Abolition of post (379, 380, 381, 382, 649, 383,-666)

You searched for:
Keywords: Abolition of post
Total judgments found: 173

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >

• Judgment 4848

  
  138th Session, 2024
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests WIPO’s decisions (i) to advertise his post; (ii) to organise a selection process to fill his post; (iii) not to appoint him to the post without competition; (iv) to renew his fixed-term appointment for three months only; (v) to restructure his division; and (vi) to modify/redefine his post.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint dismissed; difference; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; organisation's duties; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; staff member's interest; title of post;
  

  Consideration 12

  Extract:

  The Tribunal is satisfied that there is no manifest error in the Appeal Board’s finding and conclusion that there was a material difference between the duties and responsibilities of the newly created position (Director of CMD) and those of the original position (Director of CID) as a result of the redefined organizational context, warranting advertising for the post of Director of CMD. Therefore, the Director General’s decision to extend the complainant’s contract by three months only in the soon to be abolished position of Director of CID was taken in proper exercise of his discretion.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; difference; discretion; duration of appointment; extension of contract; manifest error; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; title of post;
  

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  The other and related decisions apparent from the letter of 31 January 2018 were the decisions to offer the complainant a three-month extension of his fixed-term appointment and to advertise the position of Director of the (about to be created) CMD. In his pleas, the complainant challenges the creation of this position contending, amongst other things, it was not materially different to the position he then formally occupied and was the product of a reorganisation which was illusory rather than substantial. It is unnecessary to repeat the various ways this is put by the complainant. However, mention should be made of a submission, which is tantamount to an allegation that the reorganisation was not a bona fide exercise of an undoubtedly wide discretionary power the executive head of an international organisation has to institute administrative and other structural changes within the organisation with consequential effects on existing posts, including their redefinition or abolition (see, for example, Judgments 4599, considerations 11 and 12, 4353, consideration 7, 3238, consideration 7, and 3169, consideration 7). This is, in substance, an allegation of bad faith. However, bad faith may not be presumed, and the burden of proof is on the party that pleads it (see Judgments 4682, consideration 3, 4353, consideration 12, and 2800, consideration 21). In the present case, there is not a scintilla of evidence that the reorganisation decision did not involve a bona fide exercise of the wide discretionary power of the executive head. This plea is unfounded.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2800, 3169, 3238, 4353, 4599, 4682
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; bad faith; burden of proof; difference; discretion; duration of appointment; extension of contract; fixed-term; post description; renewal of contrat; reorganisation; title of post;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4845

  
  138th Session, 2024
  International Criminal Police Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: Le requérant conteste la décision de résilier son engagement par suite de la suppression de son poste.

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  Dans son jugement 4844 […], le Tribunal a annulé la décision de la directrice de la gestion des ressources humaines […] ayant supprimé le poste du requérant et celle du Secrétaire général […] ayant confirmé cette dernière à l’issue de la procédure de recours interne. Cette annulation a pour effet de rendre également illégales, par voie de conséquence, la décision […] portant résiliation de l’engagement de l’intéressé pour absence de possibilité de réaffectation de ce dernier […].

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4844
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4844

  
  138th Session, 2024
  International Criminal Police Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: Le requérant conteste la décision de supprimer son poste.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; reorganisation;
  

  Consideration 3

  Extract:

  En vertu d’une jurisprudence constante du Tribunal, une décision relative à la restructuration des services d’une organisation internationale, telle qu’une suppression de poste, relève du pouvoir d’appréciation du chef exécutif de celle-ci et ne peut faire l’objet, en conséquence, que d’un contrôle restreint. Il appartient cependant au Tribunal de vérifier si cette décision a été prise dans le respect des règles de compétence, de forme et de procédure, si elle ne repose pas sur une erreur de fait ou de droit, si elle n’est pas entachée de détournement de pouvoir et si son auteur n’a pas omis de tenir compte de faits essentiels ou tiré du dossier des conclusions manifestement erronées (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4139, au considérant 2, 4099, au considérant 3, 3582, au considérant 6, 2933, au considérant 10, 2510, au considérant 10, et 1131, au considérant 5).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1131, 2510, 2933, 3582, 4099, 4139
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; discretion; reorganisation; role of the tribunal;
  

  Considerations 6 and 8

  Extract:

