Judgment No. 1834
Decision
THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED.
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The complainant [pleads] that the decision to terminate [her appointment] was not 'initiated' by the Director-General, as Staff Rule 110.04 required. [I]n the context of the Staff Rule the word 'initiated' does not mean that the Director-General himself must be the first person in the administration to take any action at all; it simply requires that the action, when taken, be on the Director-General's behalf and with his prior approval."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: UNIDO STAFF RULE 110.04
Keywords
decision; competence; organisation's duties; termination of employment; decision-maker; delegated authority; executive head
Consideration 7
Extract:
The organization placed the complainant on special leave without pay in August 1995, and told her in January 1996 that to stay on special leave she would have to provide medical certificates of inability to go back to work. "The complainant contends that her separation was in breach of her special leave status. [The Tribunal holds that] the receipt of [monthly medical] reports by the chief medical officer was clearly a condition of her maintaining special leave status. Her refusal, without persuasive justification, to submit the requested information [over several months] is a breach of that condition and ample indication of her intent to abandon her post."
Keywords
termination of employment; abandonment of post; illness; medical certificate; special leave; staff member's duties; condition; refusal
| 
