Abolition of post (379, 380, 381, 382, 649, 383,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Abolition of post
Total judgments found: 167
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
Judgment 3903
125th Session, 2018
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the termination of his fixed-term appointment.
Consideration 24
Extract:
[T]here is no evidence in the record to support the assertion that a review of the requirements of newly created positions was undertaken to ascertain whether the complainant had the necessary qualifications for any of those positions. It would be expected that the complainant would have at least been informed that other options had been considered. More importantly, it is also noted that the possible options considered were limited to the newly created positions as a result of the restructuring. The duty contemplated in the case law is aimed at finding other employment within the broader organisation and is not limited to newly created positions as a result of restructuring. As stated in the case law, the failure to explore with the complainant other possible options within the Court was a breach of the ICC’s duty to treat the complainant with dignity and respect (see, for example, Judgment 2902, under 14).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902
Keywords:
abolition of post; organisation's duties; reassignment; respect for dignity;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; decision quashed; fixed-term; termination of employment;
Judgment 3902
125th Session, 2018
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to pay him the indemnity due in the event of the closure of the CDE.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed; permanent appointment; retirement;
Consideration 11
Extract:
The right which the Tribunal must uphold is the right to remain in employment, not the right to termination thereof. The Tribunal considers that termination of employment must be an ultima ratio measure to which recourse may be had only after all other alternatives have been examined and found to be impracticable (see Judgment 2830, under 8(a)). At all events, continued employment must be preferred to redundancy.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830
Keywords:
abolition of post; organisation's duties; termination of employment;
Judgment 3901
125th Session, 2018
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his contract owing to the closure of the CDE and the terms and conditions of that termination.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; permanent appointment; termination of employment;
Judgment 3900
125th Session, 2018
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her contract owing to the closure of the CDE and the terms and conditions of that termination.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; closure of organisation; complaint allowed; fixed-term; termination of employment;
Consideration 4
Extract:
As the Tribunal has consistently held, “[w]hen an organisation has to abolish a position occupied by a staff member holding a continuous appointment, it [...] has a duty to do all that it can to reassign that person as a matter of priority to another post matching his or her abilities and grade.” (See Judgment 3755, under 6.) This possibility must be explored before a decision is taken to abolish a post (see Judgments 2294, under 9, 3169, under 10 and 13, and 3238, under 13) and it is up to the organisation to prove that it has made every possible effort to reassign the staff member (see Judgments 2830, under 9, 3169, under 14, 3238, under 14, and 3755, under 19).
[...] As the institution was on the point of ceasing to exist, there could be no question of reassigning the complainant to another post within it. The Centre cannot therefore be criticised for not exploring that avenue.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2294, 2830, 3169, 3238, 3755
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; permanent appointment; reorganisation;
Consideration 6
Extract:
A steady line of precedent has it that “[w]hile it is true that international organisations have the right to restructure their operations, abolish posts if necessary and consequently terminate the appointment of their staff members who are affected by the planned restructuring (see Judgment 1854, under 10), they cannot simply terminate their appointment – at least not if they hold an appointment of indeterminate duration – without first taking suitable steps to find them alternative employment (see, for example, Judgments 269, under 2, 1745, under 7, 2207, under 9, and 3238, under 10).” (See Judgment 3755, under 6, and also Judgment 3169, under 10.) Only when reassignment proves impracticable may it have recourse to the ultima ratio measure of terminating their appointment (see Judgment 2830, under 8(a)).
Although this precedent concerns redeployment within the same organisation, it may be extended to the situation where an organisation is closed and replaced with a structure mandated to do all or part of the work of the organisation which has been wound up. In this case, it is incumbent upon the organisation which is being wound up to examine whether some or all of its staff members can be absorbed by the new structure.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 269, 1745, 1854, 2207, 2830, 3169, 3238, 3755
Keywords:
abolition of post;
Judgment 3874
124th Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant claims that he has been deprived of his pension rights.
Consideration 10
Extract:
The abolition of a post necessarily implies the elimination of that post, whereas retirement of a staff member does not necessarily mean the abolition of the post occupied by the retiring staff member.
Keywords:
abolition of post;
Judgment 3871
124th Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges WHO’s refusal to reinstate him after the decision to dismiss him was set aside.
Consideration 3
Extract:
As the Tribunal has consistently held, an international organization may not terminate the appointment of a staff member whose post has been abolished, at least if she or he holds an appointment of indeterminate duration, without first taking suitable steps to find her or him alternative employment (see, for example, Judgments 269, under 2, 1745, under 7, or 2207, under 9). When it has to abolish a post held by a staff member who holds a contract for an indefinite period of time, it must do all that it can to reassign that person as a matter of priority to another post matching her or his abilities and grade. If the attempt to find such a post proves fruitless, it is up to the organisation, if the staff member concerned agrees, to try to place her or him in duties at a lower grade and to widen its search accordingly (see Judgments 1782, under 11, or 2830, under 9).
The above-cited case law relating to the abolition of a post held by staff member holding a contract for an indefinite period also applies when examining the possibilities for reinstating an official with a continuous appointment who has been unlawfully dismissed on disciplinary grounds.
