Organisation's duties (202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 645,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Organisation's duties
Total judgments found: 658
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >
Judgment 4884
138th Session, 2024
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: La requérante conteste la décision de classer sa plainte pour harcèlement à l’issue d’une enquête.
Consideration 5
Extract:
Le Tribunal rappelle sa jurisprudence constante selon laquelle la question de savoir si l’on se trouve en présence d’un cas de harcèlement se résout à la lumière d’un examen rigoureux de toutes les circonstances objectives ayant entouré les actes dénoncés (voir, notamment, le jugement 4471, au considérant 18) et l’accusation de harcèlement doit être corroborée par des faits précis dont la preuve incombe à celui qui affirme en avoir été victime, étant entendu qu’il n’a pas à démontrer que la personne accusée aurait agi intentionnellement (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4344, au considérant 3, 3871, au considérant 12, et 3692, au considérant 18). Lorsqu’une procédure spécifique est prévue par l’organisation concernée, celle-ci doit être suivie et les règles doivent être correctement appliquées. Le Tribunal a également considéré que l’enquête doit être objective, rigoureuse et approfondie, en ce sens qu’elle doit être menée d’une manière permettant de s’enquérir de tous les faits pertinents sans pour autant compromettre la réputation du membre du personnel mis en cause et en donnant à ce dernier la possibilité de vérifier les preuves avancées à son encontre et de répondre aux accusations formulées (voir, notamment, les jugements 4663, aux considérants 10 à 13, 4253, au considérant 3, 3314, au considérant 14, et 2771, au considérant 15). Pour établir qu’il y a eu harcèlement, la preuve des faits allégués ne doit cependant pas être établie au-delà de tout doute raisonnable, contrairement à ce qui est exigé lorsqu’est entamée une procédure disciplinaire à l’encontre de l’auteur des faits de harcèlement (voir, en ce sens, les jugements 4663, au considérant 12, et 4289, au considérant 10). L’élément essentiel dans la reconnaissance d’un harcèlement est la perception que la personne concernée peut raisonnablement et objectivement avoir d’actes ou de propos qui sont propres à la dévaloriser ou à l’humilier (voir les jugements 4663, au considérant 13, et 4541, au considérant 8).
Quant à la portée du contrôle qu’il peut exercer au sujet d’une décision de rejet d’une plainte pour harcèlement, le Tribunal rappelle qu’il ne lui appartient pas de réévaluer les preuves dont dispose l’organe chargé d’enquêter, qui, en sa qualité de première instance d’examen des faits, a eu l’avantage de rencontrer et d’entendre directement la plupart des personnes concernées et d’évaluer la fiabilité de leurs déclarations (voir, en ce sens, les jugements 4291, au considérant 12, et 3593, au considérant 12). Il n’interviendra en conséquence qu’en cas d’erreur manifeste (voir, notamment, les jugements 4344, au considérant 8, 4091, au considérant 17, et 3597, au considérant 2).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2771, 3314, 3593, 3597, 3692, 3871, 4091, 4253, 4289, 4291, 4344, 4344, 4471, 4541, 4663
Keywords:
harassment; inquiry; organisation's duties; role of the tribunal;
Judgment 4883
138th Session, 2024
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: La requérante conteste la décision de classer sa plainte pour harcèlement à l’issue de la procédure d’évaluation préliminaire de celle-ci.
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
Le Tribunal rappelle […] que, lorsqu’une telle étape est prévue dans le cadre de la procédure d’examen d’une plainte pour harcèlement, l’évaluation préliminaire a pour seul but de déterminer s’il y a lieu d’ouvrir une enquête en vue d’instruire cette plainte. Il s’ensuit que, au stade de l’évaluation préliminaire, la constatation prima facie du caractère sérieux de certains des éléments allégués par l’auteur de la plainte à l’appui de celle-ci suffit, en principe, à justifier la poursuite de la procédure, sachant que c’est dans le cadre de l’éventuelle enquête appelée à suivre l’évaluation préliminaire qu’il conviendra de procéder à la recherche complète des preuves (voir, en ce sens, notamment les jugements 4900, également prononcé ce jour, aux considérants 27 et 28, 4746, au considérant 9, et 3640, au considérant 5).