  La défenderesse soutient […] que la distinction entre la décision de suppression de poste et celle, postérieure, de la résiliation d’engagement par suite de cette suppression serait artificielle. […]
  Mais […] il s’agit là de décisions distinctes, dont l’une n’est pas la conséquence nécessaire de l’autre et qui, en principe, n’interviennent d’ailleurs pas simultanément.
  […]
  Dans la mesure où la décision de suppression de poste n’entraîne pas, par elle-même, la résiliation d’engagement, le Tribunal n’allouera pas de dommages-intérêts pour tort matériel à raison de cette annulation.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4841

  
  138th Session, 2024
  International Organization for Migration
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish the post she used to hold and not to renew her contract beyond 31 December 2020.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; non-renewal of contract;
  

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  The Tribunal’s case law has often reiterated that a staff member appointed on a fixed-term contract does not have a right to the renewal of the contract, when it expires (see, for example, Judgments 4587, consideration 19, 4462, consideration 18, 3586, consideration 6, and 3448, consideration 7). As a result, the Tribunal’s scope of review is limited when an organization decides not to extend or renew a fixed-term appointment because the Tribunal respects an organization’s discretion to determine its own requirements and the career prospects of staff (see, for example, Judgment 3948, consideration 2, and the case law cited therein). Thus, the Tribunal will not substitute its own assessment for that of the organization. The non-renewal of a fixed-term contract may be lawfully justified by the abolition of the post in the context of a restructuring process, provided that the abolition of the post be based on objective and valid grounds, as the abolition of a post must not serve as a pretext for removing unwanted staff, which would constitute an abuse of authority (see Judgment 3940, consideration 3). A restructuring decision must be justified by real needs (see Judgment 4009, consideration 15). An international organization may find that it has to reorganise some or all of its departments or units. Restructuring measures may naturally entail the abolition of posts, the creation of new posts or the redeployment of staff. The steps to be taken in this respect are a matter of an organization’s discretion and are subject to only limited review by the Tribunal (see Judgments 4004, consideration 2, and 3940, consideration 3).
  In brief, decisions concerning the non-renewal of a fixed-term contract, the abolition of a post, and/or a restructuring process, are discretionary decisions subject to limited review by the Tribunal. Non-renewal decisions may be set aside only if they were taken in breach of a rule of form or procedure; if they rest upon an error of fact or of law; if some essential fact was overlooked; if there was an abuse or misuse of authority; or if clearly mistaken conclusions were drawn from the evidence (see, for example, Judgment 3299, consideration 6). In turn, restructuring decisions, including the abolition of posts, may be set aside only if they are not taken in accordance with the relevant rules on competence, form or procedure, if they rest upon a mistake of fact or law, or if they constituted an abuse of authority. The Tribunal will not rule on the appropriateness of the restructuring, as it will not substitute the organization’s view with its own (see, for example, Judgments 4004, consideration 2, 2933, consideration 10, and 2742, consideration 34).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2742, 2933, 3448, 3586, 3940, 3948, 4004, 4009, 4462, 4587
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; judicial review; non-renewal of contract;
  

