|
|
 |
|
|
Adjustment (367, 368,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Adjustment
Total judgments found: 64
1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
Judgment 4842
138th Session, 2024
International Criminal Police Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the application to her salary of the new salary scale for 2018.
Consideration 9
Extract:
As the Organization rightly contends in its written submissions, the sole purpose of the salary adjustment for 2018 was to reflect inflation. It was a simple matter of automatically indexing salary scales, with an automatic update of Appendix 1 to the Staff Manual detailing the salary scales, not a proposed amendment to the Staff Regulations or Staff Rules that would lead to the salary scales being reset. The Tribunal considers that, in view of their scope, only the latter would constitute an actual amendment to Interpol’s Staff Regulations and Staff Rules that should be submitted in advance to the Staff Committee for its opinion.
Keywords:
adjustment; consultation; reckoning; salary; scale;
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls that the principles governing the limits on the discretion of international organizations to set adjustments in staff pay are clearly established in its case law. The following has been stated in Judgment 1821, consideration 7:
“Those principles may be concisely stated as follows:
(a) An international organisation is free to choose a methodology, system or standard of reference for determining salary adjustments for its staff provided that it meets all other principles of international civil service law: Judgment 1682 [...] in 6.
(b) The chosen methodology must ensure that the results are ‘stable, foreseeable and clearly understood’: Judgments 1265 [...] in 27 and 1419 [...] in 30.
(c) Where the methodology refers to an external standard but grants discretion to the governing body to depart from that standard, the organisation has a duty to state proper reasons for such departure: Judgment 1682, again in 6.
(d) While the necessity of saving money may be one valid factor to be considered in adjusting salaries provided the method adopted is objective, stable and foreseeable (Judgment 1329 [...] in 21), the mere desire to save money at the staff's expense is not by itself a valid reason for departing from an established standard of reference: Judgments 1682 in 7 and 990 [...] in 6.”
[...]
The decision in this respect to apply the inflation rate observed in France at the same time can, further, be viewed as enabling the achievement of stable, predictable and transparent results.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 990, 1265, 1329, 1419, 1682, 1821
Keywords:
adjustment; discretion; methodology; reckoning; salary; scale;
Judgment 4134
128th Session, 2019
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to apply to their salaries the post adjustment multiplier determined by the ICSC on the basis of its 2016 cost-of-living survey for Geneva, with the result that their salaries were reduced.
Considerations 26-28
Extract:
It is desirable to refer to some of the principles that govern the Tribunal’s consideration of cases such as the present. First, an international organization is free to choose a methodology, system or standard of reference for determining salary adjustments for its staff provided that it meets all the principles of international civil service law (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 7, and 3324, consideration 16). Further, the Tribunal has noted that cases such as the present can raise issues of a highly specialised nature being “based on the technical judgment to be made by those whose training and experience equip them for that task” and that it will not substitute its own assessment for that of the organization (see, for example, Judgment 3360, considerations 4 and 5). While an international organization is free to choose a methodology, system or standard of reference for determining salary adjustments it must be a methodology which ensures that the results are stable, foreseeable and clearly understood or transparent (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 7, and 2095, consideration 13). The requirement that the results must be stable, foreseeable and clearly understood or transparent does not mean a salary regime is fixed once and for all and is incapable of change (see Judgment 1912, consideration 14), or that this requirement excludes reasonable variations in the results yielded (see Judgment 3676, consideration 6). Moreover “a methodology cannot be applied without a degree of flexibility and without leaving some room for interpretation by the competent authority, which [is] entitled to take into account the imbalances generated by past applications of the adopted methodology in order to try to attenuate the effects thereof and properly to implement the Noblemaire principle” (Judgment 2420, consideration 15).
The Tribunal has recognised that “[t]he whole subject of post adjustment is of great complexity and [...] the constant changes in the factors that are considered relevant, mean that the methodology will probably never attain perfection” (see Judgment 1459, consideration 10; see also Judgment 1603, consideration 6).
