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

Staff member's interest (208,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Staff member's interest
Total judgments found: 122

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >

  • Judgment 4057


    127th Session, 2019
    World Trade Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to reduce her pension on the basis of a reduction of the consumer price index.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The rule or principle of interpretation is that a clause in a document should be interpreted in favour of the party who did not draft the clause (in this case the staff), and not in favour of the party who did draft the clause, sought the inclusion of the clause or possibly in whose interests the clause was intended to operate (that is to say contra proferentem). However this rule, whatever its width, only operates in circumstances where the clause is ambiguous (see, for example, Judgment 1755, consideration 12, and, more recently, Judgment 3355, consideration 16).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1755, 3355

    Keywords:

    contra proferentem; interpretation; interpretation of rules; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3355


    118th Session, 2014
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: After the transfer of his pension rights acquired under a national scheme to the Organisation’s pension scheme, the complainant successfully challenges the refusal to recalculate the number of pensionable years credited to him.

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    "[I]t is well established in the Tribunal’s case law that when the regulations or rules of an international organisation are ambiguous they must in principle be construed in favour of the interests of its staff and not those of the organisation itself (see, for example, Judgments 1755, under 12, 2276, under 4, or 2396, under 3(a))."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1755, 2276, 2396

    Keywords:

    interpretation; staff member's interest;



  • 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 Tribunal’s 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 member’s rights or rightful interest."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1479

    Keywords:

    duty of care; good faith; respect for dignity; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3236


    115th Session, 2013
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contends that the decision to subject him to an investigation was tainted with misuse of power.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    Concerning the initiation of the investigation itself, the Tribunal’s case law is clear that a decision to begin an investigation into misconduct at that stage is not a decision that affects the staff member’s status (see Judgment 2364, under 3 and 4).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2364

    Keywords:

    decision; inquiry; investigation; misconduct; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3216


    115th Session, 2013
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests her performance appraisal for its content and on the basis of what she considers to be procedural flaws.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "A fundamental principle of the adversarial process is the right to know and have an opportunity to respond to the evidence adduced by the opposing party (see Judgments 1815, under 5, and 2700, under 6). Upon receipt of the report, the Board, which ultimately relied upon it, was obliged to advise the complainant of the receipt of new evidence and give her an opportunity to respond before taking it into consideration."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1815, 2700

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; advisory body; case law; confidential evidence; disclosure of evidence; duty to inform; general principle; organisation's duties; right to be heard; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3204


    115th Session, 2013
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant claims moral damages for the Union’s failure to submit to its Council the matter of the recognition of same-sex marriages.

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "It is settled by the Tribunal’s case law that, according to the rules of good faith, anyone who was a staff member of an organisation and to whom a promise was made, may expect that promise to be kept by the organisation. However, the right to fulfilment of the promise is conditional. One condition is that the promise should be substantive. Another is that the promise is from someone who is competent or deemed competent to make it. Yet another is that the breach should cause injury to the person who relies on the promise (see Judgment 782)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 782

    Keywords:

    condition; definition; duty of care; formal requirements; good faith; organisation's duties; promise; staff member's duties; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3200


    115th Session, 2013
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to impose on her the disciplinary measure of demotion.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "Although the case was complex and detailed, and the subject matter sensitive, the time taken to complete the proceedings was indeed excessive. The Tribunal notes in particular that it took OSDI ten months to bring the investigation to a conclusion following the interviews, and it took the Director General seven months to reject the appeal after receiving the Appeals Committee Report. The total length of the proceedings cannot therefore be considered reasonable, and specifically, the two intervals of time noted above were excessive. The conclusion is that the Organization did not respect the need for expeditious proceedings and violated its duty of care towards the complainant."

    Keywords:

    administrative delay; delay; duty of care; internal appeal; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3191


    114th Session, 2013
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants successfully challenge a recruitment procedure which they considered as flawed.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "Regarding the contents of the vacancy notice, the confusion, to the extent there was some confusion among potential applicants, involved confusion about the interpretation of the Service Regulations and not the interpretation of the content of the vacancy notice itself. However, in these circumstances, where the EPO was aware of the confusion surrounding the interpretation of its Regulations, it was incumbent on the Administration to clarify the requirements for the position in the vacancy notice."

    Keywords:

    formal requirements; organisation's duties; staff member's interest; vacancy; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 3188


    114th Session, 2013
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions not to update her job description, not to select her for a G-6 position and her alleged subsequent demotion.

    Consideration 25

    Extract:

    "As the Tribunal has repeatedly observed, internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and with regard to the care owed by an international organisation to its staff (see for example Judgment 2522, under 7). While the time an appeal might reasonably take will often depend on the particular circumstances of a given case, it has been said by the Tribunal in Judgment 2902, under 16, that “by any standards a delay of nearly 19 months to complete the internal appeal process is unreasonable”."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2522, 2902

    Keywords:

    delay; duty of care; internal appeal; moral injury; organisation's duties; procedure before the tribunal; reasonable time; staff member's interest; time limit;



  • Judgment 3160


    114th Session, 2013
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully impugns the Director-General's decision to reject his appeal concerning breaches of confidentiality.