En l’espèce, le Tribunal constate que la matérialité des faits allégués par la requérante était, pour l’essentiel, corroborée par les témoignages recueillis au cours de l’évaluation préliminaire.
Le Tribunal estime que de tels faits entraient prima facie dans la définition du harcèlement résultant des dispositions du point 18.2 du Manuel des ressources humaines reproduites au considérant 4 ci-dessus. En effet, les actes et paroles reprochés à M. M. pouvaient être raisonnablement perçus comme constituant notamment un comportement vexatoire et/ou importun sur le lieu de travail ayant pour effet de porter atteinte à la dignité de la plaignante et/ou de créer un environnement de travail menaçant, hostile, dégradant et/ou humiliant.
Dans ces conditions, c’est à tort que Mme T. a considéré qu’il n’y avait pas lieu d’ouvrir une enquête faute de «commencement de preuve de harcèlement».
Cette seule irrégularité suffit à justifier l’annulation de la décision attaquée, sans qu’il soit besoin de se prononcer sur les autres moyens de la requête.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3640, 4746, 4900
Keywords:
harassment; mistake of law; opening of an investigation; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4848
138th Session, 2024
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests WIPO’s decisions (i) to advertise his post; (ii) to organise a selection process to fill his post; (iii) not to appoint him to the post without competition; (iv) to renew his fixed-term appointment for three months only; (v) to restructure his division; and (vi) to modify/redefine his post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed; difference; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; organisation's duties; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; staff member's interest; title of post;
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
Quite apart from any effect on the personal circumstances of a chief of a section or department, the Tribunal’s case law endorses the practice of requiring consultation with such a person in relation to plans for the reorganisation of the relevant section or department, and to not consult would ordinarily constitute a serious failure to respect the dignity of that person (see, for example, Judgments 3353, consideration 30, 3071, consideration 30, and 2861, consideration 27). In this limited context, this would be particularly so if the reorganisation had an adverse effect on the personal circumstances of the individual section or departmental chief, though this is not to suggest any member of staff adversely affected by a reorganisation must be consulted before the reorganisation occurs.
However, in this case, the rather unusual circumstances inform the content of WIPO’s duty to consult. As just noted, it is reasonable to characterise the position of the complainant as having only been nominally the Director of CID in late 2017 and early 2018. However, and notwithstanding, an attempt was made to engage with him about the proposed reorganisation, though this was resisted by the complainant, on the basis being suggested, because of his ill health. In the Tribunal’s view, the basis being suggested by WIPO was, overall, reasonable. The complainant took the position, probably legitimately, that in the circumstances, him replying in writing within four days of the email of 18 December 2017 was too burdensome given his state of health. However, he also rejected the suggestion that he take the opportunity of discussing the matter by phone with the Deputy Director General. Again, he did so because, as he put it, of the state of his health. It was not at all obvious that, at this point in very late 2017, any effective consultation could take place and it was, therefore, open to the Deputy Director General to pursue the proposed reorganisation without input from the complainant.
There is nothing in the material before the Tribunal which would warrant a conclusion that WIPO should have proceeded, in relation to its obligation to consult, on the basis that the complainant would imminently return from sick leave and actively manage the CID or, potentially, whatever organisational division might replace it. Indeed, all the signs at that time were, including the approach adopted by the complainant to the invitation to discuss the proposed reorganisation by phone, that this would not occur.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2861, 3071, 3353
Keywords:
organisation's duties; reorganisation; sick leave; staff member's interest;
Judgment 4837
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, who separated from service, contests the placement in his personnel file of a letter stating that he was found to have committed sexual harassment during his employment and that, had he not separated from service, he would have been imposed the disciplinary measure of a final letter of warning.
