Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT avait commis une erreur en sugg¨¦rant qu'il incombait ¨¤ l'ancien fonctionnaire de fournir des preuves ¨¤ l'appui de son affirmation selon laquelle sa demande de r¨¦vision ¨¦tait en instance devant le Tribunal du contentieux depuis juillet 2009 et de produire un dossier attestant que son affaire avait ¨¦t¨¦ transf¨¦r¨¦e ¨¤ celui-ci par le JDC en juillet 2009.

Le TNP a en outre estim¨¦ que la r¨¦ponse de l'Administration, selon laquelle sa demande avait ¨¦t¨¦ class¨¦e sans suite en raison de son absence de suivi pendant plus de 12 ans, ne constituait pas une d¨¦cision administrative...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR n'¨¦tait pas tenu de mettre fin ¨¤ l'engagement du fonctionnaire en vertu du paragraphe 9 c) de la circulaire AC/Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR/2019/05, qui lui aurait donn¨¦ droit ¨¤ une indemnit¨¦ de licenciement. L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR ¨¦tait en droit de le placer en SLWOP conform¨¦ment au paragraphe 9 f), afin de pouvoir r¨¦gler la question du financement de son poste avec le donateur. Le TDPNU n'a pas commis d'erreur en concluant que l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR avait exerc¨¦ son pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire de mani¨¨re appropri¨¦e, l¨¦gale et raisonnable.

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a ¨¦galement confirm¨¦ la conclusion du TDPNU selon laquelle l'ancien...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e ¨¦tait une d¨¦cision de cessation de service li¨¦e ¨¤ l'expiration d'un contrat, et non une d¨¦cision de licenciement fond¨¦e sur la suppression d'un poste ou une r¨¦duction des effectifs. L'ancien fonctionnaire n'entrait pas dans la cat¨¦gorie des fonctionnaires ayant le droit d'¨ºtre pris en consid¨¦ration de mani¨¨re pr¨¦f¨¦rentielle pour le maintien en fonction et l'Administration n'avait pas l'obligation de lui trouver un autre poste appropri¨¦ ¨¤ la suite de la suppression ou du reclassement de son poste.

Le TÄ¢¹½ÊÓƵI a observ¨¦ que, bien que l'ancien fonctionnaire...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR was not obligated to terminate the staff member¡¯s appointment under paragraph 9(c) of AC/Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR/2019/05, which would have provided him with a termination indemnity. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR was within its rights to place him on SLWOP pursuant to paragraph 9(f), to enable it to resolve the issue of funding with the donor for financing the staff member¡¯s position. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not err in finding that Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵITAR exercised its discretion properly, lawfully and reasonably.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT also affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT¡¯s finding that the former staff member had not met his burden of proof that he had...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the contested decision was a separation decision hinged on expiration of an appointment, and not a termination decision based on abolition of post or reduction of staff. The former staff member did not fall within the category of staff with the right to be considered on a preferential basis for retention and the Administration did not have an obligation to find him an alternative and suitable position following the abolition or reclassification exercise.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT observed that although the former staff member was informed in his non-renewal letter that he would be placed on...

Le Tribunal d'appel a analys¨¦ le texte de l'annexe D, dans sa version de 1966, et a conclu que : a) les veuves ont droit ¨¤ une indemnit¨¦ correspondant ¨¤ deux cinqui¨¨mes du traitement annuel du fonctionnaire d¨¦c¨¦d¨¦ ; (b) si le fonctionnaire d¨¦c¨¦d¨¦ laisse plus d'une veuve, l'indemnit¨¦ est r¨¦partie ¨¤ parts ¨¦gales entre les veuves ; (c) toutes les prestations de retraite vers¨¦es au titre des droits du fonctionnaire ¨¤ la Caisse commune des pensions du personnel des Nations Unies sont d¨¦duites de l'indemnit¨¦ vers¨¦e au titre de l'appendice D ; cette d¨¦duction ne doit pas r¨¦duire le montant de l...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a not¨¦ que l'Agence avait retir¨¦ la note litigieuse du dossier officiel du fonctionnaire et lui avait fourni le certificat de service et les ¨¦valuations de performance qu'il avait demand¨¦s. L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que le recours dans cette partie ¨¦tait donc devenu sans objet.

