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

Terms of appointment

You searched for:
Keywords: Terms of appointment
Total judgments found: 1,788

< 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, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 | next >



  • Judgment 2146


    93rd Session, 2002
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    The Invalidity Committee was constituted of two doctors respectively appointed by the organization and the complainant and of a third member chosen by mutual agreement between the first two doctors. The doctor appointed by the complainant resigned. He appointed another but challenges the fact that the third member was not rechosen. "It is clear [...] that if a member is replaced, the appointment should be by the same person or persons who originally appointed the member who has left. The complainant is wrong to liken the Invalidity Committee to an arbitral body that must always have representation from each side and must always be presided by someone chosen by the parties' representatives. The Invalidity Committee is a statutory body and once regularly constituted, it has the powers vested in it by the rules. The appointments to it do not become invalid simply by reason of the departure of a member."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; composition; consequence; disability benefit; invalidity; medical board; pension entitlements; resignation;



  • Judgment 2145


    93rd Session, 2002
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 5 to 8

    Extract:

    "In the Organisation's view, since the payments it was making to the complainant were entirely voluntary, a matter of grace and favour on its part, it was quite at liberty to suspend such payments when the complainant failed to fulfil her obligation to submit to the [...] medical examination [required by the Invalidity Committee]. [It] is wrong. The Invalidity Committee's report [...] was categorical in stating that the complainant must be regarded as not fit for work. That means that she was unable to perform her duties and at a minimum she was entitled to receive the emoluments provided for in Article 62(7) unless and until the Invalidity Committee made a further finding putting an end to her sick leave, extending it, or placing her on permanent disability. But, without the authorisation of the Invalidity Committee, the [Organisation] had no right by its own unilateral action to suspend the payments to which she was entitled by law. [...] There can be no doubt that the [complainant] has a clear obligation to assist the Invalidity Committee and to present herself as and when reasonably required to do so for examination or treatment. If she fails to do so, that might constitute grounds for the Invalidity Committee to declare her sick leave at an end or it might form the basis of disciplinary action. [However, the Organisation] cannot take the law into its own hands without regard for the complainant's rights or its own obligations under the Service Regulations. [...] The highhanded actions of the [Organisation] in cutting the complainant's payments are both unjustified and illegal. The impugned decision must be rescinded."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 62 (7) OF THE SERVICE REGULATIONS

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; disability benefit; disciplinary procedure; incapacity; invalidity; medical board; medical examination; medical fitness; organisation's duties; payment; pension entitlements; refusal; right; sick leave; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules;



  • Judgment 2142


    93rd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 16 and 17

    Extract:

    The complainants' request for mutually agreed separation was not allowed. "They suggest that a number of staff members who were granted a mutually agreed separation should not have been entitled to benefit from the exercise [...] The complainants request that the Tribunal itself undertake a complete examination of all documents relative to the [...] selection process or, alternatively, that they themselves, or their representative, be allowed to examine the documents. The Tribunal will not make an order of the type sought. The documents of the [mutually agreed separation] exercise, to the extent that they apply to other staff members, are confidential and the complainants' representative enjoys no privileged position in this regard. Without some evidence to support the complainants' unfounded allegations [...] the Tribunal will not sanction, or itself undertake, a wholesale 'fishing expedition' based on nothing more than the possibility that something may turn up."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; agreed termination; appointment; competence of tribunal; complainant; confidential evidence; counsel; disclosure of evidence; iloat; international civil servant; lack of evidence; mistake of fact; mistake of law; procedure; refusal; request; right;

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    "In a selection for a post, the most worthy candidates are selected 'in', i.e. to become members of staff, whereas in a mutually agreed separation exercise these are the very people who are most likely to be selected 'out' i.e. not to be released, in accordance with the requirements of the service. The interest of the organisation, which is paramount in each case, requires that the best candidates be employed and promoted in the first instance, and that they be retained in the organisation's service in the second."

    Keywords:

    agreed termination; appointment; candidate; competition; organisation; organisation's interest; post; procedure; promotion; qualifications;



  • Judgment 2139


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The right of international officials to resort to all internal and jurisdictional remedies available to them without detriment to their career is an essential guarantee to which the Tribunal attaches the greatest importance."

