Judgment No. 880
Decision
1. THE PRESIDENT'S DECISION OF 27 MAY 1987 AND THE RELEVANT PART OF THE COMPLAINANT'S PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR 1982-83 ARE QUASHED INSOFAR AS THE GENERAL RATING IS "A 3, ALBEIT INCLINING TO 2", THE CASE BEING SENT BACK FOR A NEW DECISION ON THAT RATING IN KEEPING WITH THE RULES ON REPORTING.
2. THE EPO SHALL PAY THE COMPLAINANT 2,000 DEUTSCHMARKS IN COSTS.
3. HIS OTHER CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED.
Consideration 4
Extract:
"As the Tribunal has often said, performance reports serve no purpose unless the supervisor has full freedom in commenting on performance. [...] The Tribunal will review the decision only where there has been blatant abuse of authority or breach of a formal or procedural rule".
Keywords
work appraisal; performance report; judicial review; discretion
Consideration 6
Extract:
"The general rating is a synthesis of the marks in the staff member's report and of several imponderables that also count in giving a fair opinion of his services to the organisation."
Keywords
work appraisal; performance report; discretion; elements
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant objected to being given a general rating couched in the form "3, albeit inclining to 2". The Tribunal considers that: "reporting officers may not, to suit themselves, make up vague in-between ratings of their own but must put against each head of assessment one of the marks on the scale. If they do want to qualify it the proper way is to add comments."
Keywords
work appraisal; rating
| 
