1. Social Dialogue Test Phase SDWG meetings
Stress at Work
SDWG 1: Workshops on interesting examples of preventing stress in national administrations. To be included in the Stress at Work Compilation report
Improving Trust in Central Government Administrations
Plenary discussions to identify a common issues for future social dialogue
Sustaining an Efficient Administration
Workshops on: Competencies and talent management, Improving leadership skills, Diversity and equality in the workforce
Themes for the meetings based on the joint work program from the Portuguese presidency and agreed with TUNED in April.
Aim of the meetings to create an open atmosphere of work and a real dialogue. To achieve this we are working with workshops and new methods:
in the November meeting professional moderators to animate discussions on more than usual controversial topics.
For the follow up on TRUST in the last meeting we used the Metaplan method, new for this forum. Based on the evaluations we had good response for those meetings. (90-100% stated that they were satisfied or very satisfied with the meeting procedure and follow ups)

2. Social Dialogue Test Phase Final Evaluation
Final Evaluation by Ramböll Management
Portuguese Presidency Resolution outlined rules and indicators, independent evaluators, overseen by steering group, all stakeholders to be consulted by interviews or questionnaires, interviews to be validated
No immediate link between evaluation findings and EUPAN decision on the future of social dialogue
State of Play
Preliminary findings presented at the EUPAN pre-meeting and 16 September
Draft report will be presented at the SDWG 16 November
Findings of the evaluation will be handled by the SD Task Force
It can be important to remind ourselves of these rules for the evaluation as we approach a stage where controversial issues may be found. Neither Presidency or Steering group can influence the results of the evaluations
Some finding were seen as controversial and the discussion at the pre meeting in large reflected polarized views on social dialogue between eupan and tuned
Issues that were discussed were particularly Consultation with the Commission, and the issue of the added value of a sectoral dialogue or in what extent the state is too diversified to be seen as a SD sector.
Task Force to us is the most appropriate forum to discuss the SD evaluation and recommendations, TUNED is also requesting a forum to discuss the evaluation

3. Social Dialogue Test Phase Task Force
The end... and the future
Test Phase concludes in December :rd DG meeting will decide whether or not the more formal patterns of work should be continued.
Task Force on the future of Social Dialogue
Handle the findings of the SD Evaluations
Consult with the European Commission
Cooperate with TUNED
Provide rational grounds for the decision
Formulate DG decision and joint resolution
To prepare Director Generals’ decision on the future of the Social Dialogue
Invitation by letter to all DG’s In July
15 MS (+ EC) participating
+ 2 countries following the work by distance
1st meeting 9 September, next meeting 7 October in Brussels
4 meetings foreseen

4. Social Dialogue Test Phase Issues to be discussed
Decision making process and involvement of DG’s
Ministers?
Continuity
What will be handed over to coming Presidencies?
Implementation of the DG meeting’s decision
Work Program?
Possible compromise?
First of all we would like to get your input on the anchoring process. Any views on how we should handle short time span and need to involve both working group level and DG level? Also, depending on the decision, some DG’s may not have sufficient mandate to handle the process, might be necessary with a Ministerial anchoring process, possibly a meeting.
Secondly we would like to discuss the continuity of this process. How do the upcoming presidencies see their role in this process? Preparedness to take on a big and possibly contentious issue.
If there will be a continued process of any kind, a joint structure with TUNED is necessary.
Very likely that if the process continues the first task will be to establish a new joint work program. (both in a continued informal setting, but also in a formalized framework)
We are also curious to get your very spontaneous and early views on how you look at the possibilities of finding a workable compromise for this issue.