Judgment 446
46th Session, 1981
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 2
Extract:
By a majority opinion of 3 to 5, the internal appeals body recommended not reclassifying the complainant's post. The Director-General accepted that view. "The question is one for a general appreciation by persons who are familiar with the working conditions". Unless there is clear evidence of a mistaken approach to the problem, the view of the majority (and of the Director-General) must be accepted.
Keywords:
discretion; internal appeals body; post classification; recommendation;
Consideration 3
Extract:
The absence of a reclassification plan, as provided for in the Staff Regulations, was not regarded by the internal appeals body as a lacuna nor did it prevent the Director-General from taking a decision on a request for a post reclassification. "If therefore there was a violation of the Regulations cited, it does not vitiate the decision impugned."
Keywords:
enforcement; flaw; lack of injury; post classification; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 428
45th Session, 1980
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 1
Extract:
The decision concerned the grading of a post. "The Tribunal will be even more cautious in reviewing the impugned decision since some of the matters raised in the complaint are technical and the [organisation] is more familiar than the Tribunal with the circumstances which determine how they should be settled."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Although the complainant was not invited to address the [Review Committee on classifications], his application for review of his classification was put to it. It is therefore not open to him to allege any breach of his right to a hearing, since the right does not mean that he is entitled to be heard in person."
Keywords:
consequence; internal appeals body; post classification; right to reply;
Judgment 425
45th Session, 1980
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4 and 6
Extract:
The Tribunal decides that the complainants are entitled to be graded at the higher grade provided for in a post description and which reflects their actual duties. These descriptions, which are provisional, are binding on the organisation until amended. The organisation may review the post descriptions and return the complainants to their present grade. "Such a decision would not impair their acquired rights since they are not entitled to preserve the position arising under this judgment."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; grade; organisation's duties; post classification; post description;
Judgment 377
42nd Session, 1979
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal will consider neither whether the grading criteria applied were sound, nor whether they were correctly chosen and applied nor, in particular, whether the degree of responsibility attached to the complainant's post was properly taken into account. The case would be different only if the Tribunal discovered some clear mistake of assessment in the decision which the Director-General came to."
Keywords:
criteria; judicial review; post classification;
Judgment 355
41st Session, 1978
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The complainants claim that the grading of their posts no longer corresponds to their actual duties and should be reviewed. "That contention may not be submitted directly to the Administrative Tribunal. It should first be put to the Director-General who will take a decision" as prescribed by circular.
Keywords:
case sent back to organisation; internal remedies exhausted; post classification; post description;
Judgment 299
38th Session, 1977
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he Director-General made an appraisal of facts which is not subject to review by the Tribunal."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Judgment 275
36th Session, 1976
International Patent Institute
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that the decisions of the Director-General were not promotions but reclassifications following the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations. These reclassifications "having been delayed for reasons for which the staff members are not responsible should be put into effect at the date on which the complainants took up their duties but, like the Staff Regulations themselves, not before 1 January 1971".
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; date; decision; delay; effective date; enforcement; post classification; provision; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 252
34th Session, 1975
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant contends that his functions should be assigned to the next grade up. The Tribunal, having examined the matter in detail comparing the post descriptions and statutory definitions of the two grades in question ["messenger" and "doorkeeper"], holds that the complainant's argument is unfounded and that the Director-General did not exceed or abuse his discretionary authority. The complaint is dismissed.
Keywords:
discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"It is for the competent body and in the last resort the Director-General to grade each staff member. Certain criteria have to be followed. [...] Further, the competent body will not base its grading exclusively on the text of the [Regulations] and post description, but will also consider the qualifications and degree of responsibility required by each."
Keywords:
criteria; discretion; grade; post classification; post description;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"In all cases grading a post requires close familiarity with the conditions in which the incumbent works. It is therefore a discretionary decision which in general the Tribunal may not interfere with unless it was taken without authority, or violates [...]."
Keywords:
criteria; discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Judgment 228
32nd Session, 1974
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
After working under a P.5 contract, the complainant accepted a P.4 mission on condition that his post would be upgraded to P.5. The organization had clearly informed him that the upgrading of his post would depend on the results of an administrative procedure; "it could not promise and had in fact never promised any positive outcome"; it "kept the complainant informed of the steps taken under the procedure and of developments. [The complainant] cannot therefore properly contend that the organization showed bad faith towards him."
Keywords:
acceptance; amendment to the rules; condition; contract; downgrading; good faith; grade; offer; post classification; promise; promotion;
Judgment 208
30th Session, 1973
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"At the time of his appointment the complainant was subject to the old grading standards. His position was therefore different from that of staff members recruited in accordance with the new standards. Thus, since he was not in the same position as those staff members, the complainant did not suffer any discrimination in relation to them."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; equal treatment; grade; post classification; provision; seniority; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Consideration 1
Extract:
In applying the provisions on post-grading the Director-General will exercise his discretion. The Director-General's decision to reject the complainant's request for regrading was in accordance with the material provisions, "that is to say [...] he took a decision which lay within his discretion."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Consideration 2
Extract:
"Insofar as [the Regulations] confer certain powers on the Director-General in respect of grading, they do not determine the substance of the measures to be taken. [...] Consequently in applying different standards in 1971 from those which had been applicable in 1968 the Director-General did not exceed his authority."
Keywords:
discretion; enforcement; post classification; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 178
26th Session, 1971
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he grading of each post is based exclusively on objective criteria. [Whilst] the present incumbent of the post [...] has qualifications superior to the standards required for the post which she accepted on the understanding that it would be upgraded [and] while this fact must leave her with an understandable grievance, it affords no legal basis for the upgrading which she claims."
