ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

Short-term (322,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Short-term
Total judgments found: 51

< previous | 1, 2, 3 | next >



  • Judgment 2821


    107th Session, 2009
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 6 to 10

    Extract:

    The complainant was employed by the ILO from 16 June 1995 until 30 April 2004 under two temporary contracts which were extended several times and did not provide for pension coverage. On 1 May 2004 he was granted a fixed-term contract and acquired the status of an official of the Organization. On 1 August 2006 he filed a grievance, requesting that the above-mentioned period be validated for the purposes of affiliation to the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund.
    "The complainant did not challenge the content of [his temporary] contracts within the six-month time limit laid down for this purpose in the contracts themselves. It follows that he was manifestly no longer in a position, by the date on which he filed his grievance with the Organization, i.e. more than two years after the end of the period covered by his last contract, to challenge the provisions thereof."
    The Tribunal rejected the arguments on which the complainant relied to persuade it that this time limit was not applicable to him.

    Keywords:

    contract; date; extension of contract; fixed-term; internal appeal; official; participation; participation excluded; pension entitlements; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; short-term; status of complainant; time bar; time limit; unjspf; validation of service;



  • Judgment 2750


    105th Session, 2008
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 27

    Extract:

    "Although [IAEA] Staff Regulation 4.02 provides that no notice is necessary in the case of expiry at the due date of a fixed-term or short-term appointment, the duty of an organisation to act in good faith and to respect the dignity of staff members requires that reasonable notice be given, 'particularly so that they may exercise their right to appeal and take whatever action may be necessary' (see Judgments 2104 and 2531)."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: IAEA Staff Regulation 4.02
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2104, 2531

    Keywords:

    contract; date; fixed-term; good faith; notice; official; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; right of appeal; separation from service; short-term; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2708


    104th Session, 2008
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    For the period 24 June 2002 to 31 December 2003 the complainant was given a fixed-term contract, financed from technical cooperation funds, which was extended until 30 June 2004. The complainant was subsequently given two external collaboration contracts, the second one ending on 31 March 2005. The contractual relationship between the complainant and the ILO ended at that date. "It emerges from an analysis of [the provisions of Circular No. 630] that short-term contracts should be offered in only specific cases and for a limited duration.
    Having already obtained a fixed-term contract which had been extended, the complainant could not be recruited under a short-term contract, let alone under an external collaboration contract, to continue performing the same work as he had performed under his fixed-term contract, without contravening the spirit of the applicable texts.
    The complainant's last two contracts should therefore be converted into a fixed-term contract."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ILO Circular No. 630

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; amendment to the rules; breach; claim; condition; consequence; contract; duration of appointment; extension of contract; external collaborator; fixed-term; limits; period; project personnel; provision; separation from service; short-term; written rule;



  • Judgment 2531


    101st Session, 2006
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9-10

    Extract:

    "A question remains as to whether the complainant was given sufficient notice of the Organization's intention not to renew his contract. Precedent has it that staff on short-term contracts are entitled, before any decision is taken not to extend or renew their appointment, to 'reasonable notice', particularly so that they may exercise their right to appeal and take whatever action may be necessary. It is true that in this case the short-term Staff Rules do not require any notice, except in the event of termination (when notice is limited to seven days), which does not apply in this case. Account should be taken, however, of the fact that the complainant was employed uninterruptedly by the Organization for more than three years. He was officially notified of the non-renewal of his contract - which until then had been regularly renewed - only by a letter he received on 28 January 2004, that is three days prior to the expiry of his last appointment. The defendant Organization suggests that he was well aware that his contract would not be renewed since he had been informed of that fact first unofficially and then officially on 16 January 2004. It even goes so far as to argue that the announcement of the competition for the complainant's post in the vacancy notice of 27 October 2003 constituted the 'reasonable notice' required by the case law and that, from that date onwards, the complainant knew full well that if he was not selected he would not continue working for the [Organization].

