Règles de l'organisation (771,-666)

Votre recherche:
Mots-clés: Règles de l'organisation
Jugements trouvés: 6

• Jugement 4856

  
  138e session, 2024
  Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture
  Extraits: EN, FR
  Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN, FR
  Synthèse: The complainant impugns the decision to dismiss him for misconduct.

  Considérant 4

  Extrait:

  [T]he FAO/WFP’s regulatory framework prohibits a staff member from engaging in any political activities or being a candidate for a public office of a political character. WFP Human Resources (HR) Manual Section I.2.2.3 relevantly states that staff members wishing to submit their candidacy for a public office, provided that it is not political in nature, must obtain prior authorization from the Executive Director. This section however refers to Staff Regulation 301.1.7, which states that any staff member who becomes a candidate for public office of a political character, while still employed with the WFP, shall resign from the Organization. This makes it obvious that a staff member’s participation in such political activity is inimical to the interest of the WFP and is strictly forbidden. Notably, the Tribunal has stated, in Judgment 1061, consideration 5, that the reason for the provision in Staff Regulation 301.1.7 is that an international civil servant, though entitled to hold his own political views, must stand aloof from demonstrations of adherence to a political party and that integrity, loyalty to the international civil service, independence and impartiality are the standards required of an international civil servant and they require him or her to keep clear of involvement in national party politics.

  Référence(s)

  Jugement(s) TAOIT: 1061
  

  Mots-clés:

  Activités politiques; Activités privées; Conflit d'intérêts; Intérêt de l'organisation; Obligations du fonctionnaire; Principes de la fonction publique internationale; Règles de l'organisation;
  

  
  
  

• Jugement 4840

  
  138e session, 2024
  Organisation internationale pour les migrations
  Extraits: EN, FR
  Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN, FR
  Synthèse: The complainant contests the decision not to renew her fixed-term contract due to underperformance after placing her on a three-month Performance Improvement Plan.

  Considérant 10

  Extrait:

  [A]n international organization must comply with the procedures it has established for evaluating performance before deciding to terminate or not to renew a contract for unsatisfactory performance. In Judgment 4666, consideration 4, the Tribunal aptly stated the following in this respect:
  “An examination of a staff member’s assessment report before taking any decision not to renew that person’s contract on the basis of unsatisfactory performance is a fundamental obligation, non-compliance with which constitutes a procedural flaw that has the effect of an essential fact being overlooked (see, in particular, Judgments 2992, consideration 18, 2096, consideration 13, and the case law cited therein).”
  In Judgment 3417, also involving IOM, this principle was enunciated in no uncertain terms at consideration 6:
  “However while there is an undoubted right of an organisation to decide not to renew a fixed-term contract, it does not follow that an organisation is, additionally, immune from any liability if it has failed to follow its own procedures designed to monitor, assess and evaluate staff performance and progress. The fundamental purpose of such procedures is to explicitly alert a staff member to identified deficiencies in her or his performance and thus give the staff member an opportunity to address those deficiencies and improve performance. The interaction of such procedures and decisions not to renew fixed-term contracts was discussed by the Tribunal in Judgment 2991, under 13:
  ‘It is a general principle of international civil service law that there must be a valid reason for any decision not to renew a fixed-term contract. If the reason given is the unsatisfactory nature of the performance of the staff member concerned, who is entitled to be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his or her service, the organisation must base its decision on an assessment of that person’s work carried out in compliance with previously established rules [...].’”
  This is entirely consistent with the related principle to the effect that an organization cannot base an adverse decision on a staff member’s unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance (see, for example, Judgments 3932, consideration 21, and 3252, consideration 8, and the case law cited therein).

  Référence(s)

  Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2096, 2991, 2992, 3252, 3417, 3932, 4666
  

  Mots-clés:

  Application des règles de procédure; Durée déterminée; Evaluation; Non-renouvellement de contrat; Obligation de motiver une décision; Patere legem; Règles de l'organisation; Services insatisfaisants; Violation;
  

  Considérant 18

  Extrait:

  [I]n the process leading up to the 6 October 2019 decision that ended up being confirmed by the impugned decision, IOM breached Rule 1.2.2(b) and Instruction IN/181 by not undertaking in due course the required periodic appraisal of the complainant’s work. The leap to the PIP was, in this sense, premature and a breach of due process, as much as a failure to adhere to explicit organizational rules.

