Judgment No. 4302
The complaint is dismissed.
The complainant challenges the final decision taken on his request for review of his 2016 performance appraisal.
performance evaluation; complaint dismissed
WHO correctly submits that the complainant’s claims are irreceivable to the extent that they are based on his allegations of harassment, which are the subject of separate proceedings (see, for example, Judgments 3291, under 6, and 2742, under 16).
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2742, 3291
[T]he review of [the complainant's] ePMDS was not in itself an official recognition of his supervisors’ wrong-doing or negligent mismanagement of the ePMDS process as he asserts. In fact, the review was an integral aspect of that process which yielded the result which the complainant sought and accepted: the revision of his 2016 End-Year ePMDS. Moreover, the review was conducted in a timely manner which ensured that the evaluation did not adversely affect his career, salary or terms of employment. He was informed of the revision in less than two months after he requested the review. Additionally, the complainant provides no evidence to support his assertion of personal prejudice or bad faith on the part of his supervisors in their initial evaluation. In fact, they both signed off on the revised ePMDS. He provides no evidence to prove that he suffered any injury or loss as a result of his supervisors’ initial evaluation (see, for example, Judgment 4156, consideration 5).
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 4156