ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

Respect for dignity (205, 206,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Respect for dignity
Total judgments found: 115

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | next >

  • Judgment 4178


    128th Session, 2019
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to grant him a promotion in the 2014 professional promotion exercise.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    As was stated in Judgment 3353, consideration 26, ď[a]n organisation must care for the dignity of its staff members and not cause them unnecessary personal distress and disappointment where this could be avoidedĒ. Although the Administration remedied the error itself, as a result of the breach of the provision and the unnecessary communication to the complainant, undoubtedly, the complainant was deeply disappointed by his non-promotion and understandably distressed not knowing for an inordinate amount of time about what had led to him not being promoted for which the complainant is entitled to an award of moral damages [...].

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3353

    Keywords:

    injury; moral damages; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 4171


    128th Session, 2019
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to dismiss her internal complaints of moral harassment.

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    [Internal] provisions simply apply the duty of care, to which the complainant also refers, owed by all international organisations. In its case law, the Tribunal has emphasised that the relations between an international organisation and its staff members must be governed by good faith, respect, transparency and consideration for their dignity (see Judgment 1479, consideration 12). An organisation must therefore treat its staff with proper consideration and avoid causing them undue injury. It must care for the dignity of its staff members and not cause them unnecessary personal distress and disappointment where this could be avoided (see, for example, Judgments 1756, consideration 10(a), and 3353, consideration 26). As the Tribunal held in Judgment 2524, an international organisation has a duty to provide a safe and adequate environment for its staff (see also Judgment 2706, consideration 5).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1479, 1756, 2706, 3353

    Keywords:

    duty of care; respect for dignity;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    Even though the charge of harassment cannot stand, an international organisation fails in its duty to treat staff members with dignity and avoid causing them undue and unnecessary injury if the organisation is aware of an unhealthy working atmosphere in the service where a staff member works but allows it to remain without taking adequate measures to remedy the situation (see, to this effect, Judgment 2067, considerations 16 and 17).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2067

    Keywords:

    duty of care; harassment; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 4086


    127th Session, 2019
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to maintain her contested job description.

    Considerations 10-11

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís case law has it that when a staff member of an international organization is transferred to a new post in non-disciplinary circumstances, that transfer is subject to the general principles governing all decisions affecting the staff memberís status. The organization must show due regard, in both form and substance, for the dignity of the staff member, particularly by providing her or him with work of the same level as that which she or he performed in her or his previous post and matching her or his qualifications (see, for example, Judgment 2229, under 3(a)). This requirement is consistent with Staff Regulation 4.3(c) [...].
    The responsibilities that attach to posts are comparable where on an objective basis the level of the duties to be performed is similar (see, for example, Judgment 1343, under 9). It is not for the Tribunal to reclassify a post or to redefine the duties attaching thereto, as that exercise falls within the discretion of the executive head of the organization, on the recommendation of the relevant manager, and it is equally within the power of the management to determine the qualifications required for a particular post (see, for example, Judgment 2373, under 7). However, every employee has the right to a proper administrative position, which means that she or he should both hold a post and perform the duties pertaining thereto and should be given real work (see, for example, Judgment 2360, under 11).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1343, 2229, 2360, 2373

    Keywords:

    assignment; discretion; general principle; grade; organisation's duties; post description; post held by complainant; respect for dignity; transfer;



  • Judgment 4079


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3930 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.

    Consideration 24

    Extract:

    The delay in fully executing Judgment 3930 has caused the complainant moral injury. In awarding moral damages, the Tribunal takes into particular account the following: the duration of the delay, the fact that there was no need to seek a decision from the Council of Administration to authorize the execution of a judgment of the Tribunal, particularly when the budget was already approved for payments of awards, and the misleading presentation made by the International Bureau (in the presentation to the Council of Administration debating whether or not to execute the judgment) that the complainantís illness was feigned. The International Bureau acted without presenting any evidence from a medical board and without having completed a disciplinary proceeding with regard to that unproven allegation, in violation of its duty of care and in breach of the adversarial principle. The UPU must respect the dignity of its staff members and preserve their reputation.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3930

    Keywords:

    delay in payment; duty of care; execution of judgment; moral damages; moral injury; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 4074


    127th Session, 2019
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to review or amend the separation agreement offered to him and to terminate his appointment without the appropriate financial package.

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    Without descending into detail having regard to the position of the Global Fund referred to in the preceding consideration, the advancing of the practical end date of the complainantís employment [...] was peremptory, without adequate explanation and was conducted in a way including a request that the complainant immediately leave the premises, that did not respect the complainantís dignity. While he alleges this effect, the complainant has not proved to the satisfaction of the Tribunal any damage to his career or reputation. The complainant is entitled to moral damages assessed in the sum of 30,000 Swiss francs and which reflect that he was a senior executive brought in to assist the organisation during change and had, it clearly appears, performed at the high level expected of him. The level of damages should reflect that this was the context in which he was very poorly treated at the time he was summarily excluded from the organisation and following.

