Abolition of post (379, 380, 381, 382, 649, 383,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Abolition of post
Total judgments found: 167
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 3163
114th Session, 2013
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision not to renew her contract following the abolition of her post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 3159
114th Session, 2013
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision to abolish his post.
Considerations 9, 19 and 20
Extract:
"The terms of Staff Rule 1050.2 are clear. They impose a duty on the Organization in specified circumstances. The duty is to use reasonable efforts to reassign a staff member whose post is being abolished. The specified circumstances are, as to a staff member on a fixed-term appointment, that the staff member has served “for a continuous and uninterrupted period of five years or more”. The expression “continuous and uninterrupted” fairly emphatically focuses attention on service of a particular character. There is no basis in the language of the Staff Rule to treat its operation as ambulatory in the sense that a person who has been on a fixed-term appointment but has not served in that capacity for a continuous and uninterrupted period of at least five years is nonetheless a person to whom the Organization, by operation of the Rule, is under a duty to make reasonable efforts to reassign. [...] However, a staff rule cast in terms of Staff Rule 1050.2 does not preclude the possibility that the Organization is under a duty requiring proactive conduct in circumstances not comprehended by the Rule itself. WHO does not put in issue that there is a general duty of loyalty, as the complainant contends. What might be required of an organisation in broadly similar circumstances was considered by the Tribunal in Judgment 2902. [...] The same reasoning can be applied in the present case. The complainant and WHO found it mutually acceptable, and with benefits accruing to both, for the complainant to be employed on a series of short-term appointments for much of the complainant’s employment. But the complainant nonetheless had worked, in a real and practical sense, for over a decade and a half in the service of the Organization. In those circumstances, WHO was obliged to explore with the complainant other employment options prior to his separation."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Staff Rule 1050.2
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902
Keywords:
abolition of post; contract; duration of appointment; enforcement; fixed-term; general principle; intention of parties; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reassignment; short-term; staff regulations and rules; successive contracts;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed;
Judgment 3127
113th Session, 2012
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reorganisation;
Judgment 3041
111th Session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
Abolition of post and termination of appointment following reorganisation / Failure on the part of the Organization to take a final decision on the complainant's appeal / Excessive delay in communicating to the complainant the outcome of the internal appeal procedure.
"The decision to abolish a post must be communicated to the staff person occupying the post in a manner that safeguards that individual's rights. These rights are safeguarded by giving proper notice of the decision, reasons for the decision and an opportunity to contest the decision. As well, subsequent to the decision there must be proper institutional support mechanisms in place to assist the staff member concerned in finding a new assignment."
Keywords:
abolition of post; complainant; decision; duty of care; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; reassignment; right; right of appeal; safeguard; staff member's interest;
Judgment 3010
111th Session, 2011
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
The complainant seeks orders annulling the abolition of her post and reinstatement. These orders must be refused. Although the decision to terminate the complainant’s contract must be set aside, there is no reason to set aside the decision to abolish her post and, that being so, reinstatement is not possible. However, the complainant is entitled to the salary and other benefits that she would have received on the basis that her contract was renewed until 28 February 2010, that being the date on which it would otherwise have expired, together with interest from due dates until the date of payment, less the amount of the payments made in lieu of notice and by way of termination indemnity. The complainant must give credit for any net earnings between 1 March 2009 and 28 February 2010.
Keywords:
abolition of post; reinstatement;
Judgment 2972
110th Session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[A]n international organisation 'necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts,[...] and the redeployment of staff' (see Judgment 2510, under 10). The notion of redeployment is apt to include not only assignment to different posts, but also the assignment of new or different shift work patterns."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; assignment; other; post; reorganisation; working conditions; working hours;
Judgment 2933
109th Session, 2010
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
According to firm precedent, decisions concerning the restructuring of an international organisation’s services, such as a decision to abolish a post, may be taken at the discretion of its executive head and are consequently subject to only limited review. For this reason, while it is incumbent upon the Tribunal to ascertain whether such a decision has been taken in accordance with the rules on competence, form or procedure, whether it rests on a mistake of fact or of law, or whether it constituted abuse of authority, it may not rule on its appropriateness, since it may not supplant an organisation’s view with its own (see, for example, Judgments 1131, under 5, or 2510, under 10).