Consideration 4
Extract:
Regarding an organization’s duties where harassment complaints are made, the Tribunal has stated, for example, in consideration 3 of Judgment 4344, that an international organization has a duty to provide a safe and adequate working environment for its staff members and that given the serious nature of a claim of harassment, an organization has an obligation to initiate the investigation itself. It further stated that the investigation must be initiated promptly, conducted thoroughly and the facts must be determined objectively and in their overall context and that upon the conclusion of the investigation, the complainant is entitled to a response from the Administration regarding the claim of harassment. Moreover, a person who makes a harassment complaint has a duty to substantiate it. The Tribunal’s case law also states that the question as to whether harassment has occurred must be determined in the light of a thorough examination of all the objective circumstances surrounding the events complained of and that an allegation of harassment must be borne out by specific facts, the burden of proof being on the person who pleads it, but there is no need to prove that the accused person acted with intent.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4344
Keywords:
burden of proof; harassment; investigation; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4834
138th Session, 2024
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the non-extension of his fixed-term appointment.
Consideration 4
Extract:
As the Federation points out, and the facts make clear, the complainant’s position was never abolished but could no longer be funded, and consequently his contract was not extended. The Tribunal has stated, in consideration 11 of Judgment 4231, for example, that ordinarily, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, an organization’s duty to reassign a staff member arises when a post is abolished. As there is no specific provision to the contrary, the Federation had no obligation to reassign the complainant.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4231
Keywords:
abolition of post; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reassignment;
Judgment 4820
138th Session, 2024
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Le requérant conteste les décisions de rejeter ses plaintes pour harcèlement moral et demande réparation pour le préjudice qu’il estime avoir subi.
Consideration 8
Extract:
Selon la jurisprudence constante du Tribunal, la question de savoir si l’on se trouve en présence d’un cas de harcèlement se résout à la lumière d’un examen rigoureux de toutes les circonstances objectives ayant entouré les actes dénoncés (voir, notamment, le jugement 4471, au considérant 18) et l’accusation de harcèlement doit être corroborée par des faits précis dont la preuve incombe à celui qui affirme en avoir été victime, étant entendu qu’il n’a pas à démontrer que la personne accusée aurait agi intentionnellement (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4344, au considérant 3, 3871, au considérant 12, et 3692, au considérant 18). Lorsqu’une procédure spécifique est prévue par l’organisation concernée, elle doit être suivie et les règles doivent être correctement appliquées. Le Tribunal a également considéré que l’enquête doit être objective, rigoureuse et approfondie, en ce sens qu’elle doit être menée d’une manière permettant de s’enquérir de tous les faits pertinents sans pour autant compromettre la réputation de la personne mise en cause et en donnant à ce dernier la possibilité de vérifier les preuves avancées à son encontre et de répondre aux accusations formulées (voir, notamment, les jugements 4663, aux considérants 10 à 13, 4253, au considérant 3, 3314, au considérant 14, et 2771, au considérant 15). Il est toutefois entendu qu’un fonctionnaire qui affirme être ou avoir été victime de harcèlement n’a pas besoin de démontrer, pas plus que la personne ou l’organe chargé(e) d’évaluer la plainte, que les faits permettent d’établir au-delà de tout doute raisonnable le caractère effectif du harcèlement (voir, en ce sens, les jugements 4663, au considérant 12, et 4289, au considérant 10). L’élément essentiel dans la reconnaissance d’un harcèlement est en effet la perception que la personne concernée peut raisonnablement et objectivement avoir d’actes ou de propos qui sont propres à la dévaloriser ou à l’humilier (voir les jugements 4663, au considérant 13, et 4541, au considérant 8).
