ICSC decision (35,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: ICSC decision
Total judgments found: 47

1, 2, 3 | next >

• Judgment 4597

  
  135th Session, 2023
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the changes made with respect to her salary pursuant to the implementation of the unified salary scale as adopted by the United Nations General Assembly.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4479

  
  133rd Session, 2022
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants challenge the changes made with respect to their salary resulting from the decision of the Director-General to implement the unified salary scale as adopted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; icsc decision; precedent; salary;
  

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  The complainants refer to the Tribunal’s case law which identifies a duty on an organisation which adopts standards or elements of the UN common system, to assess the lawfulness of those standards or elements before implementing them (see, for example, Judgments 1265, consideration 24, 1765, consideration 8, and 2420, consideration 11). They contend the ILO failed in its duty to assess the lawfulness of the unified salary scale by simply relying on the legal opinion obtained from the OLA by the ICSC. How this duty can be satisfied must vary according to the circumstances. The OLA’s advice was, in relation to the unified salary scale and acquired rights, correct. The import of that advice was made known to the ILO in the period leading up to the implementation of the unified salary scale. There is not a scintilla of evidence to suggest that the ILO or any of its officers thought the advice was wrong. In these circumstances, the ILO discharged the duty the case law imposes.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1265, 1765, 2420
  

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; lawfulness of a measure;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4465

  
  133rd Session, 2022
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to cease paying boarding assistance for his son following amendments to the education grant scheme.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  acquired right; complaint allowed; duty of care; education expenses; icsc decision;
  

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  The ICSC’s reasons for the proposed changes to the education grant scheme impugned in these proceedings were rational, logical and credible. They did not involve the general elimination of the benefit but its recasting with modifications of how, when and why the benefit would be paid. The adoption of the proposed changes by the IAEA was in conformity with obligations arising from membership of the UN common system. This is a valid reason for change (see Judgment 1446, consideration 14), at least in the absence of any apparent unlawfulness attending the change either procedurally or substantively.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1446
  

  Keywords:

  acquired right; education expenses; icsc decision;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4381

  
  131st Session, 2021
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the changes made with respect to her salary.

  Considerations 22-26

  Extract:

  It is appropriate to say something about two judgments in the UN Tribunal system although this Tribunal is not bound by them (see, for example, Judgment 3138, consideration 7). The first is a Judgment of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT): UNDT/2017/097. The second is a Judgment of the United Nations Appeals Tribunal (UNAT) (Judgment 2018-UNAT-840) upholding an appeal against the first mentioned decision. The proceedings concerned a challenge to the unified salary scale arising from the 2015 ICSC Annual Report, that is to say, the same scale impugned in these proceedings. A central issue was whether the removal of the dependency element and the effect of its removal involved a breach of an acquired right. The UNDT’s approach led to the conclusion there had been such a breach. Generally, the UNDT’s consideration of the issue involved an orthodox application of principles accepted and applied by a multitude of international administrative tribunals including this Tribunal. The approach of the UNAT was different.
  After a lengthy and detailed discussion of the facts and the authorities, the UNDT addressed the question of whether there have been breaches of an acquired right. The UNDT’s reasoning included the following elements. The salary of the affected staff was a fundamental element in the contract of employment of each. The staff had a legitimate expectation that such a fundamental element could not be changed without their consent. The right to salary necessarily extends to its quantum. The balance between the rights and obligations of the parties would be broken if an organisation was allowed to unilaterally modify the level of salary. As salaries increased over time, staff have an accrued right to be paid the newly determined salaries. The quantum of the newly determined salaries enjoys the same protection as the initial ones.
  In relation to the specific position being addressed, namely the elimination of a salary with a dependency element and the creation of a unified salary scale, the UNDT reasoned as follows. The additional payment made on account of dependence was initially embedded in staff salaries which is a fundamental and essential term of employment. Accordingly it could not be unilaterally reduced or discontinued irrespective of the reason for the change or its impact. The UNDT went on to conclude that the introduction of the transitional allowance was insufficient to safeguard the acquired rights of the applicants.
  The difficulty with the UNDT’s analysis is that it did not sufficiently recognise that a methodology for the calculation of payment for work done, which depends on a factor not referable to that work done, is readily amenable to change. It is to be recalled that one of the relevant considerations in assessing whether there has been a breach of an acquired right is the reason for the change.
  The UNAT plainly did not accept the reasoning or conclusion of the UNDT when upholding an appeal from its decision. Much of the UNAT’s reasoning central to its decision focused on the meaning of the expression “acquired rights” in Staff Regulation 12.1 which provided that the regulations could be supplemented or amended “without prejudice to the acquired rights of members of the staff”.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3138
  

