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

Motivation (669,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Motivation
Total judgments found: 102

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | next >

  • Judgment 4700


    136th Session, 2023
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges measures reorganising his working time.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    In stating that she shared an opinion that none of the members in fact held, the Head of the Human Resources and Services Unit ultimately failed to provide any reasons for her decision in this regard. It is well established by the case law that the reasons for a decision must be sufficiently explicit to enable the person concerned to understand why it was taken (see, for example, Judgment 4164, consideration 11) and an absence of reasons clearly does not satisfy this minimum standard.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4164

    Keywords:

    motivation;

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    [I]n the impugned decision, the Head of the Human Resources and Services Unit did not explain why the majority view of the three members of the Committee who had concluded that this was not a question of a simple managerial decision should be departed from in this way. Neither did she explain why a reduction from three to two officials did not constitute a change in working conditions, notwithstanding the fact that the measure was adopted pursuant to a rule of application (Rule of Application No. 29) specifically dealing with the working conditions of DNM operational staff.
    Under settled case law, the executive head of an international organisation, when taking a decision on an internal appeal that departs from the recommendations made by the appeals body, to the detriment of the employee concerned, must adequately state the reasons for not following those recommendations (see Judgment 4437, consideration 19, and the case law cited therein). As the Tribunal also recalled in Judgment 3695, consideration 9, when the executive head of an organisation “fail[s] to explain, in any satisfactory and persuasive way, why the recommendations of the [appeals body], whether the majority or the minority, should be rejected, [f]or this reason alone the impugned decision rejecting [a] complainant’s appeal [...]should be set aside” (see also, in this respect, Judgment 3161, consideration 7, and the case law cited therein).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3161, 3695, 4437

    Keywords:

    motivation;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    [T]he fact that the insufficient and deficient reasoning in the impugned decision breached the complainant’s right to a due internal appeals procedure undoubtedly caused him moral injury, which warrants an award of damages. The Tribunal considers that this injury will be fairly redressed, in this case, by awarding compensation to the complainant under this head in the amount of 1,000 euros.

    Keywords:

    moral injury; motivation;



  • Judgment 4697


    136th Session, 2023
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the Director General’s decision to impose on him the disciplinary sanction of downgrading.

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    In light of these factors, the Tribunal considers that it was not possible for the Director General to depart from the unanimous opinions of the Disciplinary Board and the Joint Committee for Disputes in the way he did. The grounds he gave in the contested decisions do not meet the standard of a clear and cogent demonstration of the Organisation’s ability to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was guilty.

    Keywords:

    beyond reasonable doubt; motivation; standard of proof;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    In the context of the present case, the Tribunal considers that the Director General of the Organisation could only depart from the unanimous opinions of the Disciplinary Board and the Joint Committee for Disputes for clear and cogent reasons (see Judgment 4504, consideration 10).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4504

    Keywords:

    motivation;



  • Judgment 4695


    136th Session, 2023
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision requiring him to reimburse the undue payments of salary he received during absences that were declared to be unjustified by the Administration.

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    [I]t is established case law of the Tribunal that the reasons for a decision must be sufficiently explicit to enable the person concerned to take an informed decision accordingly. They must also enable the competent review bodies to determine whether the decision is lawful and, in particular, the Tribunal to exercise its power of review (see Judgment 4467, consideration 7).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4467

    Keywords:

    motivation;



  • Judgment 4690


    136th Session, 2023
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to uphold his transfer to Budapest.

    Considerations 6-7

    Extract:

    The requirement that the potential transferee be provided with reasons for the transfer is plainly linked to the right to present possible observations before the decision to transfer is perfected. The complainant contends no reasons were given. This is challenged by the FAO which says, […] in substance, three reasons were given. The first was that this transfer to the Budapest duty station accommodated the complainant’s medical circumstances which had been evaluated by the FAO’s medical service. The second was that the post was commensurate with the complainant’s professional qualifications and the third was that the transfer was in the interests of the Organization.
    The second and third reasons were expressed at a high level of generality as reasons for nominating Budapest as the duty station and, particularly given the requirement in FAO Manual paragraph 311.4.11 to take into account the requirements of the work programme, did not provide the detail the provision implies. At the very least, that matter had to be expressly addressed in the reasons given for the transfer. Moreover, to say that the Budapest duty station accommodated the complainant’s medical circumstances is not, in isolation, a reason for transferring him there unless it is suggested, which it is not, that the Budapest duty station was the only duty station to which the complainant could have been transferred and which accommodated his medical circumstances. The Organization failed to do what was required of it, namely to provide him with reasons.

