Organisation's duties (202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 645,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Organisation's duties
Total judgments found: 652
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >
Judgment 1839
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 16-17
Extract:
"The complainants plead that the staff representatives having withdrawn, the [Local Salary Survey Committee] was no longer competent to act and that the organization was in breach of its duty of consulting the staff either through such a body or else, in accordance with Staff Regulation 8.1, directly. [This] plea [...] must fail. Not only did the Committee and its working party both comprising staff representatives function for many months before the survey began, but the Committee did not, as the complainants make out, cease to exist after the staff representatives had withdrawn. The [organization] repeatedly invited them to take part, and their refusal to do so did not have the effect of disqualifying the Committee or invalidating its recommendations. The methodology [of the International Civil Service Commission] provides in paragraph 6 that, though it is preferable to have representatives of both management and staff take part, the technical requirements will still be met even if one side prefers not to; so that actual participation by both sides is not a requirement. Nor was there any breach of Regulation 8.1. [The Tribunal draws an analogy between this issue and the issue considered in Judgment 1565]."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF REGULATION 8.1 PARAGRAPH 6, METHODOLOGY OF THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1565
Keywords:
case law; competence; composition of the internal appeals body; consultation; delegated authority; formal requirements; icsc decision; organisation's duties; participation; qualifications; recommendation; salary; staff representative;
Judgment 1838
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 16-17
Extract:
"The complainants plead that the staff representatives having withdrawn, the [Local Salary Survey Committee] was no longer competent to act and that the organization was in breach of its duty of consulting the staff either through such a body or else, in accordance with Staff Regulation 8.1, directly. [This] plea [...] must fail. Not only did the Committee and its working party both comprising staff representatives function for many months before the survey began, but the Committee did not, as the complainants make out, cease to exist after the staff representatives had withdrawn. The [organization] repeatedly invited them to take part, and their refusal to do so did not have the effect of disqualifying the Committee or invalidating its recommendations. nor was there any breach of Regulation 8.1. [The Tribunal draws an analogy between this issue and the issue considered in Judgment 1565]."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF REGULATION 8.1
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1565
Keywords:
advisory body; case law; competence; composition of the internal appeals body; consultation; delegated authority; organisation's duties; qualifications; recommendation; salary; staff representative;
Judgment 1834
86th Session, 1999
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The complainant [pleads] that the decision to terminate [her appointment] was not 'initiated' by the Director-General, as Staff Rule 110.04 required. [I]n the context of the Staff Rule the word 'initiated' does not mean that the Director-General himself must be the first person in the administration to take any action at all; it simply requires that the action, when taken, be on the Director-General's behalf and with his prior approval."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNIDO STAFF RULE 110.04
Keywords:
competence; decision; decision-maker; delegated authority; executive head; organisation's duties; termination of employment;
Judgment 1821
86th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The principles governing the limits on the discretion of international organisations to set adjustments in staff pay [...] may be concisely stated as follows: (a) An international organisation is free to choose a methodology, system or standard of reference for determining salary adjustments for its staff provided that it meets all other principles of international civil service law [...]. (b) The chosen methodology must ensure that the results are 'stable, foreseeable and clearly understood' [...]. (c) Where the methodology refers to an external standard but grants discretion to the governing body to depart from that standard, the organisation has a duty to state proper reasons for such departure [...]. (d) While the necessity of saving money may be one valid factor to be considered in adjusting salaries provided the method adopted is objective, stable and foreseeable [...], the mere desire to save money at the staff's expense is not by itself a valid reason for departing from an established standard of reference [...]." (See cited case law.)
Keywords:
adjustment; budgetary reasons; case law; condition; coordinated organisations; cost-of-living increase; criteria; discretion; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; exception; executive body; good faith; grounds; international civil service principles; limits; organisation's duties; patere legem; rule of another organisation; salary; scale;
Judgment 1817
86th Session, 1999
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
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; duty to inform; organisation's duties; probationary period; termination of employment; unsatisfactory service; warning; work appraisal;
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:
case pending; decision; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; judicial review; motivation; motivation of final decision; organisation's duties; right of appeal; right to reply;
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:
amendment to the rules; contract; organisation's duties; probationary period; right to reply; termination of employment;
Judgment 1815
86th Session, 1999
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
The Board responsible for appraising the complainant's application for personal promotion had put forward a negative recommendation. "To ensure due process both in internal proceedings and before the Tribunal the staff member must get any items of information material to the outcome. And one such item is the names of the Advisory Body's members. Who they are may of course affect its reasoning and the weight its report carries, and so the staff member should be allowed at least to comment. That is why the Tribunal will acknowledge a complainant's right to know who sat in his case."
