex Euroclear Grifols Jabil Circuit SAGA Group
Apple Bertelsmann Cimpress Trojan Technologies Euronet Worldwide Arval Jacobs Engineering Lockheed Martin
Applied Materials ODDO BHF Cisco Systems Videojet Tech Evoqua Water Tech BNP Paribas Asset Management
JELD-WEN CNA Hardy
AptarGroup ODDO BHF Asset Citigroup X-Rite Evotec Groz-Beckert Jenoptik Lonza
Aptiv BIAL Citrix Systems Danone Exact Grünenthal Pharma John Wiley & Sons L'Oréal - IT Division
Arrow Electronics Bilfinger Clinigen Group Dassault Systèmes Exide Technologies Guerbet Ethicon Lululemon Athletica
Ascensia Diabetes Biogen CNH Industrial Datev Expedia Haemonetics Janssen Pharma Lundbeck
Ascential Biologische Heilmittel Heel
Coca-Cola bevestor Experian Haribo Johnson & Johnson MADE.com
ADB BioNTech Coesia Deka Immobilien Facebook Harley-Davidson J&J Medical Mallinckrodt
ASM International Bio-Rad Laboratories Cofra Holding Deka Investment FANUC Harsco J&J Vision Care Mambu
Advocard Biotronik Cognex Deka Vermogensmanagement
FCA Bank Hauck & Aufhäuser Privatbankiers
Mentor Manitou
Badenia Bitdefender Cognizant DekaBank Deutsche Girozentrale
Ferring Pharma Havas Group Surgical Process Markel InterServices
CosmosDirekt BiZZdesign DJO Global WestInvest Fidelity International Haworth Synthes Guy Carpenter
Generali Deutschland Blueprint Medicines Columbia Sportswear Delivery Hero First Solar Teka Johnson Controls Marsh
Generali Services Boehringer Ingelheim NBC Universal Dell Flex Hertz Johnson Outdoors Mary Kay
Generali Informatik Boeh. Ingel. Animal Comdirect Deutsche Apotheker- und
FlixMobility
Ärztebank Hewlett-Packard Enterprise
Kantar Group MasterCard
AB Enzymes Boeing Commerz Real Deutsche Bank Flowserve Hexcel Kaspersky McCain Foods
Primark Bombardier Commerzbank DWS Investments Flughafen Düsseldorf Hexion Kelly Services McDonald's
Astellas Pharma Bonava CommScope Deutsche Leasing Fluor Hill-Rom Kennametal Munich Ergo Asset Mgmt

27
 SIRP(2021)10_REV1

General Market Companies (continued)

Germany
Medline Industries Newstore Pernod Ricard ROHM Siemens Fonds Invest Sumitomo Corporation Tosoh Vetter Pharma
Medtronic Nexteer Automotive Perrigo Rolls-Royce Siemens Healthcare SUMUP Toyota Kreditbank ViacomCBS
Megaport NH Hoteles Pfizer NatWest Markets Siemens Health Diag Sun Chemical Trane Technologies Vice
MSD NIBC Bank Pharming Royal Caribbean Siemens Healthineers Sunstar Travelex Vifor Pharma
Merck KGaA Nike Phoenix Contact RWE Renewables Siemens Mobility SupplyOn Trimble Villeroy & Boch
Meritor Financial Times Photobox S&P Global Siemens Postal, Parcel & SWIFT
Airport Logistics Trivadis Visa
Merz Nissan Corporate Incora SaarLB Siemens Power Generation
Swiss
Service
Reinsurance TSI Visteon
MEWA Textil-Service Nissan Motor Plexus Safran Helicopter Sykatec Syneos Health TÜV Nord Canal +
Micronit MicrotechnologiesNokia Pluralsight Sage Trench Shire TÜV Rheinland Vodafone
LinkedIn Braunsch Landessparkasse
TIMET Sakura Sierra Wireless Takeda Pharma Twilio W.R. Grace
Microsoft Investitionsbank SA ProSieben Sat.1 Media salesforce.com SIG Combibloc Talend Twitter Faiveley Transport
Miltenyi Biomedicine Landesförderinstitut Mecklenburg-Vorpommern
BICS Harman International Sinch Tapestry U.S. BNA Fox Networks Group
Minerals Technologies Nord LB M&G Samsung Electronics Sirtex Medical Tchibo Uber TwentiethCenturyFox
MUFG Bank Nordzucker PVH Corp. PKC Group SITA TE Connectivity UCB Walt Disney
MS Amlin Norgine QinetiQ Sanofi SIX Tecan Under Armour Waters
Mollie Northrop Grumman Qualcomm Santen Pharmaceutical Sixt Autovermietung Tech Data Underwriters LaboratoriesWebasto
Momentive Performance Materials
NorthropGrummanLITEF Quoniam Asset Mgmt SAP Sky Tech Nexus Secured BS UniCredit Bank AG Wells Fargo
Monedo Novartis Pharma Qurate Retail Group SAS Institute SMA Solar Technology Telefonica UniCredit Direct West Pharma
MoneyGram Novo Nordisk Rabobank Scandic Hotels SMCP Group Telefonica Global Units UniCredit Services Western Union
MongoDB NRW.Bank Rackspace Technology Schmolz + Bickenbach Smith & Nephew Telxius Telecom WealthCap Westlake Chemical
MorphoSys Nu Skin Enterprises Ralph Lauren Schneider Electric Snow Software Tempur Sealy Union Investment WestRock
Morrison&Foerster LLP Oerlikon Recordati Scout24 ARM Tenneco Unisys WeWork Inter
Moxa Olympus Red Bull Media Sealed Air Solvay Terumo BCT 1&1 Internet White & Case
MSA Safety Omron Healthcare Refinitiv Seattle Genetics Sony Dunnhumby Univar Wolters Kluwer
GLOBALFOUNDRIES ON Semiconductor RGA Secret Escapes Sony Pictures Teva Pharma UmgTheo Müller Woodward
Mulberry Ontex RELX Group Sensient Technologies Utimaco Safeware The Collective Valeo Workday
Mundipharma Oracle Renesas Electronics Servier Sparkasse Bremen The Student Hotel Valmet World Bank
Mylan Orsted Resideo SES Spotahome The Wellcome Trust Vandemoortele Wyndham Hotels
NASPA Ortho-Clinical Diag Rexel SGS Spotify Thermo Fisher Sci Varian Medical Sys Xilinx
OLX Otsuka Pharmaceutical Ricoh SICK Group SPX Corporation Thomson Reuters Vectura XPO Logistics
National Instruments OVH Ricoh Corporate Sidley Austin LLP STA Travel ThoughtWorks Velatia Yandex
National Oilwell Varco Oxford Instruments Rite-Hite Siegwerk Druckfarben Stanley Black & Decker Thyssenkrupp Veolia Environnement Yanfeng Global AIS
NCC Oxford Policy Mgmt Roaming Networks evosoft Stanley Security TietoEvry Verint Systems Yazaki Europe
NCR Panasonic Sys Comm Robert Half Flender Steelcase Tipico Verisk Analytics Yncoris
Nestlé Panduit Roche Diagnostics Omnetric Steris TJX Companies Verivox Zalando
NetApp PAREXEL Roche Pharmaceuticals Siemens STMicroelectronics TMF Group Verizon Zambon
NetCologne PATRIZIA Immobilien Rockwell Automation Siemens Bank Stora Enso Tokio Marine HCC Verizon Media Zenuity
New Work SE PayPal Rockwool Siemens Fin and LeasingStryker TomTom Vertiv Zimmer Biomet
Newell Brands Pearson Rohde & Schwarz SiemensFinancial IPC Tory Burch Vesuvius Zurich Insurance

28
CERN/FC/6526 13
CERN/3603

Annex 4

Report on the fellows and associated members of the personnel component of the five-yearly review
(CERN/TREF/481) – dated 7 May 2021
 CERN/TREF/481
Original: English
7 May 2021

ORGANISATION EUROPÉENNE POUR LA RECHERCHE NUCLÉAIRE

CERN EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH

TRIPARTITE EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS FORUM (TREF)

105th Meeting
Geneva – 28 May 2021

FIVE-YEARLY REVIEW 2021

REPORT ON
THE FELLOWS AND ASSOCIATED MEMBERS OF THE PERSONNEL COMPONENT
OF THE FIVE-YEARLY REVIEW

This report, which TREF is invited to discuss, has been drawn up in the framework of the 2021
five-yearly review of the financial and social conditions of members of the personnel. It outlines the
results for the fellows and associated members of personnel component of the five-yearly review,
including the results of the comparison of data received from the comparator research institutions
for fellows as defined in CERN/TREF/462.
CERN/TREF/481 1

I. ─ INTRODUCTION
Annex A 1 of the Staff Rules states that for fellows, who are employed1 members of personnel:
“The purpose of the five-yearly review is to ensure that the financial and social conditions offered to
fellows remain attractive compared to those in comparable research institutions”.

Document CERN/TREF/462 submitted to TREF in May 2020 and subsequently approved by the
Council (CERN/FC/6421/RA CERN/3505/RA) defined the following institutions as the comparator
organisations for fellows’ stipends to be used in the framework of the 2021 five-yearly review: the
Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY), the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL),
the European Space Agency (ESA), the European Organisation for Astronomical Research in the
Southern Hemisphere (ESO) and the European Commission (EC).

Data were therefore collected from these organisations2, whom CERN would like to thank for their
collaboration. This document presents the results of the data collected.

In line with the methodology described in Annex A1 for staff members’ salaries, the basis for
comparison was the “basic stipend”, i.e. the amount of the stipend after taxation, prior to any
deductions for health and social security and excluding any additional allowances or benefits where
applicable. Where available, comparisons including other obligatory remuneration components are
also provided as supplementary information.

For associated members of the personnel, Annex A 1 states:

“The purpose of the five-yearly review is to ensure that the financial and social conditions offered by
the Organization to associated members of the personnel allow it to host them in its research facilities,
taking into account the highest cost-of-living level in the local region of the Organization.”

II. ─ FELLOWS
The Fellowship Programme is separated into two sub-programmes:

 The Senior Fellowship Programme addresses PhD holders, and Master’s degree graduates
with at least four years of work experience after their degree. The recruitment criteria are
academic and research excellence, and candidates are ranked according to these criteria either
by Member State Delegations in the case of research physicists or by a CERN panel of experts
in the case of applied scientists. Fellows working in theoretical or experimental particle
physics have a free choice of the research topic that they wish to study.
 The Junior Fellowship Programme targets holders of at least a Bachelor degree (or
equivalent) and at most a Master’s degree (or equivalent), with no more than four years of
post-degree experience. The recruitment criteria match technical qualifications and skills
with specific CERN activities. The programme emphasises the concept of “on-the-job
training”.

1
Members of the personnel are divided into two categories: employed members of the personnel comprising
staff members and fellows and associated members of the personnel comprising associates for the purposes
of international collaboration, exchange of scientists and training.
2
The data provided by the comparator organisations concerns rates applicable as at 1 January 2020.
2 CERN/TREF/481

This separation is now well established and has enabled efficient management of both populations3.

The comparator organisations make a similar distinction between pre-doctoral and post-doctoral
fellowships, with some organisations placing more emphasis on post-doctoral fellowships and others
choosing not to implement pre-doctoral fellowships at all, as in the case of ESO. Therefore, to provide
a more accurate analysis, the comparison makes a distinction between the two sub-programmes.

1) Senior Fellowship Programme

The Senior Fellowship Programme is comparable to what is often termed as a ‘post-doctoral’

fellowship in the comparator organisations, or ‘Individual fellowships’ in the case of the European
Commission (EC).

CERN’s fellowship stipends comprise a basic amount, to which a seniority-based supplement is added
(see document CERN/FC/5033-CERN/2659). The 2020 rates for senior fellows are shown in Table 1
below.

Basic Amount 4565

Seniority-based
Seniority Level
supplement
Between 4 and 6 years’ research experience (or PhD) 2605
Seniority-
Between 6 and 8 years’ research experience 2994
based
Between 8 and 10 years’ research experience 3326
supplement
(Just) Over 10 years’ research 3578
Table 1 - Seniority-based supplement for the Senior Fellowship Programme in 2020 (CHF/month)

The highest seniority level provides some flexibility for “appointing outstanding individuals whose
experience profile would exceed the standard 10-year limit” (CERN/FC/5033-CERN/2659). As a
consequence, the range of the senior fellow stipend scale is wider than that of any of the other
comparator organisations. However, the highest-level supplement is seldom used, and concerns less
than 2% of fellows.