Keywords:
discretion; grade; post classification; post description; qualifications;
Considerations
Extract:
The Secretary-General, in the exercise of his discretionary power, "determine[s] and then grade[s] the posts held by staff members. Consequently, the Administrative Tribunal, which has before it an appeal against a decision of those authorities grading a specific job, may interfere with that decision only if [etc.]."
Keywords:
discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant maintains that she accepted the post only on the promise that it would shortly be graded G.6 and that the job description was marked "proposed G.6". But the complainant, who relies on mere promises or proposals, cannot claim any right to have her post regraded G.6. in the course of the general review of the grading of posts to align the organisation's classifications with those of the United Nations, the Secretary-General was "not bound by any prior legal obligation towards the complainant."
Keywords:
good faith; grade; organisation's duties; post classification; post description; promise; promotion; terms of appointment;
Judgment 158
24th Session, 1970
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"Although the complainant's services terminated [...] as a result of his resignation, he was still entitled to challenge his grading during an earlier period."
Keywords:
cause of action; complaint; post classification; receivability of the complaint; resignation; separation from service;
Judgment 153
23rd Session, 1970
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"In the opinion of the Tribunal, an assessment of what amounts to an increase in duties and responsibilities sufficient to entitle the holder of a post to a higher grade or pay-level cannot be made simply by comparing one list of tasks with another."
Keywords:
grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal will neither substitute its own assessment for that of the Director-General nor direct that a new assessment be made. In taking this view the Tribunal acts in accordance with the well-established principle that it does not review a decision of this sort unless [...]."
Keywords:
discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification;
Judgment 106
17th Session, 1967
United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5(B)
Extract:
"Having conformed to his two-fold [statutory] obligation [to hear the opinion of the ad hoc committee and to base himself on the standards observed in other international organisations] the Director is free to exercise his discretion in carrying out the responsibilities assigned to him. It follows that the Administrative Tribunal must confine itself to determining whether" [at issue is the classification of posts].
Keywords:
advisory body; consultation; discretion; judicial review; limits; post classification; rule of another organisation;
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Tribunal's review has brought to light no irregularities. "While the Director in the exercise of his discretion might have arrived at a more favourable decision in respect of complainant, whose professional competence has never been questioned, it is not for the Tribunal, having exercised its power of review, to substitute its own judgment for that of the responsible authority."
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification;
Consideration 5(B)
Extract:
"The Director [...] was entitled to undertake a general reclassification of staff members within the prescribed grades at the time the new system was introduced, and [...] for the purpose of this reclassification the duties formerly performed by the staff members concerned had to be taken into account, but only as one factor among others."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; organisation's duties; post classification; reorganisation; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 60
10th Session, 1962
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration II 2(A)
Extract:
"The complainant does not claim nor establish that during [the material] period her duties and responsibilities justified her being graded M.5, and it must therefore be concluded that she was correctly graded. Moreover, she has not established that other officials had been regraded M.5 although they performed exactly the same duties as she did. Hence she cannot complain of discrimination."
Keywords:
equal treatment; evidence; lack of evidence; post classification;
Consideration II 2(A)
Extract:
The complainant has not suffered any financial prejudice. "On the other hand, the mere fact of belonging to a given grade does not carry any prestige value, unlike the use of a title, such as 'secretary' for instance [...]. Thus there is no moral prejudice."
Keywords:
cause of action; injury; lack of injury; moral injury; post classification; title of post;
Consideration II 2(B)
Extract:
The Tribunal has carried out a detailed comparison of the tasks assigned to the complainant with those established by the classification plan. "If the organization made a mistake [...] it was not in describing complainant as a budget clerk but in placing her in grade M.4. In fact, the complainant belonged to grade M.5."
Keywords:
grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Consideration II 2(C)
Extract:
The Tribunal holds that the organization made a mistake in placing the complainant, a budget clerk, in grade M.4. "In fact, the complainant belonged to grade M.5 [...]. Under the new classification plan [...], the complainant was [...] downgraded, and the effects of this change on her salary must be determined."
Keywords:
consequence; downgrading; flaw; grade; post classification; reduction of salary; salary;
Judgment 53
9th Session, 1961
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The complainant was appointed in the grade of P.1 and accepted such appointment. Had he considered that the classification of his post did not accurately reflect the type and level of his duties and responsibilities and the qualifications required of him, it was open to him [...] to request at any time a re-examination of the classification of the post he occupied, and this he did not do. Consequently his submission in respect of incorrect grading must also be set aside."
Keywords:
absence of final decision; internal remedies exhausted; post classification; receivability of the complaint;
Judgment 39
7th Session, 1958
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"In the absence of any evidence that a particular decision taken in virtue of [the sovereign authority of the legislative organs and the Secretary-General] was arbitrary or in bad faith [...] the Tribunal cannot constitute itself as a body competent to scrutinise the classification of officials and thus to assume a hierarchical authority over the organisation and its executive head."
Keywords:
competence of tribunal; discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification;
Considerations
Extract:
"The adoption of revised salary scales together with a new classification plan [...] cannot in itself be put forward as justification for proceeding to an arbitrary and unfair treatment of officials [...]. Any such system may only be applied in the interest of the organisation and in accordance with the guarantees [set out in the Staff Regulations]; it is only where evidence has been adduced before the Tribunal to show that the organisation failed properly and fairly to observe the terms of an official's appointment and of the [...] regulations applicable that a claim would be in judgment."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; equal treatment; grade; judicial review; post classification; provision; salary; scale; staff regulations and rules;