Keywords:
advisory body; advisory opinion; composition of the internal appeals body; duty to inform; organisation's duties; personal promotion; promotion; refusal; right to reply; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1814
86th Session, 1999
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"Though the Director General does have discretion [as to who may be considered as a dependent child], the staff member must be made aware of any criteria he is applying." (See Judgment 1204.)
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1204
Keywords:
criteria; dependant; dependent child; discretion; duty to inform; executive head; family allowance; limits; organisation's duties; parent;
Judgment 1812
86th Session, 1999
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"There is no single time limit for executing judgments. The Tribunal's practice is to let the organisation have a reasonable amount of time to act, and what is reasonable will depend, among other things, on the circumstances and the issues at stake. To be sure, the Tribunal has said more than once that any lump-sum award by the Tribunal is to be paid in 30 days [see Judgments 1620 and 1748]. That deadline holds good when the organisation may readily work out the amount due. But it does not when a case is sent back for a new decision: the time to be allowed will then turn on the peculiarities of the case."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1620, 1748
Keywords:
application for execution; case law; case sent back to organisation; delay; execution of judgment; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; practice; time limit; tribunal;
Judgment 1808
86th Session, 1999
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"Grading turns on the duties of the post, not on the quality of performance. Nor do the master standard for classification of professional posts and the standards and procedures of the professional grading appeals committee lay any duty on the [organization] to make available an official's performance reports for the purpose of a grading exercise".
Keywords:
criteria; grade; icsc decision; organisation's duties; performance report; post; post classification; post held by the complainant; professional category; reclassification; work appraisal;
Judgment 1806
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15-17
Extract:
The Tribunal does not support the practice of the organization of not letting employees in the personnel unit hold office on the Staff Committee in order to avoid any risk of conflict of interest. The decision to offer the complainant a post in the personnel unit should never have been attached to the condition of resigning as president of the Staff Association. "It is important both to protect the right of association and to maintain a staff association's independence."
Keywords:
condition; freedom of association; offer; organisation's duties; post; practice; staff representative; staff union; staff union activity;
Judgment 1797
86th Session, 1999
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 12-13
Extract:
"The Organization pleads that it is under no duty to pay contributions for [the complainant] to the Pension Fund or to the staff health insurance plan and would have had such duty only if he had been reinstated [...]. The Tribunal ruled on a similar issue in Judgment 1338 [...], in which it held that its award [...] of damages equivalent to 'the amount of the salary, allowances and other entitlements [the complainant] would have received' had not required reinstatement in the Pension Fund or health insurance."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1338
Keywords:
allowance; application for execution; case law; contribution rate; contributions; enforcement; health insurance; insurance; judgment of the tribunal; organisation's duties; reinstatement; salary; social benefits; unjspf;
Judgment 1796
86th Session, 1999
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant was reassigned because of his alleged poor attendance and time-keeping. "The [Organization's] treatment of him looks like punishment for conduct it disapproved of and for low output. So there should first have been due disciplinary process affording him full safeguards."
Keywords:
conduct; disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; due process; misconduct; official; organisation's duties; output; punctuality; right to reply; safeguard; transfer; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 1787
86th Session, 1999
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"Although the abolition of his post did demand of the Organization efforts to place him suitably and at the right grade elsewhere, he had no right to preference for any particular post, the less so since others were in the same plight. He may object to the Organization's failure to let him have the transfer he wanted, but such failure does not make it unlawful for the organization to have appointed another official to the post he had applied for, provided at least that that official was qualified."
