¹ú²úAV

The UNAT noted that before the applicant became a staff member, he had been employed by UNRWA as complementary personnel with non-staff status and was not entitled to any benefit beyond what had been established for daily-paid workers. The UNAT observed that neither his daily-paid service contracts nor a sample of daily-paid service contracts applicable at the relevant time mentioned payment of any compensation upon expiration.

The UNAT found that upon each expiry of the applicant’s daily-paid service contract, it was successively renewed and he was bound by the Agency’s regulations and administrative issuances issued before each renewal. The UNAT found that his reference to universal labour laws had no merit.

As regards the staff member’s Service Computation Date, the UNAT held that his letter of appointment was the controlling document. The UNAT found that by his acceptance of the offer of appointment, as specified in the letter of appointment, he had irrevocably consented that his Service Computation Date is not computed on the basis of periods of work performed before the commencement of his appointment.

The UNAT concluded that the UNRWA DT had not erred in upholding the contested decisions.

The UNAT expressed concern that not according the staff member any benefits of employment for the period of more than 16 years when he was engaged by the Agency as a daily-paid worker was harsh.

The UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNRWA DT Judgment.