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

Judgment No. 3240


1. The Director-General’s decision of 2 December 2010 is set aside.
2. The FAO shall pay the complainant material and moral damages in a total amount of 20,000 United States dollars.
3. It shall also pay him costs in the amount of 1,000 dollars.
4. All other claims are dismissed.


The Tribunal found that the Organization had acted in breach of its own rules on performance appraisal and probationary periods.

Consideration 20


"Although the complainant did not take issue with the use of the wrong form for his performance appraisal or with the fact that his immediate supervisor did not conduct the evaluation, this does not absolve the FAO of its obligation to act in compliance with its own Staff Regulations, Staff Rules and Manual provisions implementing those rules (see Judgment 3177, under 18)."


ILOAT Judgment(s): 3177


general principle; organisation's duties; patere legem; written rule; staff regulations and rules; work appraisal; performance report

Consideration 21


"It is a well-established principle governing probation that in addition to “[identifying] in a timely fashion the unsatisfactory aspects of the performance so that remedial steps may be taken”, an organisation must also “give a specific warning that the continued employment is in jeopardy” (see Judgment 2788, under 1)."


ILOAT Judgment(s): 2788


organisation; organisation's duties; work appraisal; probationary period; unsatisfactory service; warning; purpose

Judgment keywords


complaint allowed; decision quashed; probationary period; performance evaluation; rules of the organisation

Last updated: 14.08.2020 ^ top