  Mots-clés:

  Application des règles de procédure; Evaluation; Patere legem; Performance; Rapport d'appréciation; Règles de l'organisation; Violation;
  

  Considérant 29

  Extrait:

  Firm and constant precedent has it that an international organization has a duty to provide valid reasons for a decision not to renew a fixed-term contract. For example, in Judgment 4503, consideration 7, the Tribunal stated the following in support of this principle:
  “Even though an organization is generally under no obligation to extend a fixed-term contract or to reassign someone whose fixed-term contract is expiring, unless it is specifically provided by a provision in the staff rules or regulations, the reason for the non-renewal must be valid (and not an excuse to get rid of a staff member) and be notified within a reasonable time (see Judgments 1128, consideration 2, 1154, consideration 4, 1983, consideration 6, 2406, consideration 14, 3353, consideration 15, 3582, consideration 9, 3586, consideration 10, 3626, consideration 12, and 3769, consideration 7).
  An international organization is under an obligation to consider whether or not it is in its interests to renew a contract and to make a decision accordingly: though such a decision is discretionary, it cannot be arbitrary or irrational; there must be a good reason for it and the reason must be given (see Judgment 1128, consideration 2).”
  In Judgment 3586, consideration 6, the Tribunal further clarified that “[t]hese grounds of review are applicable notwithstanding that the Tribunal has consistently stated, in Judgment 3444, [consideration] 3, for example, that an employee who is in the service of an international organization on a fixed-term contract does not have a right to the renewal of the contract when it expires and the complainant’s terms of appointment contained a similar provision”.

  Référence(s)

  Jugement(s) TAOIT: 1128, 3444, 3586, 4503
  

  Mots-clés:

  Application des règles de procédure; Durée déterminée; Evaluation; Non-renouvellement de contrat; Obligation de motiver une décision; Patere legem; Règles de l'organisation; Services insatisfaisants; Violation;
  

  Considérant 20

  Extrait:

  [A]s a result, the complainant was ultimately not provided with a full three months to improve her performance, even though it was initially determined by the organization that this was the necessary period established for improvement. In addition, while the draft PIP contemplated holding meetings every two weeks, in the end only four meetings took place to discuss the complainant’s PIP (24 July, 28 August, 4 September and 6 October 2019). And while the complainant was told at the 4 September meeting that her fixed-term contract would be renewed for six months, at the 6 October meeting that followed, she was rather notified of the non-renewal of that fixed-term contract beyond its expiry on 31 October 2019 because of the alleged sudden deterioration of her performance after mid-September.
  It follows that, on this basis alone, the PIP process was irregular and procedurally flawed, as was the subsequent decision not to renew the complainant’s contract based on the results of that PIP.

  Mots-clés:

  Application des règles de procédure; Evaluation; Patere legem; Performance; Rapport d'appréciation; Règles de l'organisation; Services insatisfaisants; Violation;
  

  Considérants 23-24

  Extrait:

  [T]he CoM thus failed to give the complainant reasonable time to improve her performance between the time that he recognized that it had improved sufficiently enough to warrant a longer contract renewal and the last-minute reversal of this view that led to the sudden imposition of the decision of non-renewal.
  In this regard, the Tribunal considers that the Organization breached its duty to act in good faith by failing to provide adequate time for the complainant to improve her performance. The Tribunal recalls its well-settled case law that in terms of alleged unsatisfactory performance, a staff member should not only be warned but also given an opportunity to improve and correct the alleged poor or unsatisfactory performance. In Judgment 3282, consideration 5, it stated the following in this respect:
  “As in Judgment 2916, under 4, the Tribunal holds that ‘an organisation may not in good faith end someone’s appointment for poor performance without first warning him and giving him an opportunity to do better [...]. Moreover, it cannot base an adverse decision on a staff member’s unsatisfactory performance if it has not complied with the rules established to evaluate that performance [...].’”
  Similarly, in Judgment 3026, consideration 8, the Tribunal recalled that “[a]n opportunity to improve requires not only that the staff member be made aware of the matters requiring improvement, but, also, that he or she be given a reasonable time for that improvement to occur”.

  Référence(s)

  Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2916, 3026, 3282
  

  Mots-clés:

  Application des règles de procédure; Appréciation des services; Avertissement; Evaluation; Non-renouvellement de contrat; Patere legem; Performance; Rapport d'appréciation; Règles de l'organisation; Services insatisfaisants; Violation;
  

  Mots-clés du jugement

  Mots-clés:

  Admission partielle; Application des règles de procédure; Durée déterminée; Evaluation; Non-renouvellement de contrat; Obligation de motiver une décision; Patere legem; Requête admise; Règles de l'organisation; Services insatisfaisants; Violation;
  

  
  
  

• Jugement 4746

  
  137e session, 2024
  Organisation internationale pour les migrations
  Extraits: EN, FR
  Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN, FR
  Synthèse: La requérante conteste la décision de classer sa plainte pour harcèlement à l’issue d’une évaluation préliminaire et sans mener d’enquête.