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  Judgment 3908 stated that:
  “[...] [T]he Tribunal has long recognised the right of an international organisation to restructure and abolish positions [...] This will imperil the continuing employment of the occupants of those abolished positions. However, a concomitant of that right to abolish positions is an obligation to deal fairly with the staff who occupy those abolished positions. That extends to finding, if they exist, other positions within the organisation for which those staff have the experience and qualifications.”
  This principle has been expressed in a different factual situation, namely in cases of anticipated termination of an appointment due to the abolition of a post (see also, in addition to Judgment 3908, Judgments 4094, consideration 4, and 4036, considerations 6 to 8), not in a case of non-renewal of a contract, as the present one. In another case of non-renewal in connection to the abolition of a post, the Tribunal held that the Organization “was obliged to explore with the complainant other employment options prior to his separation”, but it did so having regard to the specific circumstances of the case, where the complainant had been “employed on a series of short-term appointments for much of the complainant’s employment [...] [b]ut […] nonetheless had worked, in a real and practical sense, for over a decade and a half in the service of the Organization”, that is, more than 15 years […] (see Judgment 3159, consideration 20; see also Judgments 4654, consideration 20, and 2902, consideration 14).
  In the present case, the Organization was not bound by any specific provision to identify an alternative post. Where the non-renewal of a fixed-term contract is justified, the direct reassignment of the staff member to another adequate post, if it exists, is not mandatory. […] of staff members is intrinsically linked to the duration of the specific projects for which they are engaged, and the availability of funding for the positions that they occupy”. However, as noted above and consistent with its duty of care, the Organization placed the complainant on special leave without pay after the expiry of her fixed-term contract […] to enable her to apply to post vacancies within IOM as an internal candidate.
  The Organization also explored, albeit to no avail, other employment options for the complainant. The evidence in the file shows that the Organization made serious efforts and attempts in this respect, on multiple occasions. Namely, the complainant was encouraged to contact the Head of Talent Management for assistance, to update her personal history form, and to apply for any vacancies for which she considered herself to be qualified. The Head, Talent Management, maintained regular contact with the complainant regarding her preferences and the post vacancies to which she had applied, which included “consistent follow-up communication with management in Missions and Regional Offices” to support her candidacy.
  As a result, the Tribunal cannot conclude that IOM violated its duty of care towards the complainant. To this extent, it is not sufficient […] to demonstrate that she was unsuccessful in applying for a range of positions.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902, 3159, 3908, 4036, 4094, 4654
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; reassignment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4834

  
  138th Session, 2024
  International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the non-extension of his fixed-term appointment.

  Consideration 4

  Extract:

  As the Federation points out, and the facts make clear, the complainant’s position was never abolished but could no longer be funded, and consequently his contract was not extended. The Tribunal has stated, in consideration 11 of Judgment 4231, for example, that ordinarily, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, an organization’s duty to reassign a staff member arises when a post is abolished. As there is no specific provision to the contrary, the Federation had no obligation to reassign the complainant.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4231
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; organisation's duties; reassignment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4819

  
  138th Session, 2024
  European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: Le requérant conteste la décision de le mettre en «congé administratif» par suite d’une réorganisation structurelle de l’Agence Eurocontrol, secrétariat de l’Organisation, ayant engendré la suppressionde ses fonctions et le lancement d’un processus de réaffectation, ainsi que la décision de rejeter ses allégations de harcèlement moral.

  Consideration 8

  Extract:

  S’agissant toujours des décisions qui lui ont été notifiées le 5 juillet 2019, le requérant considère, en deuxième lieu, qu’elles reposeraient sur des motifs fallacieux. En effet, la réorganisation dite substantielle qu’aurait subie la Division NTS que dirigeait l’intéressé ne serait que purement fictive, ses fonctions n’auraient en réalité pas été supprimées, ainsi que cela lui avait été indiqué lors de la réunion du 5 juillet 2019, et aucun autre membre du personnel de sa division n’aurait été réellement désavantagé par la mise en place de la nouvelle Division Technologie. Il considère de même que, en aucun cas, une réorganisation devant être finalisée en septembre 2019 ne pouvait donner lieu à la suppression de ses fonctions décidée dès le 5 juillet 2019, soit plus de trois mois auparavant. Dans ces conditions, le requérant estime qu’il n’a jamais été mis en mesure de connaître les véritables motifs qui ont présidé à la suppression de ses fonctions, ce qu’ont par ailleurs relevé à l’unanimité les membres de la Commission paritaire des litiges. L’intéressé conteste à cet égard point par point les divers motifs qui sont, tour à tour, invoqués par Eurocontrol, que ce soit dans les décisions du 5 juillet 2019 ou dans ses écritures devant le Tribunal, et relève à cet égard une contradiction dans les motifs successivement indiqués par l’Organisation.
  Le Tribunal constate que, dans le mémorandum de la chef de l’Unité des ressources humaines et services notifié au requérant le 5 juillet 2019, il a, dans un premier temps, été fait état de ce que, à la suite de la réorganisation de l’Agence, la Division NTS allait disparaître, de même que les fonctions actuelles de l’intéressé. Dans un deuxième temps, il a été indiqué, dans un courriel du 8 août 2019, qu’à la suite du regroupement de toutes les activités informatiques de l’Agence, la fonction de chef de la nouvelle Division Technologie était devenue une fonction substantiellement différente de celle de chef de la Division NTS, du fait notamment que cette nouvelle division atteignait environ trois fois la taille de l’ancienne Division NTS. Enfin, dans un troisième temps, l’Agence a fait valoir que les changements organisationnels effectués en son sein nécessitaient de nouvelles compétences pour les postes managériaux, tandis que le style de «leadership» souhaité et requis par le Directeur général ne correspondait plus au profil du requérant, qui était plus un expert technique qu’un «leader».
  Ainsi, les justifications précises données au sujet des différentes décisions notifiées au requérant le 5 juillet 2019 ont évolué dans le temps, au fur et à mesure des critiques formulées par l’intéressé. L’on est ainsi passé d’une suppression pure et simple de ses fonctions à une modification substantielle des fonctions à exercer et, enfin, à une modification du style de «leadership» exigé de la part des titulaires de postes managériaux. Cela est d’autant plus regrettable que le requérant a clairement fait valoir, sans être contredit à ce sujet par Eurocontrol, d’une part, qu’il avait dirigé, de 2014 à 2017, la Division NTS, qui comptait déjà environ 150 membres du personnel et au sein de laquelle l’ensemble des services informatiques de l’Agence étaient regroupés avant qu’il ne soit décidé de les scinder et, en juillet 2019, de les regrouper à nouveau, et, d’autre part, que ses divers rapports d’évaluation, notamment ceux portant sur cette période, avaient toujours été très positifs, notamment en ce qui concerne sa capacité de «leadership».
  Il s’ensuit que les divers motifs sur lesquels sont censés reposer lesdites décisions ne peuvent être considérés comme valables et suffisants au sens de la jurisprudence du Tribunal (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4467, au considérant 7, 4108, au considérant 3, et 1817, au considérant 7).
  Le moyen ainsi soulevé est, en conséquence, fondé.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1817, 4108, 4467
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; motivation; motivation of final decision; reorganisation;
  

