Reorganisation (383,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Reorganisation
Total judgments found: 85
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
Judgment 3276
116th Session, 2014
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants unsuccessfully impugn the reclassification of their posts following the reform of the Staff Regulations, which allegedly deprives them of any career advancement.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; post classification; reorganisation;
Judgment 3275
116th Session, 2014
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the reclassification of their posts as inadequate, not equivalent to their former positions and depriving them of any career advancement.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; en banc review; plenary judgment; post classification; reorganisation;
Judgment 3274
116th Session, 2014
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complaint about a post reclassification resulting from an administrative reform was dismissed by the Tribunal.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; post classification; reorganisation;
Considerations 10-11
Extract:
It must be recalled that the Tribunal is not competent to review the advisability or merits of the changes which Eurocontrol has introduced in its staff management, for they form part of general employment policy which an organisation is free to pursue in accordance with its general interests (see Judgment 3225, under 6).
Contrary to the complainant’s submissions, the new job classification system does not, however, deprive him of his prospects of career advancement within Eurocontrol. He can still be promoted in either of the circumstances outlined above. Moreover, the complainant has produced no evidence that he would have been entitled to promotion when the change in his job title and grade was adopted. It was, however, only on this condition that the Director General would have had a duty to review the grade assigned to him subject to the particular conditions laid down by Article 6 of Rule of Application No. 35, after obtaining the opinion of the Committee in charge of job management monitoring.
The complainant considers that he should have been assigned the generic post of Service Manager or Senior Manager in a higher career bracket which, in his opinion, ought at all events to have led to his promotion to grade A*12. This is what he requested, without success, in his internal complaint of 27 September 2010. The classification of posts necessarily involves the exercise of a value judgement as to the nature and extent of the duties and responsibilities pertaining to the posts. Accordingly, the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment or direct a new assessment unless certain grounds are established. Save when the impugned decision was taken without authority or shows some procedural or formal flaw, the Tribunal will interfere with the decision only if it is based on a mistake of fact or of law, overlooks some material fact, is an abuse of authority, or draws a clearly mistaken conclusion from the facts (see Judgments 1281, under 2, and 3016, under 7). It is therefore understandable that the complainant relies only on errors of judgement and the overlooking of material facts when a comparison was made of his respective powers and tasks in his old and new posts.
The complainant’s arguments are not sufficient to convince the Tribunal that the disputed classification decision is tainted with the flaws which he alleges. He has not established that when Eurocontrol transposed grades it should have promoted him to a higher grade on account of his work and experience.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1281, 3016, 3225
Keywords:
post classification; reclassification; reorganisation;
Judgment 3238
115th Session, 2013
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the decision to terminate their appointments due to the abolition of their posts following a restructuring.
Consideration 7
Extract:
Precedent has it that in order to achieve greater efficiency or to make budgetary savings international organisations may undertake restructuring entailing the redefinition of posts and staff reductions (see, for example, Judgments 2156, under 8, or 2510, under 10). However, each and every individual decision adopted in the context of such restructuring must respect all the pertinent legal rules and in particular the fundamental rights of the staff concerned (see, for example, Judgments 1614, under 3, or 2907, under 13).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1614, 2156, 2510, 2907
Keywords:
organisation's duties; reorganisation;
Judgment 3234
115th Session, 2013
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully impugned the decision to abolish his post following a restructuring.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reorganisation;
Judgment 3189
114th Session, 2013
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants unsuccessfully challenge their placement in the new grade structure following the entry into force of the administrative reform at Eurocontrol.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; grade; reorganisation;
Judgment 3170
114th Session, 2013
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant alleges that she was the victim of harassment and that the investigation thereon was flawed.
