Duty of care (645,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Duty of care
Total judgments found: 137
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
Judgment 3917
125th Session, 2018
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his continuing appointment pursuant to the abolition of his post.
Consideration 6
Extract:
The Tribunal recalls that when an organization has to abolish a position occupied by a staff member holding a continuous appointment, it has a duty to do all that it can to reassign that person, as a matter of priority, to another post matching her or his abilities and grade. The staff member in question may therefore claim to be appointed to any vacant post which she or he is capable of filling in a competent manner, regardless of the qualifications of the other candidates (see Judgment 133). If the attempt to find such a post proves fruitless, it is up to the organisation, if the staff member concerned agrees, to try to place her or him in duties at a lower grade and to widen its search accordingly (see Judgments 1782, under 11, 2830, under 9, and 3755, under 6).
The written submissions show that the complainant’s qualifications and professional experience made him eligible for assignment to three vacant posts. The fact that numerous posts at AFRO were abolished is not in itself a valid reason for not reassigning the complainant.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 133, 1782, 2830, 3755
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; reorganisation;
Judgment 3916
125th Session, 2018
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his fixed-term appointment pursuant to the abolition of his post.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The Tribunal notes that the record, including the report of the HBA, shows that the GRC recommended that the complainant not be reassigned because his retirement date was less than three years away. Furthermore, it rejected his candidature for a two-year appointment without explanation. Therefore, WHO breached the duty of care it owed to the complainant.
Keywords:
duty of care; reassignment;
Judgment 3900
125th Session, 2018
Centre for the Development of Enterprise
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her contract owing to the closure of the CDE and the terms and conditions of that termination.
Consideration 4
Extract:
As the Tribunal has consistently held, “[w]hen an organisation has to abolish a position occupied by a staff member holding a continuous appointment, it [...] has a duty to do all that it can to reassign that person as a matter of priority to another post matching his or her abilities and grade.” (See Judgment 3755, under 6.) This possibility must be explored before a decision is taken to abolish a post (see Judgments 2294, under 9, 3169, under 10 and 13, and 3238, under 13) and it is up to the organisation to prove that it has made every possible effort to reassign the staff member (see Judgments 2830, under 9, 3169, under 14, 3238, under 14, and 3755, under 19).
[...] As the institution was on the point of ceasing to exist, there could be no question of reassigning the complainant to another post within it. The Centre cannot therefore be criticised for not exploring that avenue.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2294, 2830, 3169, 3238, 3755
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; permanent appointment; reorganisation;
Consideration 8
Extract:
By refusing to contemplate the slightest possibility of CDE staff members being employed in the new structure, and by even going so far as to oppose that option at a time when the nature of the new structure was still undefined, the Director-Curator breached the duty of care which an international organisation owes to its staff.
Keywords:
duty of care; reorganisation;
Judgment 3887
124th Session, 2017
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to dismiss him, for misconduct, with immediate effect and with reduction of pension entitlements.
Consideration 13
Extract:
The complainant’s refusal to fulfill his obligations with regard to his work as an examiner is well-established. However, the President’s decision to dismiss the complainant under Article 93(2)(f) of the Service Regulations is vitiated by the fact that neither the President, nor the Disciplinary Committee could have made a proper assessment of the allegations without taking into account whether the complainant acted intentionally, and in control of his faculties, or if the complainant suffered from a mental illness that prevented him from behaving in accordance with his obligations as a permanent employee.
Keywords:
disciplinary measure; duty of care; health reasons; intention of parties; misconduct; termination of employment; termination of employment for health reasons;
Judgment 3878
124th Session, 2017
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to reimburse him for his FAO-derived income taxes, interest charges and penalties paid to the United States tax authorities.
Consideration 16
Extract:
Having regard to the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules and the relevant Administrative Circulars, it is clear that the FAO has a duty of care towards it staff members stemming from its obligations in relation to the reimbursement of income tax. However, the duty of care does not extend to the obligations resting exclusively with the staff member for the filing of tax returns, making tax payments when due, and complying with applicable income tax laws. Further, as stated in the rules and relevant Administrative Circulars, the duty of care does not extend to providing advice or assistance in relation to these staff member responsibilities.
Keywords:
duty of care; tax;
Judgment 3866
124th Session, 2017
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to confirm her appointment at the end of her probationary period.
Consideration 10
Extract:
[A] warning that would be given at a meeting at which other colleagues were present would constitute a serious breach of the obligation to treat an employee with dignity and respect.