  Considérant 10

  Extrait:

  [L]e Tribunal estime que [le Bureau de l'Inspecteur général] a effectué un examen approfondi du dossier volumineux que l’intéressée lui a soumis et qu’il a réalisé une analyse détaillée de ses allégations. La conclusion de l’OIG selon laquelle la plainte pour harcèlement de la requérante devait être classée était fondée sur les résultats de son évaluation préliminaire, à savoir qu’«il n’y avait pas de preuve suffisante à première vue de harcèlement, d’abus de pouvoir, de représailles ou de toute autre faute». Lorsqu’il a conclu que la plainte devait être classée parce qu’il n’y avait pas de preuve suffisante à première vue, [le Bureau de l'Inspecteur général] a agi conformément au pouvoir qui était le sien et en totale conformité avec les dispositions des directives relatives aux enquêtes [du Bureau de l'Inspecteur général].
  

  Mots-clés:

  Enquête; Organe d'enquête; Règles de l'organisation;
  

  
  
  

• Jugement 4233

  
  129e session, 2020
  Office international des épizooties
  Extraits: EN, FR
  Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN, FR
  Synthèse: Le requérant conteste la décision de ne pas l’indemniser au titre du préjudice qui lui aurait été causé par le harcèlement moral dont il prétend avoir été victime.

  Considérant 2

  Extrait:

  Il est de jurisprudence constante qu’une organisation internationale a, à l’égard de ses fonctionnaires, le devoir d’enquêter de façon approfondie et objective sur des allégations de harcèlement (voir, par exemple, les jugements 3071, au considérant 36, 3314, au considérant 14, 3337, au considérant 11, et 4013, au considérant 10). Cette obligation s’impose à l’OIE, même en l’absence de procédure particulière prévue par les textes en vigueur en cas de plainte pour harcèlement. Il serait d’ailleurs souhaitable que l’Organisation comble cette lacune et institue une telle procédure en s’inspirant éventuellement de celles qui existent dans la plupart des organisations internationales et de la jurisprudence du Tribunal.

  Référence(s)

  Jugement(s) TAOIT: 3071, 3314, 3337, 4013
  

  Mots-clés:

  Enquête; Enquête; Harcèlement; Règles de l'organisation;
  

  
  
  

• Jugement 3365

  
  118e session, 2014
  Organisation mondiale de la santé
  Extraits: EN, FR
  Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN, FR
  Synthèse: Le requérant attaque la décision rejetant sa plainte pour harcèlement et déni de justice.

  Considérant 15

  Extrait:

  La politique sur la prévention du harcèlement à l’OMS, entrée en vigueur le 7 septembre 2010, prévoit en son paragraphe 8.5 que, «lorsque le CRA ou le CAS est saisi d’un appel contenant une allégation de harcèlement […], il statue sur ce volet de l’appel conformément à son Règlement intérieur».
  En outre, l’addendum provisoire du 22 novembre 2010 au Règlement intérieur du CAS (révision no 1) était une mesure provisoire qui devait s’appliquer jusqu’à ce que le CAS adapte son Règlement intérieur à la politique sur la prévention du harcèlement.
  Cet addendum prévoyait que, lorsque le CAS est saisi d’un appel qui inclut une allégation de harcèlement, le Comité soumet cet aspect de l’appel au directeur de l’IOS et suspend l’examen de l’appel en attendant de recevoir la décision finale du Directeur général à ce sujet. À la réception de la décision du Directeur général (laquelle comprend, le cas échéant, le rapport de l’IOS), le CAS reprend l’examen de l’appel originel. Le Comité «sera guidé» par la décision du Directeur général pour l’aspect de l’appel qui concerne le harcèlement.

  Mots-clés:

  Harcèlement; Règles de l'organisation;
  

  
  
  

• Jugement 3240

  
  115e session, 2013
  Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture
  Extraits: EN, FR
  Texte Intégral Du Jugement: EN, FR
  Synthèse: Le Tribunal a condamné l’Organisation pour manquement au respect de ses propres règles sur l’évaluation du travail et les périodes probatoires.

  Mots-clés du jugement

  Mots-clés:

  Annulation de la décision; Evaluation; Période probatoire; Requête admise; Règles de l'organisation;