Figure 1 compares the minimum stipend amounts paid to senior fellows calculated according to the
five-yearly review methodology set out in Annex A1 of the Staff Rules.

3
See CERN/TREF/419, May 2015 and “Five-yearly review 2010 - Proposals by the Management”
(CERN/FC/5497-CERN/2946), December 2010
CERN/TREF/481 3

Senior Fellows comparison

EMBL
86.2%

DESY
87.1%

EC 97.2%
88.3%

ESO
86.6%

ESA 88.7%
80.9%

CERN
100.0%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0%

Incl. Expat. Allowance Stipend

Figure 1 - Comparison of the minimum stipends of senior (PhD) fellows

across the comparator organisations4

The basis of comparison between the organisations used was the minimum stipend paid to fellows,
which in the case of CERN remains constant over the entire duration of the fellowship. Some
comparator organisations increase the stipend during the fellowship, in which case the average stipend
was taken. Furthermore, a sub-set of the comparator organisations supplement the stipend with
additional components (i.e. a ‘mobility allowance’ in the case of the EU, and an ‘expatriation
allowance’ in the case of ESA), while CERN does not provide similar benefits. For completeness, the
amounts including these additional components are indicated in red for the relevant comparator
organisations.

The graph in Figure 1 demonstrates that the conditions offered at CERN to post-doctoral fellows are
attractive.

The gap between the CERN rates and those of the comparator organisations can partly be explained
by the evolution of Purchasing Power Parities5 (PPP) in the host countries of the comparator
organisations. For example, in 2014 the PPP for Germany was 0.5854: in other words, 5854 Euros in
Germany had the same purchasing power as 10,000 CHF in Switzerland. In 2020 the PPP for
Germany increased to 0.6020, meaning that 6020 Euros had the same purchasing power as 10,000
CHF. During the reference period ESA embarked on a review of its stipends as did ESO (who
suppressed the expat allowance).

4
For senior fellows, all values have been converted into Swiss francs by applying the corresponding
Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), where applicable. In the case of the EC, the Swiss correction coefficient for
the EC and the applicable exchange rate for Switzerland (average July 2020) were applied. While ESO paid
an expatriate allowance at the time of the previous 5-Yearly Review, this is no longer the case.
5
https://indico.cern.ch/event/916289/contributions/3852179/subcontributions/305814/attachments/2032563
/3405598/PPPcalculation_ExplanatoryNote.pdf
4 CERN/TREF/481

2) Junior Fellowship Programme

The Junior Fellowship Programme, introduced in 2007, targets holders of at least a Bachelor degree
(or equivalent) and at most a Master’s degree (or equivalent), with no more than four years of post-
degree experience.

CERN’s fellowship stipends comprise a basic amount, to which a seniority-based supplement is added
(see CERN/FC/5033-CERN/2659). The 2020 rates for junior fellows are shown in

Table 1 below.

Basic Amount 4565

Seniority-based
Seniority Level supplement
Diploma Bachelor (or equivalent) 716
level MSc (or equivalent) 1993

Table 1 - Seniority-based supplement for the Junior Fellowship Programme in 2020 (CHF / month)

Junior fellows are comparable to what are often termed as ‘pre-doctoral’ fellows in some comparator
organisations, or as ‘Early Stage Researchers’ in the case of the EC6. The programmes at ESA7 and
DESY8 require a Master’s Degree, and for the EMBL9 and EC programmes, a degree that establishes
their eligibility to pursue a PhD degree. ESO is absent since it does not offer pre-doctoral fellowship
opportunities.

Given the entry-level requirement of the comparators, Figure 2 compares the basic stipend paid to
junior fellows with a Master’s Degree. As in the case of senior fellows, some comparator
organisations increase the stipend during the fellowship, in which case the average stipend was taken.
For those organisations which supplement the stipend with additional mandatory components (i.e. a
‘mobility allowance’ in the case of the EC and an ‘expatriation allowance’ in the case of ESA), these
additional components are indicated in red for the relevant comparator organisations.

6
Marie Curie Innovative Training Network
7
Young Graduate Trainee programme
8
DASHH programme or other full-time pre-doctoral programmes
9
International PhD programme
CERN/TREF/481 5

Junior fellows comparison

EMBL
61.5%

DESY
84.3%

EC 74.5%
64.7%

ESO

ESA 75.2%
68.4%

CERN
100.0%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0%

Incl. Expat. Allowance Stipend

Figure 2 - Comparison of the stipends of the junior (pre-doctoral) fellows

across the comparator organisations10

Figure 2 shows that conditions offered at CERN to pre-doctoral fellows are attractive. As mentioned
above, the basis for comparison in the case of junior, pre-doctoral fellows is more tenuous as the
conditions vary markedly between comparator institutes. The organisation which has the closest
equivalent to CERN’s Junior Fellowship Programme is ESA with its Young Graduate Trainee
programme.

Additional considerations

During the period 2016-2020, the cost-variation index applicable to stipends has been 0% in 2016 and
2017, 0.39% in 2018, 1.05% in 2019 and 0.80% in 202011. For reference, Figure 3 shows the evolution
of the CERN seniority supplements between the start and the end of the period. The basic amount, to
which the seniority supplement is added (see tables 1 and 2) has evolved from 4465 CHF in 2016 to
4565 CHF in 2020.

10
For junior fellows, all values have been converted into Swiss francs by applying the corresponding
Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), where applicable. In the case of the EC, the Swiss correction coefficient for
the EC and the applicable exchange rate for Switzerland (average July 2020) were applied. While ESO paid
an expatriate allowance at the time of the previous five-yearly review, this is no longer the case.
11
For 2018, 2019 and 2020 the Council granted an index of respectively 0.39%, 1.05% and 0.80% for stipends
as part of the cost-variation index of the personnel budget (2018: CERN/FC/6170 ; CERN/3333 - 2019:
CERN/FC/6274 ; CERN/3394 - 2020: CERN/FC/6366; CERN/3463).
6 CERN/TREF/481

Junior Fellowship Senior Fellowship

4000
3500
3000
Swiss Francs

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Between 4 Between 8
Between 6 (Just) over
and 6 years' and 10
and 8 years' 10 years'
Bachelor Master's research years'
research research
experience research
experience experience
(or PhD) experience
2016 700 1948 2547 2927 3252 3498
2020 716 1993 2605 2994 3326 3578

Figure 3 - Evolution of seniority supplements applied to the Junior and Senior Fellowship Programmes

Figure 5 below shows the evolution of the CERN fellowship programme over the current five-yearly
review reference period12. This shows relative stability across the centrally-funded (CERN) and
project-funded fellows (GET-Graduate Engineering Training) programmes, while a steady decrease
in Marie Curie funding is observed owing to a decline in the award of EC-funding in the period.

800
700
Number of Fellows

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2016 2017 2018 2019
GET 125 191 196 132
EU 139 122 82 44
CERN 413 415 473 507

Figure 4 - Evolution of the fellowship programme over the five-yearly reference period (data as at 31.12
each year)

Data for the current reference period also indicates the continued and stable proportion of refused
offers for fellowships (overall average 8%).

12
The current five-yearly reference period is 2016-2019.
CERN/TREF/481 7

For senior fellows the stipends paid by CERN are broadly comparable to those paid by other institutes
based in Switzerland, EPFL in Lausanne and ETHZ in Zurich, which was already observed in 2015.
While these institutes are not formally part of the comparison, they are effectively a competitor for
research fellows wishing to come to Switzerland.

Conclusion for fellows

Based on the data gathered from the comparator organisations and the subsequent analysis performed,
it can be concluded that for both the junior and senior categories of the fellowship programmes, the
financial conditions at CERN are attractive with respect to those in comparable research institutions
abroad.

III. ─ ASSOCIATED MEMBERS OF THE PERSONNEL

The purpose of the five-yearly review is to ensure that the financial and social conditions offered by
the Organization to associated members of the personnel allow it to host them in its research facilities,
taking into account the highest cost-of-living level in the local region of the Organization.

Article R V 1.04 of the Staff Regulations provides that “[t]he Organization may, under the conditions
laid down by the Director-General and within the limits specified in Annex R A 7, pay a subsistence
allowance to associated members of the personnel to cover additional costs arising from their stay in
the local area”.

Annex A1 of the Staff Rules states: “The annual review of subsistence allowances and family benefits
shall be performed using the Geneva cost of living movement”. Figure 5 illustrates the application of
the Geneva Cost-Variation Index (CVI) to the basic subsistence rate payable to associates since the
introduction of the methodology in 2007. During the reference period, the subsistence has evolved
only slightly from 4128 CHF in 2016 to 4173 CHF in 2020, due to the low CVI evolution in Geneva.

Subsistence evolution
4500
4000
3500
3000
Swiss Francs

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Subsistence 4128 4128 4128 4156 4173
CVI (%) 0 0 0 0.68 0.4

Figure 5 – 2016 – 2020 Evolution of the Geneva Cost Variation Index (CVI)
and its impact on the minimum subsistence for associates
8 CERN/TREF/481

The 11th edition of the Staff Rules and Regulations sub-divides Associated Members of Personnel
into three broad categories:
I. Associates for the purpose of international collaboration (MPAc);
II. Associates for the purpose of exchange of scientists (MPAx);
III. Associates for the purpose of training (MPAt).

For the purposes of a comprehensive analysis covering all three of the above categories whilst
maintaining consistency with previous benchmarking, this document examines the subsistence rates
paid by CERN to project associates for the MPAc category, to Scientific and Corresponding associates
for the MPAx category and to students for the MPAt category.

1) Scientific Associates

The aim of the Scientific Associates Programme is to provide scientists from all over the world with
an opportunity to participate in challenging research and development and to promote the exchange
of knowledge in cutting-edge scientific and technological fields. The programme is open to scientists
and engineers wishing to spend a period of up to one year at CERN and who are on leave of absence
from their home institute, which, as their employer, remains responsible for their social security
coverage.

Scientific associates receive the basic subsistence rate and a supplement based on seniority, reflecting
the prestige of the programme and linked to the cost of living.Figure 6 shows the evolution in the
number of scientific associates over the five-yearly review reference period, whose number has
remained stable over time. The observed slight decrease in 2019 can be linked to reduced scientific
activities during LS2.

100
90
80
Number of associates

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2016 2017 2018 2019
Corresponding Associates 20 24 18 14
Scientific Associates 90 91 94 73

Figure 6 - Evolution of the number of Scientific and Corresponding Associates over the five-yearly
reference period (NB: holders of a CASS or SASS contract at any time during the year)
CERN/TREF/481 9

2) Corresponding Associates

The Corresponding Associates Programme awards short-duration positions for a period of between
one to six months maximum to scientists holding research or teaching posts to help them remain
abreast of developments in particle physics and related fields. Corresponding associates receive the
basic rate applicable to scientific associates but are not entitled to the seniority supplement. Figure
shows the evolution of the number of corresponding associates over the reference period, showing
relatively stable numbers over time with, as for SASS, a slight decrease in 2019 in line with LS2 and
the machine shutdown, reflecting the fact that periods of machine operation are of greater interest for
this category of personnel to come to CERN.

3) Project Associates

The project associate category was introduced in 1994. The objective was to detach some of the
scientific, engineering and technical staff from institutes worldwide to CERN for a limited period of
time and assign them to a specific project (primarily projects associated with LHC construction at that
time). Besides the technological advantages, this category opened up the possibility for non-Member
States to contribute to CERN projects with a view to extending and strengthening scientific
collaboration.

Project associates are engineers, scientists and technicians who come to CERN either on an individual
basis or as a member of a team. They must have an employer, i.e. a scientific institute (commercial
firms do not qualify) from which they receive a salary during the entire period of association, and
they must also be entitled to return to their institute upon termination of their period of association.
Their social insurance cover is the responsibility of their employer or, that failing, themselves. They
must have health insurance cover adequate in both Host States for the financial consequences of
illness and accidents, including those of occupational origin. The period of association with CERN is
for an initial period of up to one year, renewable subject to the agreement of the employing institute,
up to a maximum total period of three years.

