Grade (262,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Grade
Total judgments found: 81
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
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 2819
107th Session, 2009
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
"As the transfer decision did not respect the complainant's dignity, the Tribunal will order that the complainant be reassigned, within 28 days, to a post that satisfies the core requirement of a grade A6 post, namely, the running of a prominent organisational unit covering several specialised fields, and that the decision of 22 December 2005 be quashed with effect from the date of his reassignment to the new post."
Keywords:
compensatory measure; grade; order; post; respect for dignity; terms of appointment; transfer; working conditions;
Consideration 8
Extract:
"It is well settled that a transfer decision, if of a nondisciplinary nature, «must show due regard, in both form and substance, for the dignity of the official concerned, particularly by providing him with work of the same level as that which he performed in his previous post and matching his qualifications» (see Judgment 2229, under 3(a)). Given that the new tasks of the complainant involve none of the tasks specified in the Service Regulations for a grade A6 post, it must be concluded that the transfer did not respect his dignity. There are two other matters that indicate a lack of respect for the complainant's dignity. First, there is the Vice- President's e-mail of 9 January 2006 that was transmitted to all other Principal Directors in his Directorate and that clearly impugned the complainant's ability to perform his functions as head of the Joint Cluster Computers. [...] There was no need to justify the decision to the complainant's peers and the e-mail could only lessen his standing in their eyes. The second matter is that the complainant was not provided with any staff - not even a secretary."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2229
Keywords:
grade; post; respect for dignity; status of complainant; terms of appointment; transfer; working conditions;
Judgment 2807
106th Session, 2009
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not undertake an exercise to classify or reclassify posts in an organisation's structure [...], since decisions in this sphere lie within the discretion of the organisation and may be set aside only on limited grounds. Such is the case, 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 [...]. In the absence of such grounds, the Tribunal will not remit the case to the organisation, nor will it substitute its own post evaluation for that of the competent bodies [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2151, 2514, 2581
Keywords:
case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; flaw; grade; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; post classification; post held by the complainant;
Judgment 2770
106th Session, 2009
World Intellectual Property Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 16
Extract:
"Considerations of fairness and justice apply to merit promotions as well as to promotions resulting from reclassification."
Keywords:
equity; grade; personal promotion; post classification; promotion;
Judgment 2742
105th Session, 2008
World Meteorological Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 41
Extract:
The complainant contests the decision to reassign her to the post of Chief of the Internal Audit Service (IAS) and asks to be reinstated in her former post. "Although the decision to reassign the complainant to the post of Chief of IAS was taken without authority, it does not follow that she should be reinstated in her former post. That post was lawfully abolished [...]. However, she is entitled to substantial damages notwithstanding that her reassignment was to a post at the same grade."
Keywords:
abolition of post; consequence; decision; grade; material damages; post; procedural flaw; reassignment; reinstatement; request by a party;
Judgment 2535
101st Session, 2006
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 14
Extract:
"In the complainant's case, the post he was assigned to [...] was classified as P-5 as of 9 September 1999. [...] However, apparently because the budget did not provide funds for the post until January 2000, he was not in fact promoted until 1 March 2000. The lack of budgetary provision is not a reason which can be validly invoked by an international organisation to deny a staff member a promotion to which he or she would otherwise have a right and to deny him or her the salary which is commensurate with the duties of the post occupied."
Keywords:
budgetary reasons; date; delay; effect; grade; organisation's duties; post; promotion; refusal; right; salary;
Judgment 2514
100th Session, 2006
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 13
Extract:
"The Tribunal has consistently held that it is for the competent body and, in the last resort, the executive head of the relevant organisation to grade staff members following an exercise involving the making of value judgements as to the nature and extent of the duties and responsibilities of the post. Accordingly, the Tribunal will only substitute its own assessment or direct a new assessment if it is shown, for example, that the competent body acted on some wrong principle or overlooked some material fact or reached a clearly wrong conclusion (see Judgments 594, 1067, 1152, 1281 and 1495)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 594, 1067, 1152, 1281, 1495
Keywords:
case law; discretion; disregard of essential fact; executive head; grade; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; mistaken conclusion; post classification; post description;
Judgment 2490
100th Session, 2006
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"[T]he executive head of an organisation has discretionary authority not only to promote someone from one grade to another but also to say what place he shall hold in his new grade (see Judgment 313, under 3)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 313
Keywords:
discretion; executive head; grade; official; organisation; promotion;
Judgment 2356
97th Session, 2004
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
"[T]he payment of [a] special post allowance [...] is meant to financially reward a staff member for carrying out duties of a higher-level post, and the complainant is mistaken when she equates the payment with a positive assessment of her work."
