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

Work appraisal (282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Work appraisal
Total judgments found: 132

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

  • Judgment 4115


    127th Session, 2019
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to downgrade him for serious misconduct.

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    The disciplinary proceedings were initiated before the appraisal period concluded. In Judgment 3224 the Tribunal said at consideration 7 that an organisation cannot base an adverse decision on a staff memberís unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules governing the evaluation of that performance. The decision to commence disciplinary proceedings can, for the purposes of the application of this principle, be characterised as an adverse decision. Even if the EPO believed that nothing was going to change, in terms of the complainantís conduct, between the time the disciplinary proceedings were commenced and the conclusion of the appraisal period a little over a month later, it was nonetheless obliged to complete the assessment of the complainantís performance in accordance with Circular No. 366 before initiating the disciplinary proceedings.

    Keywords:

    disciplinary procedure; due process; organisation's duties; patere legem; performance evaluation; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 4072


    127th Session, 2019
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the lawfulness of the mutually agreed separation agreement which he signed.

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recognizes that international organizations have the discretion to manage their performance management objectives but highlights that they must do so using the tools they have in the manner in which they are designed (see Judgments 3610, consideration 9, and 3750, consideration 8).
    [...]
    In the present case, the Global Fund sought to use a tool (the performance improvement plan) which is explicitly designed to correct identified underperformance, in order to address an issue of potential future underperformance. The Tribunal finds that this inappropriate use of the PIP constitutes a misuse of authority which rendered the process non-transparent and arbitrary (see Judgments 3610, consideration 9, and 3750, consideration 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3610, 3750

    Keywords:

    misuse of authority; performance evaluation; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 4071


    127th Session, 2019
    Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the lawfulness of the mutually agreed separation agreement which they signed.

    Consideration 16

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recognizes that international organizations have the discretion to manage their performance management objectives but highlights that they must do so using the tools they have in the manner in which they are designed (see Judgments 3610, consideration 9, and 3750, consideration 8).
    [...]
    In the present case, the Global Fund sought to use a tool (the performance improvement plan) which is explicitly designed to correct identified underperformance, in order to address an issue of potential future underperformance. The Tribunal finds that this inappropriate use of the PIP constitutes a misuse of authority which rendered the process non-transparent and arbitrary (see Judgments 3610, consideration 9, and 3750, consideration 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3610, 3750

    Keywords:

    misuse of authority; performance evaluation; work appraisal;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    [U]nder the Tribunalís case law, performance appraisals are the only criterion of performance where international civil servants are concerned (see Judgment 2544, consideration 8) and no account may be taken of an ad hoc assessment conducted in parallel to the statutory performance evaluation (see Judgment 3436, consideration 9).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2544, 3436

    Keywords:

    performance evaluation; performance report; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 4062


    127th Session, 2019
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to renew her fixed-term contract on the grounds of unsatisfactory performance.

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    It follows from these provisions [considerations 9 and 11], which, moreover, merely state general principles that apply to any professional appraisal procedure, that particular circumstances such as a serious lack of communication between an employee and her/his supervisors, or extraordinary pressure on the service that an employee is working in, resulting from an unbearable collective workload, must be taken into account in assessing the performance of a staff member.

    Keywords:

    general principle; performance evaluation; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3932


    125th Session, 2018
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to renew her fixed-term appointment due to unsatisfactory performance.

    Considerations 21 & 26

    Extract:

