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

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



  • Judgment 3290


    116th Session, 2014
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: Following the abolition of the complainant's post for lack of financial resources, the reassignment process was organized but was ultimately unsuccessful in finding the complainant another post.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; delay; fixed-term; grade; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity; termination;



  • Judgment 3264


    116th Session, 2014
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the decision not to renew her contract after an extension of her probationary period and is granted damages.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    breach; confidential evidence; decision; disclosure of evidence; discretion; due process; duty to inform; extension; general principle; good faith; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; performance report; probation; procedural flaw; respect for dignity; right to reply; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The purpose of probation is to give an organisation an opportunity to evaluate a probationer’s suitability for a position (see Judgment 2646, under 5). This gives rise to corollary obligations on the part of the organisation to warn a staff member in a timely manner that her or his performance is unsatisfactory, to give the staff member guidance and an opportunity to improve and to set objectives against which improvement can be measured. These are “fundamental aspects of the duty of an international organisation to act in good faith towards its staff members and to respect their dignity” (see Judgment 2414, under 23)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414, 2646

    Keywords:

    duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; probation; respect for dignity; unsatisfactory service;



  • Judgment 3262


    116th Session, 2014
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant, who applied for the position of Legal Advisor, was offered the post, but at a grade lower than that at which it was advertised.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; candidate; compensation; contract; grade; moral injury; offer; offer withdrawn; post; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3250


    116th Session, 2014
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant was recognized as a victim of institutional harassment.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal notes that intent is not a necessary element of harassment and, in this case, it is not a single episode which creates the problem, but instead it is the accumulation of repeated events which deeply and adversely affected the complainant’s dignity and career objectives. As such, the JAAB’s finding that “the long series of examples of mismanagement and omissions by the Office […] compromised [the complainant’s] dignity and career” is well founded and the Tribunal is of the opinion that this administrative wrongdoing can be defined as institutional harassment."

    Keywords:

    advisory opinion; complaint allowed in part; harassment; injury; organisation's duties; professional injury; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3106


    113th Session, 2012
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "The law of defamation is not concerned solely with the question whether a statement is defamatory in the sense that it injures a person’s reputation or tarnishes his or her good name. It is also concerned with the question whether the statement was made in circumstances that afford a defence. Broadly speaking, the defences to a claim in defamation mark out the boundaries of permissible debate and discussion. As a general rule, a statement, even if defamatory in the sense indicated, will not result in liability in defamation if it was made in response to criticism by the person claiming to have been defamed or if it was made in the course of the discussion of a matter of legitimate interest to those to whom the statement was published and, in either case, the extent of the publication was reasonable in the circumstances."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; freedom of speech; liability; limits; mitigating circumstances; moral injury; publication; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3104


    112th Session, 2012
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "[T]he fact that the complainant was not given enough work upon her return from sick leave, which led her to feel marginalised and humiliated, offended her dignity and constitutes an element of the breach of duty of care."

    Keywords:

    duty of care; organisation's duties; refusal to assign work; respect for dignity; sick leave;



  • Judgment 3099


    112th Session, 2012
    European Southern Observatory
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "[T]he obligation to treat staff members with dignity and the duty of good faith required, at the very least, that there be an accurate record of the interviews, which could have been achieved by, for example, the making of a transcript by a competent stenographer."

    Keywords:

    duty of care; good faith; inquiry; organisation's duties; recording; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3071


    112th Session, 2012
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 48

    Extract:

    "An international organisation has a responsibility to treat its officials with dignity. If criticism is warranted [...] that should be done either by means of the performance appraisal reports or in a manner that ensures respect for the staff member's dignity."

    Keywords:

    duty of care; organisation's duties; performance report; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 3069


    112th Session, 2012
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "[I]t is well settled that statements made in good faith in response to criticism or attack do not attract liability for defamation."

    Keywords:

    liability; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 2955


    110th Session, 2011
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The defendant asks the Tribunal to find that, especially in his rejoinder, the complainant engaged in 'completely gratuitous and misplaced [...] personal attacks'. It asks the Tribunal 'to censure such inappropriate language which detracts from the proper conduct of the proceedings'.
    The complainant, who is not assisted by a lawyer, has certainly used, in his complaint and rejoinder, blunt, colourful language which is not always very courteous. However, this wording does not exceed the bounds of what is acceptable in the context of legal proceedings."

