1. About the ILO
2. Topics
3. Regions
4. Meetings and events
5. Publications
6. Research
7. Labour standards
8. Statistics and databases

FOURTEENTH ITEM ON THE AGENDA

Matters relating to the ILO Administrative Tribunal

Apportionment of the costs of the Tribunal

1. At the Governing Body's 273rd Session (November 1998), the Committee discussed the current system of apportionment of the costs of the Administrative Tribunal.⁽¹⁾  The outcome was that the Governing Body asked⁽²⁾  the Office to submit to it, at its present session, proposals on possible ways of improving the distribution of the Tribunal's running costs between the ILO and the 37 other organizations that have to date accepted the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

2. Running costs consist of the costs of the permanent secretariat of the Tribunal, including those related to the maintenance of its on-line database. They are partly covered by the ILO's regular budget, and partly shared between the ILO and the other organizations that have accepted the Tribunal's jurisdiction at rates of contribution reckoned each year in proportion to the number of their staff. In 1996-97, the ILO met 59 per cent of the running costs, and the other organizations covered the remaining 41 per cent.

3. As stated in the paper submitted to the Committee at its last meeting, the ILO originally paid all the running costs. In the late 1970s, the ILO proposed that the other organizations accepting the jurisdiction of the Tribunal share the running costs in proportion to the number of their staff, on the grounds that the increase in these costs was mainly due to the increase in the number of organizations. The proposal was justified by the increase in the Registry's workload caused by the larger number of organizations and staff that had access to the Tribunal, but the understanding was that the basic services provided by the Registry, such as the registration and processing of complaints, the transmittal of briefs to the parties and the communication of the Tribunal's orders, rulings and deadlines for submissions would, in accordance with its Statute, remain the responsibility of the ILO alone. At the time the cost of the basic services was considered to be equivalent to the cost of a full-time registrar and clerical help in the form of five General Service work-months in a biennium. The number of cases has since risen from about 20 to 50 or 60 a session. To cope with this increase, during the 1980s the ILO appropriated in its regular budget ten additional Professional work-months towards the cost of the Assistant Registrar.

4. The discussion at the Governing Body's last session revealed two schools of thought: one was in favour of sharing the full costs between the organizations; the other in favour only of a reasonable cut in the proportion paid by the ILO on the grounds that the Organization has a public service responsibility to afford a system of justice for international civil servants, lacking as they do access to municipal courts in the event of disputes with their employer.

5. The Office has since consulted all the other organizations that have accepted the Tribunal's jurisdiction on a possible change in the sharing of costs. Most of them agree that some increase in their contribution to running costs is warranted by the services rendered by the Tribunal's Registry (mainly information on matters of procedure, the maintenance and development of the database on the case law of the Tribunal and the publication and distribution of judgments, all freely available to the organizations and to their staff associations and staff). At the same time, they consider that as the parent of the Tribunal and the provider of a public service relevant to its own mandate, the ILO has a special responsibility for the administration of the Tribunal that should be reflected in financial terms. Moreover, a few organizations which bear a major share of the costs (FAO, UNESCO and WHO) consider that their shares should not be increased.

6. As to the different possibilities of changing the present situation, some organizations think it reasonable to reverse the proportions by having the ILO pay 40 per cent, with the other organizations assuming the balance. Just as many organizations are of the view that a 50-50 sharing would better answer the rationale of the system. A few think that the present arrangements are about right. Some feel -- as did the Chairperson of the Committee in November -- that charging more to the other organizations would, in most cases, make for much the same result in that the aggregate charge borne by member States would not change much, but would just be split into as many bills as there are organizations.

7. Sharing the full running costs of the Tribunal could give rise to practical and legal problems. As regards the former, if the other organizations had to pay a full share, they might expect to be consulted on such administrative matters as amendments to the Tribunal's Statute, the appointment of judges and renewal of their terms of office, the judges' fees and the selection of the Registry staff or their conditions of employment. Such sharing of administrative responsibility might lead to a reduction in the independence of both the Tribunal and its Registry, and would make the taking of administrative decisions time-consuming.

8. As for legal problems, full cost-sharing would require an amendment by the Conference to the Tribunal's Statute, which states in paragraph 1 of article IX that: "The administrative arrangements necessary for the operation of the Tribunal shall be made by the International Labour Office in consultation with the Tribunal." Moreover, since that is one of the conditions under which the other organizations have accepted the Tribunal's jurisdiction, no such amendment could be made until they had either signified their agreement or been given a reasonable period of notice in which to make other arrangements for the settlement of their disputes with staff.

9. The Tribunal's Statute also provides in paragraph 2 of article IX of the annex that the "Expenses occasioned by the sessions or hearings of the Administrative Tribunal shall be borne by the organization against which the complaint is filed." In accepting the Tribunal's jurisdiction, the other organizations have hence assumed no formal obligation to bear running costs not related to a session at which they have defended at least one case.

10. In these circumstances, it would seem preferable and justified to maintain the existing institutional framework so far agreed upon by all parties concerned. A solution could be envisaged which would reduce the direct cost⁽³⁾  to the ILO while at the same time retaining the ILO's role as the provider of a public service and maintaining its present commitment to the other organizations.

11. The Office accordingly proposes that, from the year 2000, the ILO cover the costs of the Registrar, part-time secretarial support,⁽⁴⁾  and miscellaneous costs at their present level, and continue to participate in the other running costs in proportion to its number of staff. The ILO would also continue to absorb the shares of organizations when these are less than $180. The effect of such a solution would have been, in 1996-97, to reduce the ILO's share of the running costs from 59 to 45 per cent. Details of this proposed solution may be found in the appendix.

12. The Committee may wish to recommend to the Governing Body that, as from 2000, the ILO's contribution to the running costs of the Administrative Tribunal shall consist of --

(a) the cost of the Registrar (two Professional work-years), part-time secretarial support (five General Service work-months), and miscellaneous costs;

(b) a share of the other running costs based on the proportion of ILO staff to the total number of staff of organizations that have accepted the Tribunal's jurisdiction;

(c) the running costs chargeable to those organizations whose share is less than $180.

Geneva, 24 February 1999.

Point for decision: Paragraph 12.

1. GB.273/PFA/13/1.

2. GB.273/7/2.

3. The ILO would continue to absorb indirect costs such as the provision of the premises, the printing of judgments and communication costs.

4. Two work-years for the Registrar, and five General Service work-months.

Appendix

ILO Administrative Tribunal
Apportionment of running costs, 1996-97
(in dollars)

		Present Apportionment		Proposed Apportionment
		ILO	Other Organizations	ILO	Other Organizations
Professional staff		433,940	72,426	306,335	200,031
General Service staff		44,325	319,548	44,325	319,548
Miscellaneous:		16,425		16,425
		494,690	391,974	367,085	519,579
Charged back to ILO:
	Share based on number of staff	30,884	(30,884)	34,344	(34,344)
	Absorption of other organizations' share (Amounts under$180)	1,276	(1,276)	1,276	(1,276)
		526,850	359,814	402,705	483,959
Percentage of cost		59%	41%	45%	55%