    The Tribunal considers that it was only through the non-renewal decision received on 28 January 2004 that the complainant was able to know for certain that he would be leaving the Organization and that he would not be offered any other employment, despite the fact that [...] he had performed many duties, starting in 1998. Thus the situation is not very different from that dealt with by the Tribunal in its Judgment 2104 [...] and it is worth noting that, in its attempt to reach a settlement, the Organization had offered to pay the complainant the equivalent of three months' salary, consisting of two months in lieu of reasonable notice and one month for moral injury. That proposal was reasonable and, in view of the long working relationship between the [Organization] and the complainant and the very brief time that elapsed between the notification of the non-renewal of the contract and the end of the complainant's appointment, the Tribunal will echo that proposal by ruling that the complainant shall be paid a sum equal to three months' salary and allowances."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2104

    Keywords:

    case law; competition; contract; decision; duty to inform; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; right of appeal; seniority; separation from service; short-term; staff regulations and rules; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2362


    97th Session, 2004
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "By virtue of successive short-term contracts and extensions thereof, [the complainant's] service lasted for four years. The series of extensions and the grant of pension coverage and other benefits did not signify a change in her original status. Staff Rule 3.5(a) [...] cannot be invoked by her as proof that her appointment had been converted to fixed-term. While this provision ostensibly bestows on her 'the terms and conditions of a fixed-term appointment', it would be stretching the intent and signification of the provision to make the complainant a fixed-term official (see Judgment 1666). Had that been the purpose of the Rule, it would have explicitly so provided instead of stating that 'the terms and conditions of a fixed-term appointment [...] shall apply to [the official concerned]'. The complainant was recruited as a short-term official and remained one at all times."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Staff Rule 3.5(a) of the Rules Governing Conditions of Service of Short-Term Officials
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1666

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; commutation; contract; evidence; extension of contract; fixed-term; fringe benefits; fund membership; interpretation; official; period; provision; purpose; short-term; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; successive contracts; terms of appointment; unjspf;



  • Judgment 2351


    97th Session, 2004
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 7(c) and 8(a)

    Extract:

    When he was recruited the complainant provided a copy of a diploma but its authenticity was questioned a few years later. The matter was queried with the educational establishment and the Secretary-General then issued the complainant a written censure. The Tribunal considers that "there was not sufficient proof either that the diploma was not issued to the complainant [...] or that the latter had been informed that, according to the [educational establishment], he was not entitled to receive it. The Secretary-General might have enquired further into the aspects which remained uncertain, but did not do so. The 'likelihood' referred to by the Secretary-General, if it is not incontrovertibly ascertained, cannot make up for the lack of conclusive evidence. Based as it is on an arbitrary appraisal of the facts, the impugned decision as far as it concerns the disciplinary sanction must therefore be set aside. Although it did not give rise to a written decision, the non-renewal of the short-term contract was based on charges levelled against the complainant in the course of the disciplinary procedure. The mere cancellation of the disciplinary sanction must entail that of the decision of non-renewal."

    Keywords:

    bias; consequence; contract; decision; decision quashed; degree; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; executive head; grounds; implied decision; inquiry; investigation; lack of evidence; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; right; short-term; terms of appointment; warning;



  • Judgment 2308


    96th Session, 2004
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15-18

    Extract:

    "The complainant seeks compensation in lost salary and benefits for the years during which she has been remunerated on the basis of short-term employment while performing work of indefinite duration equivalent to that of a fixed-term staff member. In other words, she claims a retroactive fixed-term status. There is no basis on which the complainant can claim to be treated retroactively as if she had a fixed-term contract. She was recruited as a short-term staff member without having to go through a competition process; she accepted several contract renewals. It was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide during all those years whether to renew each short-term contract or offer her a fixed-term contract [...]. She accepted and signed all the short-term contracts. [...] If it is sought to have the Tribunal treat those short-term contracts as being null, it must be shown that they have violated some fundamental and overriding principle of law or that her apparent consent thereto was vitiated (see Judgment 2097, under 11). This, the complainant has failed to do."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2097

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; burden of proof; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; fixed-term; injury; lack of consent; law of contract; offer; short-term; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2263


