ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
ILO-en-strap
Site Map | Contact français
> Home > Triblex: case-law database > By thesaurus keyword

ICSC decision (35,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: ICSC decision
Total judgments found: 42

1, 2, 3 | next >

  • Judgment 4138


    128th Session, 2019
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to apply to their salaries the post adjustment multiplier determined by the ICSC on the basis of its 2016 cost-of-living survey for Geneva, with the result that their salaries were reduced.

    Consideration 50

    Extract:

    It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administrationís decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. WIPO cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSCís decisions lawful. Accordingly, WIPO should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324

    Keywords:

    compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of WIPO to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from WIPOís membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; pay slip;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSCís approval of it, the organizationís decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
    ďSome principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;

    Consideration 29

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunalís adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organizationís legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;

    Consideration 40

    Extract:

    The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

    Keywords:

    general assembly resolution; icsc decision; icsc statute; practice;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;



  • Judgment 4137


    128th Session, 2019
    International Telecommunication Union
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to apply to their salaries the post adjustment multiplier determined by the ICSC on the basis of its 2016 cost-of-living survey for Geneva, with the result that their salaries were reduced.

    Consideration 32

    Extract:

    The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; post adjustment;

    Consideration 42

    Extract:

    It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administrationís decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. The ITU cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSCís decisions lawful. Accordingly, the ITU should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324

    Keywords:

    compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of the ITU to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from the ITUís membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; pay slip;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSCís approval of it, the organizationís decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
    ďSome principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunalís adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organizationís legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;



  • Judgment 4136


    128th Session, 2019
    International Organization for Migration
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to apply to their salaries the post adjustment multiplier determined by the ICSC on the basis of its 2016 cost-of-living survey for Geneva, with the result that their salaries were reduced.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of IOM to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from IOMís membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; pay slip;

    Consideration 23

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunalís adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organizationís legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;

    Consideration 42

    Extract:

    It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, consideration 22). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administrationís decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. IOM cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSCís decisions lawful. Accordingly, IOM should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324

    Keywords:

    compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSCís approval of it, the organizationís decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
    ďSome principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;

    Consideration 32

    Extract:

    The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; post adjustment;



  • Judgment 4135


    128th Session, 2019
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to apply to their salaries the post adjustment multiplier determined by the ICSC on the basis of its 2016 cost-of-living survey for Geneva, with the result that their salaries were reduced.

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSCís approval of it, the organizationís decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
    ďSome principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;

    Consideration 39

    Extract:

    The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; post adjustment;

    Consideration 28

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunalís adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organizationís legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;

    Consideration 49

    Extract:

    It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administrationís decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. WHO cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSCís decisions lawful. Accordingly, WHO should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM is reinstated, together with interest.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324

    Keywords:

    compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of WHO to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from WHOís membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; pay slip;



  • Judgment 4134


    128th Session, 2019
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to apply to their salaries the post adjustment multiplier determined by the ICSC on the basis of its 2016 cost-of-living survey for Geneva, with the result that their salaries were reduced.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; scale;

    Consideration 6

    Extract:

    The legal foundation for the complaints is the individual decision, reflected in a payslip, to reduce the salary of each complainant and likewise affecting each intervener. In such circumstances the complainant can challenge the general decision on which the individual decision is based (see, for example, Judgment 1798, consideration 6). In the present case there is potentially a succession of several general decisions of the ICSC following a survey conducted in, amongst other places, Geneva in 2016 culminating in the Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above being paid at a reduced amount. In addition there was the general decision of the administration of the ILO to give effect to these ICSC decisions. The last mentioned decision flowed from the ILOís membership of and adherence to the United Nations common system.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1798

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; pay slip;

    Consideration 9

    Extract:

    [A]s noted in Judgment 1160, consideration 11, [...] if the ICSC adopts a methodology, although not binding on an organization merely by virtue of the ICSCís approval of it, the organizationís decision to apply it is one that it is not free afterwards to disclaim. Moreover, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 1000, consideration 12:
    ďSome principles there is ample precedent for will bear restating. One is that when impugning an individual decision that touches him directly the employee of an international organisation may challenge the lawfulness of any general or prior decision, even by someone outside the organisation, that affords the basis for the individual one (cf. Judgments 382 [...], 622 [...] and 825 [...]). The present complainants may accordingly challenge the lawfulness of the general methodology and of the 1987 survey of Vienna, which, taken together, constitute the basis in law of the decisions under challenge.Ē