Le Tribunal rappelle par ailleurs qu’il ne lui appartient pas de réévaluer les preuves dont dispose l’organe chargé d’enquêter, qui, en sa qualité de première instance d’examen des faits, a eu l’avantage de rencontrer et d’entendre directement la plupart des personnes concernées et d’évaluer la fiabilité de leurs déclarations (voir, en ce sens, les jugements 4291, au considérant 12, et 3593, au considérant 12). Il n’interviendra en conséquence qu’en cas d’erreur manifeste (voir, notamment, les jugements 4344, au considérant 8, 4091, au considérant 17, et 3597, au considérant 2).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2771, 3314, 3593, 3597, 3692, 3871, 4091, 4253, 4291, 4344, 4471, 4663
Keywords:
adversarial proceedings; appraisal of evidence; burden of proof; due process; harassment; inquiry; judicial review; manifest error; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; right; right to reply; standard of proof;
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
[I]l est, en premier lieu, manifeste, d’une part, que le rapport d’enquête final, contrairement à ce qu’avait demandé le requérant à diverses reprises, ne lui a jamais été communiqué dans le cadre de la procédure interne, fût-ce sous une forme anonymisée, ce qui ne lui a pas permis de se faire entendre utilement et en toute connaissance de cause dans le cadre de cette procédure.
En effet, il résulte de la décision du Directeur général du 27 mars 2020, par laquelle ce dernier a rejeté le recours interne introduit contre la décision de rejeter la première plainte pour harcèlement en ce qu’elle était dirigée contre M. P. H., que seules les conclusions du rapport d’enquête, figurant au point 5 de celui-ci, ont été communiquées au requérant, en annexe de cette décision, tandis que le Directeur général s’est contenté, dans la décision proprement dite, de faire état de ce que « les faits examinés dans le cas du requérant n’étaient pas constitutifs d’un harcèlement moral ». Si le Tribunal s’en réfère par ailleurs à ces conclusions du rapport d’enquête, force est de constater que celles-ci se limitent aux considérations suivantes : en premier lieu, « [l]a perception des faits donnée par [le requérant] n’est pas en phase avec la perception qui en a été faite par M. [P.] H. et par tous les témoins du MUAC [à Maastricht] qui ont été entendus. Les documents renvoient à des réunions, à des appréciations et à des situations, mais ne permettent pas d’établir l’existence d’une forme quelconque de harcèlement psychologique»; en deuxième lieu, «l’enquête n’a porté que sur un possible harcèlement psychologique de la part de M. [P.] H., étant donné que les enquêtrices n’avaient pas de mandat pour se prononcer sur un contexte plus large»; en troisième lieu, diverses observations formulées par les enquêtrices concernant les modalités selon lesquelles était organisé le programme de recrutement de jeunes diplômés par l’Organisation.
Le Tribunal considère qu’une communication aussi limitée des conclusions du rapport d’enquête ne répond pas, à l’évidence, aux exigences posées par sa jurisprudence en la matière et qu’il s’ensuit que le requérant peut à juste titre faire valoir qu’il n’a pas été en mesure de vérifier, même au stade de la procédure de recours interne, la teneur des déclarations du prétendu harceleur et des témoins, ni le sérieux de l’enquête menée (comparer, notamment, avec le jugement 4471, au considérants 14 et 23). Le Tribunal rappelle, en effet, que, selon sa jurisprudence constante, un fonctionnaire est, en règle générale, en droit d’avoir connaissance de toutes les pièces sur lesquelles l’autorité compétente est appelée à se fonder pour prendre une décision le concernant (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4739, au considérant 10 (et la jurisprudence citée), 4217, au considérant 4, 3995, au considérant 5, 3295, au considérant 13, 3214, au considérant 24, 2700, au considérant 6, ou 2229, au considérant 3 b)). Il en découle, en particulier, qu’une organisation est tenue de communiquer au fonctionnaire ayant déposé une plainte pour harcèlement le rapport élaboré à l’issue de l’enquête diligentée en vue d’instruire cette plainte (voir, notamment, les jugements 4217, au considérant 4, 3995, au considérant 5, 3831, au considérant 17, et 3347, aux considérants 19 à 21).
