UNDT/2009/075, Castelli
“Continuous service” occurs if a staff member under two or more consecutive contracts works without any break in employment. A break-in-service cannot be taken into account if the staff member continues to work and be paid. Not every break in employment will effect a discontinuity for the purpose of calculating entitlements. Based on its failures to follow its own internal procedures or its alleged mistakes, the Administration may not impose a break-in-service in order to deny a staff member benefits to which he would otherwise have been entitled. Outcome: Payment of relocation grant to the applicant, including interests.
The applicant was employed by the same office in the 山Secretariat under two consecutive contracts. The duration of the first was approximately 9 months and the second was 6 months. Although the first strictly limited his services to UNMIN and the second referred to UNIMIG, his responsibilities remained unchanged during the entire period of employment. After 11 months, the Administration ordered him to take a break- in-service which he refused to undertake. Instead, he continued to work and the Administration continued to pay him. Eventually, he applied for a relocation grant that largely depended upon whether he had served a continuous period of employment for one year or more. The Administration denied this. It essentially claimed that the applicant had not been employed continuously for one year or more and it was entitled to treat his employment as discontinuous, that it could not validly enter into an employment contract for one year or more without the central review body having been consulted, that it had mistakenly assigned him to UNIMIG in the second contract, and that he had not been appointed to a mission.
N/A