Judgment 1413
78th Session, 1995
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[The complainant's] claim to a higher grade is irreceivable. Even if her career did suffer delay she may not seek redress on that account in the context of the choice of career path; nor may she impugn any decision that she failed to challenge in time or object to her grading as administrative assistant."
Keywords:
assignment; career; complaint; delay; post classification; promotion; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; time bar; time limit;
Judgment 1281
75th Session, 1993
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"According to the case law the grading of posts is a matter within the discretion of the executive head of an international organisation. So the Tribunal will not interfere with the decision impugned in this case unless it was taken without authority or shows some procedural or formal flaw or a mistake of fact or of law, or overlooks some material fact, or is an abuse of authority, or draws a clearly mistaken conclusion from the facts. Moreover, the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment of the facts for the Secretary-General's."
Keywords:
abuse of power; case law; competence; decision-maker; discretion; disregard of essential fact; executive head; flaw; formal flaw; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; post classification; procedural flaw;
Judgment 1207
74th Session, 1993
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"A distinction must be drawn between the upgrading of the complainant's post and his own promotion. Any regrading is bound to affect an organisation's structure and will therefore depend on the way in which work is organised. [...]
The fact that pending the outcome he was fulfilling duties pertaining to a more highly graded post that did not yet exist does not entitle him to compensation, let alone retroactive promotion. [...]"
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 940, 1016, 1025
Keywords:
administrative delay; date; effective date; organisation's interest; personal promotion; post; post classification; promotion;
Judgment 1152
72nd Session, 1992
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"As [the Tribunal] has said many times, grading requires close familiarity with the conditions in which the staff member works. [...] The decision is, in other words, a discretionary one. [...] Consistent precedent has it that the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment or direct that a new one be made unless it is satisfied on the evidence that there is a fatal flaw".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; limits; post; post classification;
Judgment 1113
71st Session, 1991
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant failed to have her post upgraded. Her plea of disregard of relevant facts fails. "The essential point is that, though the complainant's duties might warrant an upgrading if she showed a higher degree of responsibility, initiative and judgment, it was proper to take the view that she did not, and therefore her post does not warrant the higher grade." The Tribunal holds that, despite the difference of opinion, there was evidence on which such a judgment could be based and will not substitute its own view on the matter for the organization's.
Keywords:
criteria; different appraisals; disregard of essential fact; grade; judicial review; post classification;
Consideration 2
Extract:
After carrying out a staff review, the organization confirmed the grading of the complainant's post at grade G.5. "The reasons for CERN's decision in this case are evident from the file, the implication in the words used being that it accepted the 'views and recommendations' on the file that there should be no upgrading."
Keywords:
advisory opinion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; judicial review; post classification; recommendation;
Judgment 1067
70th Session, 1991
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The grading of a post depends on evaluation of the work done and the degree of responsibility it involves. The evaluation must be done by those who by training and experience are able to apply the relevant technical criteria, and the Tribunal will interfere with a decision based thereon only where the organisation is shown to have applied wrong principles or drawn illogical conclusions."
Keywords:
criteria; discretion; judicial review; limits; post classification;
Considerations 7-8, Summary
Extract:
The complainant, who holds grade P.3, challenges the Organization's refusal to regrade his post to P.4. The fact that his chief failed to complete a questionnaire about changes in his duties does not, as he alleges, constitute a flaw such as to vitiate the reclassification procedure. Nor does the administration's refusal to disclose the Classification Unit's findings amount to a denial of due process.
Keywords:
disclosure of evidence; due process; organisation's duties; post classification; procedural flaw; procedure before the tribunal; report;
Judgment 994
68th Session, 1990
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Three successive decisions to promote the complainant were taken: a promotion by direct selection from grade G.6 to P.3 as from 1 July 1986; a personal promotion from G.6 to G.7 as from 1 January 1985 and the outcome of a procedure which led to his post being regraded from G.6 to P.3 effective on 1 February 1984. The complainant challenges the Administration's decision to treat the regrading decision as void. The regrading decision was accepted by the complainant and showed no flaw. As it became final on the expiry of the time limit for challenge, the Administration may not go back on it.
Keywords:
condition; cumulative decisions; flaw; personal promotion; post classification; professional category; promotion; time limit; withdrawal of decision;
Summary
Extract:
The complainant was granted three concurrent promotions: the first by direct selection from grade G.6 to P.3 with effect from 1 July 1986; the second by personal promotion from G.6 to G.7 with effect from 1 January 1986; and the third as a result of the regrading of his post from G.6 to P.3 with effect from 1 February 1984. The Administration said he could choose between two options: either his promotion to P.3 as from 1 February 1984 would be deemed to have cancelled the earlier ones and, in keeping with Article 3.4.4 of the Staff Regulations, his pensionable remuneration would stay at the level it had reached at that date; or else he might keep the personal promotion and his pensionable remuneration would be at the level it had reached at 1 July 1986. The complainant having refused to choose between the two options, the Administration applied the second one. Insofar as that decision conflicts with the decision to regrade his post P.3 as from 1 February 1984 it cannot stand.
