Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ

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...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the former staff member had a duty to promptly disclose to Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵFPA that she was under investigation when she resigned from Oxfam¨Ca fact that it considered relevant to her suitability for the position. It noted that the application form included a specific question about whether she resigned while under investigation, indicating her awareness of the Organisation¡¯s core values. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT also emphasized that her letter of appointment stated that she was responsible for providing any required information during both the application process and subsequent employment.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT...

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 found that the staff member had filed his appeal more than a year after the issuance of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT Judgment and even if he had requested a waiver of the time limit on the basis of exceptional circumstances, his appeal was time-barred and not receivable ratione temporis.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT nevertheless noted that the staff member¡¯s application filed with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT was not receivable under the doctrine of res judicata because the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT had already affirmed in its earlier judgment a Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT judgment deciding his challenge to the same administrative decision.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the staff member sought to...

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 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 Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not err in concluding that it was established that the former staff member diverted funds contributed to the United Nations Staff Union to support Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵ Staff Day to the United Nations Athletic Club (Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAC). The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT affirmed that even if the former staff member did not obtain personal gain, she misused her office for the private gain of a third party, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAC, which constituted misconduct.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that irrespective of what the former staff member¡¯s work environment was like, it cannot justify misconduct.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT further held that any form of dishonest...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT rejected Mr. Salon¡¯s argument that the prior Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Judgment made incorrect findings of fact regarding the dates that he made requests for management evaluation or filed complaints. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that Mr. Salon was not seeking clarification of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Judgment but was rather attempting to relitigate his case, which is not an appropriate use of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Statute¡¯s provisions for an application for interpretation.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that there was no ambiguity in its Judgment and there was no basis for the application for interpretation. The meaning and scope of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT Judgment was clear...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT erred in suggesting that it was the former staff member¡¯s burden to provide evidence to support his assertion that his request for review had been pending before the Dispute Tribunal since July 2009 and to produce a record of his case having been transferred to it from the JDC in July 2009.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT further held that the Administration¡¯s response, that his claim was closed due to his failure to pursue it for over 12 years, was neither an administrative decision, nor was it the Administration¡¯s prerogative to make regarding the judicial proceeding. The Administration...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that even though the Commissioner-General had mistakenly reimbursed the fine to Mr. El-Haj after the issuance of the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT Judgment, since the fine was subsequently reimposed, the appeal was not moot.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that in order to find that a staff member¡¯s conduct was ¡°serious misconduct¡± so as to warrant a more serious sanction, the Commissioner-General had to provide reasons for this determination. In this case, the Commissioner-General provided no reasons, and the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT rejected the Commissioner-General¡¯s argument that reasons were not necessary because it was manifestly...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the staff member knew all the relevant facts and was sufficiently made aware and properly notified of the contested decision by at least 18 May 2023 for the purpose of filing a timely request for management evaluation. However, the staff member did not file his request for management evaluation until 16 September 2023, which was beyond the 60 day time limit.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT observed that the subject line of the e-mail exchanges in August 2023 between the Administration and the staff member, were requests ¡°to clarify¡± the basis of an administrative decision that had been taken...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT did not err in finding that there was clear and convincing evidence to support that the applicant had engaged in abuse of authority by intimidating a staff member to file a false complaint of sexual harassment against another staff member. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT weighed the conflicting testimonies and assessed the credibility of the witnesses and found that she had a motive to solicit the false complaint.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT did not err in declining to review the other misconduct allegations against her, given that the abuse of authority allegation was the...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA avait correctement ¨¦valu¨¦ l'application par l'Agence des exigences en mati¨¨re d'exp¨¦rience applicables aux requ¨¦rants. Plus pr¨¦cis¨¦ment, en ce qui concerne les enseignants contestant leur classement au grade 9, l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a souscrit ¨¤ l'examen par le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA de la description du poste de personnel r¨¦gional, qui exigeait cinq ans d'exp¨¦rience dans l'enseignement au grade 9 pour ¨ºtre class¨¦ au grade 10. Les requ¨¦rants class¨¦s au grade 9 ne remplissant pas cette condition, l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ que le DT de l'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA avait correctement conclu qu'ils ¨¦taient class¨¦s...

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a not¨¦ que les conclusions du TDPI reposaient sur des preuves cr¨¦dibles lorsqu'il a d¨¦termin¨¦ que le fils de la fonctionnaire avait contract¨¦ la Covid-19, qu'il avait ¨¦t¨¦ trait¨¦ sous la supervision de son m¨¦decin traitant et que le paiement avait ¨¦t¨¦ effectu¨¦ sur la base des factures de ce dernier refl¨¦tant les soins qu'il avait prodigu¨¦s.