Keywords:
duty of care;
Judgment 3865
124th Session, 2017
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment due to the redundancy of her post.
Consideration 13
Extract:
Ordinarily it could not be expected that the Head, HR, would act on rumour, particularly if it was known to be wrong. But this was a situation where a staff member was about to be separated from the organization because her position had been abolished and where [...] the Global Fund was under an obligation to do all it could to reassign an official whose position had been abolished. At the very least, what the complainant said about Mr N. should have resulted in the Head, HR, making some enquiries [...].
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care;
Judgment 3861
124th Session, 2017
International Criminal Court
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the refusal to grant her flexible working arrangements during the breastfeeding period.
Consideration 9
Extract:
In Judgment 3024, under 12, the Tribunal recalled that the principle of good faith and the concomitant duty of care demand that international organisations treat their staff with due consideration in order to avoid causing them undue injury; an employer must consequently inform officials in advance of any action that may imperil their rights or harm their rightful interests (see Judgment 2768, under 4).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2768, 3024
Keywords:
duty of care; duty to inform; good faith; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;
Judgment 3853
124th Session, 2017
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his contract on the grounds of unsatisfactory service.
Consideration 8
Extract:
[I]f the O[rganisation] intended to terminate his contract for reasons of unsatisfactory service, [the complainant] should have been informed either through a negative performance appraisal report or precise warnings that his service had to improve (see, for example, Judgments 1872, consideration 9, 3224, consideration 7, and 3252, consideration 8). This is a manifestation of the duty of an organisation to act in good faith towards its staff (see, for example, Judgment 3613, consideration 27).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1872, 3224, 3252, 3613
Keywords:
duty of care; performance report;
Judgment 3845
124th Session, 2017
African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment at the end of his probationary period.
Consideration 8
Extract:
The Tribunal has consistently found that an organisation which employs staff members on a probationary basis must not only provide guidance, instructions and advice on carrying out duties; it must also set objectives for such staff members so that they know what criteria will be used to appraise their performance. It must, in good time and in clear language, inform a staff member of any aspects of her or his performance that are deemed unsatisfactory and warn her or him of the risk of dismissal after the probationary period so that both parties can take appropriate steps to remedy the situation sufficiently early. These requirements flow from the general principles applicable in international civil service law, in particular the principle of good faith, the duty of care and the employer’s duty to respect the dignity of its employees (see Judgments 3481, under 6 and 7, 3482, under 11, and 3678, under 2).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3481, 3482, 3678
Keywords:
duty of care; good faith; probationary period;
Judgment 3840
124th Session, 2017
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to renew his fixed-term contract.
Consideration 12
Extract:
[T]his is not a case where [the Organization] has failed in its duty of care towards the complainant to help him exercise his appeal rights (see, for example, Judgments 2345, consideration 1, 2713, consideration 3, and 3754, consideration 11).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2345, 2713, 3754
Keywords:
duty of care;
Judgment 3755
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his continuing appointment owing to the abolition of his position.
Consideration 6
Extract:
While it is true that international organisations have the right to restructure their operations, abolish posts if necessary and consequently terminate the appointment of their staff members who are affected by the planned restructuring (see Judgment 1854, under 10), they cannot simply terminate their appointment – at least not if they hold an appointment of indeterminate duration – without first taking suitable steps to find them alternative employment (see, for example, Judgments 269, under 2, 1745, under 7, 2207, under 9, and 3238, under 10).
When an organisation has to abolish a position occupied by a staff member holding a continuous appointment, it therefore has a duty to do all that it can to reassign that person, as a matter of priority, to another post matching his or her abilities and grade. The staff member in question may therefore claim to be appointed to any vacant post which she or he is capable of filling in a competent manner, regardless of the qualifications of the other candidates (see Judgment 133). If the attempt to find such a post proves fruitless, it is up to the organisation, if the staff member concerned agrees, to try to place her or him in duties at a lower grade and to widen its search accordingly (see Judgments 1782, under 11, and 2830, under 9).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 133, 269, 1745, 1782, 1854, 2207, 2830, 3238
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; reorganisation;
Consideration 19
Extract:
[B]efore terminating [the complainant's] appointment, WHO should have ascertained whether he was prepared to accept a post at a grade lower than that of the position which he had held previously (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 (see Judgment 2830, under 9, in fine).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1782, 2830
Keywords:
burden of proof; duty of care; termination of employment;
Judgment 3754
123rd Session, 2017
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, a former WHO staff member, challenges the decision to terminate his continuing appointment pursuant to the abolition of his post.
