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

Abolition of post (379, 380, 381, 382, 649, 383,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Abolition of post
Total judgments found: 150

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >

  • Judgment 4099


    127th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to abolish her position.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunalís case law, a decision concerning the restructuring of an international organizationís services, including one concerned with the abolition of a position, lies at the discretion of the organizationís executive head and is therefore subject to only limited review. The Tribunal must verify whether this decision was taken in accordance with the rules on competence, form or procedure, whether it involves an error of fact or of law, whether it constituted misuse of authority, whether it failed to take account of material facts or whether it draws clearly incorrect conclusions from the evidence. However, it cannot supplant the organizationís appraisal with its own (see, for example, Judgments 1131, consideration 5, 2510, consideration 10, 2933, consideration 10, and 3582, consideration 6).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131, 2510, 2933, 3582

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; discretion; judicial review; reorganisation;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post;



  • Judgment 4097


    127th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decisions to end her participation in the reassignment process and to terminate her fixed-term appointment further to the abolition of her post.

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    The complainant refers in her pleas to the Tribunalís judgments which emphasise the need for an organization to apply rules concerning the abolition of posts and the reassignment of staff with considerable generosity towards the affected staff members (see, for example, Judgments 133 and 388). While these and many other judgments of the Tribunal concerned permanent staff, they were judgments given at a time when the preponderance of staff in international organizations were permanent staff. There is, presently, a greater mix of staff of differing status in international organizations. However, simply because some staff are not permanent, it does not follow that those other classes of staff of differing status should be afforded no protection by principles developed by the Tribunal in circumstances where their post is abolished and attempts are being made to reassign them.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 133, 388

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; analogy; organisation's duties; reassignment; status of complainant;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    The Tribunal is satisfied that the decision not to extend the complainantís reassignment period was flawed. It is not a question of whether it was likely or not that the complainant would be placed in a position emerging from the reorganization. The power to extend a reassignment period is a discretionary power but it is not unfettered. It must be exercised having regard to the principles developed by the Tribunal. An organization that is endeavouring to reassign a staff member whose position has been abolished is obliged to do all that it can to find another position. It has been stated in one judgment of the Tribunal that the organization must do ďits utmostĒ to find another position (see Judgment 3754, consideration 16, citing Judgment 2830, consideration 9). Indeed, the Tribunal has said that it is incumbent on the organization to prove that the affected staff member was not able to remain in the organizationís service (see Judgment 2830, consideration 9). These concepts are comprehended by the expression ďreasonable effortsĒ in Staff Rule 1050.2. Even if it was only remotely possible, in the circumstances of a case such as the present when the reorganization was incomplete, that the reorganization might create a position to which the complainant could have been appointed, the complainant was entitled to the benefit of an extension of the reassignment period, as proposed by the RRC or for an even longer period.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; discretion; organisation's duties; reassignment;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    Ordinarily, when a post is lawfully abolished and reasonable and appropriate steps are undertaken, albeit without success, to reassign the official who held the post to another position within the organization, then the ensuing termination of employment can be taken to have been lawful.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; reassignment; termination;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recently addressed the question of what were an organizationís obligations in relation to reassignment in Judgment 4036, considerations 7 and 8, citing Judgment 3908. Several propositions emerge from Judgment 4036 which are consistent with earlier case law. The first is that normative legal documents promulgated within an organization cannot alone circumscribe the obligation of the organization to explore other employment options within the organization for staff whose positions have been abolished. The second is that an organization has a duty to apply processes biased in favour of the staff member whose position has been abolished and which are likely to promote appointment to another position. The third and related proposition is that an organization has an obligation to deal fairly with staff who occupy an abolished position which ordinarily extends to finding, if they exist, other positions within the organization for which those staff have the experience and qualifications. This last proposition is qualified by matters referred to in consideration 16 of Judgment 3908. The fourth proposition is that it is not the Tribunalís role to actually assess whether a staff member whose position has been abolished was suitable for another position to which they might have been reassigned. Rather, it is to ascertain whether any or adequate consideration was given to the fact that the complainant was then a member of staff whose post had been abolished and was facing the termination of her or his employment.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; reassignment; termination;



  • Judgment 4095


    127th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to abolish his post and to terminate his fixed-term contract.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; termination;



  • Judgment 4094


    127th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to abolish her post and to terminate her fixed-term contract.