    The determinative issue in this case is whether the evaluation of the complainantís performance was procedurally flawed. It is well settled in the Tribunalís case law that ďan organisation has a wide discretion in deciding whether to renew a fixed-term appointment and its right to refuse to renew can be based on unsatisfactory performanceĒ. As well, ďsuch a discretionary decision can be successfully impugned if it is fatally flawed by, for example, procedural defects, a failure to take account of some essential fact, abuse or misuse of authority, or if it was based on an error of fact or of lawĒ (see Judgment 3743, consideration 2, and the cases cited therein). The Tribunal has also consistently held that ďan organisation cannot base an adverse decision on a staff memberís unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performanceĒ (see Judgment 3252, consideration 8, and the case cited therein).
    [...]
    It was only in the memorandum of 9 July 2012 that the complainant was informed of the extensive deficiencies in her performance both in terms of her duties and conduct. This letter cannot be viewed as a proper or fair evaluation for a number of reasons. First, it was not in compliance with the mandatory PEMS. Second, other than the deficiencies identified in the audit attributed to the complainant, the letter does not give any detail with respect to when and what the observations were and which interactions with other colleagues at headquarters and in the SAP gave rise to concerns. [...] Third, the unilateral determination that the eleven deficiencies identified in the audit were solely attributable to the complainant and that the renewal of her fixed-term contract was, therefore, in jeopardy, without providing the complainant with an opportunity to respond, was a clear breach of the complainantís due process rights. This was further exacerbated by her supervisorís and the Director, OSDís failure to reply to or take into account the complainantís extensive response to the alleged deficiencies attributed to her in the audit report.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3252, 3743

    Keywords:

    misuse of authority; non-renewal of contract; reorganisation; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3670


    122nd Session, 2016
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges her Staff Performance Appraisal report, as well as the decision not to renew her fixed-term contract.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    performance report; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3432


    119th Session, 2015
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant alleges that the EPO breached its duty of care towards him and successfully impugns the decision to award him a compensation which he considers inadequate.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    probation; residence permit; termination; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3417


    119th Session, 2015
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal found that IOM's failure to ensure compliance with its performance evaluation procedures warranted an award of moral damages to the complainant.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "[W]hile there is an undoubted right of an organisation to decide not to renew a fixed-term contract, it does not follow that an organisation is, additionally, immune from any liability if it has failed to follow its own procedures designed to monitor, assess and evaluate staff performance and progress. The fundamental purpose of such procedures is to explicitly alert a staff member to identified deficiencies in her or his performance and thus give the staff member an opportunity to address those deficiencies and improve performance. The interaction of such procedures and decisions not to renew fixed-term contracts was discussed by the Tribunal in Judgment 2991, under 13 [...]."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2991

    Keywords:

    fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; performance report; work appraisal;



  • 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 14

    Extract:

    "[D]uring the extension of the probationary period, [...] its duty to act in good faith obligated the Organization to give the complainant guidance and a meaningful opportunity to improve measured against objective standards."

    Keywords:

    good faith; organisation's duties; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3252


    116th Session, 2014
    United Nations Industrial Development Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision to extend her fixed-term contract for a period of one year instead of three years on the basis of an adverse evaluation report.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    "It is necessary to make clear that the Tribunalís role is not to adjudicate on the question of whether assessments made in appraisal reports are correct or whether discretionary decisions to employ a staff member on a fixed-term contract for one or three years are correct. Discretionary decisions of these types, involving assessment and evaluation, are entrusted to the responsible officers of the international organisations within the Tribunalís jurisdiction. These types of decisions can only be set aside if they involve some breach of a formal or procedural rule, there is a mistake of fact or law or some material has been overlooked, or a plainly mistaken conclusion has been drawn from the facts, or if there is a misuse of authority (see, for example, Judgment 3006, consideration 7)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3006

    Keywords:

    admissible grounds for review; discretion; disregard of essential fact; fixed-term; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; performance report; procedural flaw; rating; work appraisal;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "There is a general principle applied by this Tribunal that an organisation cannot base an adverse decision on a staff memberís unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance (see Judgment 2414, consideration 24)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; contract; decision; fixed-term; grounds; patere legem; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3240


    115th Session, 2013
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal found that the Organization had acted in breach of its own rules on performance appraisal and probationary periods.

