L'OIT est une institution spécialisée des Nations-Unies
Plan du site | Contact English
> Page d'accueil > Triblex: base de données sur la jurisprudence > Par session > 126e session

Judgment No. 3999


The complaint is dismissed.


The complainant challenges the decision not to reclassify her post.

Judgment keywords


post classification; complaint dismissed

Consideration 8


The complainant requests oral hearings. As the submissions of the parties are sufficient to allow the Tribunal to reach a reasoned decision, there is no need to hold hearings.


oral proceedings

Considerations 9-10


The Tribunal notes that the decision which was contested in the internal appeal proceedings was the refusal to submit the complainant’s post to a reclassification exercise. That was remedied by the final decision [...], ordering that a reclassification exercise be undertaken. In fact, the Director General’s decision was implemented and a reclassification exercise took place [...], with the result that the Classification Committee found that the complainant’s post was properly classified at grade P-4. The complainant was informed of the outcome of the reclassification exercise by an internal memorandum dated 13 January 2015, that is, after she filed the present complaint. [...]
Insofar as the complainant contests the decision not to submit the request for reclassification of her post to HRMD, the Tribunal finds that this claim is moot as that decision was replaced by the final decision [...]. With regard to the issues raised by the complainant to support her claim regarding the unlawfulness of the decision not to consider reclassifying her post, they are superseded by the final decision.


claim moot

Consideration 9


[T]he Tribunal finds it useful to note that even if it were possible to consider the complainant’s claim regarding reclassification, it would not be able to order the immediate reclassification of her post as requested. It is well settled in the case law that the Tribunal will not order the promotion or reclassification of a staff member, as such decisions are discretionary and involve specialist evaluation (see, for example, Judgment 3370, under 8).


Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3370


competence of tribunal

Consideration 12


The time that elapsed from the filing of the internal appeal until the Appeal Board issued its conclusions was approximately 16 months. This included a period during which extensions were granted with respect to the filing of the submissions while there were attempts to reach a settlement. The Director General’s final decision was notified to the complainant within the time limit provided by the Staff Regulations and Rules. In these circumstances the Tribunal does not consider the duration of the internal appeal proceedings to be excessive.


internal appeal; delay in internal procedure

Dernière mise à jour: 25.05.2020 ^ haut