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

Judgment No. 178

Decision

THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.

Considerations

Extract:

"[T]he grading of each post is based exclusively on objective criteria. [Whilst] the present incumbent of the post [...] has qualifications superior to the standards required for the post which she accepted on the understanding that it would be upgraded [and] while this fact must leave her with an understandable grievance, it affords no legal basis for the upgrading which she claims."

Keywords

post classification; grade; post description; qualifications; discretion

Considerations

Extract:

The Secretary-General, in the exercise of his discretionary power, "determine[s] and then grade[s] the posts held by staff members. Consequently, the Administrative Tribunal, which has before it an appeal against a decision of those authorities grading a specific job, may interfere with that decision only if [etc.]."

Keywords

post classification; grade; post description; judicial review; discretion

Considerations

Extract:

The complainant maintains that she accepted the post only on the promise that it would shortly be graded G.6 and that the job description was marked "proposed G.6". But the complainant, who relies on mere promises or proposals, cannot claim any right to have her post regraded G.6. in the course of the general review of the grading of posts to align the organisation's classifications with those of the United Nations, the Secretary-General was "not bound by any prior legal obligation towards the complainant."

Keywords

good faith; organisation's duties; terms of appointment; post classification; grade; post description; promotion; promise

Considerations

Extract:

In taking the view that knowledge of only two languages was required for the post, the Secretary-General merely exercised the authority vested in him. "Although the appropriateness of the way in which [the discretion was exercised] is open to discussion, it does not appear from the documents that [the] decision was based on materially incorrect facts or an obvious error or distortion of the evidence, or on a seriously mistaken assessment of the requirements."

Keywords

post description; knowledge of languages; judicial review; discretion



 
Last updated: 28.02.2020 ^ top