Downgrading (263,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Downgrading
Total judgments found: 27

< previous | 1, 2

• Judgment 809

  
  61st Session, 1987
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR

  Consideration 20

  Extract:

  "[The] posts and the grade they carried were such that the decision was tantamount to a sanction. An organisation is bound to show due regard to the dignity and good name of its staff".

  Keywords:

  assignment; downgrading; grade; hidden disciplinary measure; moral injury; organisation's duties; post; professional injury; respect for dignity; transfer;
  

  
  
  

• 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;
  

  Consideration 35

  Extract:

  The Tribunal finds downgrading of function and prejudice. "The complainant has sustained moral damage in that he has been denied the satisfaction of continuing to work in a job of high interest and responsibility which he had himself helped to create and been relegated to a position of lower responsibility and declining importance. This should be marked by a moderate award of money."

  Keywords:

  downgrading; moral injury;
  

  Consideration 25

  Extract:

  "It was not a proposal to reassign but an immediate and unconditional decision to reassign made irrespective of whether or not the Director-General would permit the retention of the P.6 grade on a personal basis. Such a decision could lawfully be made only on the ground of the complainant's unsatisfactory performance or misconduct." In breach of the applicable rules, the decision was given without reasons and taken without having given the complainant an opportunity to reply. The decision must be regarded as a demotion.

  Keywords:

  downgrading; grounds; transfer;
  

  Consideration 34

  Extract:

  The Tribunal finds downgrading of function and prejudice. The complainant asks that he be reassigned to a post "fully commensurate with his grade, experience and abilities: or [...] that he should be placed on [...] leave with pay until such time as a suitable post became available. The Tribunal considers this solution to be appropriate. The Tribunal would find it difficult to believe that such a post either at WHO headquarters or elsewhere could not be found for a man in the early fifties with an unbroken record of achievement in the service of the organization for nearly twenty years."

  Keywords:

  bias; downgrading; transfer;
  

  
  
  

• 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 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 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(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