L'OIT est une institution spécialisée des Nations-Unies
ILO-fr-strap
Plan du site | Contact English
> Page d'accueil > Triblex: base de données sur la jurisprudence > Par mots-clés du thésaurus > irrégularité

Judgment No. 1250

Decision

THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

Consideration 14

Extract:

The complainant was dismissed for misconduct after refusing a transfer outside headquarters. He pleads that the FAO overlooked an essential fact by deciding to transfer him without taking account of his family situation. But he was allowed twelve months "to sort out the matter of his wife's career or obtain a suitable post at headquarters. He argues that he had more than 'ordinary family needs'. But there is nothing out of the ordinary about a situation where spouses each have a job at one and the same duty station, and neither wishes to give it up. [...] Such circumstances do not confer immunity against transfer on an international official. [...] The postponement of transfer by fourteen months is evidence of adequate consideration of his 'family situation and intersts'."

Keywords

decision; headquarters; staff member's interest; duty station; transfer; termination of employment; serious misconduct; judicial review; disregard of essential fact; refusal; official

Consideration 20

Extract:

The complainant's refusal of assignment to a post outside headquarters "was in breach of his obligation to the organization to comply with a transfer under Regulation 301.012. In view of the responsibilities of the post [to which he was assigned], that refusal impeded the effective operation of the organization [...] and amounted to misconduct."

Reference(s)

Organization rules reference: STAFF REGULATION 301.012

Keywords

complainant; headquarters; staff regulations and rules; breach; duty station; transfer; post description; post; serious misconduct; staff member's duties; organisation's interest; definition; refusal

Consideration 20

Extract:

Had the complainant "made a bona fide challenge to the validity of transfer, that would have been a satisfactory explanation for non-compliance: for a precedent, see Judgment 392 [...], under 6. For family reasons the organization refrained for five months [...] from taking action on the decision to transfer the complainant. Thereafter he did not challenge the transfer but sought to circumvent or delay it by raising a series of questions and by evading a direct response."

Reference(s)

Jugement(s) TAOIT: 392

Keywords

decision; complainant; case law; good faith; staff member's interest; transfer; flaw; refusal

Considerations 22-23

Extract:

The complainant was dismissed for misconduct after refusing transfer to a post outside headquarters. He alleges that summary dismissal was at odds with the principle of proportionality. The Tribunal holds that "dismissal was not a sudden decision. Furthermore, even after the proposal for dismissal he was given two opportunities to change his mind. [...] The decision to dismiss was a proper exercise of the discretion of the organization and did not infringe the principle of proportionality."

Keywords

decision; headquarters; organisation; general principle; proportionality; duty station; transfer; termination of employment; serious misconduct; disciplinary measure; discretion; refusal



 
Dernière mise à jour: 01.09.2020 ^ haut