    Consideration 20

    Extract:

    "Although the complainant did not take issue with the use of the wrong form for his performance appraisal or with the fact that his immediate supervisor did not conduct the evaluation, this does not absolve the FAO of its obligation to act in compliance with its own Staff Regulations, Staff Rules and Manual provisions implementing those rules (see Judgment 3177, under 18)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3177

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; general principle; organisation's duties; patere legem; performance report; staff regulations and rules; work appraisal; written rule;

    Consideration 21

    Extract:

    "It is a well-established principle governing probation that in addition to ď[identifying] in a timely fashion the unsatisfactory aspects of the performance so that remedial steps may be takenĒ, an organisation must also ďgive a specific warning that the continued employment is in jeopardyĒ (see Judgment 2788, under 1)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2788

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; confirmation of appointment; organisation; organisation's duties; probation; purpose; unsatisfactory service; warning; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3224


    115th Session, 2013
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully contests the termination of her appointment for unsatisfactory service, alleging the absence of a genuine assessment procedure.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal recalls that a staff member whose service is not considered satisfactory is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service, so as to be in a position to remedy the situation, and to have objectives set in advance. It also recalls that an organisation cannot base an adverse decision on a staff memberís unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules governing the evaluation of that performance. Except in a case of manifest error, the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment of a staff memberís services for that of the competent bodies of an international organisation. Nevertheless, such an assessment must be made in full knowledge of the facts, and the considerations on which it is based must be accurate and properly established (see Judgments 3070, under 9, 2468, under 16, and 2414, under 23 and 24)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414, 2468, 3070

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; condition; criteria; decision; due process; duty to inform; elements; exception; grounds; judicial review; limits; organisation's duties; patere legem; right; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal; written rule;



  • Judgment 3185


    114th Session, 2013
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant successfully challenges her performance evaluation report, alleging personal prejudice and discrimination on the part of her direct supervisor.

    Consideration 5(b)

    Extract:

    "In principle, a supervisor cannot be criticised for recording the mistakes and errors of a subordinate with a view to preparing that personís periodical performance evaluation, provided that the purpose of that action is, on the one hand, to ensure that the rating will be objective and, on the other hand, to increase the serviceís efficiency by improving the performance of the person concerned. In the instant case, however, it is plain from the evidence that this practice was consistently applied to the complainant in order to stigmatise her shortcomings. [...] Her [evaluation] report is thus tainted with a serious flaw which justifies that it be set aside".

    Keywords:

    breach; complaint allowed in part; condition; decision quashed; equal treatment; flaw; general principle; international civil servant; misconduct; organisation's interest; performance report; purpose; rating; supervisor; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;

    Consideration 7(b)

    Extract:

    "The rule that administrative acts cannot apply retroactively [...] prevents an international organisation from altering definitively established legal situations, for example by calling into question an appraisal of service rendered during an evaluation period prior to the adoption of the new rules, as occurred in the instant case."

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; complaint allowed in part; non-retroactivity; organisation's duties; period; work appraisal; written rule;



  • Judgment 3070


    112th Session, 2012
    International Office of Epizootics
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    "According to the Tribunal's case law, a staff member whose service is not considered satisfactory is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service, so as to be in a position to remedy the situation. Moreover, he or she is entitled to have objectives set in advance so that he or she will know the yardstick by which future performance will be assessed (see Judgment 2414, under 23). Precedent also has it that the procedure used for drawing up a performance appraisal forming the basis of a dismissal decision must always be adversarial (see, in particular, Judgments 2468, under 17, and 2515, under 18)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414, 2468, 2515

    Keywords:

    adversarial proceedings; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; criteria; date; duty to inform; organisation's duties; purpose; right; termination; time limit; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3043


    111th Session, 2011
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 18

    Extract:

    "[A]d personam promotion constitutes advancement on merit to reward an employee for services of a quality higher than that ordinarily expected of the holder of the post. In the absence of any provision to the contrary, it is an optional and exceptional discretionary measure which is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal (see Judgments 1500, under 4, and 1973, under 5). This kind of promotion should certainly not be granted as redress for an alleged injury, as the complainant requests. The advancement of an official naturally obeys its own logic related to the classification of the job done and the professional merit of the person in question, which has nothing to do with the logic behind compensation for injuries which may have been caused to this person by the international organisation employing him or her (see Judgment 2706, under 8)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1500, 1973, 2706

    Keywords:

    claim; compensation; compensatory measure; definition; discretion; exception; injury; judicial review; limits; no provision; organisation; personal promotion; post; post classification; purpose; refusal; request by a party; satisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3026


    111th Session, 2011
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    Failure on the part of the Organisation to give the complainant a fair opportunity to demonstrate improvement prior to deciding not to renew his fixed-term contract for unsatisfactory performance.
    "It must be assumed that until 2006 the complainant's work was satisfactory as his contract was renewed from time to time, albeit that he was not subject to performance appraisal during the period he was employed on temporary assistance contracts."

