Judgment No. 445
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
The complainant was first employed under various contracts with the organization before becoming an official. His several periods of service were made pensionable with the exception of a few months spent working as a consultant. In accordance with the Staff Rules, consultants who are appointed for periods not greater than eleven months are barred from participating in the Pension Fund. Up to 1972, periods of consultancy service could not be validated for Pension Fund purposes. The complainant's services as a consultant may not be counted as pensionable.
external collaborator; contract; successive contracts; pension; validation of service; titularization
The complainant maintains that his provisional acceptance of employment as a consultant was based on statements by three officials who acknowledged is right to participate in the Pension Fund from that time. There is no evidence of such statements. "The complainant has all the less reason to object to the absence of proof because at the material time the statements were made, it was open to him to ask the three officials to confirm in writing what they had said."
lack of evidence; promise; unjspf; participation; validation of service
The complainant maintains that the fact of his having begun the probationary period at the beginning of his consultancy contract conferred on him the right to participation in the pension fund. But the probationary period and pensionable service do not necessarily coincide. The complainant was treated as a probationer from the material date because a provision of the Staff Rules stipulated that service prior to appointment could be credited towards completion of probation. The provision does not rule out application of the rule disqualifying a consultant for participation in the fund.
external collaborator; period; contract; probationary period; unjspf; participation; validation of service; right