Judgment No. 1791
Decision
The complaints are dismissed.
Considerations 7-8
Extract:
"In support of their plea that the impugned decision rested on wrong reasons and wrong conclusions [the complainants] contend that [the Organization] was mistaken in its explanation: there was in fact no financial crisis warranting a compulsory pay cut. [...] The plea fails. The evidence [...] shows that [the Organization's] member States had not been spared the economic and financial plight of Europe at the time and so were much less able to fund the Organization. That was why [...] they had to think again about the budget [...] and demand a big cut. The Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence that [the Organization] did not give wrong reasons or draw any blatantly wrong conclusions."
Keywords
duty to substantiate decision; grounds; evidence; salary; budgetary reasons; mistaken conclusion; reduction of salary
Considerations 9-10
Extract:
"In support of their plea of abuse of authority the complainants accuse [the Organization] of scorning [...] the independence of the international civil service by giving in to a single government that was itself defying the principle [...]. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that [the Organization] was yielding to [the] insistence [of one State]. The impugned decision was taken because of a resolution by the Council, the sovereign body that decides things scientific, technical and administrative [...]."
Keywords
general principle; independence; member state; international civil service principles; breach; discretion; executive body; misuse of authority; official; abuse of power
Considerations 13-14
Extract:
"The complainants plead breach of their acquired rights [...]. [T]hey argue that those terms are inviolate, particularly the clauses on pay. [...] The financial crisis [facing the Organization] at the material time did amount to exceptional circumstances that warranted the slight reduction in pay that [the Organization] applied, for only one year anyway and in consideration for extra time off."
Keywords
provisional decision; exception; acquired right; proportionality; amendment to the rules; terms of appointment; contract; salary; budgetary reasons; compensatory leave; reduction of salary
Considerations 15-16
Extract:
"The complainants contend that [...] the impugned decision was in breach of [...] their right to a steady level of pay. [...] [T]hey maintain that [...] the Organization acted in breach of the general principle of the international civil service known as Noblemaire. The Tribunal is satisfied that there was no breach here of any principle of the international civil service. [...] [T]he measure the complainants are objecting to was exceptional and limited in time. As for their right to a steady level of pay, that measure neither changed the pay scales nor had any impact whatever on terms of employment in the long term. The conclusion is that there was no breach of acquired rights."
Keywords
provisional decision; exception; acquired right; international civil service principles; noblemaire principle; amendment to the rules; breach; terms of appointment; salary; scale; reduction of salary; right; official
| 