    Keywords:

    moral damages; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 4060


    127th Session, 2019
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, an ICC Senior Security Officer, contests the decision to temporarily withdraw his authorisation to carry a firearm.

    Consideration 29

    Extract:

    [A] review of the chronology [...] shows that the Administration failed to provide the complainant with relevant information in a timely manner. This led to unnecessary delays in the resolution of the complainantís case, misunderstandings, and was an affront to the complainantís dignity. This ongoing failure to provide the complainant with the information which he was entitled to receive is exacerbated by the fact that the ICC has not advanced any reasons for withholding the information. The complainant is entitled to moral damages in the amount of 20,000 euros and costs in the amount of 6,000 euros.

    Keywords:

    duty of care; duty to inform; injury; moral damages; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3995


    126th Session, 2018
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the measures taken by IFAD following its investigation into his allegations of harassment.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunalís case law, by virtue of the principle that an international organisation must provide its staff members with a safe and healthy working environment, it is liable for all injuries caused to a staff member by a supervisor when the victim is subjected to treatment that is an affront to her or his dignity (see, for example, Judgments 1609, under 16, 1875, under 32, 2706, under 5, or 3170, under 33).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1609, 1875, 2706, 3170

    Keywords:

    respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3903


    125th Session, 2018
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of his fixed-term appointment.

    Consideration 24

    Extract:

    [T]here is no evidence in the record to support the assertion that a review of the requirements of newly created positions was undertaken to ascertain whether the complainant had the necessary qualifications for any of those positions. It would be expected that the complainant would have at least been informed that other options had been considered. More importantly, it is also noted that the possible options considered were limited to the newly created positions as a result of the restructuring. The duty contemplated in the case law is aimed at finding other employment within the broader organisation and is not limited to newly created positions as a result of restructuring. As stated in the case law, the failure to explore with the complainant other possible options within the Court was a breach of the ICCís duty to treat the complainant with dignity and respect (see, for example, Judgment 2902, under 14).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3730


    123rd Session, 2017
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contends that Eurocontrol withdrew his title and duties as Head of Section.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    [T]he behaviour of the complainantís superiors, whom he was entitled to presume had authority, maintained his belief that they would take the necessary steps to have him promoted to the generic post corresponding to the duties entrusted to him, or that he would be granted a differential allowance, which he claims for the first time in these proceedings.
    As such a promotion procedure was not feasible under Article 5(3)(c) or Article 45a(1) of the Staff Regulations, the complainant was unduly kept in an illusory position for an excessively long time, which undeniably constituted a substantial affront to his dignity.

    Keywords:

    moral injury; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3663


    122nd Session, 2016
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant alleges that his dignity was impaired in the context of his various transfers.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    respect for dignity; transfer;



  • Judgment 3629


    121st Session, 2016
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who questioned the authority of the person who issued a warning letter in the context of her performance evaluation, alleges workplace harassment and attacks on her dignity.

    Consideration

    Keywords:

    harassment; respect for dignity; summary procedure;



  • Judgment 3522


    120th Session, 2015
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants contest the lawfulness of two communiquťs suspending the application of a circular on the protection of the dignity of staff.

    Judgement keywords

    Keywords:

    intervention; joinder; respect for dignity; staff representative;



  • Judgment 3502


    120th Session, 2015
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the Director General's decision to partially adopt the Appeal Board's recommendations on his appeal against his temporary suspension.

    Consideration 22

    Extract:

    "[T]he Tribunal observes that the complainantís submissions in his internal appeals and in his first complaint were unnecessarily offensive towards WIPO and were unnecessarily lengthy, with large portions devoted to irrelevant attacks on WIPO and its staff members. It should be noted that the complainant owes a duty of respect to WIPO and to its staff which, by the intemperate language of his submissions, has not been fulfilled (see Judgment 1531, under 15)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1531

    Keywords:

    respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3482


    120th Session, 2015
    Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his contract with immediate effect during his trial period.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    duty of care; probation; respect for dignity; termination;



  • Judgment 3450


    119th Session, 2015
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal set aside the contested appointment because the complainant's right to a fair and open competition was violated.

    Considerations 10-11

    Extract:

    The Tribunal notes that Ms N. was at the P.5 level and was transferred without competition to a P.4 position, retaining her P.5 salary and benefits. Therefore, the Tribunal considers her appointment to be an in-grade transfer, though it could appear to some to have been a demotion or downgrade. It is useful to note that, in principle, it would not appear to be in the ILOís best interest, from a financial point of view, to fill positions of lower grades with staff members from higher grades, nor would it demonstrate a particular respect for a staff memberís dignity to assign her or him to a position at a lower grade.
    The complainant raises the issue of violation of the principle of equality of treatment, arguing that she was treated differently than Ms N. following the abolition of her post. As the Tribunal finds Ms N.ís appointment to have been unlawful, there can be no violation of the principle of equality of treatment, as there cannot be equality in unlawfulness.

