2024-UNAT-1470 | SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

2024-UNAT-1470, Nina Humackic

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The UNAT held that the staff member had had ample opportunity to comment on her lateral transfer. The UNAT noted that she had been aware of the recommendation to separate her from her First Reporting Officer, against whom she had made a complaint of prohibited conduct, and had had the opportunity to voice her concerns and also had been informed of the reassignment decision nearly a month before she took up the new post.

The UNAT accepted that the responsibilities and job functions of the new post had been commensurate with the staff member’s competence, skills, and experience. The UNAT found that there had been no increased risk to her future job security and that she had suffered no economic prejudice.

The UNAT concluded that the procedural requirements of the reassignment had been met.

The UNAT noted that the Administration had dedicated extensive time and human resources managing the conflict between the staff member and her First Reporting Officer over four years, including mediation efforts. The UNAT agreed with the UNDT that maintaining a harmonious work environment and the prevention of prohibited conduct was a valid operational reason for the reassignment. The UNAT held that the reassignment decision was fair and operationally in the best interest of her former unit.

The UNAT found no error in the UNDT’s determination that there had been no evidence of an improper motive in the reassignment decision.

The UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the UNDT Judgment.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

A staff member contested the decision to laterally transfer her from the position of Contracts Management Officer to the position of Procurement Officer.

In Judgment No. UNDT/2023/041, the UNDT dismissed the application.

The staff member appealed.

Legal Principle(s)

There is no procedural requirement that the staff member consent to the reassignment.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed on merits

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Full Judgment

Applicants/ Appellants

Nina Humackic

Entity

UNIFIL

Case Number(s)

2023-1824

Tribunal

UNAT

Registry Location :

New York