    95th Session, 2003
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The question to be resolved is that of whether, for the purposes of service order No. 99 [which defines the conditions and formalities governing the granting of a personal promotion], the period in excess of the 12-month maximum duration stipulated for short-term contracts should be taken into account in calculating the 18 years of continuous service. The answer is necessarily affirmative. [...] Once [the first 12-month period] had elapsed, the complainant must be considered to have been in service [...], even in the absence of a provision to that effect and taking into account the contracts he was granted thereafter. Regarding the [one month] break in service which occurred [subsequently], it is necessary to establish whether this prevented the complainant from completing the 18 years of continuous service [...] The Tribunal considers that it did not. The evidence on file, and particularly an affidavit produced by the complainant as an annex to his written submissions, shows that the break imposed on the complainant was justified only by the fact that he was employed under short-term contracts. since the Tribunal has determined that the complainant must be deemed to have been in service from 17 November 1982 onwards, the break in question must be viewed as a period of leave."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: SERVICE ORDER No. 99

    Keywords:

    continuance of operations; contract; duration of appointment; fixed-term; interpretation; leave; no provision; personal promotion; promotion; reckoning; seniority; short-term; successive contracts; unpaid leave; validation of service;



  • Judgment 2198


    94th Session, 2003
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 12-13

    Extract:

    The complainant worked, from 1993 to 2000, under a series of short-term contracts of varying durations. "It was clearly within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide whether to renew the complainant's short-term contract or offer him a fixed-term contract. The complainant cannot now claim to be treated retroactively as if he had a fixed-term contract; he was at all times a short-term staff member (see, for example, Judgment 2107, under 10). [...] Precedent has it that, at the discretion of the executive head, a temporary appointment may be extended or converted to a fixed-term appointment, but it does not carry any expectation of, nor imply any right to, such extension or conversion and shall, unless extended or converted, expire according to its terms, without notice or indemnity (see, in particular, Judgment 1560, under 4)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1560, 2107

    Keywords:

    contract; discretion; duration of appointment; executive head; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; non-retroactivity; notice; right; short-term; successive contracts; terminal entitlements;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    The complainant worked, from 1993 to 2000, under a series of short-term contracts of varying durations. The complainant submits that there has been unjust enrichment on the part of the organization: it profited materially from appointing him on a short-term basis because he was doing the work of a fixed-term staff member. "The existence and validity of the contracts of employment are a complete bar to this plea. The doctrine of unjust enrichment finds its origins in the law of quasi-contract. As was said in Judgment 2097, under 20, 'the existence of a valid contract between the parties, covering the very matters which are the subject of the claim, excludes any claim of unjust enrichment'."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2097

    Keywords:

    acceptance; contract; duration of appointment; fixed-term; intention of parties; law of contract; offer; right; short-term; successive contracts; unjust enrichment;

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The complainant worked, from 1993 to 2000, under a series of short-term contracts of varying durations. "[A]ppointments extended by the organization to prospective employees and accepted by the latter freely, are policy matters over which the Tribunal will not interfere."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; intention of parties; judicial review; offer; short-term; successive contracts;



  • Judgment 2181


    94th Session, 2003
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The complainant seeks the validation of her service, for pension purposes, of the period between 13 September 1978 and 14 November 1979. What emerges from Article 23 of the UNJSPF Regulations is that "staff members whose terms of appointment expressly excluded participation in the UNJSPF during the period of service preceding their participation cannot subsequently request the validation of that period of service. that was the case with the complainant [...] she could [...] have made use, at the time [...] of the appeal mechanisms established by the [organisation], to obtain a modification of the terms of her contracts, or to challenge the legality of [the] rule [which provided that staff members engaged under short-term contracts could not participate in the unjspf]. However, since she failed to do so in due time, she is hardly in a position to seek the annulment of her appointments of 1978 and 1979 more than 20 years later. Besides, the nature of those appointments can no longer be challenged. The argument that the complainant did not use the available means of appeal for fear of harming her career cannot be accepted. Moreover, her request for validation of service, which was submitted on 22 December 1999, must be considered to be time-barred."

