�山����

The Tribunal held that the denial of the Applicant’s request for retroactive promotion was lawful. The Tribunal advanced the following reasons: a) It was legitimate for the ASG/OHRM to invoke a reason for denial of retroactive promotion that would have created technical problems and additional costs as pension contributions; b) The deninal of the Applicant’s request for a retroactive promotion was not unlawful because of the length of the selection process, given that the selection concerned a promotion for a D-1 position requiring utmost care in the examination and consideration of the candidates; c) The denial of retroactive promotion for pension purposes did not violate the principle of equal pay for work of equal value. It does not follow from the principle “equal pay for work of equal value” that a staff member who exercises higher level functions has a right to receive the same salary and pension benefits as a staff member at a higher level exercising the same or similar functions.