CERN pays project associates a flat rate subsistence allowance (4173 CHF / month as at 1 January
2020).

350
Number of Project Associates

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2001

2014
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000

2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019

Figure 7 - Evolution of the number of project associates since the first arrivals in this category up to the
end of the five-yearly reference period (as at 31.12 each year)

Figure 7 shows three peaks in the number of project associates: the first is linked to the LHC
construction, the second to the LS1 activities. The third coincides with LS2, and the ramping up of
HL-LHC.
10 CERN/TREF/481

Conclusion for Associates

As subsistence allowance has been indexed in line with the cost of living in Geneva, it can be
concluded that the rates payable to associates remain in line with the objective that CERN should
“host them in its research facilities, taking into account the highest cost-of-living level in the local
region of the Organization” (Annex A1 of the CERN Staff Rules).

As for the previous five-yearly review, an analysis is also provided in this report for the student
category, where there is significantly more competition to attract high-calibre students to CERN, and
where the subsistence payments are lower than those of the associates.

4) Students

The CERN student programmes constitute a key element of CERN’s strategy for training junior
researchers and introducing them to the global research community. They also provide the
Organization with valuable human resources, contributing to the advancement of all major research
projects. They comprise:
 The Summer Student Programme, aimed at undergraduates in physics and engineering,
who are invited to come to CERN during the summer months for periods of between 8 and
13 weeks.
 The Technical Student Programme, aimed at undergraduate students in technical fields,
whose educational establishments require them to spend a training period of several months
(typically 12) in industry or in a research establishment.
 The Administrative Student Programme, aimed at undergraduate students in
administrative fields, whose educational establishments require them to spend a training
period of several months (typically 12) in industry or in a research establishment.
 The Doctoral Student Programme, aimed at postgraduate students who wish to prepare a
doctoral thesis in a technical field. They may spend up to four years at CERN of which three
are paid on subsistence.

Throughout the reference period and including the year 2020, as the cost-variation index (CVI)
increased only slightly with 0.68% in 2019 and 0.4% in 2020, the rates provided for 2020 are
marginally higher than the previous reference period.

The following subsistence rates apply for students (expressed in 2020 levels):
− 2861 CHF/month for summer students;
− 3319 CHF/month for technical and administrative students;
− 3719 CHF/month for doctoral students.

While the subsistence rates have only marginally increased in-line with the CVI variations over the
period, CERN has continued to attract a fairly high and diverse number of students, as illustrated in
the Personnel Statistics13 as well as in Figure 8 below.

13
https://hr.web.cern.ch/documents?tid=484
CERN/TREF/481 11

400

350

300

250
Axis Title

200

150

100

50

0
2016 2017 2018 2019
ADMI 35 30 26 35
DOCT 190 204 227 211
TECH 193 182 156 137
SUMM 331 342 365 337

Figure 8 - Evolution of the number of participants in CERN’s student programmes over the five-yearly
reference period (NB: for ADMI, DOCT, TECH: number as at 31.12 of each year, for Summer students:
number “hired” on the programme each year)

Conclusion for Students

CERN continues to remain competitive with respect to its studentship programmes, while providing
subsistence rates that remain in line with the evolution of the cost of living. The evolution of the
number of students, as illustrated in the annual personnel statistics, also supports this.

IV. ─ GENERAL CONCLUSION

The results of the data collected for fellows from the comparator organisations DESY, EMBL, EC,
ESA and ESO indicate that “the financial and social conditions offered to fellows remain attractive
compared to those in comparable research institutions”.

Regarding associated members of personnel, the subsistence amounts at CERN have been indexed
according to the Geneva CVI, which saw a marginal increase in the last two years of the reference
period. A verification of available data concerning student rates across the comparator organisations
and the observed continued growth of all CERN programmes for Associated Members of the
Personnel demonstrate the continued attractiveness of these programmes. The analysis for Associated
Members of the Personnel therefore indicates that “the financial and social conditions offered by the
Organization to associated members of the personnel allow it to host them in its research facilities,
taking into account the highest cost-of-living level in the local region of the Organization”.

*****
CERN/FC/6526 15
CERN/3603

Annex 5

Report from ISRP/OECD, entitled “Diversity and Inclusion Study” (CERN/TREF/475), dated March
2021
 CERN/TREF/475
SIRP(2020)73/REV2
March 2021
Confidential

CERN

Diversity and Inclusion Study

International Service for Remunerations and Pensions

Thibaut VANBAELINGHEM, Legal Adviser

MOA reference: SIRP/MOA/CERN(2020)16

SIRP(2020)73/REV2

CONTENTS

TABLES ............................................................................................................................................................. 3
GRAPHS ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 4
1. PERSONNEL AND DIVERSITY DATA AND POLICIES.................................................................................... 6
A. COMPARATORS .............................................................................................................................................. 6
B. PERSONNEL STRUCTURE ................................................................................................................................... 7
1. Career aspects ....................................................................................................................................... 7
2. Age aspects ........................................................................................................................................... 9
3. Family aspects ..................................................................................................................................... 10
4. Gender diversity .................................................................................................................................. 11
C. DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION POLICIES ................................................................................................................. 12
D. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 13
E. SUMMARY TABLE .......................................................................................................................................... 15
2. DEFINITION OF FAMILY AND ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS ........................................................................ 16
A. NOTION OF SPOUSE ...................................................................................................................................... 16
B. NOTION OF DEPENDENT CHILD ........................................................................................................................ 17
C. BENEFITS AND FAMILY ALLOWANCE ................................................................................................................. 17
D. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 18
3. SUPPORT MEASURES FOR SPOUSE, PARTNER EMPLOYMENT AND FAMILIES ........................................ 19
A. DUAL-CAREER SUPPORT MEASURES .................................................................................................................. 19
1. Conditions of entitlement .................................................................................................................... 19
2. Nature of the support measures ......................................................................................................... 19
B. BIRTH AND ADOPTION LEAVE........................................................................................................................... 20
1. Maternity leave ................................................................................................................................... 20
2. Paternity or Co-parent leave ............................................................................................................... 22
3. Parental leave ..................................................................................................................................... 23
4. Adoption leave .................................................................................................................................... 24
C. LEAVE FOR FAMILY REASONS ........................................................................................................................... 24
D. NON-REMUNERATED LEAVE ............................................................................................................................ 26
E. PAID LEAVE FOR CARING RESPONSIBILITIES ......................................................................................................... 26
F. CHILDCARE FACILITIES .................................................................................................................................... 27
G. EDUCATION BENEFITS .................................................................................................................................... 28
H. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 29
4. SUPPORT STRUCTURES FOR WORK/LIFE INTEGRATION ......................................................................... 30
A. TELEWORKING ............................................................................................................................................. 30
B. FLEXITIME ................................................................................................................................................... 31
C. SUPPORT STRUCTURES FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ....................................................................................... 32
D. OTHER MEASURES IN SUPPORT OF WORK/LIFE INTEGRATION ................................................................................. 33
E. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................... 33
F. SUMMARY TABLE .......................................................................................................................................... 35

2
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

TABLES

TABLE 1 – RECOGNITION OF A STEP-CHILD AS A DEPENDENT CHILD ...................................................................................... 17

TABLE 3 – CAREER SUPPORT MEASURES ......................................................................................................................... 20
TABLE 3 – SOCIAL AND FINANCIAL CONDITION DURING NON-REMUNERATED LEAVE OTHER THAN PARENTAL LEAVE ....................... 26

GRAPHS

GRAPH 1 – SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE COMPARATORS’ STAFF POPULATION .............................................................. 7

GRAPH 2 – STAFF MEMBERS ON INTERNATIONAL ASSIGNMENT ............................................................................................. 8
GRAPH 3 – STAFF MEMBERS ON INDEFINITE-TERM APPOINTMENT ......................................................................................... 8
GRAPH 4 – AGE OF STAFF (AVERAGE AND MEDIAN) ............................................................................................................ 9
GRAPH 5 – AVERAGE AGE OF STAFF AT APPOINTMENT AND END OF APPOINTMENT ................................................................... 9
GRAPH 6 – MARITAL STATUS ....................................................................................................................................... 10
GRAPH 7 – DEPENDENT CHILDREN ................................................................................................................................ 10
GRAPH 8 – PROPORTION OF FEMALE STAFF .................................................................................................................... 11
GRAPH 9 – DURATION OF MATERNITY LEAVE (IN WEEKS) ................................................................................................... 21
GRAPH 10 – PERIOD OF MATERNITY LEAVE BY REFERENCE TO THE DATE OF BIRTH (IN WEEKS) ................................................... 22
GRAPH 11 – DURATION OF PATERNITY LEAVE (IN DAYS) .................................................................................................... 22
GRAPH 12 – DURATION OF PARENTAL LEAVE (IN MONTHS) ................................................................................................ 23
GRAPH 13 – DURATION OF ADOPTION LEAVE (IN WEEKS) .................................................................................................. 24
GRAPH 14 – DURATION OF LEAVE IN THE EVENT OF THE DEATH OF SPOUSE OR CHILD (IN DAYS)................................................. 25
GRAPH 15 – DURATION OF LEAVE IN THE EVENT OF THE DEATH OF A PARENT (IN DAYS) ........................................................... 25
GRAPH 16 – AGE OF ENTITLEMENT TO THE EDUCATION ALLOWANCE ................................................................................... 28
GRAPH 17 – NUMBER OF TELEWORKING DAYS ALLOWED PER WEEK..................................................................................... 30
GRAPH 18 – WORKING HOURS .................................................................................................................................... 32

3
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. By means of a Memorandum of Agreement (SIRP/MOA/CERN(2020)16), and in accordance

with paragraph 6 of the Mandate of the International Service for Remunerations and Pensions
(CCR/R(2011)4), the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) entrusted the International
Service for Remunerations and Pensions (ISRP) with a study on “Diversity and Inclusion” and the
related financial and social conditions of employment, in line with a similar studied carried out by the
ISRP in 2015 (reference: SIRP(2015)004).
2. This study consists of a benchmark between CERN and eight international organisations (“the
comparators”):
i. European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL),
ii. European Patent Office (EPO),
iii. European Southern Observatory (ESO),
iv. European Space Agency (ESA),
v. European Commission (EC),
vi. International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor Organization (ITER),
vii. United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG),
viii. Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
3. It was agreed that this study would be based on data collected directly from the human
resources division of each comparator. For the purpose of ensuring that the collected data is
exhaustive and accurate, the ISRP and CERN designed a questionnaire that was later addressed to the
comparators. This questionnaire was prepopulated by the ISRP on the basis of the comparators’ staff
regulations, information available at the ISRP, and elements from previous studies conducted by the
ISRP. The contact persons were requested to validate the content of the questionnaires, and if
necessary, to update or correct the information that had been provided. This study is based solely on
the information validated by the comparators during this process.
4. This report is composed of four sections.
5. The first section is a summary of essential data regarding CERN and the comparators, notably
statistics concerning age and gender-specific staffing aspects. The conclusion of this chapter may be
seen as an invitation for CERN to further develop initiatives towards gender diversity and inclusion;
while most comparators have made significant progress over the last five years in terms of gender
diversity, CERN seems to be falling behind. On the other hand, CERN has one of the most advanced
programs in favour of staff members with disabilities.
6. Section two covers the definition of the notion of family in the legal frameworks governing
the comparators’ conditions of employment and how this affects benefits entitlement for staff. CERN
has shown improvement in this section compared to 2015 and is doing as well as, if not better than,
the other comparators in terms of definition of family and eligibility for benefits.
7. The third section develops the support measures for families and spouse, partner
employment. This section shows a rich thematic portfolio and demonstrates gaps that CERN could
address in order to reach its goal of having high standards in diversity and inclusion. Improvements
would mainly target the length of maternity, paternity, parental, and adoption leaves. Moreover,
CERN could also enhance the dual career support measures, especially with regard to career
counselling and financial assistance or training for the spouse / partner of the staff.
8. The fourth section assesses the support structures implemented amongst the comparators
for work/life integration, with particular emphasis on measures covering working arrangements and
structures for staff members with disabilities. While only a few comparators have taken initiatives

4
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

similar to CERN’s to support the inclusion of staff members with disabilities, there is room for
improvement for CERN in the area of teleworking and the organisation of working time. It is advised
that the Organization considers the implementation of specific rules and policies governing these
conditions of employment. Inspiration could be drawn from the experience of certain comparators
which have implemented advanced policies in this respect.