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  À titre liminaire, il convient de rappeler qu’il est de jurisprudence constante que les décisions relatives à la restructuration d’une organisation internationale, y compris en matière de suppression de poste, relèvent du pouvoir d’appréciation du chef exécutif de celle-ci et ne peuvent faire l’objet, en conséquence, que d’un contrôle restreint. Ainsi, le Tribunal vérifiera si ces décisions sont prises dans le respect des règles de compétence, de forme ou de procédure, si elles ne reposent pas sur une erreur de droit ou de fait, ou si elles ne sont pas entachées de détournement de pouvoir. Le Tribunal ne se prononcera donc pas sur le bien-fondé d’une restructuration ou des décisions y relatives, tout comme il ne substituera pas sa propre appréciation à celle de l’organisation (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4608, au considérant 7, 4405, au considérant 2, 4180, au considérant 3, ou 4004, au considérant 2, et la jurisprudence citée). Le Tribunal a cependant considéré que toute suppression de poste doit être justifiée par des raisons objectives et ne saurait avoir pour but dissimulé d’éloigner du service un fonctionnaire considéré comme indésirable, ce qui constituerait un détournement de pouvoir (voir les jugements 4599, au considérant 11, 4353, au considérant 6, 2830, au considérant 6 b), et 1231, au considérant 26).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1231, 2830, 4004, 4180, 4353, 4405, 4599, 4608
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; discretion; reorganisation;
  

  Consideration 9

  Extract:

  Le requérant fait également valoir, en troisième lieu, que la décision de le placer en «congé administratif» serait, en elle-même, illégale du fait que cette position administrative n’est pas prévue par le Statut administratif et les Règlements d’application dudit statut. Il observe à cet égard qu’il serait le seul membre du personnel de l’Agence à avoir été démis de ses fonctions et placé en «congé administratif» dans le cadre de la réorganisation opérée en 2019.
  L’organisation défenderesse répond que la simple circonstance que le «congé administratif» n’est pas explicitement prévu par le Statut administratif ne rend toutefois pas son application illégale. En effet, cette mesure s’intégrerait tout naturellement, selon elle, dans le processus de recherche de possibilités de réaffectation détaillé à l’article 5 de l’Annexe X au Statut et constituerait un moyen légitime pour gérer des situations complexes occasionnées par des mesures de restructuration entraînant la perte de fonctions de l’agent concerné et dans lesquelles une réaffectation immédiate ne serait pas possible, notamment en raison du grade élevé qu’occupait le requérant au moment de la réorganisation. […]
  Il n’est aucunement prévu dans [l’article 5 de l’Annexe X au Statut administratif] que le fonctionnaire concerné puisse, durant la procédure d’examen de son éventuelle réaffectation, être placé dans une position de «congé administratif» temporaire, sachant qu’une telle position n’est pas non plus prévue par le Statut administratif ou les Règlements d’application. […] Enfin, dans la mesure où la détermination de la position administrative dans laquelle est placé un membre du personnel doit être considérée comme un élément essentiel de son statut, l’Organisation ne peut pas non plus être suivie lorsqu’elle se contente d’affirmer que la mesure de mise en «congé administratif» temporaire s’intégrerait tout naturellement dans le processus de recherche de possibilités de réaffectation prévu à l’article 5 de l’Annexe X précitée.
  Il s’ensuit que le moyen tiré de ce que la décision de placer le requérant dans la position de «congé administratif» temporaire serait entachée d’une erreur de droit est également fondé.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; reorganisation; special leave;
  

  Considerations 16-17

  Extract:

  Le requérant fait également valoir que, en raison des hautes fonctions qu’il occupait au sein de l’Agence, du parcours professionnel exemplaire qu’il avait accompli, du caractère brutal de son éviction, ainsi que du «leurre» ayant caractérisé l’ensemble du processus de réaffectation initié à son égard, il serait fondé à réclamer à l’Organisation le paiement d’une indemnité au titre de l’important préjudice moral qu’il aurait subi.
  Le Tribunal considère tout d’abord qu’il n’est pas contestable que les évaluations annuelles du requérant ont toujours été très positives […].
  En outre, le caractère brutal de l’éviction du requérant ne fait pas non plus de doute au regard des circonstances du cas d’espèce.
  Par ailleurs, les différentes décisions qui lui ont été notifiées le 5 juillet 2019 reposent sur des illégalités manifestes […].
  Enfin, le Tribunal observe que la manière dont a été mené le processus de réaffectation du requérant faisant suite à son éviction lui a également occasionné un préjudice moral évident. […]
  En résumé, il est clair que, dans le cadre du processus de réaffectation lancé à son égard, le requérant n’avait aucune chance de pouvoir être reclassé […]. Le Tribunal relève à ce sujet que l’organisation défenderesse reconnaît elle-même, mais sans s’expliquer plus amplement sur ce point, qu’«il n’était pas envisageable que le requérant retourne travailler dans une structure dans laquelle il avait perdu ses fonctions» […].
  Au regard de ce qui précède, le Tribunal ne peut que conclure que le contexte d’ensemble dans lequel s’est déroulé le processus de réaffectation de l’intéressé n’a pu qu’être très douloureusement ressenti par celui-ci, ce qui justifie que soit indemnisé le préjudice moral ainsi subi.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; moral injury; reassignment;
  

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  En ce qui concerne les différentes décisions du 5 juillet 2019 de supprimer les fonctions du requérant au moment où a été décidée la réorganisation de l’Agence, de lancer à son égard une procédure de réaffectation et de le placer avec effet immédiat en «congé administratif», l’intéressé invoque, en premier lieu, une violation de son droit d’être entendu, ce que conteste Eurocontrol.
  Mais le Tribunal constate qu’il ressort des écritures des parties que l’entretien qui a eu lieu le 5 juillet 2019 – soit le jour même de l’annonce faite par le directeur de la DNM aux membres du personnel quant à la réorganisation structurelle de l’Agence – n’avait manifestement pas pour but d’entendre le requérant au sujet des mesures qu’il était envisagé de prendre à son égard, mais simplement de lui notifier les décisions qui avaient déjà été prises le concernant. Il apparaît de même que les demandes d’explications qui ont été présentées par le requérant dans les jours qui ont suivi sont, elles aussi, restées sans réponse.
  L’organisation défenderesse fait valoir à cet égard qu’il s’agissait en l’espèce d’une opération de réorganisation de ses services et que le droit d’être entendu individuellement ne saurait en tout état de cause être envisagé dans le cadre d’une telle décision de portée générale.
  Mais le Tribunal relève que, au-delà de l’opération de réorganisation des services décidée pour des raisons managériales, les décisions qui ont été prises le 5 juillet 2019 entraînaient des conséquences fondamentales sur la situation du requérant dès lors qu’elles avaient notamment pour effet de procéder à la suppression de ses fonctions, laquelle est fermement contestée par l’intéressé. Elles faisaient donc grief au requérant, raison pour laquelle il aurait dû avoir l’occasion de faire valoir son point de vue avant qu’elles ne soient prises (voir, par exemple, les jugements 4622, au considérant 10, 3124, au considérant 3, 1817, au considérant 7, et 1484, au considérant 8).
  Le moyen tiré de la violation du droit d’être entendu est en conséquence fondé en ce qui concerne la décision de supprimer les fonctions du requérant.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 1484, 1817, 3124, 4622
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; reorganisation; right to be heard;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; reassignment; reorganisation;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4654

