UNDT/2024/053

UNDT/2024/053, Caldin, Langelaar

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

The Tribunal found no merit in the application. In particular, the Tribunal found no grounds for the Applicants’ claim that the contested decisions were unlawful or that they were subject to gender discrimination. The Tribunal found that neither Applicant qualified for sec. 6.3(a)(i) parental leave by operation of sec. 1.2 of ST/AI/2023/2, which set a cutoff date of 1 January 2023, nor did they qualify for the 10 weeks special leave under the transitional measures since they did not give birth and were not on maternity leave on 1 January 2023. The Tribunal found that since the Applicants did not give birth to their children, they were not entitled to an additional 10-weeks parental leave with full pay.

Decision Contested or Judgment Appealed

The Applicants, Mr. Caldin, a Reviser, at the P-4 level, with the Department for General Assembly and Conference Management (“DGACM”), and Mr. Langelaar, a Corrections Officer, at the P-5 level, with the United Nations Assistance Mission in Somalia (“UNSOM”), contested DGACM’s 23 March 2023 decision and UNSOM’s 12 March 2023 decision to reject each of their requests to be granted 16 weeks of parental leave under the Organization’s new parental leave framework, ST/AI/2023/2 (Parental leave and family leave).

Legal Principle(s)

The Tribunal found a clear rationale behind the parental leave transitional measures, which is to take into account the World Health Organization's ("WHO's") recommendation of six months minimum of breastfeeding for birth mothers. In this regard, the Appeals Tribunal has held that “differential treatment which pursues a legitimate policy is not unfair discrimination if there is a rational connection between the differentiation and the purpose it is designed to achieve” (see Canova 2022-UNAT-1252, para. 39, and also Krioutchkov 2022-UNAT-1248, para. 32). In this case, the differential treatment of parents who give birth to a child and parents who do not give birth to a child serves a legitimate policy objective. There is a clear rational connection between the differentiation and the purpose of the policy, which is to address health matters related to giving birth to a child in line with the WHO’s recommendation

Outcome

Dismissed on merits

Outcome Extra Text

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

Caldin

Langelaar

Entity

DGACM

Case Number(s)

UNDT/NY/2023/027

Tribunal

UNDT

Registry Location :