Grade (262,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Grade
Total judgments found: 81
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
Judgment 739
58th Session, 1986
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
In 1984, after the President of the Office adopted new rules to take account of the Tribunal's case law, the complainant was awarded a further step in his grade and additional seniority. He is asking that the impugned decision take effect not as from 1 January 1984 as called for by the new rules but as from 1 June 1982, the date when he took up his appointment. The plea fails. The Tribunal observes that, far from discriminating, the impugned decision corrects an existing element of inequality and if there remains inequality it is due to the terms of the complainant's appointment, which were not challenged within the prescribed time limits.
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; appointment; date; effective date; enforcement; equal treatment; grade; professional experience; provision; reckoning; seniority; step;
Judgment 657
55th Session, 1985
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
The wording of the relevant guidelines "is such that they cannot be treated as a mere statement of policy: they set objective criteria for dealing with individual cases."
Keywords:
administrative instruction; appointment; binding character; criteria; general decision; grade; promotion; step;
Judgment 631
54th Session, 1984
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 27
Extract:
The Staff Rule on reduction in grade is applicable: it is not concerned with the personal grade of the staff member but with the grade of the post. "The Tribunal agrees that the decision was in substance a demotion. This follows almost automatically from the fact that it was a transfer from a P.6 to a P.5 post with lower responsibility. [...] To be diminished in responsibility and effectiveness can be just as hurtful as to be lowered in grade."
Keywords:
assignment; downgrading; grade; post; transfer;
Consideration 28
Extract:
The complainant retains his P.6 grade on a personal basis, but is transferred, without reasons having been given, to a P.5 post. The Tribunal regards this as downgrading of function. "There is [...] much to be said for the argument that, whether or not there is a specific provision in the Staff Rules, as a matter of contractual obligation the administration ought not to take a decision injuriously affecting a staff member's career without first, as a matter of natural justice, giving him the reasons for the decision and getting his response."
Keywords:
downgrading; duty to substantiate decision; grade; organisation's duties; post; professional injury; transfer;
Judgment 568
51st Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
When the organisation [EPO] was created, it had to recruit a large staff; "when fixing the initial grade, [it had] to take into account experience gained, first in patent offices and, second, in industry generally. [...] The organisation distinguishes between the first and second categories. [...] In the opinion of the Tribunal the distinction is not unreal and the complainant has not shown any breach of [the principle of equality of treatment]."
Keywords:
appointment; difference; equal treatment; grade; professional experience;
Judgment 564
51st Session, 1983
International Labour Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant was eliminated from a competition. Another candidate was selected: "It is no breach of any provision of the Staff Regulations to promote someone who has been in his previous grade for only a year. It is immaterial whether that is common practice or not."
Keywords:
condition; grade; practice; promotion; seniority;
Judgment 545
50th Session, 1983
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
On taking up duty, the complainant knew that he would be in grade B.4, which he would hold until reaching the age of 30, even though his post was normally graded B.5. By accepting the appointment and unconditionally starting work, he clearly indicated his acceptance of the terms of appointment as offered. To apply some few months later for review of the terms of appointment was to go against the organisation's "reasonable expectation and to act in breach of the principle of good faith, and his application was correctly rejected for that reason."
Keywords:
acceptance; appointment; good faith; grade; terms of appointment;
Judgment 425
45th Session, 1980
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations 4 and 6
Extract:
The Tribunal decides that the complainants are entitled to be graded at the higher grade provided for in a post description and which reflects their actual duties. These descriptions, which are provisional, are binding on the organisation until amended. The organisation may review the post descriptions and return the complainants to their present grade. "Such a decision would not impair their acquired rights since they are not entitled to preserve the position arising under this judgment."
Keywords:
acquired right; amendment to the rules; grade; organisation's duties; post classification; post description;
Judgment 411
44th Session, 1980
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
"The obligation of the organization [...] is to do all that is practicable to see that a staff member is given work and responsibility appropriate to his grade."