Keywords:
definition; grade; official; payment; post; purpose; satisfactory service; special post allowance; work appraisal;
Consideration 16
Extract:
The complainant claims damages for the injury resulting from the inclusion in her personnel file of a memorandum bearing negative remarks about her performance. "While there is no evidence whatsoever to support the complainant's claim that she was humiliated and that her future career prospects were adversely affected by this memorandum, the fact remains that the Appeals Committee found, and the Director-General accepted, that the document should be removed from her file. That necessarily implies an acceptance by the Organization that it had acted wrongly in putting it there in the first place. This entitles her to a nominal award of moral damages which the Tribunal evaluates at 500 euros."
Keywords:
acceptance; advisory opinion; breach; career; claim; executive head; general service category; grade; injury; internal appeals body; lack of evidence; moral injury; official; personal file; request by a party; respect for dignity; right; supervisor; unsatisfactory service;
Judgment 2354
97th Session, 2004
World Customs Organization (Customs Co-operation Council)
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 6-7
Extract:
The complainant's post as a translator was abolished and his appointment was terminated. "According to the [applicable] provisions, the Secretary General was obliged to consult the Staff Committee before terminating [an] appointment. The Tribunal considers that this obligation to consult - which must not be seen as just an unnecessary formality, even though the Secretary General is not bound by the opinion of the advisory body - is not fulfilled unless the advisory body is in such a position that it can give an opinion independently and in full knowledge of the facts, which implies that it must be provided with all the information it needs, and especially the real reasons for the proposed measure, so that it can express an objective opinion. [...] While it emerges from the submissions that the general reasons for reducing the number of translators had been brought to the attention of the Staff Committee, it has not been established that the latter had been given the specific reasons for suppressing the complainant's post, rather than that of another official of the same grade and in the same Directorate, prior to delivering its opinion. [...] In the Tribunal's view, this lack of precise information concerning the specific reason for the decision to suppress the complainant's post in particular and to terminate his appointment invalidated the consultation provided for in [the applicable provisions], which is tantamount to saying that no consultation took place."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Staff Regulation 12(a), Staff Rule 12.1(a) and Staff Circular No. 142
Keywords:
abolition of post; advisory body; advisory opinion; binding character; condition; consequence; decision; due process; duty to inform; executive head; flaw; grade; grounds; independence; lack of evidence; official; organisation's duties; post held by the complainant; provision; staff reduction; staff regulations and rules; termination of employment; written rule;
Judgment 2299
96th Session, 2004
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"It is not for the Tribunal to appoint the complainant either to the post he applied for or to a specific grade, as he requests."
Keywords:
appointment; claim; competence of tribunal; competition; grade; iloat; post;
Judgment 2229
95th Session, 2003
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3(a)
Extract:
"A transfer of a non-disciplinary nature is subject to the general principles governing all decisions affecting an official's status. It must show due regard, in both form and substance, for the dignity of the official concerned, particularly by providing him with work of the same level as that which he performed in his previous post and matching his qualifications (see, for example, Judgments 1496, 1556, 1972 [...]). The transfer may be motivated by the need to eliminate tensions compromising the functioning of a department (see, for example, Judgments 132, 1018 and 1972)."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 132, 1018, 1496, 1556, 1972
Keywords:
assignment; case law; decision; discontinuance; effect; formal requirements; general principle; grade; grounds; official; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; post; post held by the complainant; respect for dignity; status of complainant; transfer; working relations;
Judgment 2151
93rd Session, 2002
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
"The Tribunal will not undertake a job classification exercise, which lies solely within the authority of the defendant. However, the succession of errors made in this case, as acknowledged both by the Classification Review Committee and the [Organisation] itself, leaves room for serious doubts concerning the objectivity of the rationale for the classifications that are being challenged. [...] The Tribunal finds that the complainants must not suffer any injury from the Organisation's impossibility to reconstitute the elements on which the classification was made. [The Tribunal] has to assess the effects of the errors committed and of the [Organisation]'s inability to indicate precisely the methods followed by the consultant in his recommendation to maintain the complainants' posts at [the same] grade."