    Keywords:

    motivation; transfer;



  • Judgment 4683


    136th Session, 2023
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests her non-selection to a post.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal’s case law states that the duty to state the reasons for the choice does not mean that they must be notified at the same time as the decision. These reasons may be disclosed at a later date, for example in the context of appeal proceedings (see Judgments 4467, consideration 7, and 2978, consideration 4).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2978, 4467

    Keywords:

    motivation; selection procedure;



  • Judgment 4674


    136th Session, 2023
    Pan American Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss her for misconduct.

    Considerations 9-10

    Extract:

    A difficulty with this approach of the Board is that while it may be true, based on its findings, that the complainant should have known, and possibly inferentially did know, “some” of her conduct was harassment, the Board made no finding that this was true of all the conduct charged against her as misconduct and proven to its satisfaction. This is not a case where each alleged act of misconduct was identified, separately, as warranting the sanction of dismissal. It was the aggregation of conduct “creating a hostile work environment over an extended period of time” which underlay the decision to dismiss. Additionally, one instance where the complainant had caused staff to cry occurred within two years of the complaint against her being lodged by the Staff Association in September 2016. Her complaint about lack of warning was directed to events over the entire preceding nine years comprehended by the charges, which events occurred, in the main, before 2014.
    In the impugned decision, the Director effectively repeated this flawed analysis of the Board though, significantly, omitted the word “some” (referred to earlier) in saying that “the Board found that your conduct was ‘so clearly out of bounds that [you] could not help but know that it was improper’”. As just discussed, no such compendious finding was made by the Board in relation to all the conduct relied upon by the Director in confirming the dismissal of the complainant by rejecting her appeal. This material flaw in the analysis by the Director was compounded by her saying that the complainant’s assertion that the Director of Administration and the HRM Director “tolerated” her conduct did not provide the complainant with a defence when her actions were so obviously a violation of the Harassment Policy. This comment is not motivated save to the extent that it involved a purported adoption of what the Board had concluded. No such general conclusion had been reached by the Board […].

    Keywords:

    beyond reasonable doubt; final decision; misconduct; motivation;



  • Judgment 4662


    136th Session, 2023
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the Secretary General’s decision to reject her application for voluntary departure and her claim for compensation for “legitimate resignation”.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    [I]n assessing the complainant’s application, the Committee and the Secretary General were entitled to take into account the Organization’s interests and the consequences of the complainant’s voluntary departure. The reasons given for rejecting her application – firstly, to await the arrival of a new executive director to assess the needs of the executive directorate, and secondly, because of the recent assignment of additional staff to her unit to meet human resources requirements – could be justified in terms of the Organization’s interests. It is not for the Tribunal to substitute its assessment for that of the Organization in such a case.

    Keywords:

    judicial review; motivation; organisation's interest;



  • Judgment 4658


    136th Session, 2023
    International Criminal Police Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges his suspension with pay during disciplinary proceedings against him.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal is of the view that the reasoning given for the suspension decision of 3 April 2018 is a generic formula which, in the absence of any other explanation, is meaningless. Accordingly, adequate reasons were not given for the decision [...].

    Keywords:

    motivation; suspension;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    [P]recedent has it that any administrative decision, even when the authority exercises discretionary power, must be based on valid grounds (see, for example, Judgments 4437, consideration 19, and 4108, consideration 3; see, concerning particularly the obligation to provide reasons for a measure of suspension, Judgment 4455, consideration 11).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4108, 4437, 4455

    Keywords:

    motivation; suspension;



  • Judgment 4654


    136th Session, 2023
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant seeks a redefinition of his employment relationship and the setting aside of the decision not to renew his employment contract.

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    It is clear from the submissions that the functions of statistician that he performed in HRMD no longer met that department’s requirements at the time when the decisions were taken. The IT projects on which the complainant mostly worked – namely those in the “ERP portfolio” – were due to finish in June 2017. Furthermore, new applications meant that WIPO’s various administrative units could now compile their own human resources statistics rather than needing as a matter of course to consult a specialist in this field employed within HRMD, with the result that HRMD no longer needed to have a full-time statistician. Contrary to what the complainant submits, the job description for his post, as drawn up in 2008, had been rendered obsolete, given that the content of a document of this type does not confer an entitlement to the continued existence of the post to which it relates.
    It thus appears that sufficient reasons underlay the abolition of the complainant’s post to justify that decision and accordingly that the disputed decision not to renew his appointment was itself based on valid, objective reasons, in compliance with the requirement recalled in consideration 16(b) [...].