L’Organisation fait valoir à ce sujet que le rapport complet de l’enquête est annexé à son mémoire en réponse et que cela est conforme à la jurisprudence du Tribunal sur ce point, en vertu de laquelle les motifs d’une décision peuvent résulter d’une autre procédure ou peuvent être communiqués à l’occasion d’une contestation ultérieure (voir les jugements 3316, au considérant 7, 1757, au considérant 5, et 1590, au considérant 7).
Mais le Tribunal a déjà rappelé à cet égard que, s’il peut être admis que le défaut de communication d’une pièce puisse être corrigé, dans certains cas, lorsqu’il y est remédié ultérieurement, y compris à l’occasion de la procédure suivie devant lui (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4217, au considérant 4, et 3117, au considérant 11), une telle régularisation ne saurait être admise dans l’hypothèse où le document en cause revêt, comme c’est le cas en l’espèce, une importance essentielle au regard de l’objet du litige (voir les jugements 4217, au considérant 4, 3995, au considérant 5, 3831, aux considérants 16, 17 et 29, 3490, au considérant 33, et 2315, au considérant 27).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1590, 1757, 2229, 2315, 2700, 3117, 3214, 3295, 3316, 3347, 3490, 3831, 3995, 4217, 4471, 4739
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; due process; duty to inform; duty to inform about the investigation; general principle; harassment; internal appeals body; investigation report; motivation; motivation of final decision; official; organisation's duties; procedural flaw; right to information;
Judgment 4779
137th Session, 2024
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges her dismissal for misconduct.
Considerations 5 & 13
Extract:
[A]lthough it is indeed a matter of principle under the Tribunal’s case law that an organisation must respect the confidentiality of private messages stored in a professional email account (see, in particular, Judgment 2183, consideration 19), that requirement must clearly be balanced against the requirements intrinsic to the need to combat fraud and, more generally, to the need to tackle misconduct on the part of officials. [...]
[I]t should be recalled that, while international organisations cannot intrude on the private lives of their staff members, those staff members must nonetheless comply with the requirements inherent in their status as international civil servants, including in their personal conduct. This principle is, for example, laid down in the Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service [...].Furthermore, the Tribunal has repeatedly stated in its case law that some private conduct may, on this account, legitimately lead to disciplinary action (see, for example, Judgments 4400, consideration 24, and 3602, consideration 13, and, with specific regard to a failure to honour private financial obligations, Judgments 2944, considerations 44 to 49, 1584, consideration 9, and 1480, consideration 3).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1480, 1584, 2183, 2944, 3602, 4400
Keywords:
conduct; disciplinary procedure; organisation's duties; private life;
Judgment 4748
137th Session, 2024
International Olive Council
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment at the end of his probationary period.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The [organization] violated its duty of care by failing to maintain a properly functioning appeal system, in breach of the applicable rules established by Articles 50 and 64 of the Staff Regulations [...]. Denying the complainant the opportunity to exercise his right to an effective internal appeal denied the fundamental safeguards provided by that right. Neither administrative inefficiency nor a lack of resources can excuse this failure. This is particularly important in a case involving the termination of employment, such as the present. If the appeal reveals that the termination decision was flawed, then, if it has been dealt with in a timely way, steps can be taken to reverse the effects of the termination, including reinstating the employee. As time passes, that outcome becomes increasingly difficult, for practical purposes, to achieve.