Judgment keywords
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3010, 3131
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; harassment; inquiry; investigation; reorganisation; termination of employment;
Judgment 3169
114th Session, 2013
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his contract following the abolition of his post, which, in his view, was not taken by the competent body.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; complaint allowed; reorganisation; termination of employment;
Judgment 3127
113th Session, 2012
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
abolition of post; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reorganisation;
Judgment 3010
111th Session, 2011
World Trade Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"[T]he restructured service is independent of the [Organization], has a new and different focus and has resulted in a significant reduction in cost, all of which make it impossible to accept the complainant's argument that the restructuring was not in the Organization's interest and did not result in budget efficiency. In these circumstances, it is to be concluded that the restructuring was genuine and not simply 'a pretext for dislodging undesirable staff' (see Judgment 1231, under 26)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1231
Keywords:
organisation's interest; reduction of salary; reorganisation; staff reduction;
Judgment 2975
110th Session, 2011
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"It is well established in the case law that decisions taken in relation to restructuring and the reclassification of posts within an Organization's structure are 'within the discretion of the organisation and may be set aside only on limited grounds [...] for example, if the competent bodies breached procedural rules, or if they acted on some wrong principle, overlooked some material fact or reached a clearly wrong conclusion' (see Judgment 2807, under 5)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2807
Keywords:
discretion; judicial review; post classification; reorganisation;
Judgment 2972
110th Session, 2011
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"[A]n international organisation 'necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts,[...] and the redeployment of staff' (see Judgment 2510, under 10). The notion of redeployment is apt to include not only assignment to different posts, but also the assignment of new or different shift work patterns."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; assignment; other; post; reorganisation; working conditions; working hours;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"Once it is accepted that an organisation has a right to assign new or different shift work patterns, it follows that a particular shift work pattern cannot constitute an acquired right."
Keywords:
acquired right; assignment; organisation; reorganisation; right; working conditions; working hours;
Judgment 2907
108th Session, 2010
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"According to the Tribunal's case law, international organisations may undertake restructuring by reducing or reassigning their staff, even for the sole purpose of making budgetary savings (see, for example, Judgment 2156, under 8). However, each and every individual decision adopted in the context of such restructuring must respect all the pertinent legal rules and in particular the fundamental rights of the staff concerned."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2156
Keywords:
budgetary reasons; case law; consequence; due process; implied decision; official; organisation; organisation's duties; reassignment; reorganisation; right; staff reduction; written rule;
Judgment 2902
108th Session, 2010
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"The Tribunal finds that by any standards a delay of nearly 19 months to complete the internal appeal process is unreasonable."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; internal appeal; non-renewal of contract; project personnel; reasonable time; reorganisation; time limit;
Considerations 6, 8 and 10
Extract:
The complainant impugns the decision not to renew his appointment following a restructuring which entailed the abolition of his post.
"[T]he question remains as to whether restructuring was the real reason for the decision not to renew the complainant's appointment. [...]
Although the record supports the Organization's assertion that a restructuring has occurred, it does not reflect that a decision to restructure and a decision regarding the abolition of specific posts had been taken [before] the complainant was informed that a recommendation to restructure had been approved and that new staffing requirements meant that his post and others would be abolished. [...]
[T]he decision not to renew the complainant's appointment must be set aside."
Keywords:
abolition of post; evidence; non-renewal of contract; project personnel; reorganisation;
Consideration 11
Extract:
"[T]he complainant contends that UNIDO's failure to conduct a performance appraisal before deciding not to renew his appointment constitutes a breach of procedure and a breach of his terms of employment as his letters of appointment stated that he would be evaluated on a yearly basis. [...] The defendant argues that since the non-renewal of the appointment was not based on performance, it is irrelevant whether a performance appraisal was or was not conducted. The Tribunal rejects this argument. UNIDO had a contractual obligation to conduct yearly performance appraisals. International organisations routinely require applicants for positions to provide at least their most recent performance appraisal from a prior employer. UNIDO's failure to provide the complainant with an appraisal has deprived him of the use of a critical tool in his search for future employment."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; non-renewal of contract; performance report; project personnel; reorganisation; status of complainant;
Consideration 10
Extract:
"[T]he decision not to renew the complainant's appointment must be set aside. However, the evidence does indicate that restructuring was being contemplated and has in fact occurred. In these circumstances, reinstatement is not an appropriate remedy. Rather, the complainant is entitled to be paid the salary and other allowances he would have received had his appointment been renewed for six months, together with interest [...]."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; judicial review; non-renewal of contract; project personnel; reinstatement; reorganisation;
Considerations 12 and 14
Extract:
"The complainant argues that the Organization breached its duty of care in failing to accommodate him in another post or in a manner less drastic than the non-renewal of his appointment. [...]
The Organization had no obligation under the 200 Series of the Staff Rules to find an alternative post for the complainant. However, it had a duty to explore with him possible options prior to his separation. The failure to do so was an affront to his dignity and showed a lack of respect for him as a highly regarded long-serving staff member."