5
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

1. PERSONNEL AND DIVERSITY DATA AND POLICIES

1.1. This section of the report covers baseline information on the comparators, notably the
composition of their staffing and their history of implementing diversity and inclusion policies. Certain
comparators listed below are in fact the Executive Body of a larger institution, and therefore are not
international organisations as such; however, for readability purposes, those institutions will also be
referred to as “international organisations” throughout this report.

A. Comparators

1.2. Most of the comparators were part of the 2015 version of the study. The Organisation for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was added. Although the respective mandate of the
comparators naturally remained constant, the membership of several comparators increased over the
past five years, giving rise to opportunities to increase diversity amongst staff while, at the same time,
bringing supplementary challenges in terms of geographical representation.
1.3. CERN was created in 1954. The Headquarters are in Geneva, Switzerland. CERN has
23 Member States, eight Associated Member States and three Observer States. CERN is a scientific
organisation, describing its mission as providing a unique range of particle accelerator facilities that
enable research at the forefront of human knowledge, and performing world-class research in
fundamental physics.
1.4. The European Commission (EC) was created in 1951, and has its headquarters in Brussels,
Belgium. It includes 27 Member States. The EC is the European Union’s executive body.
1.5. The European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) was established in 1974 and is
headquartered in Heidelberg, Germany. EMBL is composed of 27 Member States and two Associate
Members and two Prospect Members. EMBL’s mission is to promote molecular biology across Europe,
through research on the fundamental understanding of basic biological processes in model organisms.
1.6. The European Patent Office (EPO) was created in 1973 and has its headquarters in Munich,
Germany. It groups 38 Member States and two Observer States. The EPO is the executive body of the
European Patent Organisation; it carries out searches and substantive examinations on European
patent applications and international applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty.
1.7. The European Southern Observatory (ESO) was created in 1962 and has its headquarters in
Garching, Germany. ESO has 16 Member States. The Organisation’s mission is to provide state-of-the-
art research facilities to astronomers and astrophysicists.
1.8. The European Space Agency (ESA) was created in 1975. Its headquarters are in Paris, France.
ESA has 24 Member States. ESA’s mission is to shape the development of Europe's space capability.
1.9. The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor Organization (ITER) is the youngest
of the comparators: it was created in 2007. ITER Headquarters are in Saint-Paul Lez Durance, France,
and has seven Member States – the European Union counting as one Member State. ITER is an
international nuclear fusion research and engineering megaproject, which is currently building the
world's largest experimental tokamak nuclear fusion reactor.
1.10. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was created in 1997 and
is based in The Hague, Netherlands. It has 193 Member States. The Organisation was established to
ensure and monitor the implementation the provisions of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
1.11. The United Nations Office in Geneva (UNOG) is the second-largest office site of the United
Nations. UNOG was established in 1966, but the creation of the United Nations was in 1945. Like CERN,
the Headquarters of UNOG are in Geneva, Switzerland. The United Nations has 193 Member States
and two Observer States. For the purpose of this study, we will focus on UNOG, and not on the United

6
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

Nations as a whole. UNOG’s mission is to represent the UN Secretary-General in Geneva, which is the
largest United Nations duty station outside of New York.

B. Personnel structure

1.12. The total number of staff members amongst the comparators varies substantially, though in
less significant proportions than in the 2015 study, due to the significant increase in staffing in the
then smallest comparators (ESO and ITER).
1.13. The comparators are classified as follows, in ascending order of number of staff: OPCW (412),
ESO (746), ITER (972), EMBL (1,312), UNOG (1,520), ESA (2,361), CERN (2,660), EPO (6,444) and
EC (32,847). 1 The graph shows the order of magnitude of the size of the comparators’ staffing – the
EC, which has by far the highest staff count, is not represented.

OPCW ESO ITER EMBL UNOG ESA CERN EPO

Graph 1 – Schematic representation of the comparators’ staff population

1. Career aspects

1.14. All the comparators, regardless of their nature of single-site or multi-site employers, have a
significant majority of their staff on international assignment, with the exception of UNOG where this
concerns only 34% of staff.
1.15. The comparators, as international organisations, each have distinct and independent
employment frameworks. Consequently, the notion of “international assignment” may differ from
one organisation to the other. The purpose of this section of the study is to identify which proportion
of staff may be identified under the broader notion of “expatriate”, i.e. in general someone whose
first nationality is not that of the country of posting. It should also be noted that in certain
Organisations, notably ESO and UNOG, the qualification of “international assignment” is dependant
of the job classification, while this is no longer the case at CERN since 2016. More specifically, staff on
“international assignment” in the graph below represent:
- at CERN: Staff members meeting the criteria for the award of the international indemnity;
- at EPO, ESA, ITER, and OPCW: staff members recruited from outside the host state(s);
- at EC: staff members who are “officials”, as opposed to “temporary” and “contract agents”;
- at EMBL: staff members “recruited internationally” as per the meaning of the EMBL Staff
Regulations;
- at ESO: staff members qualifying as “international staff members” status;

1
Personnel data mentioned in this report correspond to the most recent consolidated data available to each
comparator as of the date of collection of their responses to the questionnaire (Q4 2020).

7
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

- at UNOG: staff members on “international assignment” in the “Professional and higher”

categories.

1.16. The following graph compares the proportion of staff on “international assignment” with that
of staff on “local assignment”. At ITER and OPCW, there are other staff categories, which are shown
as “Other”.

100%
12% 10%
90% 20% 22%
30% 26% 26%
33%
80%
27%
70% 17%
66%
60%
50%
88%
40% 80%
70% 74% 74%
67%
30% 63% 61%

20%
34%
10%
0%
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

International assignment Local assignment (or equivalent) Other

Graph 2 – Staff members on international assignment

1.17. Two comparators (ITER and OPCW) do not offer indefinite-term appointments – though their
fixed-term contracts may be indefinitely renewed. In the other comparators, two groups can be
distinguished, between those organisations where the vast majority of staff are on indefinite-term
appointment (EPO and ESA, with respectively 95% and 97% staff holding an indefinite-term contract),
and other organisations with more varied profiles (CERN, EC, and ESO, with respectively 66%, 75% and
74%, and UNOG with 32%). EMBL has a very limited number of staff on indefinite-term contracts (9%).

100% 5% 3%
90%
25% 26%
34%
80%
70%
68%
60%
91%
50% 95% 97% 100% 100%

40%
75% 74%
66%
30%
20%
32%
10%
9%
0%
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Indefinite-term contract Fixed-term contract

Graph 3 – Staff members on indefinite-term appointment

8
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

2. Age aspects

1.18. When considering the staff population as a whole, regardless of the nature of the contracts,
average age at appointment 2 are analogous amongst all the comparators (EMBL being significantly
below the average with a 40-to-50 age range,). However, there are significant discrepancies with
regard to the age at end of appointment (graph 5), which result from non-comparable career
structures in the comparators. In the first group of comparators, it can be inferred that the vast
majority of staff members remain in service until they reach the retirement age (EC, EPO, ESA, ESO),
whereas in the other group of comparators (notably CERN, EMBL and OPCW), there is a significant
percentage of the population on limited duration or fixed-term contracts from whom the maximum
duration of service (less than 10 years) is prescribed under their respective staff Rules. Only the
average age at appointment was available for UNOG.

55

50 50 49
50 49 49 49

47 47 46
46 46
45 45
45
43
41
40
40
38

35

30
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Average Median

Graph 4 – Age of staff (average and median)

70
65
65 63
59 59
60
55
51
50 48

45
41
39 40
40 38
35
34 34
35 32

30
25
20
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO OPCW

At appointment At end of appointment

Graph 5 – Average age of staff at appointment and end of appointment

2
Overall staff population as of date of collection of the data.

9
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3. Family aspects

1.19. Graph 6 below shows the ratios of staff marital status in the comparators. When such data
was available, a distinction is made between married staff and those in a registered partnership. When
no specific reporting was available (EMBL, EPO, ESA, ITER), all staff members in a registered
partnership are considered as “married”. No data on marital status was available for UNOG.
1.20. With the exception of the EC, the figures are analogous from one comparator to the other,
with approximately 25% of staff members declared as single – or not in a marital status recognised by
the organisation as equivalent to married.

100%
10.5% 8.78% 8.3%
90% 20%
26% 30% 27%
80% 37% 22.69% 21.6%

70% 35.8% 4%
9% 2.6%

60%
50%
40% 80%
68.53% 70% 69% 67.5%
65% 63%
30%
53.7%
20%
10%
0%
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW

Married In a registered partnership Single Other

Graph 6 – Marital status 3

1.21. The following graph represents the proportion of staff members having at least one
dependent child. No data was available for UNOG.

100%
90%
28% 33%
33%
80% 41% 39%
54% 54% 52%
70%
60%
50%
40%
72% 67%
67%
30% 59% 61%
46% 46% 48%
20%
10%
0%
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW

With dependent child(ren) Without dependent children

Graph 7 – Dependent children

3
In the EPO and OPCW data that were collected, certain staff members do not fall within either of these three
categories (“Married”, “In a registered partnership”, “Single”). They are represented in this graph as “Other”.

10
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

1.22. Ascendants may give rise to entitlement to family benefits at EC, ESA, ITER, and UNOG.

4. Gender diversity

1.23. Gender diversity ratios can be influenced by a number of external factors, in particular the
composition of an international organisation’s recruitment pool, but they are nevertheless an efficient
tool to measure the effectiveness of gender diversity policies.
1.24. The comparators were requested to express in percentages the total population of female
staff overall, and then in three subgroups: support, professional, and management. 4
1.25. On average, the staffing of the comparators is composed of 35% female staff, with staff
members in support positions being 58% females, 30% in professional positions and 32% in
management positions.
1.26. CERN and ITER have the lowest overall proportion of female staff in professional and
management positions.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

35%
Average 30%
58%
32%

21%
CERN 18%
25%
24%

56%
EC 47%
68%
41%

47%
EMBL 45%
81%
31%

34%
EPO 25%
67%
27%

29%
ESA 24%
85%
19%

24%
ESO 14%
57%
40%

20%
ITER 14%
34%
8%

42%
OPCW 30%
61%
50%

48%
UNOG 45%
49%
44%

Overall Support positions Professional positions Managerial positions

Graph 8 – Proportion of female staff

1.27. When compared to the figures that were provided for the 2015 Diversity Study, it appears
that certain comparators have significantly increased the proportion of female staff in management

4
The definition of these subgroups was left to the appreciation of the Head of Human Resources of each
comparator, which allows better comparability of the results since the employment categories of the
comparators are not prima facie arranged analogously.

11
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

positions (for example: EC from 31% to 41%, ESA from 8% to 19%, EPO from 15% to 27%, ESO from
17% to 40%). The increase is smaller at CERN, from 23% up to 24%. ITER is the only comparator where
a decrease may be found (from 15% to 8%).
1.28. However, in most comparators progress towards achieving a better gender balance in
professional positions is less visible, with a minor increase at CERN, ESA, ESO, ITER and UNOG, and
stable figures for EPO and EMBL – although it should be noted that UNOG and EMBL were already
close to gender parity in this employment category.
1.29. UNOG has achieved the most balanced gender diversity ratio, overall and in all employment
categories.

