|
|
 |
|
|
UN Common System (854,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: UN Common System
Total judgments found: 18
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 4539
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate him from service on 31 October 2018, being the date on which he reached his retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of his appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4538
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 30 September 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of his appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4537
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 July 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of his appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4536
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate him from service on 31 October 2018, being the date on which he reached the mandatory age of retirement of 62 according to the Staff Rules then in force.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4535
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate him from service on 31 October 2018, being the date on which he reached his retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of his appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4534
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former staff member of UNAIDS, challenges the decision to separate him from service on 31 October 2018, being the date on which he reached his retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of his appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4533
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 December 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of her appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4532
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 22 November 2018, after having reached the end of the extension period previously granted beyond the mandatory age of retirement of 62 according to the Staff Rules then in force.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; discrimination; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4531
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 August 2018, being the date on which she reached her retirement age according to the Staff Rules then in force, as well as the decision not to approve an exceptional extension of her appointment beyond retirement age.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; extension of contract; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4528
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to separate her from service on 31 December 2018, being the date on which she reached the mandatory age of retirement of 62 according to the Staff Rules then in force.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; retirement age; un common system;
Judgment 4527
134th Session, 2022
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants impugn WHO’s decision to postpone implementation of the mandatory age of separation adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 70/244 of 23 December 2015.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; retirement age; un common system;
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;
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 41
Extract:
[T]he purpose for which the whole scheme of post adjustments was established, namely to give effect to the Noblemaire principle [...], is not to create economies by reducing salary costs even if, in relation to any particular duty station, that is a consequence of the operation of the scheme for the purpose for which it was established.
Keywords:
noblemaire principle; post adjustment; salary; un common system;
Consideration 8
Extract:
Some principles in the case law of the Tribunal should be noted [...]. The first is, as observed in Judgment 1266, consideration 24, that:
“[...] by incorporating the standards of the common system in its own rules the [organization] has assumed responsibility towards its staff for any unlawful elements that those standards may contain or entail. Insofar as such standards are found to be flawed they may not be imposed on the staff and [the organization] must if need be replace them with provisions that comply with the law of the international civil service. That is an essential feature of the principles governing the international legal system the Tribunal is called upon to safeguard.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1266
Keywords:
general decision; receivability of the complaint; un common system;
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;
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 7
Extract:
Some principles in the case law of the Tribunal should be noted [...]. The first is, as observed in Judgment 1266, consideration 24, that:
“[...] by incorporating the standards of the common system in its own rules the [organization] has assumed responsibility towards its staff for any unlawful elements that those standards may contain or entail. Insofar as such standards are found to be flawed they may not be imposed on the staff and [the organization] must if need be replace them with provisions that comply with the law of the international civil service. That is an essential feature of the principles governing the international legal system the Tribunal is called upon to safeguard.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1266
Keywords:
general decision; receivability of the complaint; un common system;
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 33
Extract:
T]he purpose for which the whole scheme of post adjustments was established, namely to give effect to the Noblemaire principle [...], is not to create economies by reducing salary costs even if, in relation to any particular duty station, that is a consequence of the operation of the scheme for the purpose for which it was established.
Keywords:
noblemaire principle; post adjustment; salary; 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.
Consideration 7
Extract:
Some principles in the case law of the Tribunal should be noted immediately. The first is, as observed in Judgment 1266, consideration 24, that:
“[...] by incorporating the standards of the common system in its own rules the [organization] has assumed responsibility towards its staff for any unlawful elements that those standards may contain or entail. Insofar as such standards are found to be flawed they may not be imposed on the staff and [the organization] must if need be replace them with provisions that comply with the law of the international civil service. That is an essential feature of the principles governing the international legal system the Tribunal is called upon to safeguard.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1266
Keywords:
general decision; receivability of the complaint; un common system;
Consideration 33
Extract:
[T]he purpose for which the whole scheme of post adjustments was established, namely to give effect to the Noblemaire principle ...], is not to create economies by reducing salary costs even if, in relation to any particular duty station, that is a consequence of the operation of the scheme for the purpose for which it was established.
Keywords:
noblemaire principle; post adjustment; salary; un common system;
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 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 10
Extract:
Some principles in the case law of the Tribunal should be noted [...]. The first is, as observed in Judgment 1266, consideration 24, that:
“[...] by incorporating the standards of the common system in its own rules the [organization] has assumed responsibility towards its staff for any unlawful elements that those standards may contain or entail. Insofar as such standards are found to be flawed they may not be imposed on the staff and [the organization] must if need be replace them with provisions that comply with the law of the international civil service. That is an essential feature of the principles governing the international legal system the Tribunal is called upon to safeguard.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1266
Keywords:
general decision; receivability of the complaint; un common system;
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 40
Extract:
[T]he purpose for which the whole scheme of post adjustments was established, namely to give effect to the Noblemaire principle [...], is not to create economies by reducing salary costs even if, in relation to any particular duty station, that is a consequence of the operation of the scheme for the purpose for which it was established.
Keywords:
noblemaire principle; post adjustment; salary; un common system;
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.
Consideration 8
Extract:
Some principles in the case law of the Tribunal should be noted [...]. The first is, as observed in Judgment 1266, consideration 24, that:
“[...] by incorporating the standards of the common system in its own rules the [organization] has assumed responsibility towards its staff for any unlawful elements that those standards may contain or entail. Insofar as such standards are found to be flawed they may not be imposed on the staff and [the organization] must if need be replace them with provisions that comply with the law of the international civil service. That is an essential feature of the principles governing the international legal system the Tribunal is called upon to safeguard.”
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1266
Keywords:
general decision; receivability of the complaint; un common system;
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 41
Extract:
[T]he purpose for which the whole scheme of post adjustments was established, namely to give effect to the Noblemaire principle discussed earlier[,] is not to create economies by reducing salary costs even if, in relation to any particular duty station, that is a consequence of the operation of the scheme for the purpose for which it was established.
Keywords:
noblemaire principle; post adjustment; salary; un common system;
|
|
|
|
|