Le TÄ¢¹½ÊÓƵAS a estim¨¦ que m¨ºme si la question n'¨¦tait pas sans objet, il n'¨¦tait pas convaincu que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA ait exerc¨¦ son pouvoir discr¨¦tionnaire de mani¨¨re injustifi¨¦e ou ait commis une autre erreur. Le TÄ¢¹½ÊÓƵAS a not¨¦ que dans son jugement ant¨¦rieur, il avait conclu que l'Agence n'avait aucune obligation d'ex¨¦cuter...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a exprim¨¦ sa profonde pr¨¦occupation quant ¨¤ l'absence de motifs suffisants justifiant le choix du candidat retenu plut?t que celui du membre du personnel au moment de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e.

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a constat¨¦ que les consid¨¦rations li¨¦es au genre et ¨¤ la r¨¦partition g¨¦ographique avaient ¨¦t¨¦ appliqu¨¦es de mani¨¨re in¨¦gale dans le processus de s¨¦lection, ¨¦valuant positivement le candidat britannique de sexe masculin tout en ignorant ou en n¨¦gligeant le fait que le membre du personnel ¨¦tait une femme indienne. Contrairement ¨¤ l'article 4.4 du Statut du personnel, qui pr¨¦voit que les...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que m¨ºme si le Commissaire g¨¦n¨¦ral avait rembours¨¦ par erreur l'amende ¨¤ M. El-Haj apr¨¨s le prononc¨¦ du jugement de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT, l'amende ayant ¨¦t¨¦ r¨¦impos¨¦e par la suite, l'appel n'¨¦tait pas sans objet.

Le TFP a estim¨¦ que pour conclure que le comportement d'un fonctionnaire constituait une ? faute grave ? justifiant une sanction plus s¨¦v¨¨re, le Commissaire g¨¦n¨¦ral devait motiver sa d¨¦cision. En l'esp¨¨ce, le Commissaire g¨¦n¨¦ral n'avait fourni aucune justification, et le TFP a rejet¨¦ l'argument du Commissaire g¨¦n¨¦ral selon lequel aucune justification n'¨¦tait n¨¦cessaire car il...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a not¨¦ que la lettre du membre du personnel concernant sa retraite anticip¨¦e devait ¨ºtre consid¨¦r¨¦e comme une lettre de d¨¦mission. L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a not¨¦ que quelques mois plus tard, elle avait envoy¨¦ une autre lettre ¨¤ l'Administration demandant le retrait de sa d¨¦mission. L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que le TFP n'avait pas commis d'erreur de droit en identifiant la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e comme ¨¦tant la d¨¦cision de ne pas accepter le retrait de la d¨¦mission de la fonctionnaire, et que l'approche du TFP ne lui avait pas caus¨¦ de pr¨¦judice puisqu'il avait pu examiner tous ses arguments.

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que la...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the vacancy had been advertised for only ten days which violated the mandatory requirement of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA Personnel Directive, and this violation had been corrected by cancelling the recruitment process and constituting another one that met the requirement of the minimum posting period.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the staff member had not identified the alleged defects of the impugned Judgment but rather had reargued his case and, therefore, had not discharged his burden of satisfying the Appeals Tribunal that the impugned Judgment had been in error.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was of the view that, in...

Le TFP a estim¨¦ que, puisque l'indemnit¨¦ compensatoire a pour but de replacer un fonctionnaire dans la situation qui aurait ¨¦t¨¦ la sienne si l'Organisation avait respect¨¦ ses obligations contractuelles, le traitement de base net ¨¤ verser conform¨¦ment ¨¤ l'arr¨ºt du TFP ¨¦tait le traitement de base net que l'ancien fonctionnaire aurait per?u ¨¤ la date de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e et de la cessation de ses fonctions, ¨¤ savoir le 20 mai 2021. Par cons¨¦quent, le TFP a conclu que le calcul du Secr¨¦taire g¨¦n¨¦ral, qui avait retenu deux ans de salaire de base net, ¨¦tait appropri¨¦.