Nevertheless, there must be objective grounds for any decision to abolish a post (see Judgments 1231, under 26, or 1729, under 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131, 1231, 1729, 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; discretion; limits;
Judgment 2902
108th Session, 2010
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"The Tribunal finds that by any standards a delay of nearly 19 months to complete the internal appeal process is unreasonable."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; project personnel; reasonable time; reorganisation; time limit;
Considerations 6, 8 and 10
Extract:
The complainant impugns the decision not to renew his appointment following a restructuring which entailed the abolition of his post.
"[T]he question remains as to whether restructuring was the real reason for the decision not to renew the complainant's appointment. [...]
Although the record supports the Organization's assertion that a restructuring has occurred, it does not reflect that a decision to restructure and a decision regarding the abolition of specific posts had been taken [before] the complainant was informed that a recommendation to restructure had been approved and that new staffing requirements meant that his post and others would be abolished. [...]
[T]he decision not to renew the complainant's appointment must be set aside."
Keywords:
abolition of post; evidence; non-renewal of contract; project personnel; reorganisation;
Consideration 11
Extract:
"[T]he complainant contends that UNIDO's failure to conduct a performance appraisal before deciding not to renew his appointment constitutes a breach of procedure and a breach of his terms of employment as his letters of appointment stated that he would be evaluated on a yearly basis. [...] The defendant argues that since the non-renewal of the appointment was not based on performance, it is irrelevant whether a performance appraisal was or was not conducted. The Tribunal rejects this argument. UNIDO had a contractual obligation to conduct yearly performance appraisals. International organisations routinely require applicants for positions to provide at least their most recent performance appraisal from a prior employer. UNIDO's failure to provide the complainant with an appraisal has deprived him of the use of a critical tool in his search for future employment."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; non-renewal of contract; performance report; project personnel; reorganisation; status of complainant;
Consideration 10
Extract:
"[T]he decision not to renew the complainant's appointment must be set aside. However, the evidence does indicate that restructuring was being contemplated and has in fact occurred. In these circumstances, reinstatement is not an appropriate remedy. Rather, the complainant is entitled to be paid the salary and other allowances he would have received had his appointment been renewed for six months, together with interest [...]."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; project personnel; reinstatement; reorganisation;
Considerations 12 and 14
Extract:
"The complainant argues that the Organization breached its duty of care in failing to accommodate him in another post or in a manner less drastic than the non-renewal of his appointment. [...]
The Organization had no obligation under the 200 Series of the Staff Rules to find an alternative post for the complainant. However, it had a duty to explore with him possible options prior to his separation. The failure to do so was an affront to his dignity and showed a lack of respect for him as a highly regarded long-serving staff member."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; project personnel; reassignment; reorganisation; respect for dignity; seniority; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
Judgment 2885
108th Session, 2010
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"[I]t is convenient to note that there is a "misuse of authority where an administration acts for reasons that are extraneous to the organisation's best interests and seeks some objective other than those which the authority vested in it is intended to serve" (see Judgment 1129, under 8). It may be accepted that it is a misuse of authority if a post is abolished in order to circumvent the relevant procedures applicable in the case of unsatisfactory performance. Even so, "misuse of authority may not be presumed and the burden of proof is on the party that pleads it" (see Judgment 2116, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1129, 2116
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; grounds; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; reassignment; reorganisation;
Judgment 2867
108th Session, 2010
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"Although the Joint Appeals Board recommended that the complainant be reinstated in a post in the Global Mechanism, there is no evidence that her contract would have been renewed for the 2008- 2009 biennium. Accordingly, reinstatement will not be ordered. However, as the abolition of her post was the only reason advanced for the non-renewal of the complainant's contract and there is nothing to suggest that her contract would not otherwise have been extended for two years, she is entitled to material damages in the amount of salary and other benefits she would have received had her contract been renewed for a further two years, together with interest [...]."