C. Diversity and Inclusion policies

1.30. EMBL, OPCW, and UNOG have implemented an official non-binary gender registration option.
In certain comparators (notably CERN), non-binary gender options are sometimes offered in non-
official contexts, such as for events organised by staff associations or informal events organised by the
organisation.
1.31. UNOG implemented a specific definition of disability in its Staff Regulations, within the
context of its “reasonable accommodation” policy (documented in ST/SGB/2014/3), which covers
specific arrangements relating to adjustment and modification of equipment, modification of job
content, working hours, commuting, and organisation of work for the staff member concerned. UNOG
also has a dedicated recruitment program for persons with disabilities, as part of the United Nations’
“Disability strategy”. Such definition also exists at the EC, but we were not provided with further
details in this regard. The EC notes its objective to respect inclusion in the selection procedures and
to provide all candidates with an equal opportunity to fully demonstrate their competencies by
identifying and eliminating potential blocking factors, possible biases, and any other risks of
discrimination. In addition to this, as is the case at CERN, there are policies in place to ensure balanced
selection panels, and HR professionals and managers are offered unconscious bias training.
1.32. The EC and UNOG are the only comparators with a dedicated disability program and budget,
but it should be noted that ESA is in the process of setting measures for the recruitment of people
with disability, starting with a programme for persons with a physical disability. CERN has a centralised
budget in place to provide for reasonable workplace adjustments. There are policies to address
mental health and wellbeing in the workplace at CERN, EC, EMBL, EPO, ESO, ITER, and UNOG.
1.33. There are policies directed towards the recruitment of nationals of underrepresented
nationalities in place at CERN, EC, EMBL, ESA, ITER, and UNOG. OPCW is the only comparator to keep
a record of the ethnicity of its employees.
1.34. EMBL and the EC are the only comparators to have a policy to facilitate the inclusion of
transgender staff.
1.35. With regard to the working language, there are non-English working languages in most – but
not all (ESO and ITER) – of the comparators: CERN, ESA, and UNOG (French), EMBL and EPO (French
and German), OPCW (Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian, and Spanish). There are 24 official working
languages at the EC (Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French,
German, Greek, Hungarian, Irish, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian,
Slovak, Slovene, Spanish, and Swedish).
1.36. Limited proficiency in a non-English working language is considered as an advantage in the
recruitment process in all these organisations, whereas it is a requirement for career progression at
CERN, EC, EPO, and ESA; at the EC, officials must demonstrate their ability to work in a third language
before their first promotion.

12
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

1.37. With the exception of UNOG, which had a form of diversity policy at its inception, further to
the orientations contained in the United Nations Charter of 1945, the EC was the first to implement a
diversity policy, in 1988. It was followed by CERN in 1996, and 15 years later, by ESA in 2001, followed
by ESO (2006), ITER (2007), and EMBL (2010). OPCW and EPO do not have diversity programmes as
such, but EPO will implement an official diversity roadmap as from 2021.
1.38. The comparators have differing views with regard to what, according to their own appraisal,
is their most influential diversity and inclusion policy for the attraction and retention of staff. CERN,
EMBL, the EPO, ESA, and UNOG consider that their successes with regard to diversity and inclusion
are mainly driven by their policies directed towards families, in particular the benefits granted in this
specific regard and the work arrangements that accommodate the diverse needs of people at different
career and life stages. CERN also mentions the arrangements allowing more flexible working hours,
but also more preventive policies such as an anti-harassment framework and a policy of
non-discrimination. The EPO notes that the fact of having a large number of nationalities represented
among staff demonstrates the international and culturally rich environment; this is also fuelled by
policies such as that allowing staff to become members of a “Diversity and Inclusion promoter
network”, so as to identify D&I champions within the organisation. The EPO also stresses the
importance of D&I training, in particular as part of the organisation’s leadership programme.
1.39. The comparators have identified additional policies deemed relevant to increase diversity. In
particular, CERN, EPO, ESA, ESO, and ITER identify their efforts at the recruitment stage to increase
gender balance or nationality representation. EPO and OPCW name awareness raising initiatives,
notably training on several aspects of Diversity and Inclusion, and most particularly a mandatory
training for all EPO managers on unconscious biases. The EPO also organises shadowing days, during
which candidates with disabilities have the opportunity to meet EPO officials, and be introduced to
members of several business areas who present their fields of activity. UNOG goes further, with the
express setting of targets to achieve gender parity and increase geographic and regional
representation.
1.40. EMBL also mentions that it implemented a “Gender Balance Committee” in 2015, which was
renamed to “Equality and Diversity Committee” in 2016, followed by the appointment of two Equality
& Diversity Officers in 2019. Except for the development of the EMBL diversity strategy, the
Committee is in charge of the “LEAP” Programme (Leadership and Excellence for Aspiring Postdocs,
which is a Mentorship Programme with external mentors tailored for female postdocs). EMBL is also
working towards becoming a Global Stonewall Diversity Champion in partnership with the Stonewall
Organisation in order to integrate diversity and LGBTQ+ inclusion into all parts of the Organisation.
OPCW is also currently undertaking a diversity audit, which should be followed by the implementation
of an action plan in 2021.

D. Conclusion

1.41. The data shows that the international organisations covered by this study are of varied
natures (membership, number of staff members, fields of expertise, contractual policies), allowing to
benchmark CERN against a variety of other international public institutions. However, the
comparators’ staff population share very common features regarding age and family status.
1.42. CERN was one of the first Organisations to implement a diversity policy and to go further by
creating a dedicated “Diversity and Inclusion” programme in 2012, with dedicated staff.
1.43. However, with the exception of one organisation (ITER), CERN has the lowest female
representation amongst its staff. Since the last study, carried out in 2015, CERN only marginally
improved female representation in professional positions, and there was a decrease in the proportion
of females amongst staff members holding management positions.

13
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

1.44. Considering the practices from other Organisations, certain evolutions could be considered by
CERN to improve its results towards diversity and inclusion, all of which imply raising awareness
amongst staff:
- developing the CERN Staff Regulations by implementing provisions to allow a better visibility
of fields in which diversity and inclusion efforts should be made (definition of disability,
recognition of non-binary gender identification, recognition of transgender staff);
- organising additional awareness-raising initiatives within CERN, such as staff surveys,
mandatory trainings that focus on embracing differences, managing diverse population,
overcoming unconscious bias etc. ;
- setting quantifiable “diversity and inclusion” objectives for staff members in management
positions, or incorporate within promotion and/or career progression evaluations specific
recognition for diversity-positive initiatives or results; setting accountability for diversity and
inclusion results could be key to driving results;
- go through a certification process (such as the EDGE Certification, which has been awarded to
a number of other comparators).

14
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2
Confidential

E. Summary table

CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Number of staff 2,660 32,847 1,312 6,444 2,361 746 927 412 1,520

International staff 67.48% 70% 88% 73.81% 80% 74% 62.80% 60.70% 34%

Indefinite-term
Staff figures 66.47% 75% 9% 95.45% 97% 74% 0% 0% 32.2%
appointment

Percentage of staff
not
married or in a 73.95% 89.5% 63% 68.53% 70.31% 73% 80.00% 70.1%
available
registered partnership

overall 20.6% 55.6% 47% 33.89% 29% 23.60% 19.55% 42% 48%

Proportion of support positions 25.2% 68% 81% 67.29% 85% 56.50% 34.20% 60.50% 45%
female staff
in… professional positions 18.3% 47% 45% 25.13% 24% 13.80% 13.86% 30% 49%

management positions 24% 41% 31% 26.83% 19% 40% 8.39% 50% 44%

staff members with

Yes No No No No No No No Yes
disabilities

mental health and

wellbeing at the Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes
Diversity & workplace
Inclusion
policies in transgender staff No Yes Yes No No No No No No
respect of…
underrepresented
Yes Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes
nationalities

non-English working
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes
language

15
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2
Confidential

2. DEFINITION OF FAMILY AND ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS

2.1. This section of the report covers the definition of family and the structures that are eligible
for benefits.
2.2. Defining a family in the context of an Organisation and determining the eligibility for benefits
is a core element to conclude the progress in diversity and inclusion of this Organisation. In fact, while
the description of family has been evolving substantially across society, many Organisations do not
clearly define it. In the context of this benchmarking exercise, the comparators were thus asked more
specific questions that targeted their definition of a spouse and children of a staff member, and the
model of family that could grant the staff family allowances.

A. Notion of spouse

2.3. The comparators use different approaches to define the concept of “family”. CERN, EMBL,
ITER and ESO have a specific definition of this notion. CERN’s definition is, “Family means spouse
and/or dependent children, marriage includes registered partnership and spouse includes registered
partner”.
2.4. ESO has a more detailed, yet similar definition considering that, “the members of the family
are: a) the spouse; A married couple includes ones entering or having entered into a registered civil
partnership. The terms “marriage / married / to marry” equal a registered civil partnership; the term
“spouse” includes the registered partner. b) the dependent children, latest until the age of 25. Should
a child marry or obtain gainful employment before reaching that age, he/she is no longer considered
dependent. It is possible to extend the dependency beyond the age of 25 in case the child is disabled”.
2.5. ITER’s definition of family is linked to its definition to the household allowance that should be
paid to the staff who “are married; or have a registered legal partnership, recognized in the territories
of one of the Members; or are widowed, divorced, legally separated or single and who have at least
one dependent”.
2.6. While these definitions remain quite specific, they aim to be as inclusive as possible and
ensure to capture a wide meaning for family experience.
2.7. Although EMBL does not have a definition of “family”, it provides a definition of “union” that
means, “a voluntary union of a member of the personnel with one other individual (of any sex) united
in law for life and to the exclusion of all others, and which – across all areas of life - creates rights,
responsibilities and benefits established and enforceable by law which are not afforded save for the
existence of such union”.
2.8. EMBL specifies that the Staff Rules and Regulations may indicate which categories of
personnel benefits, financial or otherwise, shall be awarded or rights granted by virtue of such union.
Moreover, the individual united with the member of the personnel shall be referred to as a “life
companion”. Primary documentary evidence by which the union was initially established shall be
provided by the member of the personnel before benefits under the Staff Rules or Staff Regulations
can be provided. In the absence or insufficiency of primary documentary evidence, secondary
documentary evidence shall be provided, establishing that the relationship meets all criteria listed
herein.
2.9. This definition has the merit to clarify and identify the spouse for the eligibility of benefits,
without providing a complete definition of a “family”.
2.10. CERN is the only comparator that has periodically reviewed the definition of family on a
periodic basis (on the occasion of the previous five-yearly reviews of the social conditions of
employment). EMBL can review it within the regular 4-year reviews on conditions and benefits, if

16
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

deemed necessary. The other comparators review it only when it is judged necessary. ESA and UNOG
note that they rarely review this definition.
2.11. In this context, the comparators were asked to confirm whether their definition of “spouse”
includes the following forms of union: limited partnership, partnership, registered co-habitation, and
unregistered co-habitation. All the comparators consider that registered partnerships are equivalent
to marriage and, on the contrary, none of them recognises non-registered co-habitation. Only EC,
EMBL, OPCW, and UNOG include a registered co-habitation in their definition of spouse.

B. Notion of dependent child

2.12. The comparators were requested to establish under what circumstances the step-child of a
staff member could be recognised as a dependent child: staff is married to the parent of the child,
staff has a recognised partnership with the parent of the child, staff is living under the same roof as
the parent of the child with no official union and provides main and contributing support for the child.
2.13. In all the comparators, the child of a person married to the staff member may be recognised
as a dependent child. At the contrary, in none of the comparators is the sole circumstance of the
parent of the child living under the same roof as the staff member sufficient to give rise to the
recognition of dependent child status. The comparator’s replies for the other two situations are
summarised in the table below.

Organisations
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG
Cases

Staff partnered with

Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
parent of child

Staff provides main

and continuing Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
support for the child

Table 1 – Recognition of a step-child as a dependent child

C. Benefits and Family Allowance

2.14. It was of interest to determine if the comparators grant the same benefits to staff members
who are in a recognised partnership, such as health insurance, family allowance, dependent child
allowance, infant allowance, entitlement in respect of step children, expatriation allowance, home
leave/travel to home country, special leave for family reasons, pension for surviving spouse/partner
and/or any other benefit.
2.15. In general, spouse-related benefits are granted equally to the legally registered partner of the
staff member. There are however a few exceptions. In particular, the decision to grant pension
benefits to former UNOG staff members and their relatives is within the sole purview of the United
Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund (UNJSPF), which may not always recognise partnerships as equivalent
to marriage. Additionally, ITER grants home leave or travel to country and special leave for family
reasons differently than to married couples.
2.16. Some of the above-mentioned benefits are not granted to any type of family, for example
OPCW does not provide any family allowances or pension for surviving spouse or partner. EMBL, ESO,
ITER, OPCW, and UNOG do not grant an infant allowance. Expatriation allowances are not granted by
ITER and OPCW, regardless of the type of family. While an infant allowance at CERN is a benefit paid

17
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

on a monthly basis (up to the age of 3 years), an infant allowance at ESA is a one-off lump sum paid
upon the birth of the child. Expatriation allowances are not granted by ITER and OPCW regardless of
the type of family.
2.17. ESA awards an additional allowance with respect to children with disabilities, as well as a
specific allowance for single parents, and ESO grants a supplementary child allowance dedicated
exclusively to expatriated children with no educational grant.
2.18. In comparison with the report of 2015, CERN aligned itself with the other comparators and
granted all benefits to staff in recognised partnerships in identical means to married couples.
2.19. Additionally, it was important to determine if the comparators accept to grant family (or
household) allowances to married couples without children, married couples with children, partnered
couples without children, and partnered couples with children. In all the comparators, staff members
are equally entitled to family allowance in all these cases, with the exception of the EPO, which
excludes the case of partnered couples without children.

