The UNAT held that the Dispute Tribunal erred in law and exceeded its jurisdiction in finding that Mr. Suarez Liste be granted additional steps upon initial appointment contrary to the Grading Guidelines for language staff. The UNDT improperly broadened the definition and criteria of 鈥渞elevant work experience鈥� in the Grading Guidelines to include additional academic qualifications. By doing so, the UNDT had created a new factor or criterion in the application of the Grading Guidelines, e.g., consideration of a Ph.D. in the step-in-grade calculation. The UNAT held that this was a policy...
Showing 1 - 2 of 2
In asserting whether the Administration properly determined the Applicant鈥檚 step-in-grade, the core issue before the Tribunal is whether and, if so, to what extent, the Applicant鈥檚 Ph.D. experience in Economics would constitute relevant work experience for a language professional under the Grading Guidelines for language staff.
The documentary evidence on record shows that the Applicant did his Ph.D. in Economics from 1 October 2014 to 9 June 2019 on a full-time basis. Therefore, his Ph.D. experience in Economics would amount to around two years and four months of relevant experience...