    Considerations 16-17

    Extract:

    "As to the compensation for the delay, it is well established that internal appeals must be conducted with due diligence and with regard to the care owed by an international organisation to its staff (see, in particular, Judgment 2522). Furthermore, it has been said by the Tribunal in Judgment 2902 that “by any standards a delay of nearly 19 months to complete the internal appeal process is unreasonable”. The time an appeal might reasonably take will usually depend on the particular circumstances. The Director-General recognised that the time taken in this case, a little over two years, was excessive and awarded moral damages. As noted earlier, both the complainant and UNIDO dispute the quantum of damages awarded by the Director-General for delay.
    The amount of compensation for unreasonable delay will ordinarily be influenced by at least two considerations. One is the length of the delay and the other is the effect of the delay. These considerations are interrelated as lengthy delay may have a greater effect. That latter consideration, the effect of the delay, will usually depend on, amongst other things, the subject matter of the appeal. Delay in an internal appeal concerning a matter of limited seriousness in its impact on the appellant would be likely to be less injurious to the appellant than delay in an appeal concerning an issue of fundamental importance and seriousness in its impact on the appellant. For example, an extensive delay in relation to an appeal concerning the dismissal of a staff member could have a profound impact on his or her circumstances. On the other hand, a delay of precisely the same period in relation to an appeal concerning a comparatively trifling issue may have limited or possibly even no impact on the circumstances of the staff member."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2522, 2902

    Keywords:

    compensation; damages; delay; effect; general principle; internal appeal; organisation's duties; reasonable time; staff member's interest; time limit;



  • Judgment 3115


    113th Session, 2012
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The complainant alleges that senior officials misappropriated funds to the detriment of poor countries. "However, in raising that allegation before the Tribunal, she overlooks the fact that the competence of the Tribunal is clearly and exhaustively defined in Article II of its Statute, from which it follows that the Tribunal cannot interfere either with the policies of the international organisations which have recognised its competence, or with the workings of their administrations, unless a violation of the rights of a staff member is in issue. International civil servants seeking to file a complaint with the Tribunal must show that the decisions they are challenging are such as to affect personal interests of theirs which are protected by the rights and safeguards deriving from the applicable Staff Regulations and Rules, or from the terms of their appointments."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT reference: Article II of the Statute

    Keywords:

    breach; competence of tribunal; complaint; condition; contract; exception; iloat statute; official; organisation's reputation; provision; right; safeguard; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules; supervisor; vested competence; written rule;



  • Judgment 3099


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

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "Although staff members of international organisations necessarily have the right to protect their own interests, they must act in conformity with their duty as international civil servants."

    Keywords:

    international civil service principles; official; staff member's duties; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3069


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

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "There is no reason in principle why the actions of a subordinate cannot constitute harassment of his or her supervisor, particularly where those actions consist of persistent unfounded allegations of harassment. However, just as the actions of a supervisor that serve a legitimate managerial or supervisory function do not constitute harassment, so, too, actions taken in good faith by a subordinate that serve the function of protecting his or her legitimate interests do not constitute harassment."

    Keywords:

    good faith; harassment; staff member's interest; supervisor;



  • Judgment 3055


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

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "[A]s a general rule, an organisation should refrain from passing on damaging information about a staff member. If the recipient of that information has a legitimate interest in knowing the truth [...] it should refrain from passing on damaging information without first giving the staff member an opportunity to challenge it and give his or her own account."

    Keywords:

    communication to third party; duty of care; duty of discretion; injury; organisation's duties; professional injury; rebuttal; right to reply; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 3041


    111th Session, 2011
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal observes that there can be no justification for the delay and the failure to give the complainant a final decision. The fact that the [internal appeal body's] recommendations left the Administration in a difficult position does not excuse the unreasonable delay or absolve the Director-General from fulfilling her obligation to give a final decision in accordance with the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules. The Tribunal finds it particularly egregious that the failure to give a decision also resulted in the complainant not knowing the outcome of the [internal appeal] process. In addition to leaving the complainant in an unfair position in terms of any negotiations or other attempts to resolve the dispute, the complainant was deprived of the opportunity to consider the findings and recommendations contained in the [internal appeal body's] report before filing a complaint with the Tribunal. It appears that [the Organization's] conduct undermined the integrity of the internal appeal process and was a blatant disregard of the complainant's rights."

    Keywords:

    absence of final decision; complainant; delay; duty of care; duty to inform; internal appeal; internal appeals body; organisation's duties; recommendation; right; staff member's interest; staff regulations and rules;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    Abolition of post and termination of appointment following reorganisation / Failure on the part of the Organization to take a final decision on the complainant's appeal / Excessive delay in communicating to the complainant the outcome of the internal appeal procedure.
    "The decision to abolish a post must be communicated to the staff person occupying the post in a manner that safeguards that individual's rights. These rights are safeguarded by giving proper notice of the decision, reasons for the decision and an opportunity to contest the decision. As well, subsequent to the decision there must be proper institutional support mechanisms in place to assist the staff member concerned in finding a new assignment."

