UNDT found the application receivable and determined that the post number provided by the ICSC for reclassification purposes was that of a Compensation Officer with functions distinct from those performed by the applicant. Therefore, in the absence of a properly budgeted post, the request of the ICSC was a request for classification advice prior to a budgetary submission, which required General-Assembly approval. The reclassification proposal was not included in the budgetary submission to the General Assembly, and, accordingly, the General Assembly did not approve the proposed...
ST/AI/2004/1
Showing 1 - 3 of 3
Classification (post)
Jurisdiction / receivability (UNDT or first instance)
Subject matter (ratione materiae)
rocedurally flawed because the ASG/OCSS failed to give the Applicant an opportunity to respond to the concerns raised in the HCC Note and to comment on any perceived concerns regarding his performance. It was also unclear from the written decisions what specific conclusions the ASG/OCSS had reached about the Applicant’s responsibility for the issues raised in the HCC Note. In addition, the Tribunal was not convinced that the contested decisions would have been justified notwithstanding the breaches of due process and procedure.
Compensation
Evidence of harm
Non-pecuniary (moral) damages
Pecuniary (material) damages
Performance management
The Tribunal rescinded the contested decisions and awarded USD50,000 in non-pecuniary damages.