Equal treatment (188, 189, 900, 663,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Equal treatment
Total judgments found: 235
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 | next >
Judgment 3666
122nd Session, 2016
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to promote him in 2012.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant [...] raises the issue that Eurocontrol, by failing to implement rules supporting the Memorandum of Understanding, made his promotion impossible and that the JCD’s statement on this issue showed bias in favour of Eurocontrol. In its unanimous opinion, the JCD stated in paragraph 3 that “the Memorandum of Understanding merely state[d] in Article 10 of its Annex that union representatives should not be discriminated against other staff because of their trade union affiliation or activities. Of course, [Eurocontrol] must abide by the principle of equality of treatment and ensure that the activities carried out by trade union representatives do not have any prejudicial effect on their career. They should all have a supervisor and their performance be appraised regularly as requested by the Tribunal [in Judgment 2869], which is the case for [the complainant] since 2008.” The Tribunal considers this statement to be correct. By assigning the complainant to a post in which 50 per cent of his activity was devoted to the tasks listed in his job description (with the remaining 50 per cent devoted to his trade union activities), he was reinserted into the office hierarchy which allowed for periodic performance appraisals by a line manager. This restored the equality of treatment between the complainant and other staff members as requested by the relevant provision of the Memorandum of Understanding and by Judgment 2869.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2869
Keywords:
equal treatment; staff representative; staff union activity;
Judgment 3575
121st Session, 2016
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on him the disciplinary measure of discharge from duty with due notice.
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[T]he case law consistently holds that the principle of equal treatment cannot be invoked to protect misconduct (see Judgments 2773, 2555, 1977, 1271 and 207)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 207, 1271, 1977, 2555, 2773
Keywords:
equal treatment; misconduct;
Judgment 3524
120th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the non-application to her of a rule concerning automatic promotion.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
acquired right; complaint dismissed; equal treatment; promotion;
Judgment 3493
120th Session, 2015
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant takes issue with the fact that his remuneration is lower than that received by a colleague in a lower grade.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; equal treatment; grade; salary;
Judgment 3492
120th Session, 2015
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant takes issue with the fact that her remuneration is lower than that received by a colleague in a lower grade.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; equal treatment; grade; salary;
Judgment 3450
119th Session, 2015
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal set aside the contested appointment because the complainant's right to a fair and open competition was violated.
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that Ms N. was at the P.5 level and was transferred without competition to a P.4 position, retaining her P.5 salary and benefits. Therefore, the Tribunal considers her appointment to be an in-grade transfer, though it could appear to some to have been a demotion or downgrade. It is useful to note that, in principle, it would not appear to be in the ILO’s best interest, from a financial point of view, to fill positions of lower grades with staff members from higher grades, nor would it demonstrate a particular respect for a staff member’s dignity to assign her or him to a position at a lower grade.
The complainant raises the issue of violation of the principle of equality of treatment, arguing that she was treated differently than Ms N. following the abolition of her post. As the Tribunal finds Ms N.’s appointment to have been unlawful, there can be no violation of the principle of equality of treatment, as there cannot be equality in unlawfulness.
Keywords:
equal treatment; respect for dignity; transfer;
Judgment 3442
119th Session, 2015
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that the decision to dismiss internal appeals concerning a claim for compensation for service-incurred disability was flawed.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
absence of final decision; complaint allowed; decision quashed; equal treatment; harassment; invalidity; joinder; service-incurred;
Judgment 3427
119th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants unsuccessfully challenge a series of decisions concerning pension issues, those being decisions of general application.
Consideration 26
Extract:
[I]t is observed that none of the complainants claim to be Vice-Presidents or Principal Directors. Accordingly, their
claims of unequal treatment must fail as they have not met the threshold requirement to advance this plea, namely, that they are similarly situated in fact and in law.
Keywords:
equal treatment;
Judgment 3420
119th Session, 2015
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision not to convert his consultant's contract into a fixed-term appointment.
Considerations 18-19
Extract:
"According to the Tribunal’s case law, the principle of equal treatment requires that staff members in an identical or comparable position in fact and in law be treated in the same manner by the employer organisation (see Judgment 2198, under 14).
The plea that the principle of equal treatment has been breached must be dismissed, since the complainant supplies no proof that a person in the same situation in fact and in law as him obtained the “regularisation of his or her situation” during the period in question."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2198
Keywords:
burden of proof; equal treatment;
Judgment 3415
119th Session, 2015
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant unsuccessfully challenges the decision not to extend his fix-term contract beyond the normal tour of service.
Consideration 10
Extract:
"His argument is that there were no performance issues justifying a decision not to extend. However to compare his position with others to demonstrate inequality of treatment, the complainant would have to have shown that extensions were granted in the past even if there were not programmatic or other compelling reasons for the extension, or that there were programmatic or other compelling reasons justifying the extension of his contract. As this has not been demonstrated, his claim of inequality of treatment must fail."
Keywords:
equal treatment;
Judgment 3404
119th Session, 2015
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that the complainant had not proved that his lack of promotion in 2012 undermined his prospect of advancement within Eurocontrol.
Consideration 17
Extract:
As the Tribunal has consistently held, the principle of equal treatment applies only to officials in a similar situation in fact and in law.
Keywords:
equal treatment;
Judgment 3357
118th Session, 2014
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: After the transfer of his pension rights acquired under a national scheme to the Organisation’s pension scheme, the complainant successfully challenges the refusal to recalculate the number of pensionable years credited to him.
