Judgment No. 4595
Decision
1. The impugned decision is set aside to the extent stated in consideration 6 of this judgment.
2. The FAO shall pay the complainant 25,000 United States dollars in moral damages.
3. The FAO shall pay the complainant 1,000 United States dollars in costs.
4. All other claims are dismissed.
Summary
The complainant challenges the decision to transfer him to another duty station.
Judgment keywords
Keywords
complaint allowed; transfer
Consideration 2
Extract:
Consistent precedent has it that an executive head of an international organization has wide discretionary powers to manage the affairs of the organization pursuant to the policy directives and its rules, and that such decisions are consequently subject to only limited review. The Tribunal will ascertain whether a transfer decision is taken in accordance with the relevant rules on competence, form or procedure; whether it rests upon a mistake of fact or law, or whether it amounts to abuse of authority. The Tribunal will not rule on the appropriateness of the decision as it will not substitute the organization’s view with its own (see, for example, Judgment 4427, under 2). An international organization must carefully take into account the interests and dignity of staff members when effecting a transfer to which the staff member concerned is opposed (see, for example, Judgment 4427, under 11). It is incumbent upon an international organization to prove that a procedure which it has put in place has been duly followed, particularly if the implementation thereof is disputed (see, for example, Judgment 3601, under 20). […]
The Tribunal has also stated that every international organization is bound by a duty of care to treat its staff members with dignity and avoid causing them undue and unnecessary injury (see, for example, Judgment 4253, under 3). While the head of an international organization must take into account the organization’s interests as well as the staff member’s abilities and interests in the exercise of the discretion to transfer a staff member, in cases where the two are at odds, greater weight may be accorded by the decision maker to the interests of the organization (see Judgment 2635, under 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2635, 3601, 4253, 4427
Keywords
transfer; discretion
Consideration 7
Extract:
The Appeals Committee correctly concluded that having resigned of his own free will and no longer being in his post, the complainant had deprived himself of the right to be reinstated.
Keywords
reinstatement; resignation
|