    Keywords:

    appointment; complainant; contract; performance report; period; presumption; satisfactory service; short-term; work appraisal;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "An opportunity to improve requires not only that the staff member be made aware of the matters requiring improvement, but, also, that he or she be given a reasonable time for that improvement to occur."

    Keywords:

    notice; organisation's duties; performance report; reasonable time; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 3006


    111th Session, 2011
    European Patent Organisation
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    Case remitted to the President of the Office for review of the complainant's effective date of promotion on the basis of his amended performance appraisal.
    "Assessment of merit is an exercise that involves a value judgement. It is usual to refer to decisions or recommendations involving a value judgement as 'discretionary', signifying that persons may quite reasonably hold different views on the matter in issue and, if the issue involves a comparison with other persons, they may also hold different views on their comparative rating. The nature of a value judgement means that point-to-point comparisons are not necessarily decisive. Moreover, because of the nature of a value judgement, the grounds on which a decision involving a judgement of that kind may be reviewed are limited to those applicable to discretionary decisions. Thus, the Tribunal will only interfere if 'the decision was taken without authority; if it was based on an error of law or fact, a material fact was overlooked, or a plainly wrong conclusion was drawn from the facts; if it was taken in breach of a rule of form or procedure; or if there was an abuse of authority' (see Judgment 2834, under 7)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2834

    Keywords:

    discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; formal flaw; grounds; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; performance report; procedural flaw; rating; work appraisal;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "The principle of equality requires that all candidates in a given year be assessed by reference to staff reports for the same period. It is clear from Judgment 2221 that the principle also requires that if the 'merits' of a candidate for promotion are subsequently upgraded, the question of promotion must be considered on the basis of what would have happened if the upgraded marking had been considered previously."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2221

    Keywords:

    candidate; equal treatment; performance report; promotion; rating; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 2991


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

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    "It is a general principle of international civil service law that there must be a valid reason for any decision not to renew a fixed-term contract. If the reason given is the unsatisfactory nature of the performance of the staff member concerned, who is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service, the organisation must base its decision on an assessment of that person's work carried out in compliance with previously established rules (see, for example, Judgments 1911, under 6, and 2414, under 23)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1911, 2414

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; contract; decision; duty to inform; duty to substantiate decision; fixed-term; formal requirements; grounds; international civil servant; international civil service principles; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; right; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal; written rule;



  • Judgment 2982


    110th Session, 2011
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    Replacement of a staff member in circumstances constituting harassment.
    "The Tribunal has consistently held [...] that an organisation 'cannot base an adverse decision on a staff member's unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance' (see Judgment 2916, under 4). It is also well established that an organisation 'owes it to its employees, especially probationers, to guide them in the performance of their duties and to warn them in specific terms if they are not giving satisfaction and are in risk of dismissal' (see Judgment 2732, under 16)."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2732, 2916

    Keywords:

    decision; organisation's duties; probation; staff assessment; staff regulations and rules; unsatisfactory service; warning; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 2930


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

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    "In his internal appeal the complainant claimed in particular that he had been the victim of bullying on the part of his director, who was also his reporting officer. [...] The Internal Appeals Committee [...] found that the inaccuracies it identified [in the staff report] did not, individually, constitute an 'abuse of authority' and concluded that the 'report [did] not reveal any flaws which would justify its complete retraction'. This approach involved an error of law. It was not sufficient to consider in relation to each inaccuracy whether it, standing alone, was an abuse of authority. Rather, it was necessary to consider whether, in the light of the evidence, including the various inaccuracies which it identified, the report as a whole was the result of prejudice on the part of the reporting officer."

    Keywords:

    bias; complaint allowed; evidence; formal flaw; internal appeals body; misuse of authority; organisation's duties; performance report; work appraisal;

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


 
Last updated: 12.08.2019 ^ top