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 622, 825, 1000, 1160

    Keywords:

    general decision; icsc decision; individual decision; methodology;

    Consideration 29

    Extract:

    The Tribunalís mandate deriving from its Statute is, fundamentally, to resolve individual disputes between an organization and one or a number of members or former members of its staff. Over the life of the Tribunal a matrix of legal principles has been developed and applied by the Tribunal to ensure just and principled outcomes both from the perspective of members of staff and also the perspective of organizations as employers. In its judgments the Tribunal has recognised and accepted the existence of the United Nations common system and respected its objectives. However, the existence of the United Nations common system and a desire to maintain its integrity should not, in itself, compromise the Tribunalís adjudication of individual disputes in any particular case or series of cases involving the application of its principles. Indeed, in Judgment 2303, consideration 7, the Tribunal acknowledged the argument of the organization that considerable inconvenience arose from an earlier judgment (Judgment 1713) and it was virtually impossible for the organization to depart from the scale recommended by the ICSC. The Tribunal has to recognise that an organizationís legal obligations arising from the operation of the common system could have legal ramifications for an organization that inform or even determine the resolution of any particular dispute. However notwithstanding these matters, the Tribunal must uphold a plea from a staff member or members if it is established that the organization has acted unlawfully.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1713, 2303

    Keywords:

    competence of tribunal; general decision; icsc decision; un common system;

    Consideration 40

    Extract:

    The ICSC did not have power to decide, itself, the amounts of post adjustments with the ultimate consequence that the salaries of Geneva-based officials in the Professional category and above be reduced. The ICSC could only make recommendations and not decide on amounts. That was the preserve of the General Assembly.

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; post adjustment;

    Consideration 50

    Extract:

    It is necessary to consider what is the appropriate relief. In a number of cases in which the complainants have established that a decision to adjust salaries was unlawful, the order of the Tribunal has been to set aside the impugned decision and to remit the matter to the organization to consider the matter afresh and make a new decision (see, for example, Judgments 1821, consideration 11, and 3324, considerations 22 and 23). However, in the present case, the unlawfulness of the administrationís decision flowed from the unlawfulness of the decision of the ICSC. The decisions to implement ICSC/CIRC/PAC/518 and ICSC/CIRC/PAC/522 are unlawful. The ILO cannot, by a new decision, render the ICSCís decisions lawful. Accordingly, the ILO should be ordered to reinstate the applicable PAM in place immediately before the decision to reduce salaries was taken and pay the complainants and interveners the salary lost between then and the time the PAM are reinstated, together with interest.

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1821, 3324

    Keywords:

    compensation; icsc decision; material damages; post adjustment;



  • Judgment 3931


    125th Session, 2018
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants contest the decision to apply new salary scales in New Dehli as from 1 November 2014, which show a salary freeze for staff members already in service and a lower salary for new staff.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; general service category; icsc decision; salary;



  • Judgment 3885


    124th Session, 2017
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant contests the decision to defer the promulgation of the revised post adjustment multiplier for staff of the UN system working in New York.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; icsc decision; post adjustment; salary; staff representative;



  • Judgment 3883


    124th Session, 2017
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants contest the implementation of new salary scales as from March 2012 in Bangkok.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint allowed; general service category; icsc decision; salary;



  • Judgment 3740


    123rd Session, 2017
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainants challenge the legality of changes to the FAO General Service category staff salary scale consequent to the implementation of recommendations contained in an ICSC report in 2012 on local employment conditions in Rome.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; general service category; icsc decision; salary;

    Consideration 10

    Extract:

    [I]t must be observed that, according to the documents that have been presented to the Tribunal, the recommendations in the relevant ICSC decisions were limited to and only established two things: a revised salary scale for the GS category in Rome and revised levels for dependency allowances. The recommendations were silent with respect to all of the other matters dealt with in the 25 January 2013 Administrative Circular. [Ö]As the record shows, none of these measures were mandated by or derived from the new ICSC salary scale or dependency allowance recommendations or were necessary for their implementation. Out of a number of possible options for the implementation of the recommendations, these are the measures FAO decided to adopt. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the interim adjustment freeze or the break in service and reappointment salary consequences were derived from the ICSCís allegedly illegal decision and were not measures that the FAO decided to adopt as options for implementation of the ICSC recommendations.