D. Conclusion

2.20. CERN is the only comparator that has periodically reviewed its definition of “family”. This
demonstrates the will of the Organisation to regularly reassess its standards of diversity and inclusion
in comparison to other international organisations, and to ensure its continued positive appeal and
retention rate as an employer.
2.21. It was noted that CERN implemented significant improvements in comparison with the
exercise dated 5 years ago, by aligning the conditions of entitlement to family benefits of staff
members in a registered partnership with those applicable to married staff members.
2.22. As a general conclusion to this section of the report, CERN is on par with, if not outperforming
the comparators in terms of diversity and inclusion related to the definition of family and eligibility for
benefits. Further progress could be made by recognising registered co-habitation as a non-marital
form of union, giving rise to entitlement to family benefits, in line with other comparators.

18
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3. SUPPORT MEASURES FOR SPOUSE, PARTNER EMPLOYMENT AND FAMILIES

3.1. In this section, the focus is on support measures implemented by the comparators towards
their staff members’ families, in particular dual-career support measures, birth and adoption leave,
leave for family reasons, non-remunerated leave, childcare facilities, and education fees.

A. Dual-career support measures

1. Conditions of entitlement

3.2. In all the comparators, dual-career support measures are granted equally to spouses and
registered partners of staff members. At EMBL, ITER, and UNOG, these measures are also granted to
persons in common life or cohabitation with a staff member.
3.3. These measures are available to the families of all staff members, regardless of whether they
are on “international assignment” or not – with the exception of EMBL, where the measures are
available to the spouse/partner/cohabitant of staff members on international assignment only.

2. Nature of the support measures

3.4. Although all the comparators provide for language training to the spouse and family of the
staff, this is not always free of charge, for example at UNOG.
3.5. All the comparators, except for the EC, also allow dual employment by the Organisation.
3.6. Most of the comparators also provide a spouse network. Although the core concept is similar,
each organisation has its own specificity. The EC for example, organises an Information Day for
Spouses/Partners which is an informal get-together organised in close collaboration with the social
workers of the Commission, who explore the problems related to being a “trailing spouse” and offer
the benefit of their long experience working with expatriates. Similarly, CERN has a Welcome Club
(run by the Staff Association) and hosts a Spouse welcome event (organised by the HR Department)
twice a year; CERN also has an agreement with the Host State for the spouse/partner to receive a work
permit in Switzerland, which has the benefit of applying to a broader extent than the Swiss definition
of partnerships. EPO, through the Amicale (a staff-run association), subsidizes an extensive social,
learning, and free-time program (for employees and their families, through the year, during school
holidays, etc.), based on self-organised clubs. ESA, has had a less successful experience, reporting that
the initiatives towards newcomers have not been well attended. ESO affirms that this network is only
open in Chile, and ITER does not provide this network directly as these measures are handled by the
Welcome Office of the host nation.
3.7. CERN, ESO, and OPCW are the only comparators to provide access to a formal dual career
network. While EPO does not provide an established access to such a network, it does organise a job-
search workshop twice a year for spouses based in The Hague. The EC also organises job hunting
seminars several times a year for the partners/spouses of all officials and other agents.
3.8. EMBL and EPO are the only comparators that arrange financial assistance and subsidised
training courses in addition to the language courses.
3.9. Most of the comparators (EC, EMBL, EPO, ESA, ESO and UNOG) include career counselling in
the measures they arrange for the spouse or family of staff members.
3.10. CERN, along with EPO, OPCW, and UNOG assure a support for the family of the staff when
they are located outside the local area.
\

19
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

Organisations
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG
Measures

Dual
Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
employment

Spouse network Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Dual career
Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No
network

Financial
assistance or No No Yes Yes No No No No No
training

Career
No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes
counselling

Language
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
training

Support to
family outside Yes Ad hoc No Yes No No No Yes Yes
local area

Table 2 – Career support measures

B. Birth and adoption leave

3.11. This portion of the study compares measures related to maternity leave, paternity and
co-parent leave, parental leave, and adoption leave.

1. Maternity leave

3.12. The comparators show similarities in their policies with regard to the length of maternity
leave.
3.13. All the comparators have a specific policy addressing maternity leave. They commit to a full
remuneration of the staff who is on maternity leave, and their data shows that 100% of their staff take
the totality of the maternity leave entitlement.
3.14. In most of the comparators, the entire period of maternity leave is mandatory, with the
exception of ESO, which provides 78% of the prescribed maternity leave period as mandatory.
3.15. The main variation between the comparators was the duration of the maternity leave, which
ranges between 16 and 20 weeks, as shown in graph 9 below. CERN is one of the organisations that
grant 16 weeks as standard maternity leave, as do EMBL, ITER, OPCW, and UNOG. ESO and ESA have
a more extended period of 18 weeks, and maternity leave lasts for 20 weeks at EC and EPO. These
numbers remain consistent with the results reported in 2015.

20
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3.16. Extension of maternity leave may be granted in most of the comparators, but they vary
significantly from one Organisation to the other:
- several of the comparators provide extensions in case of multiple births, if there are already
other children in the household and/or for health-related reasons: 2 weeks at EMBL, 3 weeks
at CERN and ESO, 4 weeks at EC and EPO, up to 10 weeks at ESA, and up to 30 weeks at ITER;
- CERN and ITER are the only comparators which mentioned an extension for breast-feeding,
with respectively 4 and 2 weeks;
- OPCW and UNOG do not provide extensions per se, but these comparators note that the
duration of maternity leave must always include 10 weeks after the date of the birth.

50
2
45
40
35
30 30

25 4
4 4 10
20 7 3
2
15
10 20 20 18 18
16 16 16 16 16
5
0
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Standard duration Maximum extension Breast-feeding leave

Graph 9 – Duration of maternity leave (in weeks)

3.17. With regard to the date at which maternity leave should be taken, however there were
notable differences:
- at CERN and EMBL, the starting date of maternity leave may be postponed for a maximum of
four and two weeks, respectively. The corresponding period is reported to the end of the
maternity leave;
- the EC and OPCW do not allow flexibility towards the pre and post-partum duration of
maternity leave;
- at ITER, EPO and ESO, maternity leave may be postponed until the date of the birth; under
such circumstances, the total duration of the standard maternity leave must be taken as from
the date of birth of the child;
- at UNOG, the post-partum duration of maternity leave may be reduced from 10 to 6 weeks,
at the request of the staff member.

21
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

-7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Bi rth +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 +11 +12 +13 +14 +15 +16 +17 +18 +19 +20

CERN

EC

EMBL

EPO

ESA

ESO

ITER

OPCW

UNOG

-7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 Bi rth +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 +8 +9 +10 +11 +12 +13 +14 +15 +16 +17 +18 +19 +20

Fl exi bl e Ma nda tory

Graph 10 – Period of maternity leave by reference to the date of birth (in weeks)

2. Paternity or Co-parent leave

3.18. All comparators provide specific policy for paternity leave, but in no comparator is such leave
mandatory. When paternity leave is taken, 100% remuneration is paid.
3.19. The duration of paternity leave is 10 days for CERN, EC, EMBL, EPO, ESA, and ESO. There are
longer durations at ITER, with 12 days, and 20 days at OPCW.
3.20. While CERN has shown an improvement since 2015 – 10 days of paternity leave, up from
6 days in 2015 – it may wish to move to meet the comparators with more generous paternity leave
durations. It is of interest to note that ITER moved from 10 days in 2015 to 12 days at present. For
CERN and ITER, the recent shift to a four-week paternity leave under the labour law of host country
France may influence their policy.
3.21. With the exception of EMBL, EPO, and ESO, most of the comparators allow extra days of
paternity leave under specific circumstances (multiple births, for example). ESA grants up to 2
additional days, 5 at CERN, 8 at ITER, 10 at EC and 20 at UNOG. OPCW may grant extra days of paternity
leave under specific circumstances, which were not detailed in the replies provided.

40
35
30 20

25
20
8
15 10
5
2
10 20 20
12
5 10 10 10 10 10 10

0
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Standard duration Maximum extension

Graph 11 – Duration of paternity leave (in days)

22
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3.22. In all the comparators, paternity leave should be taken within a defined period following the
birth of the child. This period is 40 calendar days at ESO, 3 months at ESA, 14 weeks at EPO, 14 weeks
with the possibility to extend at the EC, six months at EMBL and ITER, and one year at CERN, OPCW,
and UNOG.
3.23. Data shows that 100% of the paternity leave is taken at EPO, ITER, OPCW, and UNOG, while
95% is taken at CERN, 75% at ESA, and 70% at EMBL.
3.24. EC and EPO use a gender inclusive term instead of "paternity leave": "special leave birth of
child". In this regard, it is worth mentioning that, while the term itself is gender-specific at CERN,
“paternity leave” at CERN was extended to any members of personnel, regardless of gender, after
their spouse or partner has given birth.

3. Parental leave

3.25. CERN, EC, EMBL, EPO, ESA, ESO, and UNOG have a policy for parental leave in addition to
maternity and paternity leave.
3.26. The standard duration of parental leave is 14 weeks at EMBL 5, 4 months at CERN, 6 months
at EC and ESA, 120 working days at EPO 6 and 2 years at ESO and UNOG.
3.27. With the exception of CERN and ESO, the length of parental leave may be extended, up to
twice the duration, in all the comparators, but with an impact on the benefits paid to the staff
members concerned: for example, the staff member concerned would be on reduced pay at EC and
unpaid at ESA. In this regard, parental leave is always unremunerated at CERN and UNOG. At the EC,
the standard and extended durations of parental leave are doubled for single parents. At EMBL, the
duration of the extension depends on the time remaining between the end of the
maternity/paternity/adoption leave and the child’s first birthday. 7
3.28. At the EC, the standard and extended durations of parental leave are doubled for single
parents or parents of dependent children with disability or severe illness.

50
45
40
35 24

30
25
20
15
24 24
10 6 6 6
8
5
4 6 6 6
3.5
0
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO UNOG

Standard duration Maximum extension

Graph 12 – Duration of parental leave (in months)

5
Represented as 3.5 months in Graph 12.
6
Represented as 6 months in Graph 12.
7
Represented as 8 months in Graph 12.

23
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3.29. With regard to benefits paid during parental leave, none of the comparators maintain the
standard remuneration during parental leave. However, with the exception of CERN, certain
comparators pay an emolument in the form of a fixed allowance (EC and EPO, the amount at EPO
being higher for single parents) or a percentage of salary (30% for two months at ESA, 40% with a fixed
ceiling at EMBL, 65% with a ceiling at ESO). EC and EPO officials may also take parental leave on a half-
time basis, resulting in the payment of 50% of their salary and 50% of the parental leave allowance.
CERN maintains the payment of family, child and infant allowances and pays the health insurance in
full (employee + employer contributions).
3.30. Last but not least, an interesting approach from the EPO should be noted since, when the
father of a child takes up to 60 days’ parental leave after his paternity leave and while the mother is
still on maternity leave, the amount of the parental leave allowance is increased.

4. Adoption leave

3.31. Adoption leave exists in all the comparators; it always gives rise to entitlement to full
remuneration and is granted equally to staff members in a recognised form of marital union (including
same-sex marriage and registered partnership).
3.32. The standard duration of adoption leave is 4 weeks at ESO and UNOG, 8 weeks at OPCW,
10 weeks at ITER, 12 weeks at ESA, 15 weeks at CERN, 16 weeks at EMBL, 20 weeks at EC and EPO.
3.33. This duration cannot be extended at CERN and ESA. The extension may be 4 weeks at EC, EPO,
and UNOG, up to 12 weeks at ITER, and 14 weeks at ESO. Remunerated extensions are granted on an
ad hoc basis at EMBL and OPCW.

