蘑菇视频AT Held or 蘑菇视频DT Pronouncements
蘑菇视频AT held that 蘑菇视频DT’s interpretation process, which led to the dismissal of the claim, was neither unreasonable nor unfair. 蘑菇视频AT noted that the affirmation that only the purchasing power element of comparison would allow an equal pay and treatment of staff members constituted only a postulation of a certain parameter among many possible options, without real support except in terms of policy selection because other criteria could also allow that kind of equal treatment, provided that they are applied in a general and non-discriminating way. 蘑菇视频AT noted that the comparator element adopted in the present case fell within this requirement. 蘑菇视频AT noted that the Appellant’s alleged prejudice came from a policy-oriented point of view and not from an actual violation of the law applying a different policy to the calculation of the dependency benefit. 蘑菇视频AT held that there was no error that would warrant vacating the judgment. 蘑菇视频AT dismissed the appeal in its entirety and affirmed the 蘑菇视频DT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant challenged the decision to recover monies from his current and future salaries as a result of the adjustment made to his dependency benefit. 蘑菇视频DT dismissed the application, finding that the contested decision was lawful.
Legal Principle(s)
The principle of equal pay as a standard review applies to the main composition of salary for post adjustment and does not prevent eventual differences concerning salary accessories or social benefits.