Keywords:
abolition of post; compensation; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; project personnel; reassignment; reorganisation; respect for dignity; seniority; staff regulations and rules; status of complainant;
Judgment 2885
108th Session, 2010
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"[I]t is convenient to note that there is a "misuse of authority where an administration acts for reasons that are extraneous to the organisation's best interests and seeks some objective other than those which the authority vested in it is intended to serve" (see Judgment 1129, under 8). It may be accepted that it is a misuse of authority if a post is abolished in order to circumvent the relevant procedures applicable in the case of unsatisfactory performance. Even so, "misuse of authority may not be presumed and the burden of proof is on the party that pleads it" (see Judgment 2116, under 4)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1129, 2116
Keywords:
abolition of post; abuse of power; grounds; misuse of authority; organisation's interest; reassignment; reorganisation;
Judgment 2861
107th Session, 2009
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 27
Extract:
"[I]t must be taken to be normal practice in any international organisation to involve the Chief of a Section or Department in plans for its reorganisation. Not to do so would, ordinarily, constitute a serious failure to respect the dignity of that person."
Keywords:
organisation's duties; reorganisation; respect for dignity;
Judgment 2856
107th Session, 2009
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 11 and 13
Extract:
"At the outset, the complainant's grievance was in relation to his appointment, as a result of restructuring, to [a] position [...] at grade P.3. Although the complainant has advanced a number of arguments in support of his complaint, at this juncture, he holds a post at grade P.4 and throughout the material time he has retained his personal P.4 grade. [T]he central issue is whether there is merit to the complainant's contention that he should have been placed in a «genuine P.4 position»."
"The fundamental flaw in the complainant's position is that he has not adduced any evidence that he had the specific knowledge and skills required to function in a «genuine P.4 position» within the Organization¿s new Oracle-based system. [...] As well, not only has he not adduced any evidence to show that he has the requisite knowledge and skills to work in an Oracle-based system, the evidence shows that he had difficulty performing a number of tasks attributed to his new position."
Keywords:
abolition of post; evidence; lack of evidence; qualifications; reassignment; reorganisation; status of complainant;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"[I]t is useful to recall, as stated in Judgment 2510, under 10, that «an international organisation necessarily has power to restructure some or all of its departments or units, including by the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts and the redeployment of staff (see Judgments 269 and 1614)»."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1614, 2510
Keywords:
abolition of post; discretion; reassignment; reorganisation;
Consideration 9
Extract:
"As the Tribunal pointed out in Judgment 1131, under 5, «[i]t may not supplant an organisation's view with its own on such matters as a restructuring of posts or redeployment of staff intended to make savings or improve efficiencies». Decisions on them are discretionary and the Tribunal's power of review in this respect is limited."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131
Keywords:
abolition of post; creation of post; discretion; judicial review; limits; reassignment; reorganisation;
Judgment 2830
107th Session, 2009
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant's appointment was terminated following a reorganisation.
"The Tribunal finds that the Organization has not shown that it actually did its utmost to find a post matching the complainant's qualifications. Furthermore, before simply terminating his appointment, the Organization ought to have ascertained whether he was prepared to accept a post at a lower grade to that which he had previously held (see Judgment 1782, under 11). It was not up to the complainant to prove that he was able to remain in the Organization's service in some capacity; it was up to the Organization to prove the contrary."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1782
Keywords:
burden of proof; condition; grade; lack of evidence; organisation's duties; post; qualifications; reassignment; reorganisation; termination of employment;
Judgment 2817
107th Session, 2009
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant impugns the decision to remove him from his functions following the reorganisation of the department in which he was employed.
"[There] are a number of matters pointing to the conclusion that the [impugned] decision was taken in bad faith. First, there is the fact that [...] there was no restructuring relevant to the complainant's post, although there was then a proposal to that effect. Further, no discussions were then held with the complainant with respect to the restructuring of [his] Department; he was not informed in a timely manner that the restructuring proposal had been replaced with another proposal [...] - a fact that was not disclosed to the Headquarters Board of Appeal by the Organization. No answer was given to his letter of 1 March 2006 and none to a subsequent letter of 28 August 2006 [...]."
Keywords:
good faith; reassignment; reorganisation;
Judgment 2802
106th Session, 2009
Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"Restructuring is, itself, an objective and valid ground for the abolition of a post, provided that it is a genuine restructuring and is not motivated by extraneous considerations such as bias or ill will towards the incumbent of the post."
Keywords:
abolition of post; bias; decision; grounds; post; reorganisation;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
|