L'Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT a estim¨¦ qu'¨¤ la lumi¨¨re des t¨¦moignages des t¨¦moins de la fonctionnaire, y compris elle-m¨ºme et le professionnel de sant¨¦ qui avait trait¨¦ son fils, le TDPI n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que l'Administration n'avait pas ¨¦tabli la...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT noted that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT¡¯s findings had been based on credible evidence when it determined that the staff member¡¯s son had contracted Covid-19; he had been treated under the supervision of her primary medical care provider; and payment had been made based on invoices from that provider reflecting the care he had provided.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was of the view that in light of the testimony of the staff member¡¯s witnesses, including herself and the medical professional who had treated her son, it had not been erroneous for the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT to conclude that the Administration had failed to establish the medical...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT found that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT had correctly assessed the Agency¡¯s application of the experience level requirements applicable to the Appellants. Specifically, regarding the teachers contesting their classification at Grade 9, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT agreed with the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT¡¯s review of the Area Staff Post Description, which required five years of teaching experience at Grade 9 for classification at Grade 10.As the Appellants classified at Grade 9 did not meet this requirement, the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵRWA DT had correctly concluded that they were appropriately classified at Grade 9.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT further...

Le TANU a not¨¦ qu'au vu des multiples demandes concurrentes de transfert lat¨¦ral, l'agent n'avait pas ¨¦t¨¦ l'un des candidats recommand¨¦s et s¨¦lectionn¨¦s pour le poste parce que ses responsabilit¨¦s ¨¦taient diff¨¦rentes des fonctions du poste demand¨¦, et que l'Agence recherchait des candidats plus familiers avec ces fonctions.

Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'en vertu des dispositions l¨¦gales r¨¦gissant les transferts lat¨¦raux, lues ensemble et non s¨¦par¨¦ment, l'Agence avait ¨¦t¨¦ autoris¨¦e ¨¤ fonder son ¨¦valuation sur l'aptitude des candidats ¨¤ occuper le poste plut?t que sur l'anciennet¨¦, les raisons imp¨¦rieuses...

Le TANU a examin¨¦ si l'appel interlocutoire ¨¦tait recevable parce qu'ABA n'avait pas eu l'occasion d'¨ºtre entendue sur la question des mesures de protection pour V01 lors de l'audience propos¨¦e au moment o¨´ le TNDU a rendu la premi¨¨re ordonnance. Le TANU a estim¨¦ qu'il ne s'agissait pas d'un motif pour faire droit ¨¤ l'appel interlocutoire, car les arguments d'ABA avaient ¨¦t¨¦ entendus par le TANU lorsqu'il avait d¨¦pos¨¦ sa demande de r¨¦examen.

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le TANU n'avait pas outrepass¨¦ ses comp¨¦tences ou sa juridiction lorsqu'il a ¨¦mis ces ordonnances de gestion des dossiers. Le TANU n...

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT considered whether the interlocutory appeal was receivable because ABA had not been given an opportunity to be heard on the issue of the protective measures for V01 at the proposed hearing at the time the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT issued the first Order. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that this was not grounds to grant the interlocutory appeal, because ABA¡¯s arguments were heard by the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT when he filed his motion for reconsideration.

The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT held that the Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵDT did not exceed its competence or jurisdiction when it issued these case management orders. The Ä¢¹½ÊÓƵAT was also not persuaded by ABA¡¯s argument that the violation...

Le TANU a estim¨¦ que le Tribunal n'avait pas commis d'erreur en concluant que l'acte du fonctionnaire consistant ¨¤ offrir un jouet sexuel ¨¤ un subordonn¨¦ ¨¦tait inappropri¨¦, car il transgressait la fronti¨¨re entre la vie professionnelle et la vie personnelle du subordonn¨¦, m¨ºme si l'¨¦v¨¦nement s'¨¦tait d¨¦roul¨¦ en priv¨¦. Qu'il ait ¨¦t¨¦ sollicit¨¦ ou non, il pouvait avoir un impact n¨¦gatif sur l'image et les int¨¦r¨ºts de l'Organisation. Par cons¨¦quent, le TANU a conclu qu'en agissant de la sorte, l'agent n'avait pas respect¨¦ les normes requises pour son r?le de gestionnaire.

Le TANU a ¨¦galement estim¨¦...