Le TFP a en outre estim¨¦ que...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a not¨¦ que, dans son calcul de la r¨¦duction de la prestation de retraite du b¨¦n¨¦ficiaire, la Caisse des pensions avait fix¨¦ le taux global d'ajustement au co?t de la vie applicable aux prestations, conform¨¦ment ¨¤ l'¨¦volution de l'indice des prix ¨¤ la consommation aux ?tats-Unis depuis la date du dernier ajustement, ¨¤ 6,4 %. L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a observ¨¦ que la Caisse avait ensuite r¨¦parti le taux d'ajustement global au prorata de la dur¨¦e pendant laquelle la prestation de retraite du b¨¦n¨¦ficiaire avait ¨¦t¨¦ vers¨¦e et avait d¨¦termin¨¦ que l'ajustement au titre de l'inflation qui lui ¨¦tait d? ¨¦tait de 7...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a jug¨¦ que la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e ¨¦tait l¨¦gale. Il a estim¨¦ que le TFP avait correctement analys¨¦ les ¨¦l¨¦ments de preuve pr¨¦sent¨¦s, en motivant de mani¨¨re d¨¦taill¨¦e l'acceptation ou le rejet du t¨¦moignage de chaque t¨¦moin et, surtout, en tenant compte de l'aveu par le fonctionnaire de nombreux faits essentiels. Il s'agissait notamment de reconna?tre : l'existence de tensions entre lui-m¨ºme et les membres du personnel international et national ; qu'il ¨¦tait probablement trop exigeant en tant que sup¨¦rieur hi¨¦rarchique ; qu'il avait ¨¦lev¨¦ la voix au travail ; qu'il avait fait r¨¦f¨¦rence aux...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the Agency had removed the disputed Note from the staff member¡¯s Official Status File and provided him with his requested certificate of service and performance evaluations. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the appeal in the respective part had therefore become moot.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that even if the issue were not moot, it was not persuaded that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵWRA DT had exercised its discretion injudiciously or otherwise erred. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that in its earlier Judgment it had found that the Agency had no obligation to partially execute that first Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT Judgment.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the staff...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that, since the purpose of compensation in lieu is to place a staff member in the same position he or she would have been had the Organization complied with its contractual obligations, the net base salary to be paid in accordance with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Judgment was the net base salary that the former staff member would have earned at the date of the contested decision and his separation from service, namely 20 May 2021. Therefore, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT concluded that the Secretary-General¡¯s calculation of two years¡¯ net base salary was appropriate.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT further held that the deductions made for...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the vacancy had been advertised for only ten days which violated the mandatory requirement of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA Personnel Directive, and this violation had been corrected by cancelling the recruitment process and constituting another one that met the requirement of the minimum posting period.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the staff member had not identified the alleged defects of the impugned Judgment but rather had reargued his case and, therefore, had not discharged his burden of satisfying the Appeals Tribunal that the impugned Judgment had been in error.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was of the view that, in...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the staff member¡¯s letter regarding early retirement was to be considered a letter of resignation. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that a few months later she had sent another letter to the Administration requesting to withdraw her resignation. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT had not erred in law when it identified the contested decision as the decision not to accept the staff member¡¯s withdrawal of her resignation, and the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT¡¯s approach had not caused prejudice to her as it had been able to examine all her contentions.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the staff member¡¯s resignation produced its legal...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that in its calculation of the reduction of the beneficiary¡¯s retirement benefit, the Pension Fund had determined the rate of the overall cost-of-living adjustment due to benefits in accordance with the movement in the US consumer price index since the date of the last adjustment to be 6.4 per cent. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT observed that the Fund had then prorated the overall adjustment rate in proportion to the length of time the beneficiary¡¯s retirement benefit had been in payment and had determined that the inflationary adjustment due to him was 7/12 of 6.4 per cent, equal to 3.7 per cent...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the contested decision was lawful. It held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT appropriately analysed the evidence presented, providing detailed reasons for accepting or rejecting each witness¡¯s testimony and, importantly, considered the staff member¡¯s admission of many of the key facts. These included acknowledging that: tensions existed between himself and both staff and national staff members; he was probably too demanding as a manager; he raised his voice at work; he referred to the sects of certain national staff members; he had difficult interpersonal issues with Complainant 1; he...