Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT Held or Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT Pronouncements
Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that an analysis of the e-mail and other correspondence between Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDP and the Appellant indicated that she could not have been led to believe that her home leave request for January 2020 would be granted. She had been advised that a staff member was entitled to home leave only if the staff member¡¯s contract was anticipated to continue for more than six months after the return from home leave, yet Appellant¡¯s continuing engagement with Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDP was unknown, and her current contract end date was June 30, 2020. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDP complied with its obligations to consider and decide the application for home leave reasonably and in a timely fashion. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT had not been shown to have erred in law or in fact. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT judgment.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Appellant contested the decision to find her ineligible for a home leave entitlement. Ä¢¹½ÊÓÆµDT dismissed her application.
Legal Principle(s)
The organization has an obligation to consider and decide on an application for home leave reasonably and in a timely fashion.