¹ú²úAV

Whether the Applicant is entitled to maternity leave under staff rule 6.3(a)

While the Staff Regulations and Rules of the United Nations is not a treaty, art. 31.1 of the VCLT sets forth generally accepted rules for interpreting an international document, which refers to interpretation according to the ¡°ordinary meaning¡± of the terms ¡°in their context and in the light of its object and purpose¡± (see, e.g., UN Administrative Tribunal Judgment No. 942, Merani (1999), para. VII; Avognon et al. UNDT/2020/151, para. 50; Andreeva et al. UNDT/2020/122, para. 64; Applicant UNDT/2021/165, para. 37).

The written reprimand

 Factual basis for the imposition of the measure

UNPAD, as an ad hoc special interest group, advocates for issues relating to conditions of work pertaining to staff members of African descent in the United Nations.

UNOMS is established ¡°to make available confidential services of impartial and independent persons to address work-related issues of staff members¡± (see ST/SGB/2016/7 para 1.1). UNOMS is guided in its work by four core principles, namely independence, confidentiality, neutrality, and informality.

It appeared from the information on record that the Applicant...

Le requ¨¦rant ¨¦tait tenu de pr¨¦senter sa demande dans un d¨¦lai de 90 jours. En comptant ¨¤ partir du 12 octobre 2022, la p¨¦riode s'est termin¨¦e le 9 janvier 2023. Le requ¨¦rant a introduit sa demande le 10 janvier 2023. Dans ces circonstances, la demande a ¨¦t¨¦ jug¨¦e non recevable ratione temporis.

The Applicant was required to submit his application in 90 days. When counting from 12 October 2022, the period ended on 9 January 2023. The Applicant submitted his application on 10 January 2023. In the circumstances the application was deemed not receivable ratione temporis.

Bien que le droit et la coutume n¨¦palais puissent ¨ºtre pertinents en raison de la r¨¦ticence du requ¨¦rant ¨¤ accepter culturellement cette d¨¦signation de demi-fr¨¨re comme lui ¨¦tant applicable, le droit n¨¦palais ne peut pas ¨ºtre consid¨¦r¨¦ comme le droit applicable des Nations Unies en ce qui concerne les questions d'emploi au sein de l'Organisation. Le droit applicable des Nations Unies est consid¨¦r¨¦ et accept¨¦ tel qu'il est promulgu¨¦ dans le Statut et le R¨¨glement du personnel des Nations Unies. Ce dernier s'applique aux questions d'emploi.

Bien que le requ¨¦rant ait voulu faire valoir sa...

While Nepalese law and custom may be relevant based on the Applicant¡¯s reluctance to culturally accept this designation of half-brother as applicable to him, Nepalese law cannot be deemed the applicable law of the United Nations when referring to employment matters within the Organization. The applicable law of the United Nations is seen and accepted as is promulgated in the Staff Regulations and Rules of the United Nations. The latter applies to employment matters.

While the Applicant wanted to raise his preferred belief that the law of Nepal should apply because he is Nepalese and so is his...

Tant que l'ouverture temporaire d'un poste n'avait pas d'impact sur les chances de s¨¦lection du candidat, une irr¨¦gularit¨¦ ne pouvait pas ¨ºtre invoqu¨¦e pour d¨¦clarer le processus de s¨¦lection ill¨¦gal.

Le Tribunal a convenu avec le d¨¦fendeur que le requ¨¦rant ne pouvait pas fonder son argument contre la proc¨¦dure de s¨¦lection dans l'affaire JO# 136259 en remettant en question la proc¨¦dure dans d'autres affaires qui n'ont pas d'incidence sur son cas.

Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que si la proc¨¦dure d¨¦crite dans l'avis ST/AI/2010/3 n'avait pas ¨¦t¨¦ suivie, il ne voyait pas comment cette irr¨¦gularit¨¦...

As long as the Temporary Job Opening had no impact on the Applicant¡¯s chances of selection, then an irregularity could not be relied upon as a basis for the selection process to be declared unlawful.