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; motivation; outsourcing; post description;

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    The complainant [...] submits that the decision not to renew his appointment is unlawful because proper notice and reasons were not given for the decision to abolish his post, on which the non-renewal decision must necessarily have been based.
    However, while it is true that the Tribunal’s case law requires that a decision to abolish a post satisfy these conditions (see in particular Judgment 3041, consideration 8), they were indeed satisfied in this case.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3041

    Keywords:

    motivation; non-renewal of contract;



  • Judgment 4640


    135th Session, 2023
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges a series of management acts regarding his administrative status.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    On the question of delay and remedy, the Vice-President of DG4 arguably was obliged to explain why he favoured the approach of the minority and did not favour the approach of the majority (see Judgments 4427, consideration 9, and 3161, consideration 7) and did not do so adequately. However, it is unnecessary to determine this conclusively because the complainant has failed to establish moral injury occasioned by the delay which would justify an amount exceeding the amount actually awarded.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3161, 4427

    Keywords:

    moral injury; motivation;



  • Judgment 4625


    135th Session, 2023
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant disputes the lawfulness and outcome of a competition procedure in which she participated.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    The Tribunal considers that [the] reasoning is adequate in that it allows the complainant to understand the reasons why the successful candidate was selected, even if she does not agree with them. This is especially so since this case involves a decision relating to a competition procedure, for which the authority competent to make the appointment has a broad discretion, and it is moreover possible for the organisation to clarify the reasons for its choice at a later stage in the light of the specific grievances expressed by a candidate who considers her- or himself to have been adversely affected by the decision (see, in particular, Judgments 4467, consideration 7, 4259, consideration 6, 4081, consideration 5, 2978, consideration 4, and 2060, consideration 7(a)).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2060, 2978, 4081, 4259, 4467

    Keywords:

    competition; motivation;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal considers that, except in special circumstances, an organisation is not required to state the reasons why it chooses to fill a post using a particular type of competition.

    Keywords:

    competition; motivation;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    It is well established by the case law that how extensive the reasons need to be will depend on the circumstances of each case (see, in particular, Judgments 4164, consideration 11, 4081, consideration 5, 4037, consideration 7, and 1817, consideration 6).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1817, 4037, 4081, 4164

    Keywords:

    motivation;



  • Judgment 4624


    135th Session, 2023
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant takes issue with the type of contract successively awarded to her by the ILO and seeks adequate compensation for the injury she considers she has suffered.

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant [...] contends that the Director-General’s decision did not adequately justify the amount of compensation awarded, since that amount was not broken down between the various injuries for which compensation was awarded.
    However, the Tribunal considers that it is permissible for an international organisation to decide to award a lump sum in compensation for all injuries suffered by a member of its staff.

    Keywords:

    allowance; damages; motivation;



  • Judgment 4593


    135th Session, 2023
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the withdrawal of his right to supplementary days of annual leave for “travelling time”.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    [T]he Tribunal recalls that, as it stated in Judgment 4164, consideration 11, “[i]t is well established by the case law that the reasons for a decision must be sufficiently explicit to enable the staff member concerned to take an informed decision accordingly; that they must also enable the competent review bodies to determine whether the decision is lawful and the Tribunal to exercise its power of review”.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4164

    Keywords:

    motivation;



  • Judgment 4591


    135th Session, 2023
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the reduction in the amount of his functional allowance calculated in proportion to the reduction in his working hours.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The complainant also complains that no explanation was provided to him with his payslip [...].
    The Tribunal considers, however, [...] that an automatic decision, such as that to reduce the amount of an [...] allowance, is simply the consequence of putting into practice the change in the complainant’s working hours to which he had agreed and that the applicable rules are sufficiently clear. There is therefore no requirement for the Organisation to provide a more detailed formal explanation than that which appeared on the payslip sent to the complainant [...]. By reading that payslip, the complainant was able to understand that the amount of his allowance had been reduced by 20 per cent. It was therefore open to him to familiarise himself with the relevant provisions and, if necessary, to request further information in that regard.

    Keywords:

    motivation; motivation of final decision; payslip;



