Currently, French parliamentarians are debating the "Career Choice" bill, the goal of which is to build bridges between the public and private sectors. What are other countries doing to regulate the so-called "revolving door phenomenon", which is supposed to "contribute to the vitality of the job market and the development of qualifications and skills?"

Fifteen years after the recommendation of the OECD Council on guidelines for managing conflict of interest in the public service, the subject remains one of the organisation's top priorities. The governments of its member states are overhauling their systems to cope with new challenges in terms of public integrity which, according to a study conducted in 2017, is still of major concern for citizens.

Should all countries adopt the existing waiting period before civil servants can join the private sector, or even extend it? Should this apply equally to all public officials? What sort of control procedures and penalties should be put in place?

While almost all countries oblige civil servants to inform their administration of a move to the private sector and the activities that they will undertake there (or recommend them do so), only two-thirds of them impose waiting and/or "cooling-off" periods (from less than a year in Austria to five years in Germany).

In Spain, this measure concerns only senior officials, whereas in the US and the UK it is assessed according to seniority and/or the nature of the person's duties.

Some countries compensate civil staff. This is the case in Finland, where a civil servant's salary is paid for one year.

Only a few countries, on the other hand, make decisions authorising a departure to the private sector public. The UK and, more recently, Spain published personal data on favourable opinions online.

According to the OECD, there is room for improvement in how governments provide actual – and above all effective – monitoring of compliance with rules for preventing conflicts of interest. It is often left to the initiative of the department in which the staff member has worked, which generally has relatively few resources.

In addition to the financial penalties imposed on offenders (as in Poland very recently), some countries have chosen other courses of action. In Germany, a staff member involved in disciplinary proceedings automatically loses his or her pension rights as an official (these are transferred to the general scheme) and in Italy, the staff member is banned for life from being entered in a professional or commercial register.

Innovative measures include guidelines for public officials in Norway that require that a conflict of interest clause be included in the employment contract, with contractual damages in the event of breaches of ethical obligations. According to the OECD, this initiative makes all three stakeholders accountable and contributes to securing public-to-private career paths.

Fore more information: oecd.org