Keywords:
assignment; grade; organisation's duties;
Judgment 371
42nd Session, 1979
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
Neither the former Staff Regulations of the Institute nor the complainant's terms of appointment give him an acquired right to any particular grade. The complainant has not been deprived of the right to payment of the agreed compensatory allowance. He performs the same duties that he performed formerly at the Institute; he has no acquired right to application of the method of salary adjustment that was practised at the Institute.
Keywords:
acquired right; adjustment; grade; reckoning; salary;
Judgment 294
38th Session, 1977
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 8
Extract:
At issue is a new salary schedule with additional steps in the complainant's grade. "The Director-General was right in thinking that the rule could not be interpreted in a way that would equalise the effect of the change. Where he was wrong was in thinking that he had neither the power nor the duty to equalise the effect of the change by some other means consistent with the principle that the object of the salary scale is to reward length of service and experience. [...] The change [...] required some transitional provision to cover exceptional cases and it was the duty of the Director-General to make such provision."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; enforcement; equal treatment; grade; increment; right; salary; scale; seniority; top step;
Consideration 8
Extract:
The complainant reached the highest step in her grade some years ago. An amendment was adopted introducing three new steps in her grade. She should obtain the successive increments on the date at which she fulfilled the requisite conditions. The Director-General should take steps to ensure that a) the complainant is treated as if at the time the modification was implemented she had been at step XIV for a period of five months and b) each intervener is treated in the same way, according to length of service.
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; date; effective date; enforcement; grade; increment; staff regulations and rules; top step;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"While grades are distinguishable from one another by a difference in the nature of the duties performed and in the degree of responsibility undertaken, steps within grades are not similarly distinguishable. In fact, the increment is simply a way of rewarding seniority and [...] experience [...]."
Keywords:
difference; grade; purpose; step;
Judgment 252
34th Session, 1975
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary
Extract:
The complainant contends that his functions should be assigned to the next grade up. The Tribunal, having examined the matter in detail comparing the post descriptions and statutory definitions of the two grades in question ["messenger" and "doorkeeper"], holds that the complainant's argument is unfounded and that the Director-General did not exceed or abuse his discretionary authority. The complaint is dismissed.
Keywords:
discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Consideration 1
Extract:
"It is for the competent body and in the last resort the Director-General to grade each staff member. Certain criteria have to be followed. [...] Further, the competent body will not base its grading exclusively on the text of the [Regulations] and post description, but will also consider the qualifications and degree of responsibility required by each."
Keywords:
criteria; discretion; grade; post classification; post description;
Judgment 233
32nd Session, 1974
Pan American Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
The purpose of the applicable provision is to ensure that on promotion to a higher grade the staff member receives an increase in salary of a certain amount. "The minimum is fixed as the amount he or she would have received if the promotion, instead of being to a higher grade, had been to the next highest step in the old grade. The language of the rule assumes that there will be a step in the new grade which will carry with it a salary high enough for this purpose."
Keywords:
consequence; grade; increase; promotion; right; salary; step;
Judgment 228
32nd Session, 1974
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 3
Extract:
After working under a P.5 contract, the complainant accepted a P.4 mission on condition that his post would be upgraded to P.5. The organization had clearly informed him that the upgrading of his post would depend on the results of an administrative procedure; "it could not promise and had in fact never promised any positive outcome"; it "kept the complainant informed of the steps taken under the procedure and of developments. [The complainant] cannot therefore properly contend that the organization showed bad faith towards him."
Keywords:
acceptance; amendment to the rules; condition; contract; downgrading; good faith; grade; offer; post classification; promise; promotion;
Consideration 3
Extract:
After holding a P.5 contract, the complainant was offered a P.4 mission. The appointment was "a new one and quite distinct from those he had previously held. His appointment at a lower grade cannot be assimilated to downgrading in the absence of any special circumstances."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; contract; downgrading; grade; offer;
Judgment 208
30th Session, 1973
Universal Postal Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 6
Extract:
"At the time of his appointment the complainant was subject to the old grading standards. His position was therefore different from that of staff members recruited in accordance with the new standards. Thus, since he was not in the same position as those staff members, the complainant did not suffer any discrimination in relation to them."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; equal treatment; grade; post classification; provision; seniority; staff regulations and rules; terms of appointment;
Judgment 190
28th Session, 1972
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he offer made to the complainant by the organization of a new contract involving appointment to a P.4 post [...] at a salary substantially equivalent to his previous salary did not imply any demotion, entailing as it did the conclusion of a new contract. To avoid incurring the injury for which he has claimed compensation, the complainant could have accepted that offer, which in the circumstances of the case appeared to be a reasonable one."