25

4 4
20

12
15

14
10 20 20

15 16
12 4
5 10
8
4 4
0
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Standard duration Maximum extension

Graph 13 – Duration of adoption leave (in weeks)

C. Leave for family reasons

3.34. The comparators have varying leave durations depending on the family reason.
3.35. UNOG and OPCW do not provide specific leave in the event of the death of a relative (spouse,
child, parent), but would allow the use of respectively 7 and 10 days of sick leave.
3.36. In the event of the death of a spouse or a child, 3 days of leave are granted at CERN, EMBL
and ESO, 4 days at EC and EPO (with a possible 2 day extension at EPO), 5 days at ESA and ITER (with
a possible 5 day extension at ITER).

24
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

10
9
8
5
7
6
5 2 10

4
7
3
5 5
2 4 4
3 3 3
1
0
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Standard duration Extension Sick leave

Graph 14 – Duration of leave in the event of the death of spouse or child (in days)

3.37. In the event of the death of a parent, 2 days of leave are granted at EC and EPO (with a possible
2 day extension at EPO), 3 days of leave are granted at CERN (1 day in the case of the death of siblings
or in-laws), EMBL and ESO, 4 days at ESA, and 5 days at ITER.

10
9
8
5
7
6
5 2 10

4
7
3
5 5
2 4 4
3 3 3
1
0
CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Standard duration Maximum extension Sick leave

Graph 15 – Duration of leave in the event of the death of a parent (in days)

3.38. On the occasion of the staff member’s marriage, he/she would benefit from a leave of
3 working days at CERN, EMBL and ESO, 4 days at EC and EPO (with a possible 2 day extension at EPO),
5 days at ESA, and 6 days at ITER. No such leave is provided at OPCW and UNOG.
3.39. Across all comparators, no leave for family reasons is provided in the event of divorce.
3.40. The duration of the leave granted when a staff has to move is 1 day at CERN and EMBL; 2 days
at EC, EPO, and ITER; 3 days at ESA. At ESO, the duration of the leave is 1 day by default, but 2 days in
case of a move to/from Chile. No such leave is provided at OPCW and UNOG.

25
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3.41. The standard duration of leave in the event of illness of a relative is 2 days at EC, 2 days at
EMBL (10 days applied for a child below age 12), 3 to 5 days at EPO (with a possible 2 day extension),
5 days at ITER, 7 days at CERN, 8 days at ESA, 10 days at ESO and OPCW.
3.42. However, the detailed structure of the derogations to this leave entitlement varies
significantly between comparators, and there are numerous limitations and possibilities for extension
that cannot be presented in a graph. At EMBL, for example, the leave entitlement goes up to 25 days
for households with at least 3 children, and it is doubled for single parents. Single parents also benefit
from an increase (5 days) in their leave entitlement at CERN (in the event of illness of a close relative)
and ESO. In addition to the above “family emergency leave”, OPCW grants a short-term family leave
that is 5 days per year maximum that could be taken 3 days at one time out on uncertified sick leave.

D. Non-remunerated leave

3.43. The comparators were asked which of the following social and financial conditions are
maintained, optionally maintained at the staff member’s expense, or waived during a
non-remunerated leave: health insurance, contribution to the pension scheme, family allowance, child
allowance, education allowance, or others. Their replies are summarised in the table below.
3.44. CERN now grants an optional maintenance (pro rata temporis) of the education allowance,
while this option was waived in 2015. However, family allowances and child allowances remain
waived.

CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Health Optionally Optionally Optionally Optionally

Maintained Maintained Maintained Maintained Maintained
insurance maintained maintained maintained maintained

Optionally Optionally Optionally Optionally Optionally Optionally Optionally

Pension Maintained Maintained
maintained maintained maintained maintained maintained. maintained maintained

Family Optionally
Waived Maintained Waived Waived Waived Waived Waived Waived
allowances maintained

Child Optionally Optionally

Waived Maintained Waived Waived Waived Waived Waived
allowances maintained maintained

Education Optionally Optionally Optionally

Maintained Waived Maintained. Waived Waived Waived
allowance maintained maintained maintained

Table 3 – Social and Financial condition during non-remunerated leave other than parental leave

E. Paid leave for caring responsibilities

3.45. The comparators were requested to detail whether they provide their staff with a form of paid
leave for caring responsibilities. At CERN, EMBL, ESA, ESO, ITER, OPCW, and UNOG, there is no such
leave in addition in addition to that already covered under the “Leave for family reasons” section
above.
3.46. At the EC and EPO, staff members are entitled to up to 180 working days of “family leave” in
the course of their working life, or twice this duration if taken half-time. The EPO noted that family

26
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

leave may be taken in one or more instalments of at least 14 consecutive calendar days; during this
period, staff members are entitled to a lump-sum allowance.

F. Childcare facilities

3.47. CERN, EC, EMBL, EPO, and ESA have childcare facilities available on site. At CERN, the facilities
are managed by the Staff Association. In Munich, EPO has 3 childcare facilities on its premises that are
operated by 2 external providers and financially supported by the Organisation. Depending on the ESA
site, the arrangements for child care facilities vary, but at least one duty station has a facility on site.
3.48. CERN facilities are made available to the children of members of its personnel, but enrolment
may also be opened to children whose parents are not CERN officials – such as staff members from
other international organisations. At the EC, all staff with an employment contract of more than
6 months with an EU institution are eligible to benefit from the childcare support. All personnel can
benefit from these facilities at the EMBL. The beneficiaries at EPO and ESA include all permanent and
contractual staff. At ESO, beneficiaries are international staff, fellows, students, and both paid and
unpaid associates. ITER also make this benefit available for all staff, on the condition that children pass
a language test.
3.49. Attendance at the onsite facilities is possible as from the age of 3 months at EMBL and EPO,
4 months at CERN, and 6 months at ESO. There is no minimum age requirement at the EC and ESA.
These facilities are accessible until the age of 3 years at EPO (exceptionally up to 4 years), 4 years at
EC and ESA, 6 years at CERN, EMBL and ESO. In addition, CERN and ESA also offer afterschool childcare
until age 12 years.
3.50. At CERN, the childcare facility has a total of 61 available places; in addition there are 40 school
places. The EC provides around 1,300 nursery places and 1,640 afterschool childcare places for
approximately 30,000 employees in Brussels; it also organises outdoor activities during school
holidays for up to 500 children. There are 70 places at ESA, 104 at EMBL, and 125 at EPO.
3.51. CERN, the EC, and EMBL contribute to the costs of the facility and to the staff using it. EPO
also provides both a direct subsidy and a childcare allowance to the staff. ESA provides the premises
for the facilities, including utilities. ESO has negotiated special prices for the childcare places, and in
addition for fellows and students fees are reduced by 115 € for a full-time place. While ITER does not
contribute to the cost of the facility, it is hosted by the French authorities as part of their hosting
agreement, and the facility is considered a French public school.
3.52. CERN, EC, EPO, ESA, and ESO have agreements with off-site childcare facilities. For CERN,
agreements are in place with local facilities in local towns: Meyrin, Switzerland where 20 places are
reserved for CERN contributors' children between the age of 4 months and 4 years and
Saint-Genis-Pouilly, France with a total of 40 reserved places for CERN contributors' children between
the age of 4 months and 3 years. Further, two short-term places are also available. For the EC, a
childcare facility is located near each group of the European Union’s buildings. There is also a childcare
service organised in each of the European Schools in Brussels. For EPO, childcare facilities are
subsidised by the Organisation. At those places of employment where internal office demand exceeds
availability on the local open market, the Organisation will continue to contribute to those facilities
already in place and simultaneously encourage the local community to expand the facilities on offer
to staff of the Organisation. Such facilities, recognised by the local authorities as being suitable for
childcare, include Crèches, Kindergarten, Tagesmutter, Hort, Nachmittagsbetreuung,
Gastouderbedrijf, Naschoolseopvang, official nanny services/Kinderfrau. Moreover, admission to the
European School in Munich/The Hague (with transport services, an after-school program, and other
services) may also be considered part of these facilities. There are also facilities directly associated
with international schools. Additionally, any other facilities will be considered by the Organisation on
a case-by-case basis. Finally, an extensive social, learning, and free-time program (for employees and

27
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

their families, through the year, during school-holidays, etc.), based on self-organised clubs is offered
by the Amicale, subsidised by the EPO. At ESA, the arrangements for childcare facilities vary depending
on the work site. ESO has an arrangement with a facility located 10 minutes away from the
headquarters.
3.53. The comparators also shared other forms of childcare support. CERN has a “Welcome Club”
run by the Staff Association which has a number of welcome and integration activities, including a
Toddlers Group. EPO pays a monthly childcare allowance for children up to the age of 12 years. Taking
into account the full-time basic salary of the staff member, the EPO reimburses between 45% and 60%
of the direct cost of a recognised childcare facility such as a Crèche, Tagesmutter, Kindergarten, or
Hort for children up to 4, and 30% of direct costs of after-school care and care during school holidays
for children up to age 12. ESO works together with a childcare placement agency. ITER has a dedicated
international school that accepts children from pre-school (from 3 years old, generally) through Upper
school.
3.54. CERN, EMBL, EPO, ESA, ESO, and UNOG have on-site restroom facilities (male, female, or
gender neutral) containing an infant changing table and provide a dedicated space for infant feeding.
UNOG indicates that in accordance with the breast-feeding policy of the Organisation, mothers may
have up to 2 hours per day off, for up to one year, in order to accommodate breast-feeding.

G. Education benefits

3.55. The age from which a dependent child attending education gives rise to entitlement to
education benefits varies significantly from one comparator to the other. This age is 6 months at ESO,
3 years at CERN, 4 years at EPO and UNOG, 5 years at EC and OPCW. This age is defined as the age of
compulsory school education at ESA and ITER. It is therefore represented as 3 in the graph below,
considering that it is the age of compulsory education in France, the country where these comparators
are headquartered, but higher figures may apply for education in other countries.
3.56. The age until which education fees are granted is usually linked to the age limit for a child to
qualify as a dependant under the Staff Regulations – with the notable consequence that, since this
limit does not apply to children with disabilities, education benefits may be paid in their respect
beyond this age. For children who do not have special educational needs, education benefits may be
paid until age 20 at EMBL, 22 at ESA (but 26 for the children of staff members appointed before 2017),
25 at CERN, ITER, OPCW, and UNOG, 26 at EC.
3.57. At OPCW and UNOG, the age limit could be lower than 25, provided that the child has
completed four years of post-secondary studies. On the contrary, at EPO the standard age limit is 26,
but it should be noted that payment of education benefits may continue for as long as the dependent
child is in full-time education.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 …………….……………. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

CERN

EC

EMBL

EPO

ESA

ESO

ITER

OPCW

UNOG

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 …………….……………. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Graph 16 – Age of entitlement to the education allowance

28
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

3.58. Entitlement to education benefits is generally conditional upon the staff member being on
international assignment (within the meaning of Chapter 2, and notably graph 2, of this report) in most
of the comparators – with the exception of ITER, and CERN for post-secondary education.
3.59. At CERN, OPCW and UNOG, the maximum amount of the education fee is defined by
reference to a percentage of the costs (75% at CERN, sliding scales up to 80% at OPCW 86% at UNOG)
and a ceiling expressed in monetary terms. At EMBL, EPO, ESA, ESO and ITER, the maximum amount
is defined by reference to a multiplier applied to the annual amount of the dependent child allowance,
sometimes complemented with an additional ceiling expressed as a percentage of the costs: 70% at
ESA, 75% at EMBL and ESO, 100% (up to secondary education) or 70% (post-secondary education) at
EPO. At the EC, the education allowance is simply defined as a monthly lump-sum payment.