  
  136th Session, 2023
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant seeks a redefinition of his employment relationship and the setting aside of the decision not to renew his employment contract.

  Consideration 19

  Extract:

  It is clear from the submissions that the functions of statistician that he performed in HRMD no longer met that department’s requirements at the time when the decisions were taken. The IT projects on which the complainant mostly worked – namely those in the “ERP portfolio” – were due to finish in June 2017. Furthermore, new applications meant that WIPO’s various administrative units could now compile their own human resources statistics rather than needing as a matter of course to consult a specialist in this field employed within HRMD, with the result that HRMD no longer needed to have a full-time statistician. Contrary to what the complainant submits, the job description for his post, as drawn up in 2008, had been rendered obsolete, given that the content of a document of this type does not confer an entitlement to the continued existence of the post to which it relates.
  It thus appears that sufficient reasons underlay the abolition of the complainant’s post to justify that decision and accordingly that the disputed decision not to renew his appointment was itself based on valid, objective reasons, in compliance with the requirement recalled in consideration 16(b) [...].

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; motivation; outsourcing; post description;
  

  Consideration 16

  Extract:

  [T]he decision to separate the complainant from service was taken by WIPO on the grounds that, in its view, most of the requirements which the complainant’s employment had met had gradually disappeared, so there was no reason to renew his contract. While, as the Organization correctly observes, staff members with temporary appointments do not hold budget posts, the Tribunal considers that the disappearance of the functions performed by the holder of such an appointment is still an abolition of post within the meaning of the applicable case law, in any event in the case of functions that have been performed on a continuous basis. It follows that, although WIPO was not under an obligation to redeploy the complainant, it was nevertheless required, in view of the length of his employment relationship with the Organization, to explore with him other employment options prior to his separation, even though the measure at issue was not a termination of a current appointment (see, for comparable situations, Judgments 3159, consideration 20, and 2902, consideration 14).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 2902, 3159
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; reassignment; reclassification; separation from service;
  

  Consideration 20

  Extract:

  The complainant [...] submits that WIPO did not provide him with sufficient assistance to allow him to be redeployed in a new post after his contract ended.
  As stated in consideration 16(c) above, the Tribunal considers that the Organization was required to explore other employment options with the complainant before terminating his appointment. However, the submissions show that WIPO was aware of this duty and made every effort to comply with it. In the aforementioned memorandum of 27 March 2012, HRMD “encourage[d] [the complainant] to submit [his] application for all the vacancy notices already published or to be published which interest[ed] [him] and for which [he] consider[ed] that [he had] the necessary qualifications”, bearing in mind that the only legal way for the complainant to obtain a post filled by a fixed-term appointment was to be successful in a recruitment competition. A pressing invitation to apply for vacant posts – this time including posts that might be offered by employers other than WIPO – was again sent to the complainant in the memorandum of 12 August 2016, which also stated that “HRMD [would] increase its efforts to identify a post matching [his] qualifications”. That advice was repeated in the letter from the Legal Counsel of 15 November 2016. The complainant did in fact apply for 12 competitions to fill posts at WIPO between 2011 and 2016 and, although none of his applications proved successful, the Organization cannot be held responsible, especially as it had enabled him to receive individual support from HRMD’s Performance and Development Section and a training designed to facilitate his career transition.
  In light of these various findings, the Tribunal considers that the plea that WIPO was negligent in this respect cannot be accepted (see, for a comparable situation, [...] Judgment 3159, considerations 21 to 23).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3159
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; reassignment; reclassification;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint dismissed; conversion of contract; late appeal; non-renewal of contract; redefinition of contract; short-term;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4608

  
  135th Session, 2023
  World Intellectual Property Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests WIPO’s decision to maintain Office Instruction No. 10/2016, promulgating, inter alia, the discontinuation of the Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises Section.