    Consideration 4

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recently addressed this question in Judgment 4036, considerations 7 and 8, citing Judgment 3908. Several propositions emerge from Judgment 4036 which are consistent with earlier case law. The first is that normative legal documents promulgated within an organization cannot alone circumscribe the obligation of the organization to explore other employment options within the organization for staff whose positions have been abolished. The second is that an organization has a duty to apply processes biased in favour of the staff member whose position has been abolished and which are likely to promote appointment to another position. The third and related proposition is that an organization has an obligation to deal fairly with staff who occupy an abolished position which ordinarily extends to finding, if they exist, other positions within the organization for which those staff have the experience and qualifications. This last proposition is qualified by matters referred to in consideration 16 of Judgment 3908. The fourth proposition is that it is not the Tribunalís role to actually assess whether a staff member whose position has been abolished was suitable for another position to which they might have been reassigned. Rather, it is to ascertain whether any or adequate consideration was given to the fact that the complainant was then a member of staff whose post had been abolished and was facing the termination of her or his employment.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3908, 4036

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; termination;



  • Judgment 4079


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

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; permanent; termination;



  • Judgment 4078


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU filed an application for interpretation and review of Judgment 3929 and the complainant in that case filed an application for execution of that judgment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; fixed-term; termination;



  • Judgment 4077


    127th Session, 2019
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The UPU applies for interpretation and review of Judgment 3928 alleging errors of fact, inter alia, and asserts that it is impossible to give effect to the Tribunalís order to reinstate the complainant. The complainant applies for execution of Judgment 3928.

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    [W]hen a decision to abolish a post is set aside by the Tribunal, there is no need for a new decision to recreate that post. Therefore, the UPU had only to make the administrative arrangements for reinstating the complainant with all the legal consequences that this entailed.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; reinstatement;

    Consideration 25

    Extract:

    [T]he [organization] could not refer to the complainantís alleged misconduct as a reason not to reinstate him as no disciplinary proceeding has occurred in that regard, so misconduct has never been proven. It is all the more grave when considering that the alleged reason for the abolition of the posts was because of financial constraints. The abolition of a post can never be based on a staff memberís conduct, as that would constitute a hidden sanction. The [organization]ís presentation before the Council of Administration constituted a breach of the duty of care and of the adversarial principle, as the complainant was not given any opportunity to defend himself and his reputation from the allegations. The UPU must respect the dignity of its staff and preserve their reputation.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; adversarial proceedings; budgetary reasons; due process; duty of care; hidden disciplinary measure; misconduct; reinstatement;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; application filed by the organisation; application for execution; application for interpretation; application for review; reinstatement;



  • Judgment 4036


    126th Session, 2018
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests UNESCOís decisions to abolish his post and to terminate his appointment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; termination;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    It is often the case in a challenge to a decision to abolish a post that the aggrieved staff member, in this case the complainant, will develop arguments, often at length, as to how the restructuring might have been done differently and without the consequence of their post being abolished. But whether it could have been done differently is usually, as it is in this case, beside the point. It is sufficient for the organisation to point to legitimate reasons for the action actually taken. UNESCO has done so in this case.

    Keywords:

    abolition of post;

    Considerations 7, 8, 9, 10

    Extract:

    There are many judgments of the Tribunal concerning the obligations of an international organisation towards staff whose positions have been abolished as a result of a reorganization or restructuring. A recent one is Judgment 3908. [...]
    [A]s noted in Judgment 3908, consideration 14, a document such as an Administrative Circular and what it might say about steps to be taken to redeploy staff cannot circumscribe exhaustively UNESCOís obligations towards staff whose positions have been abolished.
    The complainant was offered one post in the redeployment process [...], but he declined the offer. UNESCO relies on this offer as part of its argument that it took adequate steps to redeploy the complainant. The complainant expressed interest in two other positions, which had been listed on the HRM website and to which he could have been reassigned as part of the redeployment process set out in Administrative Circular AC/HR/28 and Memorandum DDG/2013/13. He was unsuccessful in securing appointment to those positions, as they were ultimately filled by officials whose positions also had been abolished. No criticism can be made of UNESCO in following this approach (see the observations of the Tribunal in consideration 16 of Judgment 3908 [...]).
    [...] However, as discussed in Judgment 3908, considerations 14 to 16, an organisationís obligation to find another position for a member of staff whose post has been abolished extends, at least in principle, to any vacant position within the organisation involving duties which the member of staff would be qualified and able to perform. In this context, UNESCO argues that the complainant should have, but failed to, challenge in separate proceedings his non-appointment to any, or all, of these four additional positions. However, for the reasons just given concerning the extent of the organisationís obligation, he is able to challenge his non-appointment as part of a challenge to the termination of his employment arising from his non-redeployment within UNESCO.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3908

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; reassignment;



  • Judgment 4009


    126th Session, 2018
    Energy Charter Conference
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term contract following the abolition of his post, but to give him a Project Staff contract.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    [A]s the Tribunal has consistently held, although job abolitions may arise from a restructuring, they must be justified by real needs and not be immediately followed by the creation of equivalent posts (see Judgments 3422, under 2, and 2156, under 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2156, 3422

    Keywords:

    abolition of post;



  • Judgment 4008


    126th Session, 2018
    Energy Charter Conference
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: In her first complaint, the complainant challenges the decision not to extend her fixed-term contract following the abolition of her post, but to give her a Project Staff contract. In her second complaint, she challenges three vacancy notices concerning C category posts and in her third complaint, she challenges the rejection of her application for two of these posts.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; competition; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    [A]s the Tribunal has consistently held, although job abolitions may arise from a restructuring, they must be justified by real needs and not be immediately followed by the creation of equivalent posts (see Judgments 3422, under 2, and 2156, under 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2156, 3422

    Keywords:

    abolition of post;



  • Judgment 4007


    126th Session, 2018
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge their redeployment following a restructuring.

    Considerations 5 & 8

    Extract:

    In Judgment 3907, [...] the Tribunal considered the lawfulness of the Principles and Procedures. At consideration 26, the Tribunal held:
    ďAs the promulgation of the Principles and Procedures by Information Circular was in violation of the Presidential Directive, they were without legal foundation and are, therefore, unlawful as are the decisions taken pursuant to the Principles and Procedures. It follows that the decisions to abolish the complainantís position and to terminate the complainantís appointment were also unlawful and will be set aside.Ē [...]
    The ICC does not dispute the fact that the redeployment was effected pursuant to the Principles and Procedures and does not seek to establish that it could have been done lawfully by other means. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in Judgment 3907, the redeployment decisions are unlawful and will be set aside, as will the impugned decisions [...]. In the circumstances, a consideration of whether the complainantsí positions underwent substantial changes as a result of the redeployment is unnecessary.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3907

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; patere legem; publication;



  • Judgment 4004


    126th Session, 2018
    International Criminal Court
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of his appeal against the abolition of his post and the termination of his fixed-term appointment, which was filed after he had accepted a mutually agreed separation.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; fixed-term; reorganisation; termination;

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    Firm precedent has it that decisions concerning restructuring within an international organization, including the abolition of posts, may be taken at the discretion of the executive head of the organization and are consequently subject to only limited review. Accordingly, the Tribunal will ascertain whether such decisions are taken in accordance with the relevant rules on competence, form or procedure, whether they rest upon a mistake of fact or law, or whether they constituted abuse of authority. The Tribunal will not rule on the appropriateness of the restructuring, as it will not substitute the organizationís view with its own (see, for example, Judgments 2742, under 34, and 2933, under 10).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2742, 2933

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; discretion; limits;

    Considerations 6-7

    Extract:

