Judgment No. 3874
The complaint is dismissed.
The complainant claims that he has been deprived of his pension rights.
The complainant requests oral proceedings. He does not include a list of witnesses and in fact does not substantiate his request. Considering that the abundant written submissions are clear and detailed, the Tribunal is satisfied that the complaint can be fairly and appropriately determined by reference to the written material filed by the parties. Accordingly, no order is made for oral proceedings.
[The complainant's] argument that it was in the Organization’s interests to extend his appointment and allow his pension rights to become vested rather than to appoint another staff member to replace him is untenable. As pointed out in the Organization’s submissions, [the Organization] would incur an indirect cost by extending his appointment, so not only would the extension of his appointment not be in the interests of the Organization, but it could reasonably be against its interests.
The abolition of a post necessarily implies the elimination of that post, whereas retirement of a staff member does not necessarily mean the abolition of the post occupied by the retiring staff member.
abolition of post
[I]t is not reasonable for the complainant to assert that financial aspects are “irrelevant factors” for deciding whether or not something is “in the interests of the Organization”. Clearly, financial responsibility is a core requirement of the proper functioning of an international organization.