Consideration 16
Extract:
"[T]he complainant manifestly has no reason to insinuate that the decisions concerning him were prompted by a wish to discriminate on account of his role as a staff representative.
Contrary to the view apparently taken by the complainant, who merely comments in this respect that “it [cannot] be proven” that his activities in that capacity were not borne in mind by the Organisation, or that “the possibility [cannot] be ruled out” that they were, the existence of such bias, which would constitute a misuse of authority, may not be presumed. It is incumbent upon the official who intends to rely on a plea of this nature to furnish at least some prima facie evidence in support thereof; mere allegations which are moreover purely speculative are immaterial here (see, for example, Judgments 1775, under 7, 2019, under 24, 2927, under 16, or 3182, under 9)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1775, 2019, 2927, 3182
Keywords:
equal treatment; staff representative;
Judgment 3298
116th Session, 2014
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants contest the conditions of their reassignment and allege unequal treatment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
breach; complaint allowed; equal treatment;
Consideration 24
Extract:
"[B]y denying the complainants the status of non-locally recruited officials, whereas that status was granted to three officials reassigned to Addis Ababa in the same circumstances, the [Organization] breached the principle of equal treatment."
Keywords:
breach; equal treatment; reassignment; status of complainant;
Judgment 3284
116th Session, 2014
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenged the decision not to conduct a review of the grade assigned to his post.
Consideration 17
Extract:
These cases involve the application of the principle of equal value for equal work in contexts removed from the facts of this case. The Tribunal rejects this aspect of the complaint to the extent that the complainant invites the Tribunal to determine that the work he did from January 2007 should properly be viewed as work at the P-2 level and that he should have been remunerated accordingly. However, it was not in dispute that he was performing work beyond his current grade (as acknowledged in a memorandum dated 30 November 2009 from the Head of HRB, as found by the Appeals Council and conceded by the OPCW in its reply to the Tribunal). He is entitled to material damages for this. He was offered an ex gratia payment of 3,000 euros, an offer he did not accept. This amount is inadequate. An appropriate sum is 25,000 Swiss francs.
Keywords:
equal treatment;
Judgment 3283
116th Session, 2014
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenged the decision not to promote him earlier to grade A3.
Consideration 19
Extract:
"It is clear that Section III.C of Circular No. 271 supports rather than detracts from the principle of equal treatment for all persons once they are recruited or promoted to a category A post. The basic requirement is that once recruited to that category, all persons, whether recruited externally with no prior EPO experience, or promoted internally, with prior EPO experience, no past EPO category B or C experience will be taken into account for subsequent promotion within category. All persons who are within any specific A category are placed on an equal seniority footing. Their promotion will be determined by the relevant years of experience within the specific category and their career path, average or rapid, and their performance as reflected in their appraisal reports. It will also depend upon the existence of a vacant post, and in accordance with other criteria that are specified, for example in Article 49(1) of the Service Regulations of the EPO. In the end, promotion is to be “by selection” on a competitive basis and within the discretion of the President on the recommendation of the Promotion Board."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Section III.C of Circular No. 271; Article 49(1) of the Service Regulations
Keywords:
equal treatment; promotion; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 3219
115th Session, 2013
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges his non-selection for a post, alleging that the selection process was flawed and unfair.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
competition; complaint allowed; decision quashed; equal treatment; flaw; selection procedure;
Judgment 3199
115th Session, 2013
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the calculation of her daily subsistence allowance, alleging unequal treatment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; equal treatment;
Judgment 3185
114th Session, 2013
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges her performance evaluation report, alleging personal prejudice and discrimination on the part of her direct supervisor.
Consideration 5(b)
Extract:
"In principle, a supervisor cannot be criticised for recording the mistakes and errors of a subordinate with a view to preparing that person’s periodical performance evaluation, provided that the purpose of that action is, on the one hand, to ensure that the rating will be objective and, on the other hand, to increase the service’s efficiency by improving the performance of the person concerned. In the instant case, however, it is plain from the evidence that this practice was consistently applied to the complainant in order to stigmatise her shortcomings. [...] Her [evaluation] report is thus tainted with a serious flaw which justifies that it be set aside".
Keywords:
breach; equal treatment; flaw; organisation's interest; performance report; purpose; rating; supervisor; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
Judgment 3157
114th Session, 2013
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the lawfulness of the selection process for a post for which he had unsuccessfully applied.
Considerations 9 and 11
Extract:
"[H]aving regard to the submissions [...], the Tribunal notes that the complainant was excluded from the technical evaluation on the grounds that he did not possess all the required qualifications, but that the [three] candidates shortlisted [...] did not possess them either. [...] [T]he complainant received unequal treatment when the shortlist was established. As the selection process is tainted with a flaw, the impugned decision must be set aside and the disputed appointment must be cancelled [...]. The Organization must shield the successful candidate from any injury that might result from the cancellation of his appointment, which he accepted in good faith."
Keywords:
appointment; breach; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; consequence; criteria; degree; equal treatment; good faith; grounds; internal competition; lack of injury; organisation's duties; procedural flaw;
Judgment 3084
112th Session, 2012
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 19
Extract:
"[A]n organisation must ensure that a staff member is not disadvantaged on the grounds of his or her participation in staff representation activities."
Keywords:
equal treatment; freedom of association; organisation's duties; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 | next >
|