The Tribunal agreed with the Respondent that the Applicant cannot base his argument against the selection process in JO# 136259 by questioning the process in other matters which do not affect his case.

The Tribunal held that whilst the procedure spelt out in ST/AI/2010/3 was not followed, it was unable to see how this irregularity could have had any impact on the selection process.  

Le tribunal a jug¨¦ qu'il n'y avait pas suffisamment de preuves pour ¨¦tayer la conclusion que toute d¨¦tresse caus¨¦e au demandeur ¨¦tait le r¨¦sultat du non-respect de la plainte de harc¨¨lement et, par cons¨¦quent, un lien essentiel dans l'exigence de prouver que les dommages moraux n'avaient pas ¨¦t¨¦ ¨¦tablis par la preuve. Le Tribunal a not¨¦ que la conclusion selon laquelle il y avait un abus de pouvoir n'¨¦tait pas bas¨¦e sur un acte administratif qui faisait partie de la demande du demandeur. Le demandeur a affirm¨¦ que le retard faisait partie du harc¨¨lement r¨¦dig¨¦ par l'administration. Cependant...

The Tribunal held that there was insufficient evidence to support the conclusion that any distress caused to the Applicant was a result of the failure to resolve the harassment complaint and therefore an essential link in the requirement to prove moral damages had not been established by the evidence. The Tribunal noted that the finding that there was abuse of power was not based on an administrative act which was part of the Applicant¡¯s application. The Applicant claimed that the delay was part of the harassment meted out by the Administration. However, she never provided evidence to link the...

La r¨¦ponse ¨¤ l'¨¦valuation de la direction a ¨¦t¨¦ envoy¨¦e au demandeur le vendredi 7 mai 2020 ¨¤ 10 h 51, heure de New York (EST), ¨¤ 17 h 51. ¨¤ J¨¦rusalem-Est et Ramallah. Le PNUD a envoy¨¦ la r¨¦ponse RME apr¨¨s les heures de travail dans la station des droits, au d¨¦but du week-end du demandeur (qui ¨¦tait samedi et dimanche), et pendant le week-end traditionnel de l'oPt qui est vendredi et samedi. Le tribunal a donc d¨¦termin¨¦ que la premi¨¨re journ¨¦e compl¨¨te de la livraison de l'e-mail ¨¦tait le 8 mai 2020, ce qui signifie que le d¨¦compte de 90 jours en vertu de l'art. 8.1 (d) (i) (a) du statut de l...

The management evaluation response was sent to the Applicant on Friday, 7 May 2020, at 10:51 a.m., New York time (EDT), which was 5:51 p.m. in East Jerusalem and Ramallah. UNDP sent the RME Response after working hours in the duty station, at the start of the Applicant¡¯s weekend (which was Saturday and Sunday), and during the traditional weekend in the oPt which is Friday and Saturday. The UNDT therefore determined that the first full day of the delivery of the email was 8 May 2020, which means that the 90-day count under art. 8.1(d)(i)(a) of the UNDT Statute started from 9 May 2020. The...

L¡¯avis et son placement dans le personnel du demandeur notant que la d¨¦cision en cause est une r¨¦primande ¨¦crite impos¨¦e pour lutter contre la conduite insatisfaisante d¡¯un membre du personnel ¨¤ la suite d¡¯une enqu¨ºte sur une altercation, le tribunal estime que la d¨¦cision en cause constitue une mesure administrative en vertu de la SEC. 2.1 (d) de ST / AI / 2017/1 (conduite insatisfaisante, enqu¨ºtes et processus disciplinaire). Le fait qu¡¯une r¨¦primande n¡¯est pas une mesure disciplinaire ?ne signifie pas qu¡¯une r¨¦primande n¡¯a pas de cons¨¦quences juridiques, qui sont au d¨¦triment de son...