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 3.4.4 OF THE ILO STAFF REGULATIONS
Keywords:
consequence; cumulative decisions; general service category; pension; pensionable remuneration; post classification; professional category; promotion; withdrawal of decision;
Judgment 968
66th Session, 1989
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"The attribution of duties to a staff member, the nature of the duties to be carried out and the grading of posts are matters that the Director-General decides at discretion. The Tribunal will not interfere with such a decision unless it was taken without authority [etc]".
Keywords:
assignment; discretion; judicial review; limits; post classification; post description;
Judgment 929
65th Session, 1988
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
For several years the complainants have been trying to obtain review of the description and grading of their posts. Their claims have all been rejected. The Tribunal was satisfied that on the evidence the description of their duties was out of date. In the circumstances the organization committed a mistake of law by refusing to carry out the requested review.
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; elements; flaw; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The grading of a post depends on evaluation of the work done and the degree of responsibility involved. Such evaluation must be done by those who by training and experience are able to apply the relevant technical criteria, and the Tribunal will interfere only if the organization is shown to have applied the wrong principles or drawn illogical conclusions."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; limits; post classification;
Judgment 809
61st Session, 1987
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"The organization submits that it followed a practice introduced by the master standard for job classification which the International Civil Service Commission has approved and which applies throughout the United Nations system. But the master standard does not apply directly to the staff of the international organisations: it consists of mere guidelines which the organisations are free to introduce into their own regulations."
Keywords:
administrative instruction; binding character; enforcement; general decision; icsc decision; post classification; practice; rule of another organisation; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 804
61st Session, 1987
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"For want of other evidence the Tribunal cannot but conclude that the consultation required by the order [laying down the procedure to be followed when the reclassification of a post is requested] never took place. The requirement of an on-the-spot evaluation is not met by just taking note of the staff member's application: there must be a meeting and discussion with him on any points it may raise"
Keywords:
flaw; inquiry; investigation; post classification; procedural flaw; right to reply;
Judgment 791
60th Session, 1986
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
The organization argues that because the post was regraded there was no longer any point in the complainant's challenging the lawfulness of the appointment. "The plea relates only to part of [the complainant's] claims and it fails anyway. As an unsuccessful candidate he may challenge any decision that served to invalidate the holding of the competition."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; appointment; candidate; cause of action; competition; other; post classification; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 629
54th Session, 1984
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The Tribunal holds that on the evidence the supervisor did not break promises as alleged by the complainant in support of his claims: first of all, when assigning additional work to the complainant, his supervisor made no promise to him; furthermore, while he led the complainant to believe that he would suggest upgrading of his post, he appears to have done so. The claim for compensation fails.
Keywords:
post classification; promise; promotion;
Consideration 8
Extract:
For some years the complainant has been trying, to no avail, to have his post upgraded. "Although the evidence shows the complainant to be a fine staff member who has perhaps not fared as well towards the end of his career as he might reasonably have expected, that does not mean the iILO has been in any way at fault."
Keywords:
career; legitimate expectation; post classification; promotion; satisfactory service;
Judgment 614
53rd Session, 1984
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The complainant claims to have received unequal treatment. He invites the Tribunal to order disclosure of another staff member's personnel file for comparison with his own, along with the file on the grading of his post. "The ILO objects to disclosing another official's records to the complainant but is willing to let the Tribunal see them."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 564, 565
Keywords:
confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; equal treatment; personal file; post classification; request by a party;
Judgment 606
52nd Session, 1984
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
Following a recommendation by the Appeals Committee, the Director-General ordered a desk audit on the qualifications for the complainant's duties. The results were submitted to the committee responsible for post classifications, which advised that the post should not be reclassified. Determining the grade of a post is a matter falling within the discretion of the administration. Its conclusions can only be set aside on certain grounds, none of which have been established by the complainant in respect of the impugned decision.
Keywords:
discretion; inquiry; investigation; judicial review; post classification;
Considerations
Extract:
"There are no rigid rules for determining whether a post properly belongs to the professional or the general service categories. It depends upon the presence or absence of factors which only the expert, or at least the knowledgeable knows how to weigh. It is a question to be decided by experience rather than by rule. Those who conduct the desk audit have the necessary experience. The final decision falls within the discretion of the Director-General".