    Among other issues which he raises, the complainant challenges the legal validity of the Information Circulars, and, by extension, the Principles and Procedures contained therein, under which his post was abolished and he separated from the ICC. He argues that by publishing the Principles and Procedures in the Information Circulars, the Registrar breached the method stipulated for their promulgation as provided in the Presidential Directive ICC/PRESD/G/2003/001 (the Presidential Directive). The Tribunal considered this very question in a detailed analysis in Judgment 3907 and concluded as follows in consideration 26:
    ďIn conclusion, pursuant to the Presidential Directive, the Principles and Procedures should have been promulgated by an Administrative Instruction or, arguably, by a Presidential Directive. As the promulgation of the Principles and Procedures by Information Circular was in violation of the Presidential Directive, they were without legal foundation and are, therefore, unlawful as are the decisions taken pursuant to the Principles and Procedures. It follows that the decisions to abolish the complainantís position and to terminate the complainantís appointment were also unlawful and will be set aside.Ē
    This finding also holds for the present complaint, with the result that the decisions to abolish the complainantís post and to terminate his appointment were unlawful since the Principles and Procedures upon which they were made were promulgated in breach of the process stipulated in the Presidential Directive. The Separation Agreement arose from the implementation of the unlawful Principles and Procedures. The Separation Agreement is therefore unenforceable. In the circumstances, the ICCís contention that the complaint is irreceivable is unsustainable and is rejected. Accordingly, the decisions to abolish the complainantís position and to terminate his appointment will be set aside.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3907

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; agreed termination; patere legem; publication;



  • Judgment 3948


    125th Session, 2018
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to renew her fixed-term contract.

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    [T]he plea of abuse of authority in relation to the non-renewal decision is one of the generic grounds of challenge to a discretionary administrative decision. Thus the following was stated in Judgment 3172, consideration 16:
    ďA decision taken for an improper purpose is an abuse of authority. It follows that when a complainant challenges a discretionary decision, he or she by necessary implication also challenges the validity of the reasons underpinning that decision. In this respect, the Tribunal may examine the circumstances surrounding the abolition of the post to determine whether the impugned decision was tainted by abuse of authority.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3172

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; misuse of authority;



  • Judgment 3940


    125th Session, 2018
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to abolish his post.

    Consideration 3

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís case law concerning the abolition of a post in the context of a restructuring process was succinctly stated in Judgment 2830, under 6: ď(a) An international organisation may find that it has to reorganise some or all of its departments or units. Reorganisation measures may naturally entail the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts or the redeployment of staff (see Judgments 269, 1614, 2510 and 2742). The steps to be taken in this respect are a matter for the Organizationís discretion and are subject to only limited review by the Tribunal (see Judgments 1131, under 5, and 2510, under 10).
    (b) The Tribunal has consistently held that Ďthere must be objective groundsí for the abolition of any post. It must not serve as a pretext for removing staff regarded as unwanted, since this would constitute an abuse of authority (see Judgment 1231, under 26, and the case law cited therein)í.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; reorganisation;

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    The Tribunal has consistently held that a distinction must be made between a decision to abolish a post and a decision to terminate an appointment (see, for example, Judgment 3755, under 3).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3755

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; decision; termination;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; fixed-term; outsourcing;



  • Judgment 3933


    125th Session, 2018
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; non-renewal of contract; permanent;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    There is some support in the Tribunalís case law for the proposition that it is open to the Tribunal to examine the circumstances surrounding the abolition of a post in a challenge to the subsequent termination of a staff memberís employment, even if no legal challenge was made, within time or at all, to the abolition of the post itself (see Judgment 3172, consideration 16). However even if, in the face of more recent case law referred to in the preceding consideration, it is open to the Tribunal to do so, it is for the limited purpose of, for example, ascertaining whether there has been an abuse of authority which entails consideration of whether the decision was taken for an improper purpose. The case law certainly does not provide a licence to examine all or any other aspects of the decision to abolish the post in the context of dealing with a challenge to the subsequent termination of employment.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3172

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; judicial review; misuse of authority;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    [I]t is open to the complainant to impugn the redeployment process, as he does in his pleas under his second heading, if a failure to redeploy him has led to the termination of his employment (see, for example, Judgment 3727).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3727