The Notice and its placement in the Applicant¡¯s personnel file   Noting that the decision at issue is a written reprimand imposed to address a staff member¡¯s unsatisfactory conduct following an investigation of an altercation, the Tribunal considers that the decision at issue constitutes an administrative measure under sec. 2.1(d) of ST/AI/2017/1 (Unsatisfactory conduct, investigations and the disciplinary process). The fact that a reprimand is not a disciplinary measure ¡°does not mean that a reprimand does not have legal consequences, which are to the detriment of its addressee, especially...

En affirmant si l'administration a correctement d¨¦termin¨¦ la st¨¦noserie du demandeur, le probl¨¨me de base devant le tribunal est de savoir si et, dans l'affirmative, dans quelle mesure, le doctorat du demandeur. L'exp¨¦rience en ¨¦conomie constituerait une exp¨¦rience de travail pertinente pour un professionnel de la langue selon les directives de notation pour le personnel linguistique. Les preuves documentaires au dossier montrent que le demandeur a fait son doctorat. en ¨¦conomie du 1er octobre 2014 au 9 juin 2019 ¨¤ temps plein. Par cons¨¦quent, son doctorat. L'exp¨¦rience en ¨¦conomie...

In asserting whether the Administration properly determined the Applicant¡¯s step-in-grade, the core issue before the Tribunal is whether and, if so, to what extent, the Applicant¡¯s 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...

La port¨¦e du contr?le juridictionnel dans les cas de licenciement pour service insatisfaisant se limite ¨¤ examiner si la nomination a ¨¦t¨¦ l¨¦galement r¨¦sili¨¦e sur la base des r¨¨gles applicables. Il n'appartient pas au Tribunal de proc¨¦der ¨¤ un examen du processus d'¨¦valuation du rendement ou de d¨¦terminer une cote de rendement diff¨¦rente. En l'esp¨¨ce, le Requ¨¦rant a ¨¦t¨¦ inform¨¦ que sur la base de la note globale 2020-2021 de "ne r¨¦pond pas aux attentes en mati¨¨re de performances" et de la note globale 2019-2020 "r¨¦pond partiellement aux attentes en mati¨¨re de performances", l'Administration a...

The scope of judicial review in termination cases due to unsatisfactory service is limited to reviewing whether the appointment was lawfully terminated based on the applicable rules. It is not the role of the Tribunal to conduct a review of the performance evaluation process or to determine a different performance rating. In this case, the Applicant was notified that based on the 2020-2021 overall rating of ¡°does not meet performance expectations¡± and the 2019-2020 ¡°partially meets performance expectations¡±, the Administration decided to terminate his continuing appointment. Having examined...

Le tribunal a constat¨¦ que l'annulation de l'exercice de s¨¦lection en question au motif qu'il y avait une violation de la confidentialit¨¦ dans le processus de recrutement ¨¦tait un exercice raisonnable de discr¨¦tion. Le Tribunal a rejet¨¦ la demande du requ¨¦rant selon lequel la d¨¦cision a ¨¦t¨¦ entach¨¦e par la discrimination fond¨¦e sur le sexe car une telle r¨¦clamation n¡¯¨¦tait pas ¨¦tay¨¦e par des preuves. En ce qui concerne le deuxi¨¨me processus de s¨¦lection, le tribunal a constat¨¦ que le demandeur avait re?u une contrepartie pleine et juste car il a ¨¦t¨¦ recommand¨¦ en tant que candidat appropri¨¦...

Nulle part dans la politique n'utilise des entretiens ou des tests ¨¦crits pour ¨¦valuer les comp¨¦tences et / ou les qualifications des candidats ¨¤ l'interdiction ou m¨ºme autant que d¨¦courag¨¦s. Les entretiens sont plut?t obligatoires lorsque ?la nomination d'un candidat externe est en cours d'examen? car il est indiqu¨¦ que dans de telles circonstances, ?les candidats (externes et internes) s¨¦lectionn¨¦s par le gestionnaire seront interrog¨¦s? (l'accent ajout¨¦). Il est en outre indiqu¨¦ qu'un ?test [w] rit peut ¨ºtre n¨¦cessaire? (voir Sec. 71). Quel que soit le statut du demandeur au moment du...