However, if the organization is relying on an external body for advice and assistance, it nonetheless needs to ensure these principles have been applied (see, for example, Judgment 1765, consideration 8, where the Tribunal said in relation to erroneous calculation by the ICSC):
“[The organization] has the duty of checking the lawfulness of any decision by another body on which it bases its own decision. So too must it check the adequacy of action by that other body to correct any mistake it may have made, and make sure that such corrective action respects the rights of staff. Authority for that is in Judgment 826 [...] under 18. If the [ICSC]’s original reckoning was unlawful, so is a second one that fails to redress fully the wrong.”
To the same effect was Judgment 1713, consideration 3, and later, Judgment 2303, consideration 7. In Judgment 1713 the Tribunal observed that a decision on local pay cannot “stand if, say, it overlooks or misconstrues some particular factor, or if some method is applied for the wilful contrivance of lower figures of local pay, or if corners are cut for the sake of saving time, but to the detriment of staff interests” (consideration 8).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 826, 1459, 1603, 1713, 1765, 1821, 1912, 2095, 2303, 2420, 3324, 3360, 3676
Keywords:
adjustment; methodology; post adjustment; salary;
Consideration 49
Extract:
[I]n the documentary material before the Tribunal, the alteration of the operative percentage in the gap closure measure was without real explanation as to the rationale in statistical, mathematical, methodological or otherwise scientific terms. [...] No explanation was proffered as to why 5 per cent was appropriate up to and including 2015 and yet no longer appropriate in 2016 and 2017. The reduction of the threshold percentage to 3 per cent was not substantiated nor transparent.
Keywords:
adjustment; methodology;
Judgment 4057
127th Session, 2019
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reduce her pension on the basis of a reduction of the consumer price index.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Tribunal’s case law does not establish a principle that there can never be a downward adjustment of pensions (that there can be such downward adjustments is apparently accepted by the complainant in her rejoinder) and indeed there is a theme in the case law that it is entirely appropriate to have, in the rules governing pension funds, a provision to preserve the purchasing power of the pension, to protect staff members from “the adverse repercussions of a rise in the cost of living on their purchasing power and hence in theory to maintain the standard of living their pension initially secured for them” (see Judgment 2615, consideration 6). As a matter of logic and fairness, this approach would justify a reduction in pensions in the face of falling costs of living.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2615
Keywords:
adjustment; pension; pension adjustment system; pension entitlements;
Judgment 3408
119th Session, 2015
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants unsuccessfully challenge the decision to apply to them a salary adjustment index they considered illegal.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
adjustment; complaint dismissed; joinder; salary;
Judgment 3324
117th Session, 2014
World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to not apply the salary adjustment recommended by the Co-ordinating Committee on Remuneration of the system of Co-ordinated Organisations for officials serving in Belgium, in violation of the internal rules of the organisation.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
adjustment; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; salary;
Judgment 3180
114th Session, 2013
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant claims interest for the late payment of the back pay resulting from a salary adjustment.
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[T]he complainant is [...] entitled to claim interest for the late payment of the back pay resulting from [...] a [salary] adjustment."
Keywords:
adjustment; amount; claim; delay; interest on damages; payment; salary;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
adjustment; complaint allowed; decision quashed; delay in payment; interest on damages; salary;
Consideration 12
Extract:
[A] salary adjustment forms an integral part of a salary and that a salary, plus increments, is due on precise dates at the end of every month.
Keywords:
adjustment; salary;
Judgment 2782
106th Session, 2009
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
In order to execute Judgment 2560 the Organisation paid salary arrears not only to the officials who had filed the complaints that led to that judgment, but also to all other members of staff and to all former members of staff in receipt of a retirement pension.
"It is not disputed that only the parties to the proceedings leading to the delivery of Judgment 2560 could seek its enforcement. But this does not mean that that judgment remains without effect for staff members who, although they did not participate in those proceedings, are de facto in a situation identical to that of colleagues who did. It is clear from Judgment 2560 that the Organisation breached the provisions of the Staff Regulations by not taking any measure to adjust salaries and pensions for the period under consideration. Staff members who were not party to the proceedings are entitled, for the same reasons as those stated in the judgment, to receive the salary arrears paid to the staff members who participated in those proceedings, provided that they are in the same situation.