Keywords:
duty of care; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; right of appeal;
Judgment 4746
137th Session, 2024
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to close her harassment complaint following a preliminary assessment and without conducting an investigation.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; opening of an investigation; organisation's duties; parallel proceedings; time bar;
Consideration 9
Extract:
It should be recalled that, according to firm precedent, an organisation has no obligation to open a full investigation into allegations of harassment if the allegations are insufficiently substantiated at the stage of the preliminary assessment. As the Tribunal recalled in Judgment 3640, consideration 5, “[t]he sole purpose of the preliminary assessment of [...] a complaint [of harassment] is to determine whether there are grounds for opening an investigation”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3640
Keywords:
harassment; opening of an investigation; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4727
136th Session, 2023
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant asserts that the EPO failed to assist him in his attempts to obtain corrected identity cards for his children.
Considerations 6 & 10
Extract:
As regards the particular legal context of the present dispute, it must be noted that the issuing of identity documents or visas to persons enjoying the privileges and immunities conferred by the seat agreement of an international organisation is the prerogative of the host State. The only duty on the organisation in question in that regard is to provide its officials with the necessary assistance to ensure that the rights inherent in their status as members of staff of that organisation are complied with by that State. Furthermore, the organisation is free to choose how it approaches the authorities in order to discharge that duty. As a result, the organisation can only be liable for delays in a suitable visa or identity document being issued if it has acted in bad faith, behaved inappropriately in its relations with the host State or been negligent in monitoring the progress of the case (see, in particular, on these various points, Judgment 3510, delivered in connection with a previous complaint lodged by the complainant concerning the initial refusal of the Dutch authorities to grant an entry visa to his daughter S., considerations 9, 12 to 14, 17 and 18, and the case law cited therein).
[...]
Admittedly, as has already been stated, issuing identity cards is a matter for the authorities of the host State and it is clearly beyond the competence of the Tribunal to examine the conditions in which the authorities assume that responsibility.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3510
Keywords:
duty of care; host state; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4697
136th Session, 2023
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the Director General’s decision to impose on him the disciplinary sanction of downgrading.
Consideration 26
Extract:
As regards the complainant’s claim for the award of 50,000 euros in moral damages, it is well established in the Tribunal’s case law, firstly, that international organisations are bound to refrain from any type of conduct that may harm the dignity or reputation of their staff members and that the general principle of good faith and the concomitant duty of care require them to treat their staff with due consideration in order to avoid causing them undue injury (see, for example, Judgment 4559, consideration 10). Secondly, settled case law also holds that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and in a manner consistent with the duty of care an international organisation owes to its staff members (see Judgment 4178, consideration 15).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 4178, 4559
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; internal appeal; moral injury; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4671
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the restitution of amounts wrongly deducted from his salary in respect of sickness insurance contributions.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; medical insurance; negligence; organisation's duties; refund;
Judgment 4670
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the restitution of amounts wrongly deducted from her salary in respect of sickness insurance contributions.
Considerations 12-13
Extract:
[S]ince reimbursement of the disputed contributions for the 2009-2012 period did not appear clearly impossible in the light of the aforementioned decision of the French Constitutional Council and the above-mentioned provisions of the French Social Security Code, the Tribunal considers that the Organization ought, at the very least, to have expressly requested URSSAF or the French public authorities to effect that reimbursement.
Interpol’s decision to affiliate its officials to the French social security scheme did not in any way release it from its obligations towards them. While it is true that the Organization only deducted the ESC following what it believed, wrongly, to be the applicable French law on the matter, it cannot take refuge behind the fact that it acted only as an intermediary, nor behind its status as an international organisation with no responsibility of its own for the application of that law. In fact, it is pursuant to Staff Regulation 7.1 that the Organization’s officials are usually covered by the compulsory social security schemes in force in the States in which they are stationed, unless the Organization decides otherwise. The officials concerned thus have no choice in this regard and it is therefore unreasonable to suggest that it was their own responsibility to pursue the matter with the French authorities and courts of their own accord, assuming this would be possible.
Keywords:
domestic law; medical insurance; organisation's duties;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; medical insurance; negligence; organisation's duties; refund;
Judgment 4669
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the restitution of amounts wrongly deducted from her salary in respect of sickness insurance contributions.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; interest on arrears; medical insurance; negligence; organisation's duties; refund;
Judgment 4668
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant seeks the restitution of amounts wrongly deducted from his salary in respect of sickness insurance contributions.