  Keywords:

  case law of other tribunals; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  Consideration 29

  Extract:

  [T]he ICSC’s reasons for the proposed changes to salaries and benefits impugned in these proceedings were rational, logical and credible. They did not involve an elimination of the benefit but the modification of how, why and in what circumstances the benefit would be paid. Their adoption by the WFP (notwithstanding opposition when being originally proposed) was in conformity with obligations arising from membership of the UN common system. This is a valid reason for change (see Judgment 1446, consideration 14), at least in the absence of any apparent unlawfulness attending the change either procedurally or substantively.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1446
  

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; salary;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  acquired right; complaint dismissed; icsc decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4380

  
  131st Session, 2021
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the changes made with respect to his salary.

  Consideration 19

  Extract:

  [T]he ICSC’s reasons for the proposed changes to salaries and benefits impugned in these proceedings were rational, logical and credible. They did not involve an elimination of the benefit but the modification of how, why and in what circumstances the benefit would be paid. Their adoption by the WFP (notwithstanding opposition when being originally proposed) was in conformity with obligations arising from membership of the UN common system. This is a valid reason for change (see Judgment 1446, consideration 14), at least in the absence of any apparent unlawfulness attending the change either procedurally or substantively.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1446
  

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; salary;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  acquired right; complaint dismissed; icsc decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4138

  
  128th Session, 2019
  World Intellectual Property 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.

  Consideration 50

  Extract:

  It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administration’s decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. WIPO cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSC’s decisions lawful. Accordingly, WIPO should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324
  

  Keywords:

  compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;
  

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of WIPO to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from WIPO’s membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; payslip;
  

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSC’s approval of it, the organization’s decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
  “Some principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;
  

  Consideration 29

  Extract:

  The Tribunal’s mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunal’s adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organization’s legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  Consideration 40

  Extract:

  The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

  Keywords:

  general assembly resolution; icsc decision; icsc statute; practice;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4137

  
  128th Session, 2019
  International Telecommunication Union
  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.

  Consideration 32

  Extract:

  The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; post adjustment;
  

  Consideration 42

  Extract:

  It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administration’s decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. The ITU cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSC’s decisions lawful. Accordingly, the ITU should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324
  

  Keywords:

  compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;
  

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of the ITU to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from the ITU’s membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; payslip;
  

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSC’s approval of it, the organization’s decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
  “Some principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;
  

  Consideration 23

  Extract:

  The Tribunal’s mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunal’s adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organization’s legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4136

  
  128th Session, 2019
  International Organization for Migration
  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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;
  

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of IOM to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from IOM’s membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; payslip;
  

  Consideration 23

  Extract:

  The Tribunal’s mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunal’s adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organization’s legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  Consideration 42

  Extract:

  It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, consideration 22). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administration’s decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. IOM cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSC’s decisions lawful. Accordingly, IOM should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324
  

  Keywords:

  compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;
  

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSC’s approval of it, the organization’s decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
  “Some principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;
  

  Consideration 32

  Extract:

  The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; post adjustment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4135

  
  128th Session, 2019
  World Health 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.

  Consideration 11

  Extract:

  [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSC’s approval of it, the organization’s decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
  “Some principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;
  

  Consideration 39

  Extract:

  The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; post adjustment;
  

  Consideration 28

  Extract:

  The Tribunal’s mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunal’s adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organization’s legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  Consideration 49

  Extract:

  It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administration’s decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. WHO cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSC’s decisions lawful. Accordingly, WHO should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324
  

  Keywords:

  compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;
  

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of WHO to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from WHO’s membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; payslip;
  

  
  
  

• 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.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; decision quashed; en banc review; icsc decision; plenary judgment; post adjustment; salary; scale;
  

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of the ILO to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from the ILO’s membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; payslip;
  

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSC’s approval of it, the organization’s decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
  “Some principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.”