    Keywords:

    rejoinder; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 2938


    109th Session, 2010
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal has determined that a staff member on leave on personal grounds is ipso facto no longer performing the duties of his former post and that, although during this leave he continues to be an official, the rights arising from the performance of his duties - remuneration, promotion, guarantee of employment, etc. - are suspended until he is reinstated. In the interests of the service the Agency may therefore use the vacant post (see Judgment 416, under 2). At the end of leave on personal grounds the employer nonetheless has a duty to reinstate the official provided that the two cumulative conditions laid down by [...] Article 40 [of the General Conditions of Employment Governing Servants at the Eurocontrol Maastricht Centre] are met: firstly, there must be a vacant post and, secondly, the staff member must be qualified for it (see Judgment 2034, under 11). This duty must be fulfilled promptly and with due regard for the dignity of the staff member concerned and the principle of good faith."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: Article 40 of the General Conditions of Employment Governing Servants at the Eurocontrol Maastricht Centre
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 416, 2034

    Keywords:

    accumulation; assignment; compassionate leave; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; condition; consequence; general principle; good faith; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; period; post held by complainant; promotion; qualifications; reinstatement; respect for dignity; right; safeguard; salary; security of tenure; special leave; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant; suspension; vacancy;



  • Judgment 2931


    109th Session, 2010
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "[I]t was an affront to her dignity and a breach of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value to expect the complainant to work at a post that was graded below the level of the duties actually being performed. For this, she is entitled to moral damages [...]."

    Keywords:

    compensation; equal treatment; grade; moral damages; moral injury; post; post classification; post description; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 2902


    108th Session, 2010
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 12 and 14

    Extract:

    "The complainant argues that the Organization breached its duty of care in failing to accommodate him in another post or in a manner less drastic than the non-renewal of his appointment. [...]
    The Organization had no obligation under the 200 Series of the Staff Rules to find an alternative post for the complainant. However, it had a duty to explore with him possible options prior to his separation. The failure to do so was an affront to his dignity and showed a lack of respect for him as a highly regarded long-serving staff member."

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; project personnel; reassignment; reorganisation; respect for dignity; seniority; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2895


    108th Session, 2010
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal finds that WHO's unilateral decision to "waive" the exit medical examination constitutes a violation of Staff Rule 1085. It also finds that, although there is no evidence that the decision was motivated by malice, the manner in which the Organization dealt with this issue was an affront to the complainant's dignity."

    Keywords:

    medical examination; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; separation from service; staff member's duties; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 2879


    108th Session, 2010
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 22

    Extract:

    "[A]n e-mail was sent to all WIPO staff regarding the article that had appeared in the newspaper. The e-mail stated that the allegations in the press had proven to be false. It also stated that in light of the seriousness of the breach of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules and the Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service sanctions were applied to the staff member concerned. Even though the complainant was not named, her alleged connection with the article was well known to many staff members. This constituted a violation of her privacy and was an affront to her dignity."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: WIPO Staff regulations and Staff Rules; Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service

    Keywords:

    disciplinary measure; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 2878


    108th Session, 2010
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant asks the Tribunal to quash the decision dismissing his appeal as irreceivable. He submits in particular that Staff Rule 212.02 is not applicable in his case because he was in the process of negotiating a new contract with the Organization and therefore the deadline should have been suspended. He also submits that there was a breach of the principles of good faith, of legitimate expectation, of the duty of care and of respect for dignity.
    "[T]here was no reason why the complainant could not submit his request for review within the 60-day time limit provided for in Staff Rule 212.02, and withdraw it later if necessary. The Joint Appeals Board was correct in recommending that his appeal be dismissed as time-barred. So far as concerns the applicable time limits, there was no breach of the principles of good faith, legitimate expectation, respect for dignity, or duty of care. The complainant refers to Judgment 2584 [...]. However, [...] in the present case there was only one official communication from the Organization to the complainant between the date of the letter notifying him of the decision not to further extend his contract [...] and the date of his letter requesting the Director-General to review that decision [...]. This cannot be construed, as claimed by the complainant, as an initiation of settlement negotiations which could have suspended the time limit for submission of a request to review the decision."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2584, 2841

    Keywords:

    breach; collective bargaining; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; delay; duty of care; good faith; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; proposal; respect for dignity; settlement out of court; staff regulations and rules; time limit;



  • Judgment 2869


    108th Session, 2010
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "[I]t is not enough that the decision may be reasonable and in good faith; it must also appear to be reasonable and in good faith. [...] [A]ll decisions regarding the promotion or non-promotion of staff union representatives must be, and must appear to be, made impartially so as to avoid any hint of preference or prejudice."

