Judgment No. 1817
Decision
The complaint and the Agency's claim to costs are dismissed.
Consideration 6
Extract:
"A staff member needs to know the reasons for a decision so that he can act on it, for example by challenging it or filing an appeal. A review body must also know the reasons so as to tell whether it is lawful. How ample the explanation need be will turn on circumstances. It may be just a reference, express or implied, to some other document that does give the why and wherefore. If little or no explanation has yet been forthcoming, the omission may be repaired in the course of appeal proceedings, provided that the staff member is given his full say."
Keywords
decision; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; right of appeal; case pending; right to reply; organisation's duties; judicial review; motivation; motivation of final decision
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The case law says that an organisation may not take unilateral action that affects status before giving the staff member the opportunity of answering (see Judgment 1484 [...]). And that rule applies, of course, to dismissal of a probationer."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1484
Keywords
right to reply; organisation's duties; amendment to the rules; contract; probationary period; termination of employment
Consideration 11
Extract:
"Poor performance does not warrant ending a probationary appointment unless there is not some hope of reasonably early improvement, usually by the expiry of the probation."
Keywords
work appraisal; period; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; condition
Consideration 11(a)
Extract:
"Before dismissing someone on the grounds of performance an organisation must ordinarily give fairly prompt warning so as to allow for improvement. But all that is needed is that the staff member be aware of the risk of dismissal and of the need for improvement. If the staff member still proves unsatisfactory, dismissal will be in order even if founded on new shortcomings that are not the same as those that prompted the warning [...]. And again those rules hold good mutatis mutandis for ending probation". The Tribunal cites the case law.
Keywords
case law; organisation's duties; duty to inform; work appraisal; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; warning
| 