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; impugned decision; salary;



  • Judgment 3739


    123rd Session, 2017
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The complainant challenges changes to the IFAD General Service Staff salary scale as a result of the implementation of recommendations contained in an ICSC report in 2012 on local employment conditions in Rome.

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    complaint dismissed; icsc decision; impugned decision; salary;

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    [I]t must be observed that, according to the documents that have been presented to the Tribunal, the recommendations in the relevant ICSC decisions were limited to and only established two things: a revised salary scale for the GS category in Rome and revised levels for dependency allowances, the latter not being in issue in this proceeding. The revised salary scale recommendation was silent with respect to all of the other matters dealt with in the 31 January 2013 Presidentís Bulletin. In particular, it did not deal with setting an implementation date; the application of the revised salary scale to only certain staff members; or the freezing of interim adjustments for staff appointed prior to 1 February 2013. As the record shows, none of these measures were explicitly mandated by the revised ICSC salary scale recommendation. Out of several possible options for the implementation of the recommendation, these are the measures IFAD decided to adopt. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the interim adjustment freeze was derived from the ICSCís allegedly illegal decision and that it was not a measure that IFAD decided to adopt from among options for implementation of the ICSC recommendation.

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; impugned decision; salary;



  • Judgment 3360


    118th Session, 2014
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
    Summary: The Tribunal dismissed the complaints seeking a review of the decision to apply to the complainantsí salaries the post adjustment calculated on the basis of the ICSC 2010 cost-of-living survey for Vienna.

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "While ideally, the ICSC would be able to use only precise numbers to reflect staff rents for each duty station, the reality is that it would be excessively cumbersome to adopt that methodology, particularly considering that the rates would not undergo drastic changes from the estimated numbers that are currently used. Considering the overall goal of establishing and maintaining purchasing parity among the various duty stations and the difficulty associated with calculating costs using every single staff memberís precise information, the Tribunal concludes that it is not unreasonable for the ICSC to adopt a system of estimation in the interest of efficiency and brevity. The Tribunal is satisfied that the methodology used was established pursuant to a prescribed, transparent process, without any vitiating errors of fact or law."

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; salary;



  • Judgment 3143


    113th Session, 2012
    International Fund for Agricultural Development
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Judgment keywords

    Keywords:

    icsc decision; rental subsidy;



  • Judgment 2610


    102nd Session, 2007
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 5

    Extract:

    "While it is highly desirable that staff representatives should be allowed to participate in operations to determine their colleagues' remuneration, this can in no way affect the right of each staff member to avail himself or herself of the means of redress which are open to him or her and which constitute a fundamental safeguard for international civil servants. The ICSC is therefore mistaken in believing that it can rely on the theory of estoppel vis-ŗ-vis the complainants by arguing that staff representatives are supposed to act on behalf of all the members of the personnel and that 'their actions should be considered as legally attributable to each and every one of the staff they represent'."

    Keywords:

    adjustment; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; general principle; icsc decision; internal appeal; official; receivability of the complaint; right of appeal; safeguard; salary; scale; staff representative;



  • Judgment 2422


    98th Session, 2005
    International Atomic Energy Agency
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 2

    Extract:

    "The Staff Association has submitted an amicus curiae brief. The defendant is not opposed to an examination of those submissions by the Tribunal, but it points out that the staff representatives raised no objection to the implementation of the new salary scale at the IAEA when they were consulted on the matter. That of course does not prevent the Staff Association from expressing different views, which the Tribunal agrees to take into consideration for the reasons set forth in Judgment 2420 [...] whilst emphasising that these submissions are not to be regarded as the brief of an intervener."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 2420