Keywords:
complainant; consequence; flaw; grade; injury; judicial review; limits; mistake of fact; negligence; post; post classification; post held by the complainant;
Judgment 2076
91st Session, 2001
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 10
Extract:
The complainant was promoted with retroactive effect. "The complainant claims interest on the amounts the organization owes him. [Since it] agreed to promote him to G.5 with retroactive effect to 1 September 1997 [...] it should have paid him each month from that date the salary and entitlements corresponding to grade G.5. He is therefore entitled to interest, which the Tribunal sets at 8 per cent a year on those monthly earnings from each due date as from 1 September 1997."
Keywords:
date; debt; effective date; grade; interest on damages; promotion; request by a party; salary; tribunal;
Judgment 2053
91st Session, 2001
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant was on leave without pay for a period of 2 years and 8 months. There being no suitable post at the end of this period, this leave was extended for another 2 years. "What the complainant asked for [at the date of her reintegration] was the recalculation of her reckonable experience and her grade; in other words she was seeking promotion as a result of experience gained while on unpaid leave. Promotion is carefully regulated under Article 49 [of the Service Regulations]. This article provides for six different types of promotion, but there is no provision for promotion for having gained additional experience while on leave. Nor is there provision for any recalculation of the calculation made on recruitment. This claim fails."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: ARTICLE 49 OF THE SERVICE REGULATIONS
Keywords:
grade; professional experience; promotion; reckoning; special leave; staff regulations and rules;
Judgment 2027
90th Session, 2001
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 12
Extract:
"A quantitative difference in duties rather than a difference in their nature or intrinsic importance is not a decisive criterion on which to base a difference in grade between two officials who perform exactly the same duties."
Keywords:
criteria; difference; grade; official; post; post classification; post description;
Judgment 2018
90th Session, 2001
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 15
Extract:
The decision not to confirm the complainant's appointment after a probationary period and to terminate his employment prior to the expiry of his fixed-term contract is quashed. "The complainant is entitled to be reinstated in his post or in one of an equivalent grade with full salary and benefits (including any salary increases which he would have received if he had not been terminated) to the end of his fixed-term appointment."
Keywords:
allowance; condition; contract; date; fixed-term; grade; increase; post; post held by the complainant; probationary period; reconstruction of career; refusal; reinstatement; right; salary; termination of employment;
Judgment 1854
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 15, 17 and 18
Extract:
The post of the complainant (employed on a permanent contract) was abolished and replaced by a new one of higher level, the functions of which however remained substantially similar to those of the previous post. "By changing the requirements [the organisation] manifested its desire to have those functions performed by a person with higher academic or professional qualifications, but it does not prove that the complainant, who had twenty-eight years of experience with the [organisation], was unable to perform them. [T]he complainant has [...] shown that, prima facie, the functions of the new post were substantially similar to his post, and within his capabilities [...] on the other hand, the [organisation] has failed to prove that the new post did have greater responsibilities; or that it was higher in grade than the old one; or that its greater responsibilities were recognised by way of higher remuneration. [I]n the circumstances, the Tribunal holds that there was no genuine suppression of the complainant's post, and that the termination of his contract was caused mainly by an unjustified loss of confidence in him by the administrator."
Keywords:
abolition of post; contract; grade; permanent appointment; post; professional experience; training;
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; reclassification; work appraisal;
Judgment 1804
86th Session, 1999
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 12-14
Extract:
The promotion of Mr C., presented as the fulfilment of a promise made to him on recruitment, gave rise to a decision adopted on 7 December 1994. "Only that decision was notified to the staff. So the complainants, who were unaware of the promise, were in good faith in challenging the promotion on the grounds that it was in breach of the Rule it actually cited. So they were right in saying that Mr C. had been promoted to A4 even though he did not fully qualify under the [relevant] rules [...]. Because of the unusual circumstances in which Mr C. was promoted the complainants were also right to challenge the decision: the [Organization] had on the face of it failed to observe the general principle of equal treatment because in promoting Mr C. it did not abide by the requirements of the Service Regulations or by the criteria for promotion to which the complainants were themselves subject. The conclusion is that the complainants did suffer moral injury and each of them is entitled under that head to [compensation]".
Keywords:
appointment; breach; cause of action; condition; decision; equal treatment; general principle; good faith; grade; injury; moral injury; promise; promotion; staff regulations and rules;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
|