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; reassignment; termination;



  • Judgment 3930


    125th Session, 2018
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish her post and to terminate her appointment while she was on sick leave.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; permanent; termination;



  • Judgment 3929


    125th Session, 2018
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish her post and to terminate her appointment while she was on sick leave.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; fixed-term; termination;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recalls that ď[a]ccording to firm precedent, a decision concerning the restructuring of an international organisationís services, which leads to the abolition of a post, may be taken at the discretion of its executive head and is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal. The latter must therefore confine itself to ascertaining whether the decision was taken in accordance with the rules on competence, form or procedure, whether it involves a mistake of fact or of law, whether it constituted abuse of authority, whether it failed to take account of material facts, or whether it draws clearly mistaken conclusions from the evidence. The Tribunal may not, however, supplant an organisationís view with its own (see, for example, Judgments 1131, under 5, 2510, under 10, and 2933, under 10). Nevertheless, any decision to abolish a post must be based on objective grounds and its purpose may never be to remove a member of staff regarded as unwanted. Disguising such purposes as a restructuring measure would constitute abuse of authority (see Judgments 1231, under 26, 1729, under 11, and 3353, under 17)Ē (Judgment 3582, under 6).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131, 1231, 1729, 2510, 2933, 3353, 3582

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; discretion; limits; misuse of authority; reorganisation;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunalís case law: ď[w]hether the post was abolished for financial reasons is a question of fact. Those facts were within the knowledge of [the organization] and it must show that when it advanced financial reasons as a ground for the abolition of the complainantís post this was genuine. It has not done so. In the absence of that evidence, it is determined that the complainantís post was unlawfully abolished and the claim on this ground is well foundedĒ (see Judgment 3688, under 18). In the Tribunalís view, the UPU has not presented sufficient evidence to support its assertion that the abolition of posts was for urgent financial reasons.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3688

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; budgetary reasons; burden of proof;



  • Judgment 3928


    125th Session, 2018
    Universal Postal Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish his post and to terminate his appointment while he was on sick leave.

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    It should also be noted that, in breach of the UPUís duty of care and duty to protect the dignity of its staff members, the complainant was not even notified directly of the abolition of his post. He was instead informed, as all staff, via the publication of a corrigendum of January 2015 to internal memorandum No. 02/2015, stating, inter alia, that a ďP3 Post (French Translation Service)Ē would be abolished (along with the other four posts). The Tribunal recalls that ď[t]he decision to abolish a post must be communicated to the staff person occupying the post in a manner that safeguards that individualís 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 assignmentĒ (see Judgment 3041, under 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3041

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; duty of care; duty to inform;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; permanent; reinstatement; termination;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    The Tribunal recalls that ď[a]ccording to firm precedent, a decision concerning the restructuring of an international organisationís services, which leads to the abolition of a post, may be taken at the discretion of its executive head and is subject to only limited review by the Tribunal. The latter must therefore confine itself to ascertaining whether the decision was taken in accordance with the rules on competence, form or procedure, whether it involves a mistake of fact or of law, whether it constituted abuse of authority, whether it failed to take account of material facts, or whether it draws clearly mistaken conclusions from the evidence. The Tribunal may not, however, supplant an organisationís view with its own (see, for example, Judgments 1131, under 5, 2510, under 10, and 2933, under 10). Nevertheless, any decision to abolish a post must be based on objective grounds and its purpose may never be to remove a member of staff regarded as unwanted. Disguising such purposes as a restructuring measure would constitute abuse of authority (see Judgments 1231, under 26, 1729, under 11, and 3353, under 17)Ē (Judgment 3582, under 6).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131, 1231, 1729, 2510, 2933, 3353, 3582

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; discretion; limits; misuse of authority; reorganisation;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    According to the Tribunalís case law: ď[w]hether the post was abolished for financial reasons is a question of fact. Those facts were within the knowledge of [the organization] and it must show that when it advanced financial reasons as a ground for the abolition of the complainantís post this was genuine. It has not done so. In the absence of that evidence, it is determined that the complainantís post was unlawfully abolished and the claim on this ground is well foundedĒ (see Judgment 3688, under 18). In the Tribunalís view, the UPU has not presented sufficient evidence to support its assertion that the abolition of posts was for urgent financial reasons.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3688