    Keywords:

    equal treatment; respect for dignity; transfer;



  • Judgment 3409


    119th Session, 2015
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal awarded the complainants material and moral damages stemming from IFAD's unlawful decisions and violation of its duty of care.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal is of the opinion that IFAD violated its duty of care and did not respect the dignity of the complainants. Specifically, with regard to Ms V., it was out of the ordinary for her job title to have suddenly changed from [...] to [...], and later [...] only after she protested against the unjustified change, which appeared to demote her. [...] By simply expecting her to apply for posts at the P-4 level, IFAD did not recognise her P-5 level nor did it respect her dignity."

    Keywords:

    duty of care; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3377


    118th Session, 2014
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the decision rejecting his harassment complaint, especially because he was deprived of work and because the Organisation breached its duty to treat him with dignity.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "The evidence shows that the Organization breached its duty to ensure that the complainantís dignity was preserved with meaningful work during his last three years in the Organization. It was, in effect, a continual exclusion from work over that period. This constituted harassment that the FAOís Administrative Circular No. 2007/05 expressly proscribes."

    Keywords:

    harassment; respect for dignity;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "The evidence further shows that the Organization also breached its duty to ensure that his complaints were addressed in a proactive manner. Circular No. 2007/05 charges persons who are in supervisory positions to ensure adherence to the Policy on the Prevention of Harassment by taking early corrective measures to avert or correct any act that threatens or compromises a staff memberís dignity. There is no evidence that such early corrective measures were taken to address the complainantís situation."

    Keywords:

    harassment; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3370


    118th Session, 2014
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who performed duties at a higher level than his grade, impugns the decision not to grant him a promotion and acting allowance, and partially succeeds on the basis that the Organisation breached its duty of care.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "While the complainant was not legally entitled to have his post upgraded nor was he legally entitled to be appointed to the position for which he had applied, he was entitled to have the Organisation act in good faith towards him and respect his dignity. It was an affront to his dignity to be exposed to a delay of over two years to resolve his status in circumstances where he believed, and more importantly where he knew his immediate superior also believed, he had been performing duties of [a higher] post and was suitable for appointment to such a post."

    Keywords:

    good faith; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3366


    118th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to transmit to the Board of Appeal his claim concerning the displaying of his photo in the security premises of the Organisation following his dismissal.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "There is no doubt that the displaying of the complainantís photograph in the guard posts and in the library of the Regional Office was liable to offend his honour, reputation or dignity. However, for the reasons already stated, and which relate to the complainantís own conduct, this measure was justified."

    Keywords:

    respect for dignity;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    respect for dignity; suspension;



  • Judgment 3353


    118th Session, 2014
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the non-renewal of their contracts following a restructuring process and obtain moral damages for the serious affront to their dignity and the failure to give reasonable notice.

    Consideration 26

    Extract:

    "The Tribunalís case law states that the relations between an international organisation and a staff member must be governed by good faith, respect, transparency and consideration for their dignity (see Judgment 1479, under 12). Accordingly, an organisation is required to treat its staff with due consideration and to avoid causing them undue injury. An organisation must care for the dignity of its staff members and not cause them unnecessary personal distress and disappointment where this could be avoided. In particular, good faith requires an organisation to inform a staff member in advance of any action that it might take which may impair a staff memberís rights or rightful interest."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1479

    Keywords:

    good faith; respect for dignity; staff member's interest;

    Consideration 30

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal has stated, in Judgment 2861, under 27, that it must be taken to be normal practice in any international organisation to involve the Chief of a Section or Department in plans for its reorganisation. This is because not to do so would ordinarily constitute a serious failure to respect the dignity of that person."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2861

    Keywords:

    reorganisation; respect for dignity;

    Considerations 31 and 32

    Extract:

    "This submission misses the essential and overriding concern that it is inimical to the dignity of a person who held the senior management positions that the complainants did, to have been left unaware that restructuring was being contemplated and then pursued. It is the Tribunalís view that this was insensitive and it was not unexpected that they would have felt embarrassed, sidelined and hurt to be informed that their contracts would not be renewed because their posts were to be eliminated by a process that they were unaware of until it culminated in the abolition of their posts. [...] The Tribunal has not seen any good reason why the restructuring process was shrouded in secrecy and why that eventuality was not known to the complainants. [...]
    It was insensitive and in scant respect for his dignity that Mr M.ís desk and computer were reallocated to other users without his prior knowledge even when he was still returning to his office [...] before his contract expired."

    Keywords:

    respect for dignity;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 | next >


 
Last updated: 19.07.2019 ^ top