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

Judgment No. 4000

Decision

The complaint is dismissed.

Summary

The complainant challenges the decision not to reclassify his post at grade P-4.

Judgment keywords

Keywords

post classification; complaint dismissed

Consideration 2

Extract:

The complainant applies for an oral hearing. The application will be dismissed as it provides no basis for a hearing. Moreover, in view of the abundant and sufficiently clear submissions and evidence provided by the parties, the Tribunal considers that it is fully informed about the case and does not therefore deem it necessary to hold an oral hearing.

Keywords

oral proceedings

Consideration 6

Extract:

The complainant claims that he was subjected to unequal treatment in the reclassification exercise. However, he has not established that he was treated differently from any other staff member who was similarly situated in fact and in law (see, for example, Judgment 3912, under 15).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 3912

Keywords

equal treatment

Considerations 7-9

Extract:

In Judgment 3589, in which the reclassification of a post was also challenged, the Tribunal stated the following, in consideration 4:
“It is well established that the grounds for reviewing the classification of a post are limited and ordinarily a classification decision would only be set aside if it was taken without authority, had been made in breach of the rules of form or procedure, was based on an error of fact or law, was made having overlooked an essential fact, was tainted with abuse of authority or if a truly mistaken conclusion had been drawn from the facts (see, for example, Judgments 1647, consideration 7, and 1067, consideration 2). This is because the classification of posts involves the exercise of value judgements as to the nature and extent of the duties and responsibilities of the posts and it is not the Tribunal’s role to undertake this process of evaluation (see, for example, Judgment 3294, consideration 8). The grading of posts is a matter within the discretion of the executive head of the organisation (or the person acting on her or his behalf) (see, for example, Judgment 3082, consideration 20).”
As to the main factors that are to be taken into account in a reclassification process, the Tribunal has relevantly stated as follows, in Judgment 3764, consideration 6:
“It is for the competent body and, ultimately, the Director-General to determine each staff member’s grade. Several criteria are used in this exercise. Thus, when a staff member’s duties attach to various grades, only the main ones are taken into account. Moreover, the classification body does not rely solely on the text of the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules and the job description but also considers the abilities and degree of responsibility required by each. In all cases grading a post requires detailed knowledge of the conditions in which the incumbent works.”
The classification of a post involves an evaluation of the nature and extent of the duties and responsibilities of the post based upon the job description. It is not concerned with the merits of the performance of the incumbent (see, for example, Judgment 591, under 2).

Reference(s)

ILOAT Judgment(s): 591, 1067, 1647, 3082, 3294, 3589

Keywords

equal treatment; post classification; reclassification



 
Last updated: 02.09.2020 ^ top