UNDT/2022/047, Raja
The Tribunal held that based on the available evidence, the Administration had demonstrated that all reasonable efforts were made to consider the Applicant for available suitable posts in keeping with staff rules 9.6(e) and 13.1(d). Good faith efforts to place him in a suitable alternative post were made by the Organization and the Applicant did not find a suitable position before his separation. Accordingly, the application was dismissed.
The Applicant contested the Administration’s decision to not make good faith efforts to absorb him to a new post after the abolition of his post. The Applicant served on a continuing appointment.
Pursuant to the settled jurisprudence of the Tribunal and in accordance with staff rules 9.6(e) and (f), the Administration has a duty to make reasonable efforts to find suitable placements for staff members whose posts have been abolished. The affected members of staff equally have an obligation to express interest in suitable posts by applying for them. Once the application process is completed the Administration is required to consider the continuing or indefinite appointment holders on a preferred or non-competitive basis for the positions, to retain them. This requires determining the suitability of the staff members for the posts, considering the staff members’ competence, integrity and length of service, as well as other factors such as nationality and gender.