    Keywords:

    bias; discretion; equal treatment; good faith; judicial review; misuse of authority; promotion; respect for dignity; staff representative; staff union activity;



  • Judgment 2868


    108th Session, 2010
    South Centre
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 35 and 36

    Extract:

    "At the material time, the Centre had not formally adopted a procedure for the selection of candidates for vacant posts; however, it had developed a set of Guidelines."
    "Although the Guidelines do not have the force of formally adopted regulations or rules, they are intended to foster a transparent selection procedure in which candidates are fairly evaluated against selection criteria. The process in the present case [...] undermines the credibility of the procedure and is an affront to the dignity of the complainant, who submitted his candidature in good faith and with the expectation that it would be considered in accordance with the procedure found in the Guidelines."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1077, 2393

    Keywords:

    candidate; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; criteria; difference; procedure; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 2861


    107th Session, 2009
    World Meteorological Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 91 and 93

    Extract:

    "[T]he complainant seeks damages for the publication in the [Organization] monthly information bulletin that she had been separated from service, in the English version, and dismissed from service ('démise de ses fonctions') in the French version. The publication of this information was contrary to the Secretary-General's instructions but, even if published negligently, [the Organization] is liable for the damage occasioned to the complainant's reputation and dignity. In this regard, it was said in Judgment 2720 that 'international organisations are bound to refrain from any type of conduct that may harm the dignity or reputation of their staff members' (see also Judgments 396, 1875, 2371 and 2475). It was also pointed out in Judgment 2720 that that obligation extends to former staff members."
    "There will be an award of material and moral damages in relation to the publication [...]. However, account will be taken of the facts that the publication resulted from negligence, not malice, that it was speedily withdrawn and that the Secretary-General apologised to the complainant. In Judgment 2720 mentioned above the Tribunal held that, in the case of a continuing duty of an organisation to refrain from any type of conduct that may harm the reputation or dignity of its staff members, the Tribunal may order performance of that duty, including by ordering the publication of material to restore a person's reputation. The complainant seeks an order of that kind in the present case. However, the Tribunal is satisfied that her honour and reputation will be sufficiently vindicated by this judgment and by an award of damages."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 396, 1875, 2371, 2475, 2720

    Keywords:

    compensation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; damages; judgment of the tribunal; material injury; moral injury; negligence; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;

    Considerations 97, 98 and 99

    Extract:

    The complainant argues that she was discharged from the continuing obligation of confidentiality when her employment was unlawfully terminated.
    "There is no doubt that an international civil servant is under an obligation of discretion (see Judgments 1608 and 1732)."
    "In the present case, the complainant had unsuccessfully availed herself of internal appeal procedures with respect to the decision to reassign her to the post of Chief of IAS, her attempt to raise her claim of harassment had been rejected as 'abusive and ill driven' without investigation and her request for review of the decision not to renew her contract led to her summary dismissal. In these circumstances, it is to be doubted that there was a continuing obligation of complete discretion."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1608, 1732

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; duty of discretion; limits; organisation's duties; organisation's reputation; respect for dignity; staff member's duties;

    Consideration 27

    Extract:

    "[I]t 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. Not to do so would, ordinarily, constitute a serious failure to respect the dignity of that person."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; organisation's duties; reorganisation; respect for dignity;



  • Judgment 2856


    107th Session, 2009
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 15 and 16

    Extract:

    "In its submissions the Organization details the comprehensive training strategy that was established to enable the complainant to strengthen his skills. [T]hat strategy included participation in a number of courses and a half-time secondment to the IRIS project to allow the complainant exposure to the new system."
    "The Tribunal concludes that, in the circumstances, the Organization did its utmost to respect the complainant's dignity and good name and not to cause him any harm. Despite the fact that the complainant did not possess the requisite skills, the grade P.3 position was designated at grade P.4 and his personal grade was not altered."

    Keywords:

    decision; grade; organisation's duties; post held by complainant; qualifications; reassignment; respect for dignity; status of complainant; training; transfer;

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "It is [...] clear that a transfer of a non-disciplinary nature «is subject to the general principles governing all decisions affecting an official's status. It must show due regard, in both form and substance, for the dignity of the official concerned, particularly by providing him with work of the same level as that which he performed in his previous post and matching his qualifications» (see Judgment 2229, under 3(a))."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2229

    Keywords:

    decision; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity; same; status of complainant; transfer; working conditions;

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


 
Last updated: 12.08.2019 ^ top