  • Judgment 4586


    135th Session, 2023
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to convert his suspension with pay into a suspension without pay pending an investigation for misconduct against him, as well as the overall length of his suspension.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The reasons given for the suspension without pay from 26 March 2019, and in effect the reason for transforming the suspension as one with pay to one without pay, was [...] that: “[t]he various interviews that have been conducted by OIG, including with you, and the strong evidence gathered thus far in the course of the investigation have reinforced the credibility of the allegations raised against you” and later: “the elements gathered by OIG [...] reinforce[d] the credibility of the allegations raised against you”. The letter of 26 March 2019 does not refer to the requirement in the rules that suspension without pay can only occur if the Director General (or a person acting on delegation) considers there are exceptional circumstances. But it can reasonably be inferred that the additional elements just quoted were viewed as constituting exceptional circumstances. The legal question which then arises is whether it was reasonably open to the decision-maker to form that opinion. The word “exceptional”, in this context, denotes circumstances which are beyond, and probably well beyond, circumstances which might simply justify suspension with pay. But apart from that, the expression “exceptional circumstances” is an expression of great width. It must be borne in mind that the power to suspend does not simply arise in circumstances where allegations of serious misconduct are being investigated or pursued in disciplinary proceedings (as it does in some other organisations’ rules). The power to suspend as expressly conferred by IOM’s rules can be exercised in relation to any conduct which might lead to a disciplinary sanction which could include alleged minor transgressions. But, of course, questions of proportionality can arise as discussed in consideration 8 [...]. Moreover, under Rule 10.3(d) a person suspended without pay is entitled to receive pay withheld if the allegations against the staff member were not substantiated or later found not to warrant summary dismissal. In this respect, the Rule itself ameliorates what otherwise might be viewed as the severe effect of suspension without pay. What, in substance, the letter of 26 March 2019 was saying was that the case against the complainant involving the receipt of corrupt payments of approximately 600,000 United States dollars (and solicited by him) was one where there was a much-increased measure of certainty, in the eyes of the Organization, that in fact corrupt payments in this amount had been received. If proved it would be a gross misconduct of the most egregious kind and almost certainly criminal behaviour. The decision-maker was entitled, in the Tribunal’s view, to treat the highly likely fact that the complainant had received corrupt payments in this amount solicited by him, as giving rise to exceptional circumstances in all the circumstances.

    Keywords:

    motivation; motivation of final decision; suspension without pay;



  • Judgment 4565


    134th Session, 2022
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on her the disciplinary sanction of downgrading for having engaged in gainful employment while on non-active status without prior authorisation.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    In the impugned decision […], the President was […] following the Committee’s conclusions (including that the complainant had acted in good faith) and recommendation which, in turn, was based, […] on a balanced and thoughtful consideration by the Committee of all the circumstances. In such a case, an executive head does not need to fully motivate acceptance and adoption of the conclusions and applicable recommendation (see Judgment 4044, consideration 7), particularly bearing in mind that the imposition of a disciplinary measure involves the exercise of a wide discretionary power (see Judgment 4460, consideration 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4044, 4460

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; discretion; motivation; motivation of final decision;



  • Judgment 4543


    134th Session, 2022
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges her performance evaluation for 2016.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recalls its settled case law under which “the executive head of an international organization, when taking a decision on an internal appeal that departs from the recommendations made by the appeals body, to the detriment of the employee concerned, must adequately state the reasons for not following those recommendations” (see, for example, Judgment 4062, consideration 3, and the case law cited therein).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4062

    Keywords:

    final decision; motivation; motivation of final decision;



  • Judgment 4541


    134th Session, 2022
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to notify her of the outcome of the investigation into her internal complaint of moral harassment, the decision not to send her the full report drawn up following that investigation, and the decision not to inform her of the outcome of her internal complaint.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    [M]erely informing an international civil servant that disciplinary proceedings have been started against a supervisor
    following an investigation into a complaint of harassment and that appropriate managerial measures have been taken [...] does not enable that civil servant to know whether the harassment she or he alleges has been recognised and, if so, how the organisation concerned intends to compensate her or him for the material or moral injury suffered (see, to that effect, Judgment 3965, consideration 9).
    [...]
    [T]he staff member who engaged the procedure, while not entitled to be informed of any measures taken against the alleged harasser, is entitled to a decision on the question of harassment itself (see [...] Judgment 3096, consideration 15) and, in consequence, to receive a reply from the administration concerning her or his harassment complaint (see, to that effect, Judgment 4207, consideration 15).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3096, 3965, 4207

    Keywords:

    harassment; motivation; motivation of final decision;



  • Judgment 4504


    134th Session, 2022
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to demote her from grade P4 to grade P3 for a period of two years.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    Inasmuch as the Appeal Board’s role in an internal appeal is an advisory one, the Director General may depart from its recommendations provided that she or he must state clear and cogent reasons for doing so (see, for example, Judgment 2699, consideration 24).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2699

    Keywords:

    disciplinary body; disciplinary measure; final decision; motivation;



  • Judgment 4503


    134th Session, 2022
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend her fixed-term appointment upon its expiry.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    [T]he Organization complied with its duty of care. The complainant was given five months’ notice of the non-renewal of her contract; the expiry of the contract occurred at the contractually agreed time, and the complainant received reasons for the non-renewal, orally and in writing (see Judgment 4321, consideration 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 4321

    Keywords:

    duty of care; fixed-term; motivation; motivation of final decision; non-renewal of contract; notice;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | next >


 
Last updated: 30.04.2024 ^ top