In the instant case, the Director-General therefore had a duty, in principle, to restore the status quo ante after having decided to set aside the decision to dismiss the complainant. Thus, regardless of the fact that the complainant’s previous post had been abolished, the Director-General was not free to choose between reinstatement and compensation.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 269, 1745, 1782, 2207, 2830
Keywords:
abolition of post; reinstatement;
Judgment 3869
124th Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, challenges the decision to abolish his post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed; receivability of the complaint; time bar;
Judgment 3865
124th Session, 2017
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment due to the redundancy of her post.
Consideration 13
Extract:
Ordinarily it could not be expected that the Head, HR, would act on rumour, particularly if it was known to be wrong. But this was a situation where a staff member was about to be separated from the organization because her position had been abolished and where [...] the Global Fund was under an obligation to do all it could to reassign an official whose position had been abolished. At the very least, what the complainant said about Mr N. should have resulted in the Head, HR, making some enquiries [...].
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; termination of employment;
Consideration 5
Extract:
The rights and duties of the employee and the organization crystallise not when a decision is taken that the job is no longer needed by the organization but when, as a result, a decision is taken to terminate the employment of the person occupying that position.
Keywords:
abolition of post; termination of employment;
Judgment 3841
124th Session, 2017
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to abolish his post, as well as the earlier decision to reassign him to that post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed;
Judgment 3770
123rd Session, 2017
ITER International Fusion Energy Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to renew his contract following the abolition of his post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 3769
123rd Session, 2017
ITER International Fusion Energy Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to renew his contract following the abolition of his post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint dismissed; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 3768
123rd Session, 2017
ITER International Fusion Energy Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to renew his contract following the abolition of his post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 3759
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her fixed-term appointment following the abolition of her position.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reassignment;
Judgment 3756
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, challenges the decision to abolish his post and terminate his fixed-term appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3755
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his continuing appointment owing to the abolition of his position.
Consideration 6
Extract:
While it is true that international organisations have the right to restructure their operations, abolish posts if necessary and consequently terminate the appointment of their staff members who are affected by the planned restructuring (see Judgment 1854, under 10), they cannot simply terminate their appointment – at least not if they hold an appointment of indeterminate duration – without first taking suitable steps to find them alternative employment (see, for example, Judgments 269, under 2, 1745, under 7, 2207, under 9, and 3238, under 10).
When an organisation has to abolish a position occupied by a staff member holding a continuous appointment, it therefore has a duty to do all that it can to reassign that person, as a matter of priority, to another post matching his or her abilities and grade. The staff member in question may therefore claim to be appointed to any vacant post which she or he is capable of filling in a competent manner, regardless of the qualifications of the other candidates (see Judgment 133). If the attempt to find such a post proves fruitless, it is up to the organisation, if the staff member concerned agrees, to try to place her or him in duties at a lower grade and to widen its search accordingly (see Judgments 1782, under 11, and 2830, under 9).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 133, 269, 1745, 1782, 1854, 2207, 2830, 3238
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; reorganisation;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3754
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, challenges the decision to terminate his continuing appointment pursuant to the abolition of his post.
Consideration 16
Extract:
The loss of employment by the abolition of a post can be particularly acute for a person who has been employed by the one organisation for a very lengthy period and is of advancing years. It could be all the more acute if the area or field of employment has a significant technological component in which the technology is evolving continuously. At a high-level of generality, an organisation’s duty has, in relation to reassignment an official whose post has been abolished, been described as “[doing] its utmost to find a post matching the complainant’s qualifications” (see Judgment 2830, consideration 9), or “[doing] all that it can” to reassign the official (see Judgment 3437, consideration 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830, 3437
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; reassignment;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3753
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, contests the decision to terminate his fixed-term appointment pursuant to the abolition of his post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3752
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, challenges the decisions to abolish his post and to terminate his continuing appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3751
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, challenges the decisions to abolish her post and to terminate her fixed-term appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed;
Judgment 3727
123rd Session, 2017
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, whose post was abolished following a restructuring exercise, challenges the new final decision taken by the Secretary General pursuant to Judgment 3208.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3208
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; termination of employment;
Consideration 15
Extract:
What the Federation does not do in its pleas and evidence is to demonstrate that it corresponded or otherwise communicated with the complainant about specific available positions encouraging the complainant to apply for or pursue them or to demonstrate that, at the time, it undertook any sort of analysis of positions which might, at least potentially, have been positions to which the complainant might be transferred as contemplated by Article 11.3.2 of the Staff Regulations. It was not sufficient for the Federation to take the approach, as it apparently did, that it was incumbent on the complainant to identify other positions for which he might be suitable and then apply for those positions. The Federation bore the onus of showing the complainant was not able to remain in the Federation’s service in some capacity (see Judgment 2830, consideration 9). A much more active role was required of the Federation in circumstances where a long-serving member of staff towards the end of his career was facing the prospect of his employment being terminated because of redundancy. The Federation’s obligations have been described as requiring it to do “its utmost to find [an official facing redundancy] a post which matched his skills and level of responsibility” [...] (see Judgment 2090, consideration 7). The Federation failed in its duty towards the complainant and, in this respect, the complainant is entitled to moral damages.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2090, 2830
Keywords:
abolition of post; burden of proof; duty of care; moral injury; reassignment; respect for dignity;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >
|