    Keywords:

    contract; contributory service; fund membership; internal appeal; late appeal; participation excluded; receivability of the complaint; short-term; terms of appointment; time bar; time limit; unjspf; validation of service;



  • Judgment 2107


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The complainant's claim that he should be considered as a fixed-term staff member cannot be sustained. The complainant was recruited as a short-term staff member, without having to go through a competition process; he accepted several contract renewals. It was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide during the years that the complainant was with the organization whether to renew each short-term contract or offer him a fixed-term contract. There is no basis on which the complainant can claim to be treated retroactively as if he had a fixed-term contract. He was at all times a short-term staff member."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; claim; competition; complainant; contract; decision; discretion; executive head; fixed-term; non-retroactivity; official; participation; refusal; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2104


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "Precedent says that there will be abuse of authority where the administration, though not overstepping its authority, uses it for some purpose other than those prescribed by law or, to put it more broadly, those that the general interest requires. A staff member who pleads misuse of authority, and the Tribunal that allows the plea, must be able to identify the improper purposes for which the authority (in this case the authority not to renew a short-term appointment) has been exercised."

    Keywords:

    abuse of power; contract; definition; misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; purpose; short-term;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    An international organization has a "duty to warn the [staff member] about the non-renewal [of his contract] long enough in advance to enable him to exercise his rights and take whatever steps he saw fit." The present case concerned a short-term appointment which was renewed several times.

    Keywords:

    contract; duration of appointment; non-renewal of contract; notice; organisation's duties; separation from service; short-term;



  • Judgment 2097


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    Because of serious financial difficulties the organisation had to employ the complainants simultaneously under a fixed- term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. After being restored to their full-time fixed-term status they complained about the rates of remuneration received by them under their short-term contracts. "The principle which guarantees equal remuneration for work of equal value [...] is designed to prevent discrimination by employers between employees and to ensure that persons performing different work of the same or similar value shall receive equal remuneration. The organization is right to submit that its most common application is to the classification or grading of jobs [...]. That principle was never intended to apply so as to give rise to a claim by an individual to be paid at the same rate for all work which he or she performs: differential rates for work performed under different conditions, such as overtime to take a common example, are not discriminatory. In the present case there is nothing improper in the who's paying lower rates to persons such as the complainants doing temporary work on a short-term basis."

    Keywords:

    amount; budgetary reasons; condition; contract; difference; enforcement; equal treatment; fixed-term; general principle; official; organisation; overtime; part-time employment; post classification; safeguard; salary; scale; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainants worked simultaneously under a fixed-term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. "While it is unusual to find an employee working simultaneously for a single employer under two different contracts of employment, there is nothing inherently illegal about such an arrangement."

    Keywords:

    contract; difference; exception; fixed-term; official; organisation; part-time employment; short-term; terms of appointment;

    Considerations 10-11

    Extract:

    In respect of each short-term appointment taken up by them, [the complainants] entered into a written contract specifying the duration, remuneration, grade, step and other pertinent conditions applicable to them. They do not deny that they were paid exactly as stated in the contract documents. If the contracts are valid and enforceable and not in breach of any applicable staff rule or principle of international civil service law, the Tribunal has no power to reform them or to remake the bargain which the parties themselves have chosen to make.
    Furthermore, the complainants, having taken the benefit of the short-term appointments offered to them, have a heavy burden to overcome if they are to argue successfully that the Tribunal should now treat the contracts as being null, for it is now impossible to replace the parties in the position they were in at the time the bargain was struck. They must show either that their short-term appointments violated some fundamental and overriding principle of law or that their apparent consent thereto was vitiated.

    Keywords:

    role of the tribunal; short-term; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2086


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    In order to be awarded a personal promotion the complainant must have completed 18 years of continuous service under a fixed-term or permanent contract. "The [organisation] is arguing that [...] in determining whether the complainant fulfilled [such a] requirement [...] reference must be made to clauses of the contracts which came into force unopposed, [including] short-term contracts [...] The approach is too rigid [...] The issue was [not] one of applying or interpreting the complainant's early appointments [...] It is a matter of applying a rule which is currently in force and which concerns the legal nature of former contractual relationships between the parties. In other words, in the light of the current rule, what type of appointment did the early contracts establish? It should be noted that the name they were given will not necessarily express the actual relationship".