Keywords:
abolition of post; extension of contract; legitimate expectation; material damages; non-renewal of contract; reinstatement; staff reduction;
Judgment 2856
107th Session, 2009
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 11 and 13
Extract:
"At the outset, the complainant's grievance was in relation to his appointment, as a result of restructuring, to [a] position [...] at grade P.3. Although the complainant has advanced a number of arguments in support of his complaint, at this juncture, he holds a post at grade P.4 and throughout the material time he has retained his personal P.4 grade. [T]he central issue is whether there is merit to the complainant's contention that he should have been placed in a «genuine P.4 position»."
"The fundamental flaw in the complainant's position is that he has not adduced any evidence that he had the specific knowledge and skills required to function in a «genuine P.4 position» within the Organization¿s new Oracle-based system. [...] As well, not only has he not adduced any evidence to show that he has the requisite knowledge and skills to work in an Oracle-based system, the evidence shows that he had difficulty performing a number of tasks attributed to his new position."
Keywords:
abolition of post; evidence; lack of evidence; qualifications; reassignment; reorganisation; status of complainant;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"[I]t is useful to recall, as stated in Judgment 2510, under 10, that «an international organisation necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts and the redeployment of staff (see Judgments 269 and 1614)»."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1614, 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; discretion; reassignment; reorganisation;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"As the Tribunal pointed out in Judgment 1131, under 5, «[i]t may not supplant an organisation's view with its own on such matters as a restructuring of posts or redeployment of staff intended to make savings or improve efficiencies». Decisions on them are discretionary and the Tribunal's power of review in this respect is limited."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131
Keywords:
abolition of post; creation of post; discretion; judicial review; limits; reassignment; reorganisation;
Judgment 2802
106th Session, 2009
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"Restructuring is, itself, an objective and valid ground for the abolition of a post, provided that it is a genuine restructuring and is not motivated by extraneous considerations such as bias or ill will towards the incumbent of the post."
Keywords:
abolition of post; bias; decision; grounds; post; reorganisation;
Judgment 2800
106th Session, 2009
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
"While international organisations have a broad discretion in relation to the abolition of posts, the decision to abolish a post will be reviewable where it can be established that the decision was taken in bad faith."
Keywords:
abolition of post; bad faith; decision; discretion; limits;
Judgment 2742
105th Session, 2008
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 34
Extract:
"It was said in Judgment 2510 that 'an international organisation necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts and the redeployment of staff'. The word 'necessarily' in that statement indicates that that power will be implied even if it is not expressly conferred by the relevant regulations. However, that power cannot be implied if it is contrary to the regulations."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; breach; creation of post; discretion; interpretation; organisation; reorganisation; written rule;
Consideration 41
Extract:
The complainant contests the decision to reassign her to the post of Chief of the Internal Audit Service (IAS) and asks to be reinstated in her former post. "Although the decision to reassign the complainant to the post of Chief of IAS was taken without authority, it does not follow that she should be reinstated in her former post. That post was lawfully abolished [...]. However, she is entitled to substantial damages notwithstanding that her reassignment was to a post at the same grade."