    Keywords:

    career; complaint allowed; consequence; iloat; internal appeal; international civil servant; judicial review; right; right of appeal; safeguard;



  • Judgment 2138


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainant requests that he be considered for a long- term contract. He "can take no comfort from the case of another staff member in a somewhat similar situation who was given a long-term contract [...] The awarding of such contracts is exceptional and wholly discretionary and the fact that a contract is granted to one staff member creates no rights for any other staff member."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; complainant; contract; discretion; duration of appointment; equal treatment; exception; executive head; international civil servant; request; right; same;



  • Judgment 2130


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 2 and 3

    Extract:

    The relief sought by the complainant is that he be granted special leave with pay for the months of November 1999, December 1999 and January 2000. He "was informed that his appointment would be terminated as of 24 December 1999. He does not dispute that he was paid up to that date. Obviously, he cannot claim special leave with pay for any period during which he received his regular salary. Equally obviously, from 24 December 1999 to the end of January 2000, he was no longer on the staff and there can be no basis to his claim for special leave, with or without pay."

    Keywords:

    date; period; refusal; request; salary; separation from service; special leave; status of complainant;



  • Judgment 2129


    93rd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "The complainants [state] that, according to the Tribunal's case law (see Judgment 1821, for example), adjustments to international civil servants' salaries must satisfy objective criteria of stability, foreseeability and transparency. The Tribunal considers that this line of precedent - concerning the determination of staff salaries, which is necessarily governed by very strict rules - is not entirely applicable to the determination of allowances granted for a specific purpose, such as that of covering expenses incurred by staff members on travel status. Even if it claims to be acting in the exercise of its discretion, and although the legal framework surrounding its action remains vague or non-existent, the administration must base its decisions on objective considerations and avoid breaching any of the guarantees protecting the independence of international civil servants."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821

    Keywords:

    adjustment; allowance; analogy; breach; case law; compensatory allowance; compensatory measure; criteria; decision; discretion; duty to substantiate decision; grounds; independence; international civil servant; no provision; official travel; organisation's duties; purpose; safeguard; salary; travel expenses; written rule;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The Organization's Regional Office was transferred from Brazzaville (Congo) to Harare (Zimbabwe). The amount of the per diem the complainants were paid was progressively reduced. "Since the travel per diem is merely intended to cover the essential expenses of a staff member on duty travel, including lodging and food, a high rate of travel per diem cannot be justified where duty travel, which by nature implies that the staff member will continue to work primarily at his or her original duty station, lasts for two years or more."

    Keywords:

    allowance; amount; assignment; compensatory allowance; compensatory measure; extension; international civil servant; payment; period; place of origin; purpose; rate; reduction; transfer; travel expenses;

    Considerations 7 and 8

    Extract:

    "A steady line of precedent, such as that cited in Judgment 1786, under 5, confirms that when impugning an individual decision that concerns the staff member directly, the latter may challenge the lawfulness of any general measure [...] In this case, the complainants could have challenged the individual application of [the] Information Circular [fixing the rate of their travel per diem] to each of them as long as that circular remained in force. [And as they] did not expressly challenge the individual application of that circular to them in due time, [they] can no longer impugn it. The fact that [they] thought that they might succeed in negotiating an amicable solution and for that reason chose not to appeal does not justify lifting the time bar that applied."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1786

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; allowance; case law; cause of action; collective bargaining; complaint; enforcement; general decision; grounds; individual decision; internal appeal; international civil servant; rate; receivability; right of appeal; settlement out of court; time bar; time limit;



  • Judgment 2125


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 5 and 6

    Extract:

    The complainant's request to have his contract extended beyond retirement age was not allowed. "On the merits, the Agency is undoubtedly right in pointing out that the Director General has discretion in the matter, over which the Tribunal has only a limited power of review. This discretion enables the Agency to depart from the rule governing the normal age of retirement. [...] Although the Director General can determine the interest of the Agency, his decisions must be based on clear and coherent reasons. In this case, the reason given - that the request for an extension contained no indication as to whether any of the criteria [on the basis of which he may authorise such an extension] had been satisfied - is not valid, and the reason based on 'rejuvenation' of the staff is too general to constitute a sufficient justification for the refusal of the complainant's request." The Tribunal considers that "this reason is not in itself reprehensible, but it could be used to justify a systematic refusal to depart from the rule governing the normal age of retirement. [By setting out the criteria] the [Agency] established for itself a number of rules which it must apply."

