UNDT/2011/150, Gehr
The Tribunal finds that none of the applicable provisions prevented the renewal of fixed-term appointments for a period of less than a year. It further finds that the alignment policy was properly issued and rejects the Applicant’s allegations of improper motives and discrimination. Terminology: renewal/extension: The wording of staff rule 4.12 and 4.13 shows an undifferentiated use of the terms “renewal” and “extension”. Delegation of authority: A delegation of power should not be guessed at or presumed. Organizational measure: A policy which consists, for a 山Secretariat office away from headquarters, in aligning the expiry dates of fixed-term appointments with the last calendar year may constitute an organizational measure. As a result of the Secretary-General’s broad discretion in relation to decisions on internal management, such a measure is subject to limited review by the Tribunal. Non-renewal of contracts: The fact that the Administration could have mistakenly granted an extension which contravened the applicable policy does not give any right to a staff member to have his/her contract subsequently extended in further breach of that policy. Principle of equal treatment: The principle of equality means that those in like case should be treated alike, and that those who are not in like case should not be treated alike.
In 2008, UNODC adopted a new policy, according to which the expiry dates of fixed-term appointments would be aligned with the last day of the calendar year (“alignment policy”). In 2011, the Applicant was informed that his appointment would be extended for 11 months, until 31 December 2011, pursuant to the alignment policy. Before the Tribunal, he challenges the decision to limit the length of his contract extension to less than a year and submits, inter alia, that fixed-term appointments should be renewed for at least one year, and that the alignment policy was neither properly issued nor fairly implemented.
N/A