    Keywords:

    applicable law; condition; contract; criteria; definition; effective date; enforcement; fixed-term; interpretation; permanent appointment; personal promotion; provision; reckoning; short-term; working hours;



  • Judgment 1666


    83rd Session, 1997
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6(c)

    Extract:

    It may not be inferred from Short-Term Rule 3.5 and from the extension of his appointment that the complainant was entitled to the retroactive grant of non-local status. "The effect of the Rule is to bestow retroactively on a short-term official benefits granted to the holder of a fixed-term appointment. If, like the complainant, he belongs to the professional category the place of recruitment will have no bearing on the terms of his appointment. So neither does it have any bearing on entitlements granted retroactively."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ILO SHORT-TERM STAFF RULE 3.5

    Keywords:

    appointment; contract; duty station; local status; non-local status; professional category; short-term; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 1560


    81st Session, 1996
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "The complainant had a temporary appointment. The Staff Regulations and Rules distinguish such an appointment both from a permanent and a fixed-term one and from a traineeship and supernumerary employment. It differs in particular from a fixed-term appointment in that it is expected from the outset to be a fairly short stint, with no more than a few brief extensions, whereas the fixed-term appointment is commonly extended and may even afford the basis of a career in the Organization".

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: UNESCO STAFF RULE 104.8
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 444, 1116

    Keywords:

    career; contract; definition; difference; duration of appointment; fixed-term; short-term; staff regulations and rules; successive contracts;



  • Judgment 1526


    81st Session, 1996
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "An organisation owes its staff a general duty of care, and must not cause them undue hardship. A case of non-renewal is no exception. The duty may entail avoidance or reduction of injury that termination may cause [...] at least when it was not a short-term appointment, when the record of service was long, and when the official had reasonable expectations of making a career in the organisation."

    Keywords:

    career; contract; duration of appointment; general principle; injury; legitimate expectation; moral injury; non-renewal of contract; official; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; short-term;



  • Judgment 1385


    78th Session, 1995
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 12-13

    Extract:

    The complainant had his short-term appointment extended after a break during which he had an external collaboration contract. Under Rule 3.5 of the short-term rules whenever the appointment of a short-term official is extended by a period of less than one year so that the total continuous contractual service amounts to one year or more, the terms and conditions of a fixed-term appointment - with certain exceptions - apply. "The interruption of the complainant's appointment by the external collaboration contract was merely a device to deny him the protection of Rule 3.5 without forfeiting the benefit of his services. There being no change in the actual conditions of employment, the real intention was that he should continue to do the same work as before. [...] The external collaboration contract must be treated like any other of his short-term contracts that ensured continuity of service. So his 'total continuous contractual service' [exceeded one year] and he thus became entitled [...] to 'the terms and conditions of a fixed-term appointment'."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ILO SHORT-TERM RULE 3.5

    Keywords:

    contract; duration of appointment; enforcement; extension of contract; external collaborator; fixed-term; intention of parties; interpretation; non-renewal of contract; short-term; staff regulations and rules; successive contracts;



  • Judgment 1383


    78th Session, 1995
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 7-10

    Extract:

    The organization contends that the Tribunal lacks competence to hear a complaint from a "temporary adviser", whose status does not imply the right of appeal. But the Tribunal finds that the organization has described her "as holding an appointment as [a] short-term consultant. [...] Her contract was for a total of over ninety days, she was therefore not a 'temporary advisory' whithin the meaning of [WHO Manual paragraph] II.12.590." holding a "temporary short-term appointment as a consultant [...] she therefore qualified as a 'staff member'" with the right to appeal. "The rules draw no distinction between 'regular' staff members and the holders of temporary appointments."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: WHO MANUAL PARAGRAPH II.12.590

    Keywords:

    duration of appointment; external collaborator; internal appeal; locus standi; ratione personae; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; short-term; staff member; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 1116


    71st Session, 1991
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant, whose post was abolished, alleges that the organization committed a mistake of law by keeping him in its employ under a long string of short-term appointments. He relies on what he says was UNESCO's established practice of extending fixed-term appointments for never less than one year. The Tribunal observes that there is no rule binding the organization to a minimum or maximum period of extension and that the complainant does not offer a shred of evidence of the practice he says it followed.

    Keywords:

    burden of proof; contract; duration of appointment; evidence; extension of contract; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; practice; short-term; successive contracts;

< previous | 1, 2, 3 | next >


 
Last updated: 07.05.2024 ^ top