    Keywords:

    adjustment; amicus curiae; consultation; icsc decision; intervention; rate; salary; scale; staff union;



  • Judgment 2420


    98th Session, 2005
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "The Association of Professional Staff has submitted an amicus curiae brief. Although the possibility of gathering the observations of an association or union representing staff interests is not envisaged under its Statute, the Tribunal considers that it can only be beneficial to extend that possibility, as do other international administrative tribunals, to associations and unions wishing to defend the rights of the staff members whom they represent in the context of disputes concerning decisions affecting the staff as a whole or a specific category of staff members. Indeed, the Organization has raised no objection to the Tribunal's examination of the submissions in question, which are not, however, to be equated with the brief of an intervener, and which are simply intended to clarify certain points raised by the complaints with the Tribunal."

    Keywords:

    amicus curiae; general decision; icsc decision; iloat statute; intervention; staff union;

    Consideration 11

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal has on numerous occasions ruled on the issue of whether an international organisation is bound to comply with general provisions that would infringe the rights of its staff members. The fact that an international organisation belongs to the common system does not enable it to decline or limit its own responsibility towards the members of its staff or lessen the degree of judicial protection it owes them. Any organisation that introduces elements of the common system into its own rules has a duty to ensure that the texts it thereby imports are lawful (on this issue, see Judgment 1265, which refers to Judgments 382 and 825; for more recent examples concerning the duties of the FAO, see Judgments 1713 and 2303). Whilst the Tribunal fully appreciates the difficulties - emphasised by the defendant - that international organisations are liable to face in departing from the salary scales adopted on the basis of ICSC recommendations, it is nevertheless bound to ensure that international law is observed in the relations between the said organisations and their staff, regardless of the external authority from which the decisions taken emanate. Indeed, the case of an organisation having to revise salary scales resulting from recommendations or decisions affecting the common system, whether or not pursuant to a ruling by the competent tribunal, is not without precedent."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 382, 825, 1265, 1713, 2303

    Keywords:

    adjustment; case law; criteria; decision-maker; icsc decision; liability; organisation's duties; recommendation; right; rule of another organisation; salary; scale;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    "The complainants' second plea is that the methodology applied by the General Assembly [to review salary levels] does not satisfy the requirements of stability, foreseeability and transparency established by the case law. [...] Given that the application of that methodology can yield results as different as those obtained, on the one hand, by the ICSC, and on the other, by the Fifth Committee and subsequently the General Assembly, one may legitimately query its foreseeability. However, it must be borne in mind that a methodology cannot be applied without a degree of flexibility and without leaving some room for interpretation by the competent authority, which was entitled to take into account the imbalances generated by past applications of the adopted methodology in order to try to attenuate the effects thereof and properly to implement the Noblemaire principle."

    Keywords:

    adjustment; case law; icsc decision; interpretation; noblemaire principle; organisation's duties; rate; recommendation; salary; scale;



  • Judgment 1839


    86th Session, 1999
    World Health Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Considerations 16 and 17

    Extract:

    "The complainants plead that the staff representatives having withdrawn, the [Local Salary Survey Committee] was no longer competent to act and that the organization was in breach of its duty of consulting the staff either through such a body or else, in accordance with Staff Regulation 8.1, directly. [This] plea [...] must fail. Not only did the Committee and its working party both comprising staff representatives function for many months before the survey began, but the Committee did not, as the complainants make out, cease to exist after the staff representatives had withdrawn. The [organization] repeatedly invited them to take part, and their refusal to do so did not have the effect of disqualifying the Committee or invalidating its recommendations. The methodology [of the International Civil Service Commission] provides in paragraph 6 that, though it is preferable to have representatives of both management and staff take part, the technical requirements will still be met even if one side prefers not to; so that actual participation by both sides is not a requirement. Nor was there any breach of Regulation 8.1. [The Tribunal draws an analogy between this issue and the issue considered in Judgment 1565]."