Keywords:
criteria; discretion; general service category; post classification; professional category;
Judgment 594
51st Session, 1983
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
"It is not every reformulation of the duties of a post that produces the result that there are increased duties and responsibilities within the meaning of [the material provision in the Staff Manual]. What must be shown is that the totality of enumerated duties, taken in the light of the everyday functioning of the post, in all the circumstances surrounding such functioning, represents an increase in the duties and responsibilities of the post. This the complainant has been unable to show."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; condition; post classification; post description; promotion;
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The matters cited by the complainant as showing prejudice and bias fall far short of establishing any abuse of authority on the part of the WHO and the allegation of personal prejudice and bias must be dismissed as groundless."
Keywords:
bias; lack of evidence; post classification;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The extent of the duties and the nature of the responsibilities attached to a post are questions of fact. These facts were the subject of investigation and assessment [...] after interviews with the complainant and after consultation with the regional administration and the technical staff at headquarters. The Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment or direct that a new assessment be made unless it is shown that the [organisation] acted on some wrong principle."
Keywords:
discretion; inquiry; investigation; judicial review; post classification;
Judgment 591
51st Session, 1983
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant's post was left at the same level. In deciding this, the Director erred in principle: in the absence of criteria, he should have remitted the request to the appropriate unit for reconsideration after himself providing clear parameters. The International Civil Service Commission has established a job classification system. The organization has completed post descriptions in accordance with that system. Three and a half months after the impugned decision, the complainant's occupational group was classified using the ICSC system. The complainant is referred to the organization for a new assessment of his post on the basis of the ICSC system.
Keywords:
criteria; enforcement; flaw; icsc decision; no provision; post classification;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The post classification system suffers from a lack of parameters and criteria. The Board of Appeal for want of categorical elements of judgment to support reclassification, concluded that the post should remain at the same level. "This seems to be putting the onus on the complainant of finding a way out of a situation created by the obscurity of the system for which the organization is responsible."
Keywords:
criteria; post classification;
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The classification of a post depends upon an assessment of the type of work performed and the level of responsibility. It is an assessment which can only be made by persons whose training and experience equip them for the task of evaluating and grading posts. The Tribunal, therefore, will not substitute its own assessment or direct that a new assessment be made unless it is shown that the organization acted in the matter on a wrong principle."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; limits; post classification;
Judgment 585
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The applicable Staff Rule says that it is the Administrative Council which may decide to reclassify a post on a proposal by the President. As the President saw no reason for regrading the complainant, he had no proposal to put to the Council.
Keywords:
competence; executive body; executive head; post classification; proposal;
Consideration 3
Extract:
"A decision against a change in grading is a discretionary one, and according to its case law the Tribunal will quash such a decision only if [...]".
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Consideration 2
Extract:
"What the right [to a hearing] requires is that the parties should have a chance to state their views before any decision is taken to their detriment. It does not mean that they must be allowed to comment at every stage in the procedure. In particular they have no right to be consulted by a branch whose opinion is sought by the decision-maker, and [the directorate] was not required to give the complainant a hearing when it was consulted for the second time about her grading."
Keywords:
condition; post classification; right to reply;
Judgment 529
49th Session, 1982
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
"The assessment of the type of work performed and the level of responsibility is necessarily a value judgement, which can only be done by persons whose training and experience equip them for the task of evaluating and grading posts. The Tribunal, therefore, will not substitute its own assessment or direct that a new assessment be made unless it is shown that the organization acted in the matter on some wrong principle. The Tribunal does not review a decision of this sort unless [...]."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Consideration 2
Extract:
According to the complainant, personal prejudice is evidenced by the delay. "It does not follow that because the reclassification exercise was protracted the organization was prejudiced against the complainant. Indeed the reclassification required careful fact-gathering and evaluation which was by its nature time-consuming."
Keywords:
administrative delay; bias; post classification;
Judgment 486
48th Session, 1982
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
The complainant moved from grade GS.8 to P.2. "The Tribunal doubts whether the change was an appointment of any sort; the complainant remained in the same post which was reclassified into a higher grade. But anyway appointment is a word whose meaning depends upon the context. It can be used to mean an appointment to the staff of [the organization] or an appointment to a post on the staff. [Here] it is clearly being used in the former sense, as an appointment to the service. [...] It is not and cannot be contended that in January 1979 the complainant concluded one period of service and without changing his post embarked upon another. This solution must be rejected."
Keywords:
appointment; consequence; general service category; post classification; professional category; promotion;
