2011-UNAT-185, Leboeuf et al.
UNAT noted that the language on overtime was interpreted for around 50 years in one way and then was changed and that there was some ambiguity in the provision. UNAT noted that it was still unclear on some issues surrounding whether it was proper for Staff Rules to apply differently in different duty stations and that UNDT should hear evidence on the issue, including on potential differences in application amongst departments in New York. UNAT vacated the UNDT judgment and remanded it to UNDT for further proceedings.
The Applicants contested what they considered to be new practices on overtime and compensatory time off, namely that a staff member must have actually worked eight hours before becoming eligible for payment of overtime. UNDT found against the Applicants.
Left deliberately blank