    Keywords:

    age limit; complaint allowed; contract; criteria; decision; definition; discretion; exception; executive head; extension; grounds; iloat; international civil servant; judicial review; organisation; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; patere legem; refusal; request; retirement; written rule;



  • Judgment 2122


    93rd Session, 2002
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant submitted her candidacy for a post of legal assistant. Her application was not taken into consideration because she did not fulfil the eligibility conditions set out in the notice of competition. She submits that there is a contradiction between the provisions of Staff Regulation Article 30 and those of Rule of Application No. 2 which sets out conditions for eligibility. The Tribunal finds "no contradiction between the provisions of Staff Regulation Article 30 and those of Rule of Application No. 2. [...] Contrary to what the complainant appears to suggest, the fact that Article 30(1) of the Staff Regulations says that the 'selection of candidates shall be based on qualifications' does not preclude the setting of eligibility conditions. [...] The eligibility conditions provided for in Rule No. 2 offend against no provision of the Staff Regulations. [...] The complainant did not meet all the conditions set in the notice of competition, and the Agency was therefore right to reject her application."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 30 OF THE STAFF REGULATIONS GOVERNING OFFICIALS OF THE AGENCY

    Keywords:

    appointment; breach; candidate; competition; complainant; condition; criteria; degree; difference; enforcement; grounds; post; provision; refusal; staff regulations and rules; vacancy notice;



  • Judgment 2121


    93rd Session, 2002
    Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 9 and 14

    Extract:

    The recommendation of the Personnel Advisory Panel not to renew the complainant's contract was followed. She submits that "at no time was she given a reason for the decision not to renew her appointment. The failure to cite a reason runs counter to principles embodied in a series of Tribunal judgments [...] to state that another body has recommended against renewal, without stating why, is not enough to satisfy the Tribunal that a reason for such non-renewal was given."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; advisory body; case law; complainant; complaint allowed; contract; duty to substantiate decision; evidence; general principle; grounds; iloat; non-renewal; recommendation;



  • Judgment 2120


    93rd Session, 2002
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 10 and 11

    Extract:

    A paragraph of a notice issued by the Organisation's secretariat stipulates that the spouse of a staff member shall normally not be employed in the same department as the staff member. The Tribunal considers that "the provision improperly discriminates between candidates for appointment based on their marital status and family relationship [...]. Discrimination on such grounds is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations, general principles of law and those which govern the international civil service, as well as international instruments on human rights. [...] All forms of improper discrimination are prohibited. What is improper discrimination? It is, at least in the employment context, the drawing of distinctions between staff members or candidates for appointment on the basis of irrelevant personal characteristics. Manifestly, the fact that two staff members may be married to each other is not relevant to their competence or the capacity of either one of them to fulfil their obligations. and, if it is thought that marital or intimate personal relationships between staff members may create management problems, such problems must be dealt with in ways that do not discriminate against either of them as a result of such relationships. The Tribunal notes that [the notice] as it is written, besides being too broad, is not even effective in dealing with the presumed possibility of undue influence or favouritism for it is silent on non-marital intimate relationships. It also fails to deal with marriages taking place after appointment".

    Keywords:

    administrative instruction; assignment; breach; candidate; competition; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; definition; difference; equal treatment; family relationship; general principle; grounds; international civil servant; international civil service principles; international instrument; organisation; post; provision; publication; qualifications; same; staff member's duties; terms of appointment; un charter; universal declaration of human rights;



  • Judgment 2116


    92nd Session, 2002
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "The [organization] was cavalier in the way in which it informed [the complainant] of what was to become of the selection process. For the complainant it was particularly important that she be informed promptly whether she could expect to be appointed, so that she could start to look for another job if need be. She contends, and the [organization] does not demur, that she had the more reason to be optimistic as she had been told unofficially that of all the applicants, she stood the best chance of being appointed. In these circumstances, the [organization] ought to have [informed] her [...] that reclassification was a serious possibility for the post in question. But it did not [...] thereafter, when a decision was taken [...] to withdraw the vacancy announcement, the organization should have informed the candidates immediately. [...] The complainant was so informed in writing [...] nearly four months later. Even if [...] she was informed by telephone [...] written notification was nonetheless an obligation. The complainant's personal interests have undoubtedly been harmed and some redress for the material and moral injury she suffered is warranted [...]."

