Participation excluded (451,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Participation excluded
Total judgments found: 4

• Judgment 2821

  
  107th Session, 2009
  International Labour Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Considerations 6 to 10

  Extract:

  The complainant was employed by the ILO from 16 June 1995 until 30 April 2004 under two temporary contracts which were extended several times and did not provide for pension coverage. On 1 May 2004 he was granted a fixed-term contract and acquired the status of an official of the Organization. On 1 August 2006 he filed a grievance, requesting that the above-mentioned period be validated for the purposes of affiliation to the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund.
  "The complainant did not challenge the content of [his temporary] contracts within the six-month time limit laid down for this purpose in the contracts themselves. It follows that he was manifestly no longer in a position, by the date on which he filed his grievance with the Organization, i.e. more than two years after the end of the period covered by his last contract, to challenge the provisions thereof."
  The Tribunal rejected the arguments on which the complainant relied to persuade it that this time limit was not applicable to him.

  Keywords:

  contract; date; extension of contract; fixed-term; internal appeal; official; participation; participation excluded; pension entitlements; receivability of the complaint; request by a party; short-term; status of complainant; time bar; time limit; unjspf; validation of service;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 2181

  
  94th Session, 2003
  International Telecommunication Union
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  The complainant seeks the validation of her service, for pension purposes, of the period between 13 September 1978 and 14 November 1979. What emerges from Article 23 of the UNJSPF Regulations is that "staff members whose terms of appointment expressly excluded participation in the UNJSPF during the period of service preceding their participation cannot subsequently request the validation of that period of service. that was the case with the complainant [...] she could [...] have made use, at the time [...] of the appeal mechanisms established by the [organisation], to obtain a modification of the terms of her contracts, or to challenge the legality of [the] rule [which provided that staff members engaged under short-term contracts could not participate in the unjspf]. However, since she failed to do so in due time, she is hardly in a position to seek the annulment of her appointments of 1978 and 1979 more than 20 years later. Besides, the nature of those appointments can no longer be challenged. The argument that the complainant did not use the available means of appeal for fear of harming her career cannot be accepted. Moreover, her request for validation of service, which was submitted on 22 December 1999, must be considered to be time-barred."

  Keywords:

  contract; contributory service; fund membership; internal appeal; late appeal; participation excluded; receivability of the complaint; short-term; terms of appointment; time bar; time limit; unjspf; validation of service;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 1034

  
  69th Session, 1990
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Summary

  Extract:

  The pension rights of an employee in the United Nations family of institutions are governed by the Regulations of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and are determined by the kind of contract he holds. The complainant was employed for a certain time under special service agreements which do not entitle him to membership in the Fund.

  Keywords:

  contract; external collaborator; fund regulations; participation excluded; pension; pension entitlements;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 417

  
  44th Session, 1980
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 19

  Extract:

  The Tribunal believes that the complainant was expressly excluded, by his contract of employment, from participation in the Pension Fund. An alteration in the contract could be made only by mutual consent. The Tribunal treats a letter addressed to the complainant as "an offer, which the organization was rightly confident would be accepted to remove the exclusion clause".

  Keywords:

  amendment to the rules; contract; offer; organisation; participation excluded; pension; unjspf;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  The complainant received a form, summarising for the needs of the organisation the elements of his contract. The heading "Pensions" was marked "Not applicable". The complainant fulfilled the required conditions for participation in the fund; the Tribunal therefore considers that the expression in question could be justified only if participation was excluded by the contract. The existing contract was silent about pension rights. The expression is "only making explicit what is implied in the contract already executed."

  Keywords:

  contract; participation excluded; pension; unjspf;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  A new provision as well as an [indirect] amendment to his contract allowed the participation of the complainant in a pension fund. He may not validate prior service because his earlier participation was specifically excluded under the terms of his contract of employment, such a situation having been provided for by the material provisions.

  Keywords:

  amendment to the rules; contract; participation; participation excluded; pension; unjspf; validation of service;