Consequently, in deciding to extend the scope of Judgment 2560 to all serving or retired members of staff, the Organisation [...] perform[ed] a legal obligation."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2560
Keywords:
adjustment; breach; complainant; effect; execution of judgment; grounds; limits; organisation's duties; payment; pension; purport; res judicata; retirement; right; salary; same cause of action; staff regulations and rules;
Consideration 6
Extract:
In order to execute Judgment 2560 the Organisation paid salary arrears not only to the officials who had filed the complaints that led to that judgment, but also to all other members of staff and to all former members of staff in receipt of a retirement pension. However, interest on arrears was paid only to the members of staff who had filed a complaint with the Tribunal; the complainant was not among them. He is consequently challenging the decision not to pay him interest on arrears.
"(a) In the absence of any particular rule requiring the Organisation to pay interest on arrears to a staff member where a benefit due to that person is paid belatedly, such interest is not in principle due until the creditor - i.e. the staff member to whom the benefit is owed - has served notice on the Organisation to pay. This apparently harsh solution is justified because no particular formalities are required for the service of such notice, it being sufficient for the creditor to request payment of the amount due. [...]
(b) However, this rule does not apply where the debt is one which falls due on a fixed date. In such a case the due date is equivalent to the service of notice (dies interpellat pro homine). The debtor owes interest on arrears as from that date, without any need for the creditor to establish that he or she has requested payment of the due sum. The same applies where the debt falls due periodically at a fixed date, as in the case of a salary.
The salary adjustment at issue forms an integral part of the salary. Moreover, the salary, plus increments, is due on precise dates at the end of every month. In the instant case the payment of the staff member's salary, including the adjustment thereto, did not depend on a request from that person. The claim for interest on arrears is therefore well founded."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2560
Keywords:
adjustment; amount; complainant; date; debt; delay; exception; execution of judgment; formal requirements; general principle; increase; interest on damages; no provision; organisation's duties; payment; request by a party; retirement; salary;
Judgment 2632
103rd Session, 2007
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[T]he complainants assert that their acquired rights were breached because the Agency abandoned a practice, applied to them from 1 January to 30 June 2005, involving the application to pensions of the same weightings as were applied to the remuneration of serving officials. But a practice of salary and pension adjustment, even where repeated, does not bind the Organisation that adopted it, which is at liberty to abandon it provided that it does so lawfully (see in this connection Judgment 2089). As for acquired rights, they could not be held to have been breached unless the contested reform impaired a fundamental and essential term of the complainants' conditions of appointment, which include the right to a pension (see aforementioned Judgment 2089 and the case law cited therein). This is clearly not the case here."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2089
Keywords:
acquired right; adjustment; amendment to the rules; breach; condition; cost-of-living weighting; discretion; enforcement; formal requirements; injury; organisation's duties; pension; pension adjustment system; pension entitlements; practice; salary; terms of appointment;
Judgment 2610
102nd Session, 2007
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"While it is highly desirable that staff representatives should be allowed to participate in operations to determine their colleagues' remuneration, this can in no way affect the right of each staff member to avail himself or herself of the means of redress which are open to him or her and which constitute a fundamental safeguard for international civil servants. The ICSC is therefore mistaken in believing that it can rely on the theory of estoppel vis-à-vis the complainants by arguing that staff representatives are supposed to act on behalf of all the members of the personnel and that 'their actions should be considered as legally attributable to each and every one of the staff they represent'."
Keywords:
adjustment; general principle; icsc decision; internal appeal; official; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; safeguard; salary; scale; staff representative;
Judgment 2533
101st Session, 2006
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 22
Extract:
The complainant suffered a workplace injury at the Organization premises. The results of this seemingly minor accident were catastrophic and the complainant is now permanently and totally disabled and suffers from a rare illness, which has extended up both of the complainant's legs and requires him to use a wheelchair.
