Judgment No. 1488
Decision
1. THE IMPUGNED DECISION IS SET ASIDE.
2. THE EPO SHALL CORRECT THE FIGURES RELATING TO THE COMPLAINANT'S OUTPUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SYSTEM OF POINTS AS IN FORCE BEFORE THAT DECISION TOOK EFFECT.
3. IT SHALL ALTER HER STAFF REPORTFOR 1992-93 ACCORDINGLY.
4. IT SHALL PAY HER 2,500 GERMAN MARKS IN COSTS.
5. HER OTHER CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED.
Consideration 9
Extract:
Article 38(3) of the Service Regulations, which provides for consultation of an advisory body, does "apply to cases where the Service Regulations and Pension Scheme Regulations are to be amended or 'implementing rules' are to be made, and the legal status of staff is thereby to be affected. But it goes further: it applies to cases where 'any proposal' is made 'which concerns the whole or part of the staff'. So it casts a wide net that goes beyond mere changes in legal provisions."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 38(3) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords
advisory body; staff regulations and rules; interpretation; consultation
Consideration 10
Extract:
"Article 38(3) [...] seeks to ensure that the proposal shall go through a formal process in which the staff have a right to be consulted through the General Advisory Committee. Indeed it makes for good relations between staff and administration not just to empower but to require that body, set up under the Service Regulations to represent both sides, to give 'a reasoned opinion'. It does not matter that management may have consulted the staff on the subject in other ways. What was lacking in this case was what Article 38(3) required: the formal consultation of the General Advisory Committee and the submission of its reasoned opinion before the decision was made."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 38(3) OF THE EPO SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords
advisory body; due process; organisation's duties; staff regulations and rules; consultation; procedural flaw
| 