Consideration 16
Extract:
The loss of employment by the abolition of a post can be particularly acute for a person who has been employed by the one organisation for a very lengthy period and is of advancing years. It could be all the more acute if the area or field of employment has a significant technological component in which the technology is evolving continuously. At a high-level of generality, an organisation’s duty has, in relation to reassignment an official whose post has been abolished, been described as “[doing] its utmost to find a post matching the complainant’s qualifications” (see Judgment 2830, consideration 9), or “[doing] all that it can” to reassign the official (see Judgment 3437, consideration 6).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2830, 3437
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care; reassignment;
Judgment 3727
123rd Session, 2017
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant, whose post was abolished following a restructuring exercise, challenges the new final decision taken by the Secretary General pursuant to Judgment 3208.
Consideration 15
Extract:
What the Federation does not do in its pleas and evidence is to demonstrate that it corresponded or otherwise communicated with the complainant about specific available positions encouraging the complainant to apply for or pursue them or to demonstrate that, at the time, it undertook any sort of analysis of positions which might, at least potentially, have been positions to which the complainant might be transferred as contemplated by Article 11.3.2 of the Staff Regulations. It was not sufficient for the Federation to take the approach, as it apparently did, that it was incumbent on the complainant to identify other positions for which he might be suitable and then apply for those positions. The Federation bore the onus of showing the complainant was not able to remain in the Federation’s service in some capacity (see Judgment 2830, consideration 9). A much more active role was required of the Federation in circumstances where a long-serving member of staff towards the end of his career was facing the prospect of his employment being terminated because of redundancy. The Federation’s obligations have been described as requiring it to do “its utmost to find [an official facing redundancy] a post which matched his skills and level of responsibility” [...] (see Judgment 2090, consideration 7). The Federation failed in its duty towards the complainant and, in this respect, the complainant is entitled to moral damages.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2090, 2830
Keywords:
abolition of post; burden of proof; duty of care; moral injury; reassignment; respect for dignity;
Judgment 3689
122nd Session, 2016
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contends that he contracted onchocerciasis, a parasitic disease which may eventually lead to blindness, during the performance of his duties as a collector of insects that are vectors of the disease, in Côte d’Ivoire under WHO’s Onchocerciasis Control Programme.
Consideration 5
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal recalls that international organizations have a duty to adopt appropriate measures to protect the health and ensure the safety of their staff members (see Judgments 3025, under 2, and 2403, under 16). An organization which disregards this duty is therefore liable to pay damages to the staff member concerned.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2403, 3025
Keywords:
duty of care; moral injury;
Judgment 3688
122nd Session, 2016
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to abolish her post and to separate her from service.
Consideration 23
Extract:
WHO breached its duty of care to the complainant by abolishing her post while at the same time recruiting someone to fill the P-4 position the duties of which the complainant was qualified to undertake.
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care;
Consideration 27
Extract:
WHO appreciated the long established principle that an international organization owes a duty of care to an employee whose post is abolished to consider that person for other posts for which that person is qualified.
Keywords:
abolition of post; duty of care;
Judgment 3674
122nd Session, 2016
Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to confirm his appointment at the end of his probation period.
Consideration 5
Extract:
By informing the complainant [...] that he could not file an appeal with the Administrative Committee under [...] Article 58, OTIF therefore misled him as to his right to avail himself of the means of redress that were open to him under the Staff Regulations.
Keywords:
duty of care; internal appeal;
Judgment 3613
121st Session, 2016
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his employment for alleged unsatisfactory performance, the Global Fund’s refusal to retract a News Release published on the date of the termination of his employment, and the decision to maintain the News Release on the Fund’s website and its refusal to award compensation for excessive publication, defamation and continued breach of privacy.
Consideration 46
Extract:
It is well established in the Tribunal’s case law that “international organisations are bound to refrain from any type of conduct that may harm the dignity or reputation of their staff members” (Judgment 2861, under 91; see also Judgments 396, 1875, 2371, 2475 and 2720).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 396, 1875, 2371, 2475, 2720
Keywords:
duty of care; organisation's duties; respect for dignity;
Judgment 3586
121st Session, 2016
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to extend his fixed-term appointment.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; due process; duty of care; equity; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract;
Judgment 3510
120th Session, 2015
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant objects to the excessive length of the process of obtaining a visa for his wife’s adopted daughter.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; duty of care; reasonable time; visa;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 | next >
|