"The absence of an indexation clause [of the "disability pension"], however, does not remove the defendant's obligation to provide the complainant with adequate compensation. The concern that the utility of the award may be reduced through spoliation is very real and could, in times of high inflation, conceivably, have the effect of negating the very purpose of the disability pension which is to make the complainant whole despite his service-related injury. That is only a possibility, however, and the Tribunal is reluctant to order indexation as a matter of routine when the feared spoliation may never occur to an extent significant enough to seriously affect the complainant's position. Exceptionally, the Tribunal will frame its order in such a way that the complainant may apply at a future date for an adjustment to any ongoing pension payments when and if the purchasing power of such payments has been reduced by at least 10 per cent. Such applications should be by way of request for the execution of the present judgment."
Keywords:
adjustment; application for execution; cost-of-living increase; disability benefit; handicapped person; invalidity; organisation's duties; professional accident; reckoning; service-incurred;
Judgment 2422
98th Session, 2005
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The Staff Association has submitted an amicus curiae brief. The defendant is not opposed to an examination of those submissions by the Tribunal, but it points out that the staff representatives raised no objection to the implementation of the new salary scale at the IAEA when they were consulted on the matter. That of course does not prevent the Staff Association from expressing different views, which the Tribunal agrees to take into consideration for the reasons set forth in Judgment 2420 [...] whilst emphasising that these submissions are not to be regarded as the brief of an intervener."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2420
Keywords:
adjustment; amicus curiae; consultation; icsc decision; intervention; rate; salary; scale; staff union;
Judgment 2420
98th Session, 2005
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"The Tribunal has on numerous occasions ruled on the issue of whether an international organisation is bound to comply with general provisions that would infringe the rights of its staff members. The fact that an international organisation belongs to the common system does not enable it to decline or limit its own responsibility towards the members of its staff or lessen the degree of judicial protection it owes them. Any organisation that introduces elements of the common system into its own rules has a duty to ensure that the texts it thereby imports are lawful (on this issue, see Judgment 1265, which refers to Judgments 382 and 825; for more recent examples concerning the duties of the FAO, see Judgments 1713 and 2303). Whilst the Tribunal fully appreciates the difficulties - emphasised by the defendant - that international organisations are liable to face in departing from the salary scales adopted on the basis of ICSC recommendations, it is nevertheless bound to ensure that international law is observed in the relations between the said organisations and their staff, regardless of the external authority from which the decisions taken emanate. Indeed, the case of an organisation having to revise salary scales resulting from recommendations or decisions affecting the common system, whether or not pursuant to a ruling by the competent tribunal, is not without precedent."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 825, 1265, 1713, 2303
Keywords:
adjustment; case law; criteria; decision-maker; icsc decision; liability; organisation's duties; recommendation; right; rule of another organisation; salary; scale;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"[T]he fact that financial considerations were taken into account does not, in itself, invalidate the decision setting the salary scale, provided that the other reasons justifying the decision are correct. In the present case, the evidence on file shows that the scale ultimately adopted was justified by the desire to reduce the imbalances resulting from the application of the previous decisions penalising staff in the higher categories, to restore the remuneration margins in relation to US federal civil servants to values within the range of 110 to 120 and to move closer to attaining the objective of an overall margin level of 115."
Keywords:
adjustment; budgetary reasons; decision; grounds; professional category; rate; salary; scale;
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The complainants' second plea is that the methodology applied by the General Assembly [to review salary levels] does not satisfy the requirements of stability, foreseeability and transparency established by the case law. [...] Given that the application of that methodology can yield results as different as those obtained, on the one hand, by the ICSC, and on the other, by the Fifth Committee and subsequently the General Assembly, one may legitimately query its foreseeability. However, it must be borne in mind that a methodology cannot be applied without a degree of flexibility and without leaving some room for interpretation by the competent authority, which was entitled to take into account the imbalances generated by past applications of the adopted methodology in order to try to attenuate the effects thereof and properly to implement the Noblemaire principle."