Keywords:
amendment to the rules; complainant; contract; downgrading; fixed-term; grade; non-renewal of contract; offer; refusal; salary;
Judgment 178
26th Session, 1971
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he grading of each post is based exclusively on objective criteria. [Whilst] the present incumbent of the post [...] has qualifications superior to the standards required for the post which she accepted on the understanding that it would be upgraded [and] while this fact must leave her with an understandable grievance, it affords no legal basis for the upgrading which she claims."
Keywords:
discretion; grade; post classification; post description; qualifications;
Considerations
Extract:
The Secretary-General, in the exercise of his discretionary power, "determine[s] and then grade[s] the posts held by staff members. Consequently, the Administrative Tribunal, which has before it an appeal against a decision of those authorities grading a specific job, may interfere with that decision only if [etc.]."
Keywords:
discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Considerations
Extract:
The complainant maintains that she accepted the post only on the promise that it would shortly be graded G.6 and that the job description was marked "proposed G.6". But the complainant, who relies on mere promises or proposals, cannot claim any right to have her post regraded G.6. in the course of the general review of the grading of posts to align the organisation's classifications with those of the United Nations, the Secretary-General was "not bound by any prior legal obligation towards the complainant."
Keywords:
good faith; grade; organisation's duties; post classification; post description; promise; promotion; terms of appointment;
Judgment 153
23rd Session, 1970
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Considerations
Extract:
"In the opinion of the Tribunal, an assessment of what amounts to an increase in duties and responsibilities sufficient to entitle the holder of a post to a higher grade or pay-level cannot be made simply by comparing one list of tasks with another."
Keywords:
grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Considerations
Extract:
"[T]he Tribunal will neither substitute its own assessment for that of the Director-General nor direct that a new assessment be made. In taking this view the Tribunal acts in accordance with the well-established principle that it does not review a decision of this sort unless [...]."
Keywords:
discretion; grade; judicial review; post classification;
Judgment 133
21st Session, 1969
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 5
Extract:
"The organization cannot claim to have discharged its responsibilities by offering [the] complainant a post in grade P.1/P.2 [...] even if [he] had continued to receive his P.3 salary, the duties attached to the post were of a lower grade than those he had formerly performed. He was therefore justified in refusing the offer."
Keywords:
abolition of post; complainant; downgrading; grade; organisation's duties; reassignment; refusal;
Judgment 126
20th Session, 1968
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 4
Extract:
"[W]hile as a general rule employees in a given grade must be assigned to work normally done by members of that grade, it is within the discretion of the Director-General, provided that there is no change in the grade or reduction in salary, nor any lowering of the dignity of the persons concerned, to assign them to work done by lower-grade employees if the needs of the service so require".
Keywords:
assignment; discretion; downgrading; grade; limits; organisation's duties; organisation's interest; respect for dignity; salary; transfer;
Judgment 60
10th Session, 1962
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration II 2(B)
Extract:
The Tribunal has carried out a detailed comparison of the tasks assigned to the complainant with those established by the classification plan. "If the organization made a mistake [...] it was not in describing complainant as a budget clerk but in placing her in grade M.4. In fact, the complainant belonged to grade M.5."
Keywords:
grade; judicial review; post classification; post description;
Consideration II 2(C)
Extract:
The Tribunal holds that the organization made a mistake in placing the complainant, a budget clerk, in grade M.4. "In fact, the complainant belonged to grade M.5 [...]. Under the new classification plan [...], the complainant was [...] downgraded, and the effects of this change on her salary must be determined."
Keywords:
consequence; downgrading; flaw; grade; post classification; reduction of salary; salary;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | next >
|
