Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

Le Tribunal a d¨¦cid¨¦ que la demande devait ¨ºtre rejet¨¦e ¨¦tant donn¨¦ que la faute commise par la requ¨¦rante ¨¦tait tr¨¨s grave et qu'il n'y avait pas de circonstances att¨¦nuantes. La requ¨¦rante a refus¨¦ de fournir des informations pertinentes alors qu'elle savait qu'il ¨¦tait connu qu'elle avait une s?ur travaillant dans l'Organisation.

La mesure disciplinaire impos¨¦e ¨¦tait donc proportionn¨¦e et ¨¦quitable, avec la possibilit¨¦ de r¨¦pondre aux questions pos¨¦es et de clarifier les r¨¦ponses, si n¨¦cessaire.

The Tribunal found no procedural flaws in the procedure adopted to investigate and impose the disciplinary action taken.

The Tribunal determined that the application should be denied since the misconduct committed by the Applicant was very serious and there were no mitigating factors. The Applicant refused to supply relevant information even though she knew that it was known that she had a sister working in the Organization.

The disciplinary measure imposed was therefore proportionate and fairly imposed, with full opportunity to respond to questions asked and clarify answers, if necessary.

?tant donn¨¦ que l'ABCC a ¨¦t¨¦ conseill¨¦e par un organisme technique, sa d¨¦cision ne n¨¦cessite pas d'¨¦valuation de la part de la direction.

Le Tribunal a d¨¦termin¨¦ que la demande avait ¨¦t¨¦ correctement introduite mais qu'elle avait ¨¦t¨¦ rejet¨¦e parce que le Tribunal ne pouvait pas trouver de faute dans la d¨¦cision de l'ABBC de rejeter la demande du requ¨¦rant concernant le droit ¨¤ une indemnisation pour les blessures et les maladies subies pendant et r¨¦sultant d'un emploi au nom des Nations unies.

Since the ABCC was advised by a technical body its decision does not require management evaluation.

The Tribunal determined that the application was properly made but it was denied because the Tribunal could find no fault with the decision of the ABBC to deny the Applicant's claim for an entitlement to compensation for injury and illness incurred during and resulting from employment on the behalf of the United Nations.

Le Tribunal a conclu que les d¨¦cisions pertinentes visant ¨¤ acc¨¦l¨¦rer la transition du poste de la requ¨¦rante vers celui d'agent principal charg¨¦ des questions d'¨¦galit¨¦ entre les hommes et les femmes ¨¦taient ¨¦quitables, justes et transparentes.

The Tribunal concluded that the relevant decisions to fast track the transition of the Applicant's post to Senior Gender Officer were fair, just and transparent.

Le recours contre la d¨¦cision de placer le requ¨¦rant sur un PIP et le r¨¦sultat de l'examen de l'UEM des d¨¦cisions contest¨¦es n'est pas recevable.
L'Administration n'a pas respect¨¦ les normes proc¨¦durales attendues des Nations Unies dans une proc¨¦dure conduisant ¨¤ l'imposition d'un bl?me ¨¦crit. Les d¨¦ficiences susmentionn¨¦es soul¨¨vent des doutes quant ¨¤ l'apparence d'impartialit¨¦ de l'enqu¨ºte et du processus d¨¦cisionnel et sont donc suffisantes pour entacher la d¨¦cision attaqu¨¦e. En cons¨¦quence, la d¨¦cision de l'administration d'adresser ¨¤ la requ¨¦rante un bl?me ¨¦crit et de le verser ¨¤ son...

Le responsable du recrutement a conclu que le candidat ne remplissait pas l'une des conditions minimales requises pour le poste et qu'il n'avait donc l¨¦galement pas ¨¦t¨¦ pris en consid¨¦ration dans le cadre du processus de s¨¦lection. Cette exigence ¨¦tait "l'exp¨¦rience de la direction de grandes ¨¦quipes", que le responsable du recrutement a d¨¦finie comme "la supervision d'au moins 10 employ¨¦s".

Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que le processus d'annonce et de d¨¦finition des crit¨¨res de s¨¦lection avait ¨¦t¨¦ men¨¦ de mani¨¨re l¨¦gale. Toutefois, il a ¨¦galement constat¨¦ qu'il existait des preuves d'une proc¨¦dure...

Sur la base du cadre juridique applicable, l'administration peut d¨¦terminer le statut d'¨¦ligibilit¨¦ des membres du personnel en ce qui concerne les prestations familiales, qui comprennent l'allocation pour enfant ¨¤ charge, et proc¨¦der au recouvrement des montants lorsqu'un membre du personnel ne se conforme pas ¨¤ ses obligations en la mati¨¨re.

Conform¨¦ment ¨¤ l'annexe III de la circulaire ST/IC/2020/12, pour l'enfant d'un membre du personnel qui n'est pas le parent gardien ou qui a la garde conjointe de l'enfant, ce qui est le cas du requ¨¦rant, le montant du paiement pour avoir droit ¨¤ une...