Keywords:
adjustment; case law; icsc decision; interpretation; noblemaire principle; organisation's duties; rate; recommendation; salary; scale;
Judgment 2410
98th Session, 2005
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[M]onthly pension payments are not notified individually except when pensioners are informed of decisions concerning the rate of adjustment decided by CERN's competent bodies. In the circumstances, the Tribunal considers that, while the bank statement does not constitute a decision, it does reflect a decision taken to credit the complainant's account and, just like a payslip, this decision may be challenged by all legal means."
Keywords:
adjustment; date of notification; decision; general decision; individual decision; payslip; pension; rate; receivability of the complaint; salary;
Consideration 6
Extract:
"[I]t is CERN's Council which decides pension adjustments; and the individual decisions on pension rates have as their sole legal basis the general decisions taken periodically by CERN's Council, the lawfulness of which may indeed be challenged in the context of a complaint directed against such individual decisions (see Judgments 1000, 1451 and 2129). In this case, the complainant's objections concern only the lawfulness of the position advocated by the Governing Board of the Pension Fund, when it considered that it could not give its backing to the extraordinary pension adjustment requested by the [CERN Pensioners' Association, of which the complainant is the President]. Since this refusal to support the latter's request before CERN's competent bodies cannot be considered as a legislative act of general application, any pleas based on its alleged unlawfulness must fail."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Article II.1.15 of the Regulations of the CERN's Pension Fund
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1000, 1451, 2129
Keywords:
adjustment; advisory opinion; cern pension fund; decision; executive body; general decision; individual decision; pension; rate; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 2252
95th Session, 2003
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"If the level of salary adjustments is set by a body external to an international organisation, the latter must ensure that the figures proposed comply with the law".
Keywords:
adjustment; coordinated organisations; organisation's duties; salary; scale;
Judgment 2129
93rd Session, 2002
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The complainants [state] that, according to the Tribunal's case law (see Judgment 1821, for example), adjustments to international civil servants' salaries must satisfy objective criteria of stability, foreseeability and transparency. The Tribunal considers that this line of precedent - concerning the determination of staff salaries, which is necessarily governed by very strict rules - is not entirely applicable to the determination of allowances granted for a specific purpose, such as that of covering expenses incurred by staff members on travel status. Even if it claims to be acting in the exercise of its discretion, and although the legal framework surrounding its action remains vague or non-existent, the administration must base its decisions on objective considerations and avoid breaching any of the guarantees protecting the independence of international civil servants."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821
Keywords:
adjustment; allowance; analogy; breach; case law; compensatory allowance; compensatory measure; criteria; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; independence; no provision; official; official travel; organisation's duties; purpose; safeguard; salary; travel expenses; written rule;
Judgment 2095
92nd Session, 2002
Surveillance Authority of the European Free Trade Association
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainants challenge a decision taken by the Committee of Representatives of the Member States concerning salary adjustments. The organisation submits that the complaints are irreceivable since it is not the author of that decision. "The complainants are paid by [the organisation] and so may challenge any individual decisions that affect their terms of employment, particularly salary, regardless of who has authority over such decisions."
Keywords:
adjustment; competence; complaint; decision; decision-maker; executive body; individual decision; official; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; salary; terms of appointment;
Judgment 2089
92nd Session, 2002
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
From 1986 to 2000 the organisation followed the practice followed by the coordinated organizations in adjusting both salaries and pensions in accordance with both cost-of-living and standard-of-living adjustments. In July 2000 it made a cost-of-living adjustment mandatory for pensions even if no such adjustment is made to salaries, but no provision is made for standard-of-living adjustment to pensions. "It is to no avail that the complainants criticise the effectiveness of the change or the accuracy of the calculations on which it was based, for those are not matters within the Tribunal's competence."
