Judgment No. 4345
The complaint is dismissed.
The complainant challenges the decision to extend his temporary reassignment.
reassignment; complaint dismissed
The Tribunal [...] finds that the IAEA did not breach its duty of care and stresses that it is not always possible to cater to the needs of each individual employee, as the product or result of the work being done is often justifiably considered a higher priority over the individual’s personal interests (see Judgments 2587, under 10, 3192, under 22, 3447, under 11, and 4316, under 18).
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2587, 3192, 3447, 4316
reassignment; duty of care
The complainant contends that the impugned decision is vitiated by abuse of authority[...]. This contention is unsubstantiated and the Tribunal’s consistent case law holds that bad faith cannot be assumed; it must be proven (see, for example, Judgments 4261, under 10, 4161, under 9, 3154, under 7, 3902, under 11, and 2800, under 21).
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2800, 3154, 3902, 4161, 4261
misuse of authority; bad faith; abuse of power
According to the Tribunal’s case law, decisions which appear to be managerially justified when taken individually, can amount to institutional harassment when the accumulation of repeated events of mismanagement or omissions, for which there is no reasonable explanation, deeply and adversely affect the staff member’s dignity and career objectives (see, for example, Judgments 3250, 4111 and 4243).
Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3250, 4111, 4243