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; complainant; decision; duty of care; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; reassignment; right; right of appeal; safeguard; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 2992


    110th Session, 2011
    Centre for the Development of Enterprise
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    The CDE requests that certain documents be removed from the file on the grounds that they are confidential and that the complainant obtained them unlawfully.
    "The Tribunal will not accede to the request for the removal of items of evidence, since the Centre has not proved that this request is justified by the protection of interests more worthy of protection that the complainant's interest in defending herself (see Judgment 2700, under 7)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2700

    Keywords:

    claim; confidential evidence; discontinuance; flaw; lack of evidence; organisation; organisation's interest; refusal; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 2963


    110th Session, 2011
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "The rule against retrospectivity permits of two exceptions, namely where the decision involves no detriment to the staff member concerned and where the decision replaces an earlier provisional decision (see Judgment 1130, under 2)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1130

    Keywords:

    decision; exception; injury; non-retroactivity; provisional decision; staff member's interest;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "[A] decision to terminate a staff member's service retrospectively involves necessarily a detriment in that it negates the possibility of notice allowing for the person concerned to make necessary arrangements during the notice period. This is so whether or not a payment is made in lieu of notice."

    Keywords:

    decision; injury; non-retroactivity; notice; payment; staff member's interest;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    Quashing of a retroactive termination of appointment for reasons of health.
    "It is well settled that an international organisation cannot retrospectively alter the rights and obligations of staff members to their detriment, whether by written rule or otherwise (see, for example, Judgments 595, under 5 and 6, 1669, under 17 and 18, and 1979, under 5(h))."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 595, 1669, 1979

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; non-retroactivity; right; staff member's duties; staff member's interest; written rule;



  • Judgment 2921


    109th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "In addition to the absence of a closing date, the vacancy notice contained no information regarding the main duties of the position, the required qualifications, or an invitation to interested applicants to apply. This is the same issue that arose in Judgment 2920 [...]. In that judgment, the Tribunal observed: 'The underlying rationale for the publication of the vacancy notice is to permit qualified staff members to make an informed decision as to whether they should submit an application to be considered for the vacant post and to foster a policy consistent with [...] the Service Regulations. Although there are no set content requirements for a vacancy notice, it cannot be said that the notice [...] in the present case provided even the minimum information that a staff member would require to reach an informed decision.' "

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2920

    Keywords:

    formal requirements; organisation's duties; publication; staff member's interest; vacancy; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2920


    109th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The underlying rationale for the publication of the vacancy notice is to permit qualified staff members to make an informed decision as to whether they should submit an application to be considered for the vacant post and to foster a policy consistent with [...] the Service Regulations. Although there are no set content requirements for a vacancy notice, it cannot be said that the notice [...] in the present case provided even the minimum information that a staff member would require to reach an informed decision."

    Keywords:

    formal requirements; organisation's duties; publication; staff member's interest; vacancy; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2906


    108th Session, 2010
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "Although [...] the decision [to promote the complaintant to grade A5] did not create any rights because it stemmed from a factual error, it could be reversed only on certain conditions dictated by the principle of good faith. This principle requires, firstly, that the power to reverse a decision resting on a factual error must be exercised as soon as the competent authority notices the error in question and not at a later date chosen at its own convenience. Secondly, this principle requires that if the person concerned by a decision resting on a factual error has not contributed to this error, he or she must not suffer any unfavourable consequences from the application of the decision in question during the period before it was reversed. In particular, it is thus essential that any remuneration received by the official concerned on the basis of this decision should not give rise to reimbursement or any other form of restitution."

    Keywords:

    condition; consequence; decision; good faith; individual decision; mistake of fact; promotion; right; staff member's interest;

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    "Even though [...] the Organisation was entitled to reverse the decision wrongly promoting the complainant to grade A5, the factual error on which its initial decision rested was nonetheless negligent. By submitting a draft decision whose content had not been properly checked for signature by the President, the services of the Organisation displayed gross negligence, which is even less excusable in view of the fact that individual decisions on promotion are of a particularly sensitive nature. The complainant obviously had cause to be extremely disappointed because, having been notified of this decision, he was then told that it had been reversed and that he had been promoted simply to grade A(2). By proceeding in this manner the EPO breached the duty which the Tribunal's case law establishes for every international organisation not to cause its staff unnecessary injury (see, for example, Judgments 1526, under 3, or 2007, under 11)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1526, 2007

    Keywords:

    decision; individual decision; injury; mistake of fact; negligence; organisation's duties; promotion; staff member's interest;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >


 
Last updated: 07.03.2024 ^ top