Keywords:
abolition of post; appointment; competition; condition; equal treatment; grade; organisation's duties; post; priority; qualifications; reassignment; right;
Judgment 1782
85th Session, 1998
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
"What [Staff Rule 110.02 a) on abolition of posts and staff reduction] entitles staff members with permanent appointments to is preference to 'suitable posts in which their services can be effectively utilized', and that means posts not just at the same grade but even at a lower one. [...] The Advisory Group should have asked the complainant [who held grade G.7] at the outset whether she would accept a G.6 post. Because it failed to do so, it considered her for vacant posts at G.7 only and deprived her of the opportunity of being considered for G.6 vacancies." See also Judgment 346 [...].
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNIDO'S STAFF RULE 110.02 A)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 346
Keywords:
abolition of post; contract; duration of appointment; grade; organisation's duties; permanent appointment; post; priority; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; vacancy;
Judgment 1780
85th Session, 1998
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6(a)
Extract:
"According to consistent precedent both employer and employee must show good faith. For the Organisation, that means giving its staff notice of any facts or rules that may influence their dealings with it [...]. But [...] the Organisation will not be financially liable unless the staff member has suffered financial injury."
Keywords:
case law; duty to inform; good faith; injury; liability; material injury; organisation; organisation's duties; staff member's interest;
Judgment 1765
85th Session, 1998
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The International Civil Service Commission made a mistake in reckoning the multiplier used to work out the post adjustment in Geneva. "[The Organization] has the duty of checking the lawfulness of any decision by another body on which it bases its own decision. So too must it check the adequacy of action by that other body to correct any mistake it may have made, and make sure that such corrective action respects the rights of staff."
Keywords:
adjustment; breach; decision; icsc decision; organisation's duties; post adjustment; right; salary;
Judgment 1764
85th Session, 1998
International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
The complainant is accused of having cheated the Organisation by falsifying airline tickets intended for official travel. "[A]lthough in all fairness an organisation must tell the staff member of the charges against him, it need not go into the detail of the penalties he may be incurring. Besides, the complainant must be deemed to have been familiar with the [staff] rules, and they do set out all the penalties, including dismissal. The staff member's right to know and to answer the charges against him does not require that he be told just what the punishment may be if he is found guilty."
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; disciplinary procedure; duty of loyalty; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; honesty; limits; organisation's duties; purport; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 1757
85th Session, 1998
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
In processing, ordering and notifying transfer an organisation must heed the staff member's dignity and good name and not cause undue injury. And the decision must follow proper inquiry: see Judgment 1496 [...] under 7 and 8.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1496
Keywords:
decision; moral injury; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; transfer;
Consideration 5
Extract:
"Transfer is such an important decision that it must be properly accounted for. For one thing, that helps the staff member to make up his mind about what to do, for example lodge an appeal; for another, it allows review of the lawfulness of the decision. Yet the reasons need not be stated in the actual text notifying transfer: they may have been conveyed beforehand or later, even in the course of internal appeal proceedings."
Keywords:
date; decision; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; organisation's duties; right of appeal; transfer;
Judgment 1756
85th Session, 1998
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10(b)
Extract:
"An organisation may not deny an employee access to any significant information which it has about him and which is or may later be put in his personal file. For one thing, such information may be helpful or harmful to him; for another, he must have the opportunity of challenging or adding to it."
Keywords:
duty to inform; organisation's duties; personal file; right of appeal;
Consideration 10(a)
Extract:
[A]n organisation, bound as it is, like its own employees, to show good faith, must avoid causing them undue injury. Precedents which declare the duty of care and consideration over its staff are to be found in, for example, Judgments 361, [...] under 9; 367, [...] under 4; 396, [...] under 6; 435, [...] under 5; 447, [...] under 4; 873, [...] under 5 and 7; and 942, [...] under 4.
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;
Judgment 1741
85th Session, 1998
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15-16
Extract:
"Whatever his rank was in the programme the complainant was entitled to appraisal that was in keeping with the written rules or at least so far observed due process as to afford him the opportunity of adding any timely comments of his own for entry in his personal file. [...] [T]he conclusion is that for want of any properly made appraisal there is no objective and reliable means of reviewing the grounds for non-renewal. The impugned decision cannot stand."
Keywords:
decision; due process; grade; grounds; organisation's duties; performance report; procedural flaw; work appraisal;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 | next >
|