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
[S]ince reimbursement of the disputed contributions for the 2009-2012 period did not appear clearly impossible in the light of the aforementioned decision of the French Constitutional Council and the above-mentioned provisions of the French Social Security Code, the Tribunal considers that the Organization ought, at the very least, to have expressly requested URSSAF or the French public authorities to effect that reimbursement.
Interpol’s decision to affiliate its officials to the French social security scheme did not in any way release it from its obligations towards them. While it is true that the Organization only deducted the ESC following what it believed, wrongly, to be the applicable French law on the matter, it cannot take refuge behind the fact that it acted only as an intermediary, nor behind its status as an international organisation with no responsibility of its own for the application of that law. In fact, it is pursuant to Staff Regulation 7.1 that the Organization’s officials are usually covered by the compulsory social security schemes in force in the States in which they are stationed, unless the Organization decides otherwise. The officials concerned thus have no choice in this regard and it is therefore unreasonable to suggest that it was their own responsibility to pursue the matter with the French authorities and courts of their own accord, assuming this would be possible.
Keywords:
domestic law; medical insurance; organisation's duties;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; medical insurance; negligence; organisation's duties; refund;
Judgment 4667
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants seek the restitution of amounts wrongly deducted from their salaries in respect of sickness insurance contributions.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; medical insurance; negligence; organisation's duties;
Considerations 11-12
Extract:
[S]ince reimbursement of the disputed contributions for the 2009-2012 period did not appear clearly impossible in the light of the aforementioned decision of the French Constitutional Council and the above-mentioned provisions of the French Social Security Code, the Tribunal considers that the Organization ought, at the very least, to have expressly requested URSSAF or the French public authorities to effect that reimbursement.
Interpol’s decision to affiliate its officials to the French social security scheme did not in any way release it from its obligations towards them. While it is true that the Organization only deducted the ESC following what it believed, wrongly, to be the applicable French law on the matter, it cannot take refuge behind the fact that it acted only as an intermediary, nor behind its status as an international organisation with no responsibility of its own for the application of that law. In fact, it is pursuant to Staff Regulation 7.1 that the Organization’s officials are usually covered by the compulsory social security schemes in force in the States in which they are stationed, unless the Organization decides otherwise. The officials concerned thus have no choice in this regard and it is therefore unreasonable to suggest that it was their own responsibility to pursue the matter with the French
authorities and courts of their own accord, assuming this would be possible.
Keywords:
domestic law; medical insurance; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4663
136th Session, 2023
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal to acknowledge the harassment that she alleges she suffered and to provide her with the full inquiry report drawn up following her internal complaint against a colleague.
Considerations 10-13
Extract:
The Tribunal observes that the position taken by the Organization in the preliminary inquiry report, the decision of 13 October 2017 and the responses given to the complainant’s request for review, namely that there was insufficient evidence of the conduct alleged by the complainant because any reasonable doubt had to weigh in Mr S.’s favour when it came to the decision whether to take disciplinary action against him, was incorrect. In Judgment 4289, consideration 10, the Tribunal stated as follows on precisely this point:
“[...] A staff member alleging harassment, and a fortiori in an investigation on a preliminary basis of the type being undertaken, does not need to establish, nor does the person or body evaluating the claim, that the facts establish beyond reasonable doubt that harassment occurred. While an allegation of harassment may found disciplinary proceedings in which the standard of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ would apply, it has no application in the assessment of the claim of harassment where the staff member is seeking workplace protection or damages or both.”
(See, to the same effect, aforementioned Judgment 4207, consideration 20.)