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  It is well settled in the Tribunal’s case law that decisions concerning restructuring within an international organisation, including the abolition of posts, may be taken at the discretion of the executive head of the organisation and are consequently subject to only limited review. Accordingly, the Tribunal shall ascertain whether such decisions are taken in accordance with the relevant rules on competence, form or procedure, whether they rest upon a mistake of fact or of law, or whether they constitute abuse of authority. The Tribunal shall not rule on the appropriateness of a restructuring or of decisions relating to it, and it shall not substitute the organisation’s view with its own (see, for example, Judgments 4405, consideration 2, 4004, consideration 2, and 4180, consideration 3, and the case law cited therein).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4180, 4404, 4405
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; discretion; reorganisation;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4599

  
  135th Session, 2023
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish her post, reassign her, terminate her contract including the decision to defer the date of her termination, and to reject her claims of retaliation.

  Considerations 11-12

  Extract:

  [T]he case law has it that a decision concerning the restructuring of an international organization, which leads to the abolition of a post, may be taken at the discretion of its executive head and is subject to review only on limited grounds by the Tribunal. The Tribunal will not supplant an organisation’s view with its own. Nevertheless, any decision to abolish a post must be based on objective grounds and its purpose may never be to remove a member of staff regarded as unwanted. Disguising such purposes as a restructuring measure would constitute abuse of authority (see, for example, Judgment 4353, under 6). It has also been stated that in order to achieve greater efficiency or to make budgetary savings international organisations may undertake restructuring entailing the redefinition of posts and staff reductions. However, each and every individual decision adopted in the context of such restructuring must respect all the pertinent legal rules, and, in particular the fundamental rights of the staff concerned (see, for example, Judgment 4353, under 7).
  Following the decision to abolish a post, there must be proper institutional support mechanisms in place to assist the staff member concerned in finding a new assignment (see, for example, Judgment 4353, under 7).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 4353
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; organisation's duties; reorganisation;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; reassignment; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4587

  
  135th Session, 2023
  South Centre
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the non-renewal of her fixed-term appointment.

  Consideration 16

  Extract:

  With respect to the findings of the Appellate Body that there were valid, objective and substantiated reasons for discontinuing in-house translation and thus ultimately not renewing the contract of the complainant, notwithstanding the latter’s understandable disagreement, it remains that, based on the analysis conducted by the Administration and the costs evaluations made, there were justifications for the outsourcing of translation services that, in fact, permitted significant savings while reducing translation times as well as increasing the number of translated languages. This is supported by the written submissions filed as well as by the annexes. In Judgment 3376, at consideration 2, the Tribunal indicated that “[t]he outsourcing of certain services, that is to say the use by an organisation of external contractors to perform tasks that it feels unable to assign to officials hired under its staff regulations, forms part of the general employment policy that an organisation is free to pursue in accordance with its general interests. The Tribunal is not competent to review the advisability or merits of the adoption of such a measure in a specific field of activity”.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3376
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; outsourcing; reorganisation;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4499

  
  134th Session, 2022
  Customs Co-operation Council
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment following the abolition of her post.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; case sent back to organisation; complaint allowed; late appeal;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4411

  
  132nd Session, 2021
  Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment as a result of the abolition of her post.

  Consideration 23

  Extract:

  Regarding the complainant’s request for the payment of the remaining 37 days of her unused annual leave, as the Appeals Committee correctly noted, it was due to the unlawful termination of her appointment that the complainant could not use those days of leave prior to the expiry of her appointment. In these circumstances, the complainant is entitled to be paid the remaining 37 days of leave.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; annual leave; leave; material injury; termination of employment;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; decision quashed; fixed-term; termination of employment;
  

  Consideration 15

  Extract:

  In its pleadings before the Tribunal, the FAO again provided no information regarding the restructuring of LOG. In particular, the FAO did not adduce any evidence as to whether LOG was, in fact, restructured and, if so, when the decision to restructure LOG was taken, in particular, if the restructuring had occurred prior to the decision to abolish the complainant’s post. These were facts within the knowledge of the FAO that the FAO opted not to provide. In this regard, the FAO submits that it was “not legally obliged” to provide the complainant with “documentation on the proposed restructuring”, referring to Judgment 3920, consideration 11, and it emphasises that she has not “adduced any evidence to discharge her burden of proving that extraneous factors motivated the decision to abolish her post”. However, as the Tribunal observed in Judgment 3415, consideration 9, “[w]hile international organisations are entitled to defend proceedings before the Tribunal, and even do so robustly, it is singularly unhelpful and inappropriate for an organisation to refuse to provide documents sought by a complainant that are patently relevant to his case and then argue that the complainant has not furnished relevant evidence in support of that case”.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3415, 3920
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; burden of proof; evidence; organisation's duties; reorganisation;
  

  Consideration 22

  Extract:

  As stated in Judgment 3613, consideration 46, “[i]t 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)”. Based on the nature of the content of the complainant’s communications with the Administration subsequent to her receipt of the email of 8 May 2017, it is clear that the unexpected notification of the abolition of her post and the termination of her appointment was a serious affront to the complainant’s dignity and caused her significant personal harm, for which she is entitled to an award of moral damages.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 396, 1875, 2371, 2475, 2720, 2861, 3613
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; moral injury; respect for dignity;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4405

  
  132nd Session, 2021
  International Criminal Court
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decisions to abolish her post and terminate her fixed-term appointment.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; decision quashed; reorganisation; termination of employment;
  

  Consideration 6

  Extract:

  [T]he decision to terminate the complainant’s appointment, which was based on the abolition of her position, is without legal foundation and is therefore also unlawful.

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4369

  
  131st Session, 2021
  United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate her appointment.

  Consideration 5

  Extract:

  Under the Tribunal’s case law, the decision to abolish a post and the consequent decision to terminate the appointment of the holder of that post, in the event that she or he is not reassigned, are legally separate (see, for example, Judgment 3905, consideration 15) and “the abolition decision is an administrative decision challengeable with the Tribunal in accordance with Article II of its Statute”, provided that the complainant has exhausted the internal means of redress that may be available to her or him (see also Judgments 3928, consideration 14, and 3929, consideration 13). Thus, since an internal appeal was not lodged in the prescribed period, the decision to abolish the complainant’s post has become final and cannot be contested in these proceedings.

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3905, 3928, 3929
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; internal remedies exhausted;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; redeployment; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4353

  
  131st Session, 2021
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to abolish his post.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint dismissed;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4305

  
  130th Session, 2020
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his appointment due to the abolition of his post and the failure to reassign him to another suitable vacant position.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; reassignment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4303

  
  130th Session, 2020
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the amount of compensation awarded for the unlawful abolition of her post.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4180

  
  128th Session, 2019
  International Criminal Court
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant challenges the rejection of her appeal against the decision to abolish her post and terminate her appointment, the decision not to shortlist her for a specific position and the decisions not to select her for three other positions.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; decision quashed; selection procedure; termination of employment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4149

  
  128th Session, 2019
  World Health Organization
  Extracts: EN, FR
  Full Judgment Text: EN, FR
  Summary: The complainant contests the decision to abolish his post and to place him on special leave with pay until the expiry of his fixed-term appointment.

  Consideration 7

  Extract:

  WHO raises a threshold issue about the receivability of the complaint insofar as it might be thought to contain allegations of harassment, malice, prejudice and retaliation being pursued independently of the challenge to the impugned decision to abolish the complainant’s post. However, it is relatively clear that the allegations of harassment and related matters are intended to establish an aspect of the unlawfulness of the decision to abolish the post and the complainant’s claims are cast no wider. It is open to the complainant to follow this course (see, for example, Judgment 3688, consideration 1).

  Reference(s)

  ILOAT Judgment(s): 3688
  

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; harassment; receivability of the complaint;
  

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; reassignment;
  

  
  
  

• Judgment 4139

  
  128th Session, 2019
  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 fixed-term contract as a result of her post having been abolished.

  Judgment keywords

  Keywords:

  abolition of post; complaint allowed; decision quashed; fixed-term; reorganisation; termination of employment;
  

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 | next >