Keywords:
adjustment; amendment to the rules; competence of tribunal; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; iloat; no provision; pension; pension adjustment system; period; practice; reckoning; salary;
Consideration 16
Extract:
"To accept that pensions must always be adjusted to keep in line with post-retirement salary increases would be to expose pension funds to an uncertain and unmeasurable future liability which might well in the end wipe out the funds themselves."
Keywords:
acceptance; adjustment; discontinuance; increase; pension; pension adjustment system; retirement; salary; separation from service; special hazard; subsequent fact; unjspf;
Consideration 9
Extract:
From 1986 to 2000 the organisation followed the practice followed by the coordinated organizations in adjusting both salaries and pensions in accordance with both cost-of-living and standard-of-living adjustments. In July 2000 it made a cost-of-living adjustment mandatory for pensions even if no such adjustment is made to salaries, but no provision is made for standard-of-living adjustment to pensions. "It is simply untenable to argue that the [organisation] could, by following the practice of the coordinated organizations in previous years, bind itself to do so for all time [...] There can be no doubt that the same body that had the authority to adopt [the] decision [to follow the practice followed by the coordinated organizations] had equally the authority to decide to withdraw it."
Keywords:
adjustment; amendment to the rules; competence; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; decision quashed; executive body; no provision; organisation's duties; pension; pension adjustment system; period; practice; salary;
Judgment 2057
91st Session, 2001
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"As the Tribunal found in Judgment 1682, confirming the precedent in Judgment 1329 [...], a line of argument cannot be entertained that would allow appeals to lie sine die against past decisions in a matter as delicate as the setting and periodic adjustment of staff pay."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1329, 1682
Keywords:
adjustment; case law; decision; period; receivability of the complaint; salary; scale;
Consideration 9
Extract:
Following Judgments 1682 and 1887, adjustments of the 1995-1996 salary scales have been retroactively raised. The organisation paid the difference in salary but did not adjust the salary scales for the following years (those salary scales had been calculated based on the old 1995-1996 salary scales). The Tribunal states that "the [organisation]'s retroactive reconstitution of the adjustments had the paradoxical effect of limiting the application of the [...] staff's improved salary scales to a single year, and of reducing their salary levels [...] after [...] 1996. The result is an impairment of rights: staff are entitled to expect that any adjustments to their pay will be made on the basis of the salary scales which were established lawfully for the period preceding the adjustment."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1682, 1887
Keywords:
accumulation; adjustment; date; effect; increase; official; purport; right; salary; scale;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
adjustment; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; en banc review; plenary judgment; salary;
Judgment 1915
88th Session, 2000
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 18-19
Extract:
A comparison study of language proficiency between the common system staff and outside employers was attacked by the complainants because the required level of proficiency is higher in the common system. "The Tribunal holds that it is not necessary to achieve a perfect match between outside jobs and those in the common system. There must merely be sufficient similarity between these jobs."
Keywords:
adjustment; allowance; flemming principle; knowledge of languages; language allowance; qualifications; salary; scale;
Judgment 1912
88th Session, 2000
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"The methodologies adopted by international organisations for setting and adjusting the remuneration of the staff, in principle, must enable results to be obtained that are stable, foreseeable and clearly understood [...] when the applicable method uses an external index, [...] not with a view to requiring the competent body to conform automatically to the index, but only as a simple orientation', which in itself is not a breach of any rights, the staff can only be protected against arbitrariness if the criteria used in deviating from the suggested orientation of the external index are objective, adequate and known to the staff."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821
Keywords:
adjustment; bias; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; criteria; duty to inform; organisation's duties; rule of another organisation; salary; scale;
Consideration 19
Extract:
"International civil servants do not have an acquired right [...] to an automatic indexing of their salaries. [...] The establishing of regulations for the periodic adjustment of salary is within the discretion of the organisations provided that these regulations do not violate the principles of international civil service law and their application does not bring about an erosion of salary that could be regarded as substantially jeopardising the contractual balance between those organisations and their staff members."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1118
Keywords:
acquired right; adjustment; cost-of-living increase; discretion; international civil service principles; salary; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
1, 2, 3, 4 | next >
|
|
|
|
|