    Reference(s)

    Organization rules reference: WHO STAFF REGULATION 8.1 PARAGRAPH 6, METHODOLOGY OF THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1565

    Keywords:

    case law; competence; composition of the internal appeals body; consultation; delegated authority; formal requirements; icsc decision; organisation's duties; participation; qualifications; recommendation; salary; staff representative;



  • Judgment 1808


    86th Session, 1999
    International Labour Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 7

    Extract:

    "Grading turns on the duties of the post, not on the quality of performance. Nor do the master standard for classification of professional posts and the standards and procedures of the professional grading appeals committee lay any duty on the [organization] to make available an official's performance reports for the purpose of a grading exercise".

    Keywords:

    criteria; grade; icsc decision; organisation's duties; performance report; post; post classification; post held by the complainant; professional category; work appraisal;



  • Judgment 1800


    86th Session, 1999
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "The complainants' [...] plea is that the sole purpose of the change in the rules on the [post adjustment] index [decided by the ICSC] was to save money. The Tribunal need only quote the reply it gave to that argument in Judgment 1776: 'If the new method is lawful the fact that applying it saves member States money cannot in itself be a flaw.' And the evidence suggests no misuse of authority by the [ICSC], which, against the odds, tries to find from time to time objective criteria for reckoning post adjustment throughout the common system."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1776

    Keywords:

    amendment to the rules; budgetary reasons; case law; icsc decision; member state; misuse of authority; official; post adjustment; reckoning; right; salary; same;



  • Judgment 1765


    85th Session, 1998
    World Intellectual Property Organization
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    The International Civil Service Commission made a mistake in reckoning the multiplier used to work out the post adjustment in Geneva. "[The Organization] has the duty of checking the lawfulness of any decision by another body on which it bases its own decision. So too must it check the adequacy of action by that other body to correct any mistake it may have made, and make sure that such corrective action respects the rights of staff."

    Keywords:

    adjustment; breach; complaint allowed; decision; icsc decision; organisation's duties; post adjustment; right; salary;

    Consideration 12

    Extract:

    The International Civil Service Commission made a mistake in reckoning the multiplier used to work out the post adjustment for Geneva from July 1994. "There is no merit to the Commission's plea that, not having got word of the mistake until August 1995, it need not apply the proper multiplier until four months later. For one thing [...] the data needed to put it right had been readily at hand for well over a year. It was for want, not of information, but of care on the part of the Commission or its secretariat that the mistake came about. For another thing, the plea betrays an utter failure to grasp what the four-month rule means. [...] It has no bearing whatever on the Commission's correction of any mistake of its own making."

    Keywords:

    adjustment; complaint allowed; cost-of-living increase; icsc decision; liability; post adjustment; salary;



  • Judgment 1713


    84th Session, 1998
    Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
    Extracts: EN, FR
    Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "The manner of applying Flemming does not turn on such variables as the desire of staff to keep their jobs or the ease or difficulty of finding good local recruits. What Flemming ordains is that general service staff shall have pay and other terms of employment that match the best on offer at their duty station."

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; elements; flemming principle; icsc decision; official; safeguard; salary;

    Consideration 14

    Extract:

    "The dropping, and even the phasing out, of the language factor is a decision that ignores the peculiarities of the employment market in Rome. It therefore amounts to breach of the right of general service staff to one of the terms of employment - namely pay - that must [...] be 'among the best in the locality without being the absolute best'."

    Keywords:

    breach; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; flemming principle; general service category; icsc decision; language allowance; official; salary;

    Consideration 8

    Extract:

    "In choosing figures of local pay for the purpose of applying Flemming there can be no single hard-and-fast approach. As was held in Judgment 1265, the [ICSC] must be allowed some discretion over method, even though the Tribunal will still review the exercise of it. The decision impugned may not stand if, say, it overlooks or misconstrues some particular factor, or if some method is applied for the wilful contrivance of lower figures of local pay, or if corners are cut for the sake of saving time, but to the detriment of staff interests."

    Reference(s)

    ILOAT Judgment(s): 1265

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; flemming principle; icsc decision; judicial review; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; misuse of authority; salary;

    Consideration 15

    Extract:

    "The Tribunal will not entertain any general challenge to the policies of the [ICSC] or of the FAO: it will rule only on particular pleas from the parties."

    Keywords:

    case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; complaint allowed in part; decision quashed; discretion; icsc decision; judicial review; limits;

1, 2, 3 | next >


 
Last updated: 02.07.2020 ^ top