Keywords:
abolition of post; consequence; decision; grade; material damages; post; procedural flaw; reassignment; reinstatement; request by a party;
Judgment 2510
100th Session, 2006
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"An international organisation necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts and the redeployment of staff (see Judgments 269 and 1614). As was pointed out in Judgment 1131, the Tribunal may not supplant an organisation's view with respect to these matters, and decisions on them are discretionary and subject to limited review."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 269, 1131, 1614
Keywords:
abolition of post; creation of post; decision; discretion; judicial review; limits; post; reassignment; reorganisation;
Judgment 2354
97th Session, 2004
World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant's post as a translator was abolished and his appointment was terminated. "According to the [applicable] provisions, the Secretary General was obliged to consult the Staff Committee before terminating [an] appointment. The Tribunal considers that this obligation to consult - which must not be seen as just an unnecessary formality, even though the Secretary General is not bound by the opinion of the advisory body - is not fulfilled unless the advisory body is in such a position that it can give an opinion independently and in full knowledge of the facts, which implies that it must be provided with all the information it needs, and especially the real reasons for the proposed measure, so that it can express an objective opinion. [...] While it emerges from the submissions that the general reasons for reducing the number of translators had been brought to the attention of the Staff Committee, it has not been established that the latter had been given the specific reasons for suppressing the complainant's post, rather than that of another official of the same grade and in the same Directorate, prior to delivering its opinion. [...] In the Tribunal's view, this lack of precise information concerning the specific reason for the decision to suppress the complainant's post in particular and to terminate his appointment invalidated the consultation provided for in [the applicable provisions], which is tantamount to saying that no consultation took place."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Staff Regulation 12(a), Staff Rule 12.1(a) and Staff Circular No. 142
Keywords:
abolition of post; advisory body; advisory opinion; binding character; condition; consequence; decision; due process; duty to inform; executive head; flaw; grade; grounds; independence; lack of evidence; official; organisation's duties; post held by the complainant; provision; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;
Judgment 2352
97th Session, 2004
World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4-5
Extract:
The complainant's post was abolished and his appointment terminated. "It is clear from the [applicable] provisions that [...] the Staff Committee had to be consulted before the decision was taken to terminate the complainant's appointment. The purpose of consulting an advisory body, prior to terminating an official's appointment, is to allow that body to ensure that all the conditions for taking such a step are met, with a view to submitting a recommendation to the executive head. The Tribunal takes the view that it is established, by the evidence [...], that the Staff Committee was indeed consulted regarding the suppression of the [complainant's] post [...]. However, it considers that the Committee was not formally consulted with regard to the intention to terminate the complainant's appointment. [...] As the impugned decision was taken in breach of the applicable rules, it must be held unlawful and the Tribunal need not rule on the complainant's other pleas."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Staff Regulation 12(a), Staff Rule 12.1(a) and Staff Circular No. 142
Keywords:
abolition of post; advisory body; advisory opinion; breach; condition; consequence; decision; due process; executive head; flaw; formal requirements; organisation's duties; post held by the complainant; provision; purpose; recommendation; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;
Judgment 2314
96th Session, 2004
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 23
Extract:
The post in respect of which the complainant was receiving a special post allowance was transferred but he has continued to perform the duties of the post. The Director-General has taken the view that transfer was equivalent to the abolition of the post and the allowance was terminated. "The principle of equal pay for work of equal value requires that, until a proper evaluation of the work performed by the complainant is carried out, he should be remunerated at a rate equivalent to that which he would have received by way of special post allowance for so long as he continues to perform all of the duties and responsibilities of the abolished post."
Keywords:
abolition of post; equal treatment; executive head; general principle; organisation's duties; payment; post; refusal; salary; special post allowance; transfer; work appraisal;
Consideration 21
Extract:
The post in respect of which the complainant was receiving a special post allowance was transferred but he has continued to perform the duties of the post. The Director-General has taken the view that transfer was equivalent to the abolition of the post and the allowance was terminated. The relevant Manual provision "does prohibit payment of a special post allowance when a post has been abolished. However, it does not and cannot relieve an employer of its duty to ensure proper remuneration for extra duties and responsibilities discharged by an employee over and above those of the substantive post which he or she holds."
Keywords:
abolition of post; executive head; official; organisation; organisation's duties; payment; post held by the complainant; provision; refusal; salary; special post allowance; staff regulations and rules; transfer;
Judgment 2294
96th Session, 2004
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
Case of an official who served the Organization for 16 years and always gave satisfaction, whose post was abolished. The Organization states "that although the complainant was entitled to apply for posts which fell vacant after his appointment had been terminated, he did not do so. [T]he Tribunal considers that it was up to [the Organization] to make proposals to the complainant and to give some preference to his application."
Keywords:
abolition of post; appointment; candidate; official; organisation's duties; post; post held by the complainant; priority; reassignment; right; seniority; separation from service; vacancy;
Judgment 2156
93rd Session, 2002
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Admittedly, precedent has it that international organisations can undertake restructuring where it is necessary to achieve greater effectiveness, or indeed to make savings, and can therefore regroup certain functions and make staff reductions. But any job abolitions arising out of such a policy must be justified by real needs, and not be immediately followed by the creation of equivalent posts."
Keywords:
abolition of post; case law; cause; creation of post; post; staff reduction; termination of employment;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
