Judgment No. 1231
1. THE TRIBUNAL SETS ASIDE THE SECRETARY GENERAL'S DECISIONS OF 19 AUGUST, 13 SEPTEMBER 1991 AND 19 MARCH 1992 ABOLISHING THE COMPLAINANT'S POST AS HEAD OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP IN SUB-DIVISION 2 OF DIVISION II OF THE GENERAL SECRETARIAT AND TERMINATING HIS APPOINTMENT.
2. THE ORGANIZATION SHALL PAY HIM DAMAGES FOR INJURY UNDER ALL HEADS EQUIVALENT TO TWO YEARS' GROSS PAY, TO BE RECKONED AT THE RATE OF HIS LAST FULL MONTH'S PAY.
3. IT SHALL PAY HIM 30,000 FRENCH FRANCS IN COST.
The complainant seeks the quashing of a decision to dismiss him following the abolition of his post. The only grounds given for his dismissal are "just a broad allusion to the organization's 'service requirements' or 'interests'. Such terms are meaningless unless there is a fuller explanation enabling the staff member and, if need be, the Tribunal to grasp the actual reasons, especially where the outcome is as drastic as abolition of post and dismissal."
decision; duty to substantiate decision; organisation's duties; staff member's interest; abolition of post; termination of employment; judicial review; organisation's interest; purport
As the Tribunal has often held "there must be objective grounds for abolition, which must not be used as a pretext for dislodging undesirable staff: see Judgments 334 [...], under 5; 523 [...], under 5; 756 [...], under 2; and 807 [...], under 16 and 17."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 334, 523, 756, 807
case law; organisation's duties; abolition of post; termination of employment; misuse of authority; purpose; abuse of power
Considerations 31 to 33
A new post to which the complainant had been assigned was then abolished. The facts "lend weight to the complainant's view that 'shunting' him - as he puts it - into an empty administrative post was just a start to removing him. What bears out the foregoing is that apart from the broad allusion to 'interests' the impugned decisions disclose no consistent idea of reform warranting the creation of the post [in question] in 1989 or the abolition of it in 1991. There is no discerning in what happened anything but a series of makeshift measures taken - at heavy cost to the organization's coffers - to dispose of the case of an official Interpol wanted to discharge in disregard of due forms and process. To that extent there is a parallel in law with a case the Tribunal deplored in Judgment 807 [...]."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 807
case law; refusal to assign work; creation of post; post held by the complainant; abolition of post; judicial review; organisation's interest; misuse of authority; abuse of power
The complainant requests the quashing of the organization's decision to terminate him and abolish his post. The Tribunal recalling - notably in Judgments 269 and 1207 - that it may exercise its power of review the conditions under which a post may be abolished and the subsequent consequences for the incumbent, determined that "the complainant's post was plainly created and abolished for no objective reasons, the sole purpose being to sort out the case of someone the organization was finding harder and harder to keep on because his presence had made for trouble."
ILOAT Judgment(s): 269, 1207
decision; case law; abolition of post; termination of employment; working relations; misuse of authority; abuse of power