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; budgetary reasons; burden of proof;



  • Judgment 3920


    125th Session, 2018
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term appointment pursuant to the abolition of her post.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; fixed-term; termination;

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    It is well settled in the Tribunalís case law that if a decision is taken to abolish a post, then the staff member occupying the post is entitled to know the reasons for that decision in a manner that safeguards the individualís rights (see, for example, Judgments 3290, consideration 14, and 3041, consideration 8).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3041, 3290

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; duty to substantiate decision;

    Consideration 13

    Extract:

    [W]hen a post is abolished for financial reasons it is incumbent on the organisation to demonstrate that this was genuine, given that the relevant facts are within the knowledge of the organisation (see Judgment 3688, consideration 18).

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3688

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; budgetary reasons; burden of proof;

    Considerations 11 & 12

    Extract:

    If, as a matter of practice or by operation of staff rules, regulations or other normative legal documents, internal documents are created by management proposing the abolition of a post and the post is abolished, the organisation is not under a legal obligation to provide those documents to the person whose post is to be abolished (see Judgment 2885, consideration 6). Nevertheless, the organisation is obliged to inform the affected staff member of the reasons for the abolition of the post. That obligation can be discharged (though it was not in the present case) by setting out in another document, as is often the case in a letter informing the staff member that the post is abolished, reasons which may have been discussed in internal management documents created in the lead-up to the decision to abolish the post. [...]
    Even if a document is confidential, this ordinarily does not provide a basis for not providing the complainant with a copy of it, which might potentially be an important document, in adversarial proceedings such as the internal appeal procedure where the document is relied on by the organization (see, for example, Judgment 3862, consideration 11). The complainant, in this case, was entitled to see the evidence advanced by the Organization in the internal appeal procedure in order to equip her to provide rebutting evidence or to otherwise challenge the evidence or comment on it. These legal principles are rooted in judgments of the Tribunal made well before these proceedings commenced (see, for example, Judgment 2700, consideration 6). While it is not an issue raised directly by the complainant in her pleas, this failure to uphold the complainantís due process rights warrants an award of moral damages which the Tribunal assesses in the sum of 15,000 United States dollars.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2885

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; duty to inform;



  • Judgment 3918


    125th Session, 2018
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his continuing appointment pursuant to the abolition of his post.

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    [T]he Director-General accepted in her decision of 17 June 2015 that the complainant had lost an opportunity to be reassigned to another position within the Organization because of a failure, in the reassignment process, to consider the complainant for one of two specified positions. This is not contested by WHO in its reply. The Tribunalís case law establishes that, in such circumstances, a complainant is entitled to material damages (see, for example, Judgments 3756, consideration 14, 3755, consideration 20, 3754, consideration 21, 3753, considerations 15 and 17, and 3752, consideration 17). [...] At the time of the complainantís termination of appointment, he had approximately five years remaining employment under his continuing appointment, was 55 years old and had served as an official of WHO for a little over 30 years. These factors influence the assessment of the material damages, particularly the fact that the complainant was some considerable time off retiring. The Tribunal assesses the material damages for this lost opportunity in the sum of 80,000 United States dollars.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 3752, 3753, 3754, 3755, 3756

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; loss of opportunity; material damages; termination;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    An organisation which has restructured, abolished positions, and is in the process of trying to reassign staff members whose positions have been abolished is under a positive duty to communicate with them in a way that promotes the likelihood of reassignment (see, for example, Judgments 2902, consideration 14, 3439, consideration 9, and 3755, consideration 9). It is no answer to suggest that the staff member is under a duty to inform herself or himself and failed to do so. However, again, this is another manifestation of the flawed reassignment process by which the complainant was deprived of the opportunity of being reassigned.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902, 3439, 3755

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; duty to inform; reassignment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    abolition of post; permanent; termination;

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 | next >


 
Last updated: 19.06.2019 ^ top