|
|
 |
|
|
Continuance of operations (520,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Continuance of operations
Total judgments found: 7
Judgment 4009
126th Session, 2018
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to extend his fixed-term contract following the abolition of his post, but to give him a Project Staff contract.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant [...] submits that his employment relationship after 1 July 2016 could not be termed a Project Staff contract because his duties, which remained the same, could not be subsumed under the notion of a project, nor could they be viewed as short-term.
The Tribunal notes that according to the terms of the letter of 4 December 2015, the Secretary General offered the complainant a six-month Project Staff contract, with “the same job description” and at the same grade and step. In other words, the complainant continued to perform the same duties with the same remuneration. The only differences between the contract under which he was employed and that which was offered to him, were their name and duration. As the complainant had been employed since 1998 as Head of Administration and Finance under a fixed-term contract, the Secretary General could not offer him a temporary contract to continue performing exactly the same work as he was performing under a fixed-term contract without contravening the spirit of the applicable texts (see Judgment 2708, under 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2708
Keywords:
continuance of operations; duration of appointment; fixed-term; renewal of contrat;
Judgment 4008
126th Session, 2018
Energy Charter Conference
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: In her first complaint, the complainant challenges the decision not to extend her fixed-term contract following the abolition of her post, but to give her a Project Staff contract. In her second complaint, she challenges three vacancy notices concerning C category posts and in her third complaint, she challenges the rejection of her application for two of these posts.
Consideration 15
Extract:
The complainant [...] submits that her employment relationship after 1 January 2016 could not be termed a Project Staff contract because her duties, which remained the same, could not be subsumed under the notion of a project, nor could they be viewed as short-term.
The Tribunal notes that according to the terms of the letter of 4 December 2015, the Secretary General offered the complainant a one-year Project Staff contract, with “the same job description” and at the same grade and step. In other words, the complainant continued to perform the same duties with the same remuneration. The only differences between the contract under which she was employed and that which was offered to her, were their name and duration. As the complainant had been employed since 1996 as Administrative Assistant under a fixed-term contract, the Secretary General could not offer her a temporary contract to continue performing exactly the same work as she was performing under a fixed-term contract without contravening the spirit of the applicable texts (see Judgment 2708, under 10).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2708
Keywords:
continuance of operations; duration of appointment; fixed-term; renewal of contrat;
Judgment 2493
100th Session, 2006
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 11
Extract:
The complainants were issued a written warning on the grounds that they had participated in industrial action which management considered to be unlawful and that caused them to be absent from duty without authorisation. "[I]f it were a work stoppage not involving unlawful actions, the question arises as to whether the Agency could, in view of the provisions of Article 11 of the Staff Regulations whereby an official is bound to ensure the continuity of the service and must not cease to exercise his functions without previous authorisation, deem participation in the collective action by the officials in question to be unlawful. Without overlooking the fact that a strike will necessarily affect continuity of service, the Tribunal considers that, if the answer to that question were yes, it would in practice deprive of all substance the exercise of a right, the existence of which the Agency does not deny and which, according to the case law, is lawful in principle (see, for instance, Judgments 615 and 2342 of the Tribunal). To make the exercise of that right conditional on obtaining leave of absence would clearly be incompatible with the principle itself, the necessary corollary of which is the freedom of officials to follow or not to follow a call to strike duly issued by their representative organisations."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: Article 11 of the Staff Regulations governing officials of the Agency
ILOAT Judgment(s): 615, 2342
Keywords:
collective rights; condition; consequence; continuance of operations; disciplinary measure; freedom of association; general principle; provision; right to strike; staff member's duties; staff regulations and rules; staff union; strike; unauthorised absence; warning;
Judgment 2263
95th Session, 2003
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 7
Extract:
"The question to be resolved is that of whether, for the purposes of service order No. 99 [which defines the conditions and formalities governing the granting of a personal promotion], the period in excess of the 12-month maximum duration stipulated for short-term contracts should be taken into account in calculating the 18 years of continuous service. The answer is necessarily affirmative. [...] Once [the first 12-month period] had elapsed, the complainant must be considered to have been in service [...], even in the absence of a provision to that effect and taking into account the contracts he was granted thereafter. Regarding the [one month] break in service which occurred [subsequently], it is necessary to establish whether this prevented the complainant from completing the 18 years of continuous service [...] The Tribunal considers that it did not. The evidence on file, and particularly an affidavit produced by the complainant as an annex to his written submissions, shows that the break imposed on the complainant was justified only by the fact that he was employed under short-term contracts. since the Tribunal has determined that the complainant must be deemed to have been in service from 17 November 1982 onwards, the break in question must be viewed as a period of leave."
Reference(s)
Organization rules reference: SERVICE ORDER No. 99
Keywords:
continuance of operations; contract; duration of appointment; fixed-term; interpretation; leave; no provision; personal promotion; promotion; reckoning; seniority; short-term; successive contracts; unpaid leave; validation of service;
Judgment 1886
87th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9(2)
Extract:
"The fact of accepting the offer of a new contract of indefinite duration cannot deprive the complainant of the rights he acquired whilst he was in the service of the [organisation] under successive fixed-term contracts."
Keywords:
acquired right; continuance of operations; contract; fixed-term; offer; permanent appointment; successive contracts;
Judgment 1790
86th Session, 1999
European Southern Observatory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 9
Extract:
The complainant says that the Organisation has paid him a termination indemnity reckoned on the strength of only six years' service though he was on its staff for over twelve years. The defendant's answer is that according to the Staff Regulations the complainant had only six years' unbroken service. The Tribunal considers that "the defendant has misread its own rules. For the purpose of reckoning the total period of unbroken service they do not, as it makes out, distinguish between a year served as a fellow' and a year served as a staff member or auxiliary."
Keywords:
continuance of operations; interpretation; staff regulations and rules; terminal entitlements;
Judgment 805
61st Session, 1987
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Consideration 18
Extract:
"It is beyond question that like any national civil service an international organisation has the right and indeed the duty, when its staff goes on strike, to take action to ensure its survival and the continuance of its work."
Keywords:
continuance of operations; organisation's duties; right to strike; strike;
|
|
|
|
|