    Keywords:

    appointment; assignment; candidate; competition; competition cancelled; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; damages; date of notification; delay; duty to inform; material injury; moral injury; organisation's duties; post; post classification; procedure; staff member's interest; time limit; vacancy notice;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "A staff member who files an appeal is entitled to expect a decision to be taken within a reasonable time. Since an internal appeal is a necessary prelude to judicial review, the organization too must respect the need for expeditious proceedings. In this case more than two-and-a-half years elapsed between the complainant's appeal to the Appeals Committee and the Director-General's decision to reject it. Circumstances and the nature of the case demanded an expeditious appeal procedure. Since, in the internal appeal, the complainant was challenging a decision not to keep her on and claiming reinstatement, she needed to know quickly what the outcome of the appeal would be. Indeed, her future to some extent depended on it. Though it raised some delicate issues, the case was not particularly complex. The conclusion is that the appeal was not sufficiently expeditious. The amount of time usually needed to deal with such a case was far exceeded. As a result the complainant suffered injury warranting redress."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; damages; delay; exception; internal appeal; internal appeals body; non-renewal; organisation's duties; reasonable time; staff member's interest; time limit;

    Consideration 5 §1

    Extract:

    "Relations between an organisation and its staff must be governed by good faith. Furthermore, an organisation must treat its staff with due consideration and avoid causing them undue injury. In particular, it must inform them in advance of any action that may imperil their rights or rightful interests." See the case- law cited.

    Keywords:

    case law; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision; duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; respect for dignity; staff member's duties; staff member's interest;



  • Judgment 2114


    92nd Session, 2002
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "When the measure takes the form of a reprimand, the Tribunal will exercise a limited power of review. It will not interfere 'unless the measure was taken without authority, or violates a rule of form or procedure, or is based on an error of fact or of law, or if essential facts have not been taken into consideration, or if it is tainted with abuse of authority, or if a clearly mistaken conclusion has been drawn from the facts'. (see Judgment 274, [...], under 2.)"

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 274

    Keywords:

    censure; conduct; decision-maker; disciplinary measure; disregard of essential fact; duty of discretion; formal flaw; freedom of speech; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistake of law; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; procedural flaw;



  • Judgment 2111


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal acknowledges that the relationship between officials and international organisations does not come to an end when they cease to work (see in this respect Judgment 986). It must therefore be recognised that former officials who consider that the terms of their contracts of employment or Staff Regulations have been disregarded, or that the administration has not accorded them the protection and guarantees deriving from their position as international civil servants, may avail themselves of the means of recourse available for the recognition of their rights [...]."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 986

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; locus standi; organisation's duties; receivability; separation from service;



  • Judgment 2107


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The complainant's claim that he should be considered as a fixed-term staff member cannot be sustained. The complainant was recruited as a short-term staff member, without having to go through a competition process; he accepted several contract renewals. It was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General to decide during the years that the complainant was with the organization whether to renew each short-term contract or offer him a fixed-term contract. There is no basis on which the complainant can claim to be treated retroactively as if he had a fixed-term contract. He was at all times a short-term staff member."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; appointment; claim; competition; complainant; contract; decision; discretion; executive head; fixed-term; international civil servant; non-retroactivity; participation; refusal; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;



  • Judgment 2104


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "Precedent says that there will be abuse of authority where the administration, though not overstepping its authority, uses it for some purpose other than those prescribed by law or, to put it more broadly, those that the general interest requires. A staff member who pleads misuse of authority, and the Tribunal that allows the plea, must be able to identify the improper purposes for which the authority (in this case the authority not to renew a short-term appointment) has been exercised."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; definition; misuse of authority; non-renewal; purpose; short-term;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    An international organization has a "duty to warn the [staff member] about the non-renewal [of his contract] long enough in advance to enable him to exercise his rights and take whatever steps he saw fit." The present case concerned a short-term appointment which was renewed several times.

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; duration of appointment; non-renewal; notice; organisation's duties; separation from service; short-term;



  • Judgment 2103


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 7 and 10

    Extract:

    "An organisation may try by all legal means to recover any money a staff member may owe it when he or she leaves service. But that does not entitle it to suspend or block consideration of the staff member's pension entitlements. [...] However, [the organization] was right to defer consideration of the complainant's entitlement to a repatriation allowance."