H. Conclusion

3.60. In the dual career support measures, while it is understandable that CERN does not include
an individual who is in co-habitation with a staff member as a beneficiary of dual career support, the
Organisation should consider that in some comparators (EMBL, ITER and UNOG) this support is
extended to these individuals. An improvement of CERN’s position could come from allowing
spouses/partners to benefit from specific training and/or career counselling, in addition to their access
to the dual career network.
3.61. While CERN’s maternity leave of 16 weeks is on par with EMBL, ITER, OPCW, and UNOG, these
Organisations offer less favourable conditions than ESA and ESO (18 weeks), and EC and EPO
(20 weeks) – even though this is partly compensated at CERN with the additional four weeks’ breast-
feeding leave.
3.62. The same conclusion can be reached in respect of paternity and co-parent leave. Although
CERN improved in comparison to 2015 and is now aligned with the majority of the comparators, it
should be noted that two comparators grant more than 10 days of paternity leave: 12 days at ITER, 20
days at OPCW and UNOG. A noteworthy example is that of EPO, which implemented an incentive
consisting in an increase of the parental leave remuneration if such leave is taken while the mother is
on maternity leave.
3.63. While CERN maintains the payment of a certain number of benefits (family allowances and
health insurance in full) during parental leave, it nevertheless lags behind most of the comparators in
this respect. As opposed to the 2015 study, this type of leave now gives rise to a form of remuneration
in most of the comparators. For non-remunerated leave other than parental leave, CERN’s approach
is among the least favourable, as none of the social conditions are maintained by default, and not all
of them may be maintained at the request of the staff member concerned.
3.64. However, CERN ranks amongst the best comparators with regard to childcare facilities,
offering a broad range of facilities, subsidised by the employer and available for children within a wide
age range. Although the benchmark shows that this has become rather common in international
organisations, the presence of infant changing facilities and a dedicated space for infant feeding is
noted.
3.65. CERN also ranks favourably in respect of the coverage of education fees, from the perspective
of both the conditions of entitlement and the level of the benefits.

29
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

4. SUPPORT STRUCTURES FOR WORK/LIFE INTEGRATION

4.1. This section of the study explores the measures that were implemented in the comparators
with regards to flexible work time arrangements (teleworking and flexitime), support structures for
persons with disabilities and, overall, additional measures aiming at supporting work/life integration.

A. Teleworking

4.2. With the exception of EMBL and OPCW, all the comparators have implemented a teleworking
policy governed by the Staff Regulations. Telework for EMBL and OPCW staff is addressed on an ad
hoc basis.
4.3. By default, staff members who telework should work from the registered location of their
residence, but CERN, ESO, and ITER have a flexible approach in this regard, allowing telework from
other places – to the extent that the telework is compatible with the needs of the service concerned
and with the interests of the Organisation. ESA and the EPO also allow teleworking from places other
than the staff member’s usual residence, but with a more restrictive approach: no more than one day
per week at ESA, and subject to management approval at the EPO. At UNOG, such derogatory
teleworking arrangements may also be granted, but only in cases where there are compelling personal
circumstances.
4.4. Teleworking time varies across the comparators. CERN and ESO have implemented the
shortest time allowance, with one day per week being the standard allowance – though there may be
ad hoc derogations to this. At EMBL, in the absence of an express policy, one day per week is
considered in practice to be the maximum teleworking duration. The EC allows up to 2.5 days of
working remotely per week, ESA allows two to four days, ITER and UNOG allow up to three days, and
there is no limitation at EPO.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

CERN

EC

EMBL

EPO

ESA

ESO

ITER

UNOG

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Graph 17 – Number of teleworking days allowed per week

4.5. In principle, staff members of CERN, EC, ESO, ITER, and UNOG who are teleworking cannot
benefit from a loan of equipment in addition to their laptop – even though there can be exceptions
at CERN and ITER, in case of specific needs, such as larger screens. Subject to management approval,
officials who telework at ESA may receive a screen and a work phone; they may also be entitled to the
reimbursement of office furniture up to EUR 600. EPO staff members who telework can request the

30
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

provision of equipment in addition to their office equipment (for example large screen, keyboard,
mouse, webcam, and headset) and delivery of office furniture to their home address (desk and chair).
It should be noted that, in the context of the COVID-19 crisis, certain comparators have modified their
standard practice; it could be useful for CERN to consider the measures implemented by other
Organisations in this context.

B. Flexitime

4.6. CERN is the only Organisation that does not have a flexitime policy while flexitime is the
default regime for all staff at the EC. For the other comparators, flexitime policies may only be
applicable to certain categories of staff, depending on service requirements – for example, the ESA
highest-ranking officials are not entitled to flexible working hours, and at OPCW security and certain
operational officials cannot request flexible working hours. The EMBL and ITER flexitime policy allows
the implementation of flexible working arrangements on a case by case basis. They are therefore not
reflected in graph 13 below which illustrates the general rules.
4.7. The typical work week is 40 hours for all of the comparators (with the exception of EMBL,
where it is 39 hours), from Monday to Friday. CERN, the EPO, ESA, ESO, and OPCW have a core hours
system, under which presence is mandatory for all staff, while there is more flexibility with regards to
the other hours. However, in the absence of a flexitime policy, CERN allows a certain flexibility to staff
members with regards to the starting and/or end time(s) of their working day, allowing them to
stagger their working hours by up to one hour. At the EPO and ITER, there is an express policy further
to which staff members are not allowed to reduce their daily working time below a certain number of
hours (five at ITER, six at EPO); in addition, EPO officials cannot exceed a daily 10 hours of work.
4.8. In addition to its flexible work schedule, the EC allows work done outside the bandwidth (7:00-
20:30) to be considered as working time, unless there is an objection from the line manager; under
specific circumstances, work done outside the workplace and outside the bandwidth may also be
considered as working time.
4.9. Certain Organisations also allow staff members to benefit from a “compressed work
schedule”; at UNOG, staff members may request to benefit from the “ten working days in nine” or
“five working days in four and a half” programmes, allowing the reallocation of working hours so that
the staff members concerned may take respectively a day or half day off over the period.
4.10. The standard working day is analogous from one Organisation to the other, but core presence
at EC, ESA, and ESO ends earlier on the last working day of the week (and also on Wednesdays at the
EC).

31
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00

CERN

EC

EMBL

EPO

ESA

ESO

ITER

OPCW

UNOG

07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00

Fl exi bl e hours Core hours

Graph 18 – Working hours

C. Support structures for persons with disabilities

4.11. Although CERN does not have a program applicable to staff members, the Organisation
implemented a "Short-term Internship for STEM students with disabilities", which consists of the
publication of one or two posts per year, with applications reserved for students with disabilities. The
students concerned benefit from a subsistence allowance and the CERN health insurance coverage.
There are no such programmes in force in the other Organisations, whether they are targeted towards
staff members or other employees, but the EPO recently launched an inclusion policy for people with
a disability, aiming at reinforcing the Organisation’s ability to hire and retain officials regardless of any
disability that they may have. ESA is in the process of designing a policy directed towards staff
members with disabilities.
4.12. Both CERN and the EPO have a dedicated budget for the above-mentioned programmes.
4.13. As mentioned in Part 2 of this report, in 2014 the United Nations implemented a policy for the
“Employment and accessibility for staff members with disabilities in the United Nations Secretariat”.
This policy is built around the four following axes:
i. employment: creation of a non-discriminatory and inclusive workplace, notably by making
“reasonable accommodation” to the working arrangements of the persons concerned,
ii. accessibility: adaptation of premises to ensure that they are physically accessible and usable
by persons with disabilities, and assessment of accessibility to documentation and
information,
iii. awareness-raising: periodic dissemination of information to staff;

32
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

iv. monitoring, co-ordination and consultation, notably including the consultation of staff
members with disabilities and the appointment of a focal point in Human Resources.
4.14. Other comparators do not have any policy or program for the recruitment and/or the inclusion
of people with disabilities.

D. Other measures in support of work/life integration

4.15. Silent rooms are present at the EC, EMBL, certain ESA duty stations, OPCW, and UNOG.
4.16. There are onsite sport facilities in all Organisations, with the exception of ESO. There is a
dedicated time allowance for fitness during working hours at the EC, EMBL, OPCW, and UNOG.
However, ESO has a recreational room and “back fit” trainings are organised twice a week during lunch
hours at a neighbouring institute. There are Ergonomics sessions provided by the occupational
practitioner of ESO; and the Organisation has a special discount at a gym on campus.
4.17. Language training classes are offered onsite in all Organisations, and are partially subsidised
by the employer at CERN, EC, EMBL, EPO, and ESO. In addition, in certain establishments, ESA offers
staff members dedicated sessions on "life in the host country". The EC offers a wide range of on-site
and virtual language courses, and learning materials on culture, with respect to the 24 official
languages and 4 non-EU languages (Arabic, Chinese, Russian, and Turkish).
4.18. Career counselling services for early professionals are provided at EC, EMBL, OPCW, and
UNOG; CERN and ESA officials may turn to Human Resources Advisors to be provided with career
advice and/or coaching, but this would not be their primary role. At UNOG, staff members wishing to
attend external courses relevant to their professional development may request breaks of up to six
hours per week.
4.19. All Organisations have implemented anti-harassment complaint and support structures.
4.20. The EPO indicated that the variety of types of leave proposed to staff members, combined
with the flexible teleworking arrangements, foster work/life balance. Furthermore, the Organisation
offers a variety of classes during lunch hours and after core working hours.
4.21. ITER Groups are created and managed by staff for various topics/activities. Some of these
groups may benefit from facilities/funds provided by the ITER Organization upon request and
approved by the Director-General,

E. Conclusion

4.22. This part of the report focuses on working arrangements, with regard to flexible measures
towards working time (“flexitime”) and workplace (telework).
4.23. CERN provides conditions that are less favourable than those in force in the majority of
comparators. With regard to telework, the teleworking policy is significantly less favourable than the
standard practice from most international organisations. In particular, the maximum time allowance
for teleworking at CERN is amongst the lowest of the comparators, which contrasts with certain
Organisations such as the EPO, where certain staff members are entitled to telework full-time and
may, in addition, benefit from the provision of office furniture delivered at home. Policies such as that
in force at the EPO may be seen as incentives for staff members to request teleworking, which can
arguably have a positive impact on finding the right balance between professional and private life.
4.24. The CERN policy on working hours also appears to be less favourable than that in force in
several other Organisations, in which staff members benefit from significantly more flexibility in the
Organisation of their work time – which naturally has a positive impact on work/life integration.
4.25. For flexitime, it would be recommended for CERN to focus on the development and
implementation of official policies, to be integrated into the Organisation’s Staff Regulations. The use

33
SIRP(2020)73/REV2

that is concretely made of such policies within each Organisation is naturally conditional upon the
activities of the Organisation’s staff members; however, the specificities of an Organisation’s core
activity could not, in itself, rationally justify the absence of a flexible approach in other areas of
operation.
4.26. The UNOG “reasonable accommodation” programme could serve as a source of inspiration
for the development of policies at CERN, in addition to those already implemented for certain
categories of students and interns. In fact, as mentioned in the conclusions of Part 2 of this report,
measures cannot be limited to recruitment programmes designed specifically for the appointment of
persons with disabilities; there should also be measures for raising-awareness among staff, and
adaptations made to the facilities, so as to concretely enhance the inclusiveness of the workplace.
4.27. All comparators appear to have measures targeted at allowing staff members to better adapt
to their working environment, or to their new country of residence, notably through the provision of
language classes. Well-being is also reinforced by the Organisations’ official support towards social
and/or sportive activities organised by groups managed by staff members. In these fields, CERN is
doing well in comparison with the comparators. However, an improvement could be made at CERN
with the creation of a silent room – which may also constitute an opportunity for the Organisation to
reinitiate a reflection in respect of spirituality in the workplace, which is another aspect strongly linked
to diversity and inclusion.

34
 SIRP(2020)73/REV2

F. Summary table

CERN EC EMBL EPO ESA ESO ITER OPCW UNOG

Teleworking
2.5 1 1 (ad hoc) 5 2 to 4 1 3 n/a 3
days per week

Possibility to telework
n/a Yes n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes n/a No
from abroad
Working time
arrangements
Loan of equipment in
No No n/a Yes Yes No No n/a No
case of teleworking

Yes (ad Yes (ad

Flexible working hours Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No
hoc) hoc)

Support structure for persons with

Yes No No Yes No No No No Yes
disabilities

Silent room Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes

Sport facilities Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Other work/life
Language training Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
balance
measures
Career counselling Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes

Anti-harassment
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
measures

35