In the present case, given that it was aware that the complainant objected to the impact of the harassment and that her harassment complaint was not confined to seeking the adoption of disciplinary measures against Mr S., the Organization should not have considered only the question of whether reasonable doubt existed but should instead have carried out a rigorous and thorough inquiry so as to resolve any credibility issues that it had identified in respect of what it saw as the contradictory accounts given by the complainant and Mr S. in their testimonies. In this respect, the Tribunal notes that the Organization appears to have attached little importance to the email exchanges that immediately followed the incident on 8 July 2017, the content of which strengthened the credibility of the complainant’s testimony while diminishing that of Mr S.’s subsequent account, or to the explanations provided by Mr S., called into question by the investigators themselves, as to the sexualised language he had used.
Nor could the Organization ignore the complainant’s perception of herself as a victim of harassment and her assertion that she had felt demeaned, degraded and humiliated by the behaviour to which she had been subjected. As the Tribunal similarly noted in Judgment 4541, consideration 8, the main factor in the recognition of harassment is the perception that the person concerned may reasonably and objectively have of acts or remarks liable to demean or humiliate her or him. In this respect, the Organization should have ascertained why the harassment complaint submitted by the complainant could not be deemed credible, especially as the complainant’s good faith was never called into doubt.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3312, 4207, 4471, 4541, 4547
Keywords:
harassment; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4609
135th Session, 2023
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the new decision taken by UNESCO pursuant to Judgment 3936 in the context of her appeal against the decision to transfer her to Paris.
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Tribunal notes [...] that, in this particular case, UNESCO was obliged to end the complainant’s assignment as Head of the Kinshasa Office following the birth of her child. Non-family duty stations, which are determined for all organisations in the United Nations system by the International Civil Service Commission on the basis of recommendations from the United Nations’ Department of Safety and Security, and a list of which appears, in the case of UNESCO, in Annex 4 C to the Human Resources Manual, are places considered unsuitable for the assignment of staff members who are accompanied by their family due to the security situation in the States where they are located. Since Kinshasa was, at the material time, classed as a duty station in this category, the Tribunal considers that the Organization was therefore obliged to transfer the complainant to a post compatible with her new family status. Had it not done so, UNESCO would not only have failed to follow its own rules but also and above all would have put the complainant and her child in danger, which would have been a serious breach of the duty that all international organisations have pursuant to the Tribunal’s case law to adopt appropriate measures to ensure the safety of their staff members and, more generally, a breach of the duty of care towards them (see, inter alia, Judgments 4239, consideration 21, 3689, consideration 5, and 3025, consideration 2).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3025, 3689, 4239
Keywords:
duty of care; duty station; non-family duty station; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4606
135th Session, 2023
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the non-recognition of her illness as an occupational illness and requests that her sick leave entitlements be re-credited to her.
Consideration 14
Extract:
It is well settled in the Tribunal’s case law that international organizations must respond to requests from their staff members within a reasonable time (see, for example, Judgment 3188, under 5).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3188
Keywords:
delay; organisation's duties;
Judgment 4601
135th Session, 2023
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to summarily dismiss him after an internal complaint of harassment was made against him.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he WTO’s assertion that those complaints did not lead to a full or thorough examination of the situation at the time because the procedure for dealing with harassment complaints was deficient is clearly not an argument capable of justifying that reversal. First, even assuming that the procedure at the time was inadequate, that cannot be relied on by the WTO since the Tribunal has consistently stated that international organisations are required to investigate accusations in this area and to provide protection for persons who claim they are the victims of harassment (see Judgments 2706, consideration 5, and 2552, consideration 3) and also to ensure that their investigative and internal appeal bodies for this purpose are functioning properly (see Judgments 3314, consideration 14, and 3069, consideration 12), these obligations being are part of a more general duty owed by those organisations to provide a safe and adequate environment for their staff, free from physical and psychological risk (see Judgments 4299, consideration 4, and 4171, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2552, 2706, 3069, 3314, 4171, 4299
Keywords:
investigation; organisation's duties;
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >
|