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; debt; organisation's duties; pension; pension entitlements; repatriation allowance; separation from service; terminal entitlements;



  • Judgment 2102


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "The duty laid on international organisations to treat their staff with due consideration and not to impair their dignity may extend beyond the term of their appointment. In charging a staff member with misconduct in the performance of duty an organisation must observe due process, otherwise it may be held liable even after its contractual or statutory ties with the official have ceased, and the Tribunal will entertain such matters."

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; complainant; complaint; locus standi; organisation's duties; receivability; respect for dignity; separation from service;



  • Judgment 2098


    92nd Session, 2002
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The complainant denies having signed an agreement for the termination of his appointment. He asked for a signed copy of the agreement but the organization cannot provide it. "The facts show beyond all doubt that the complainant accepted the [organization]'s offer. His attitude [is] tantamount to an admission that he did agree to the termination of his appointment. This is further borne out by the fact that he raised no objection when the agreement was implemented. The concurrence and reciprocity between the parties would in itself constitute sufficient evidence that a contract existed even in the absence of proof of a written agreement."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; agreed termination; complainant; contract; enforcement; evidence; intention of parties; lack of evidence; offer; request;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The complainant's appointment was terminated by mutual agreement. He appears to object that the organization terminated his employment while he was on sick leave. "Although the Tribunal held in Judgment 938 [...] that a staff member cannot be separated while on sick leave, it later pointed out that its ruling was to be seen in context and could not be applied in any circumstances whatever (see Judgment 1494 [...], under 6). The rule being intended to protect the staff member, it cannot be applied where the termination is the subject of an agreement, particularly when it has been mooted by the staff member concerned".

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 938, 1494

    Keywords:

    agreed termination; case law; condition; contract; exception; iloat; limits; separation from service; sick leave;



  • Judgment 2097


    92nd Session, 2002
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    "If the contracts are valid and enforceable and not in breach of any applicable staff rule or principle of international civil service law, the Tribunal has no power to reform them or to remake the bargain which the parties themselves have chosen to make."

    Keywords:

    acceptance; amendment; applicable law; collective bargaining; competence of tribunal; contract; iloat; international civil servant; international civil service principles; provision; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 19

    Extract:

    "Most contracts are entered into because both parties think it is to their economic advantage to do so. Where there is great disparity in bargaining power [...] the law will impose constraints upon the more powerful. In the international civil service that is one of the functions of the staff rules, and where these are inadequate, the Tribunal will intervene to redress the balance through the application of general principles of international civil service law."

    Keywords:

    collective bargaining; contract; difference; enforcement; grounds; international civil service principles; limits; right; staff regulations and rules; tribunal;

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    Because of serious financial difficulties the organisation had to employ the complainants simultaneously under a fixed- term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. After being restored to their full-time fixed-term status they complained about the rates of remuneration received by them under their short-term contracts. "The principle which guarantees equal remuneration for work of equal value [...] is designed to prevent discrimination by employers between employees and to ensure that persons performing different work of the same or similar value shall receive equal remuneration. The organization is right to submit that its most common application is to the classification or grading of jobs [...]. That principle was never intended to apply so as to give rise to a claim by an individual to be paid at the same rate for all work which he or she performs: differential rates for work performed under different conditions, such as overtime to take a common example, are not discriminatory. In the present case there is nothing improper in the who's paying lower rates to persons such as the complainants doing temporary work on a short-term basis."

    Keywords:

    amount; budgetary reasons; condition; contract; difference; enforcement; equal treatment; fixed-term; general principle; international civil servant; organisation; overtime; part-time employment; post classification; safeguard; salary; same; scale; short-term; status of complainant; terms of appointment;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The complainants worked simultaneously under a fixed-term appointment at half-time and a short-term part-time appointment. "While it is unusual to find an employee working simultaneously for a single employer under two different contracts of employment, there is nothing inherently illegal about such an arrangement."

    Keywords:

    contract; difference; exception; fixed-term; international civil servant; organisation; part-time employment; same; short-term; terms of appointment;

< 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, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 | next >


 
Last updated: 26.05.2015 ^ top