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160
  

  Keywords:

  general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;
  

  Consideration 29

  Extract:

  The Tribunal’s mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunal’s adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organization’s legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303
  

  Keywords:

  competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;
  

  Consideration 40

  Extract:

  The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; post adjustment;
  

  Consideration 50

  Extract:

  It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administration’s decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. The ILO cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSC’s decisions lawful. Accordingly, the ILO should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM are reinstated, together with interest.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324
  

  Keywords:

  compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3931

  
  125th Session, 2018
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants contest the decision to apply new salary scales in New Dehli as from 1 November 2014, which show a salary freeze for staff members already in service and a lower salary for new staff.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; general service category; icsc decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3885

  
  124th Session, 2017
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests the decision to defer the promulgation of the revised post adjustment multiplier for staff of the UN system working in New York.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; staff representative;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3883

  
  124th Session, 2017
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants contest the implementation of new salary scales as from March 2012 in Bangkok.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; general service category; icsc decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3740

  
  123rd Session, 2017
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainants challenge the legality of changes to the FAO General Service category staff salary scale consequent to the implementation of recommendations contained in an ICSC report in 2012 on local employment conditions in Rome.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; general service category; icsc decision; salary;
  

  Consideration 10

  Extract:

  [I]t must be observed that, according to the documents that have been presented to the Tribunal, the recommendations in the relevant ICSC decisions were limited to and only established two things: a revised salary scale for the GS category in Rome and revised levels for dependency allowances. The recommendations were silent with respect to all of the other matters dealt with in the 25 January 2013 Administrative Circular. […]As the record shows, none of these measures were mandated by or derived from the new ICSC salary scale or dependency allowance recommendations or were necessary for their implementation. Out of a number of possible options for the implementation of the recommendations, these are the measures FAO decided to adopt. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the interim adjustment freeze or the break in service and reappointment salary consequences were derived from the ICSC’s allegedly illegal decision and were not measures that the FAO decided to adopt as options for implementation of the ICSC recommendations.

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; impugned decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3739

  
  123rd Session, 2017
  International Fund for Agricultural Development
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges changes to the IFAD General Service Staff salary scale as a result of the implementation of recommendations contained in an ICSC report in 2012 on local employment conditions in Rome.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint dismissed; icsc decision; impugned decision; salary;
  

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  [I]t must be observed that, according to the documents that have been presented to the Tribunal, the recommendations in the relevant ICSC decisions were limited to and only established two things: a revised salary scale for the GS category in Rome and revised levels for dependency allowances, the latter not being in issue in this proceeding. The revised salary scale recommendation was silent with respect to all of the other matters dealt with in the 31 January 2013 President’s Bulletin. In particular, it did not deal with setting an implementation date; the application of the revised salary scale to only certain staff members; or the freezing of interim adjustments for staff appointed prior to 1 February 2013. As the record shows, none of these measures were explicitly mandated by the revised ICSC salary scale recommendation. Out of several possible options for the implementation of the recommendation, these are the measures IFAD decided to adopt. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the interim adjustment freeze was derived from the ICSC’s allegedly illegal decision and that it was not a measure that IFAD decided to adopt from among options for implementation of the ICSC recommendation.

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; impugned decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3360

  
  118th Session, 2014
  International Atomic Energy Agency
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The Tribunal dismissed the complaints seeking a review of the decision to apply to the complainants’ salaries the post adjustment calculated on the basis of the ICSC 2010 cost-of-living survey for Vienna.

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  "While ideally, the ICSC would be able to use only precise numbers to reflect staff rents for each duty station, the reality is that it would be excessively cumbersome to adopt that methodology, particularly considering that the rates would not undergo drastic changes from the estimated numbers that are currently used. Considering the overall goal of establishing and maintaining purchasing parity among the various duty stations and the difficulty associated with calculating costs using every single staff member’s precise information, the Tribunal concludes that it is not unreasonable for the ICSC to adopt a system of estimation in the interest of efficiency and brevity. The Tribunal is satisfied that the methodology used was established pursuant to a prescribed, transparent process, without any vitiating errors of fact or law."

  Keywords:

  icsc decision; salary;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 3143

  
  113th Session, 2012
  International Fund for Agricultural Development
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  complaint allowed; icsc decision; rental subsidy;
  

  
  
  

• 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 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 7

  Extract:

  "The Association of Professional Staff has submitted an amicus curiae brief. Although the possibility of gathering the observations of an association or union representing staff interests is not envisaged under its Statute, the Tribunal considers that it can only be beneficial to extend that possibility, as do other international administrative tribunals, to associations and unions wishing to defend the rights of the staff members whom they represent in the context of disputes concerning decisions affecting the staff as a whole or a specific category of staff members. Indeed, the Organization has raised no objection to the Tribunal's examination of the submissions in question, which are not, however, to be equated with the brief of an intervener, and which are simply intended to clarify certain points raised by the complaints with the Tribunal."

  Keywords:

  amicus curiae; general decision; icsc decision; iloat statute; intervention; staff union;
  

  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 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;
  

1, 2, 3 | next >