Le bl?me ¨¦crit

Base factuelle de l'imposition de la mesure

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵPAD, en tant que groupe d'int¨¦r¨ºt sp¨¦cial ad hoc, d¨¦fend les questions relatives aux conditions de travail des membres du personnel d'ascendance africaine au sein des Nations Unies.

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOMS a ¨¦t¨¦ cr¨¦¨¦e "pour mettre ¨¤ disposition des services confidentiels de personnes impartiales et ind¨¦pendantes afin de traiter les questions li¨¦es au travail des membres du personnel" (voir ST/SGB/2016/7, paragraphe 1.1). L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOMS est guid¨¦e dans son travail par quatre principes fondamentaux, ¨¤ savoir l'ind¨¦pendance, la confidentialit¨¦, la...

La requ¨¦rante a-t-elle droit ¨¤ un cong¨¦ de maternit¨¦ en vertu de la disposition 6.3(a) du R¨¨glement du personnel ?

Bien que le Statut et R¨¨glement du personnel des Nations Unies ne soit pas un trait¨¦, l'art. 31.1 de la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des trait¨¦s ¨¦nonce les r¨¨gles g¨¦n¨¦ralement accept¨¦es pour l'interpr¨¦tation d'un document international, qui se r¨¦f¨¨re ¨¤ l'interpr¨¦tation selon le "sens ordinaire" des termes "dans leur contexte et ¨¤ la lumi¨¨re de son objet et de son but" (voir, par exemple, le jugement du Tribunal administratif des Nations Unies n¡ã 942, Merani (1999), para. VII...

The challenge against the decision to place the Applicant on a PIP and the outcome of the review of MEU of the contested decisions is not receivable.

The Administration failed to respect the procedural standards expected from the United Nations in proceedings leading to the imposition of a written reprimand. The above-mentioned deficiencies raise doubts about the appearance of impartiality of the investigation and the decision-making process and are thus sufficient to taint the contested decision. Accordingly, the Administration¡¯s decision to issue to the Applicant a written reprimand and...

The alleged lack of decision

The Tribunal noted that if a claim is submitted timely, the Administration opens the case under the framework of Appendix D, which remains open as compensation may be awarded any time after the original incident.

The Tribunal referred to art. 2 entitled ¡°Principles of award¡± of the pre-2017 Appendix D, applicable at the time the claim was submitted, and found that for a compensation to be paid or a benefit to be granted under Appendix D, a staff member must make a specific request such as the reimbursement of medical expenses or the payment of compensation for...

Accoding to the hiring manager, he concluded that the Applicant id not meet one of the minimum requirements for the position and thus, lawfully not considered further in the selection process. This requirement was "experience in leading large teams", which the hiring manager defined as "supervising at least 10 employees".

The Tribunal found that the process of advertising and setting out the criteria for selection was done lawfully. However, it also found that there was evidence of an unjust process that failed to provide a fair chance to job applicants like the Applicant because it failed to...

Based on the applicable legal framework, the Administration can determine the status of eligibility of staff members in connection with dependency entitlements, which include dependent child allowance, and proceed to recover any amounts when a staff members fail to comply with their relevant obligations.

Pursuant to Annex III of ST/IC/2020/12, for a child of a staff member who is not the custodial parent or who has joint custody of the child, which is the case of the Applicant, the amount of payment to be eligible for a child dependency allowance should be at least the amount of the court...

Whether the Applicant is entitled to maternity leave under staff rule 6.3(a)

While the Staff Regulations and Rules of the United Nations is not a treaty, art. 31.1 of the VCLT sets forth generally accepted rules for interpreting an international document, which refers to interpretation according to the ¡°ordinary meaning¡± of the terms ¡°in their context and in the light of its object and purpose¡± (see, e.g., Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ Administrative Tribunal Judgment No. 942, Merani (1999), para. VII; Avognon et al. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2020/151, para. 50; Andreeva et al. Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2020/122, para. 64; Applicant Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT/2021/165, para. 37).

The written reprimand

Factual basis for the imposition of the measure

Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵPAD, as an ad hoc special interest group, advocates for issues relating to conditions of work pertaining to staff members of African descent in the United Nations.

Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOMS is established ¡°to make available confidential services of impartial and independent persons to address work-related issues of staff members¡± (see ST/SGB/2016/7 para 1.1). Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵOMS is guided in its work by four core principles, namely independence, confidentiality, neutrality, and informality.

It appeared from the information on record that the Applicant...

Le requ¨¦rant ¨¦tait tenu de pr¨¦senter sa demande dans un d¨¦lai de 90 jours. En comptant ¨¤ partir du 12 octobre 2022, la p¨¦riode s'est termin¨¦e le 9 janvier 2023. Le requ¨¦rant a introduit sa demande le 10 janvier 2023. Dans ces circonstances, la demande a ¨¦t¨¦ jug¨¦e non recevable ratione temporis.

The Applicant was required to submit his application in 90 days. When counting from 12 October 2022, the period ended on 9 January 2023. The Applicant submitted his application on 10 January 2023. In the circumstances the application was deemed not receivable ratione temporis.