51ÁÔÆæ

Le droit du requ¨¦rant ¨¤ un niveau correct de classification du poste et ¨¤ un niveau ¨¦quitable de r¨¦mun¨¦ration d¨¦coule des fonctions effectives exerc¨¦es au cours des ann¨¦es, toujours les m¨ºmes au moins ¨¤ partir de 2018, fonctions qui - selon l'aveu de l'Administration elle-m¨ºme - correspondent au niveau FS-5.

Le requ¨¦rant a droit ¨¤ une indemnit¨¦ calcul¨¦e comme la diff¨¦rence de salaire, indemnit¨¦s et autres droits entre le niveau FS-5 et le niveau FS-4, pour la p¨¦riode allant de novembre 2018 ¨¤ septembre 2022, plus les int¨¦r¨ºts au taux correspondant au taux d'inflation, y compris l...

The right of the Applicant to a correct level of classification of the post and a fair level of pay derives from the effective functions performed in the years, always the same at least from 2018, functions which - according to the acknowledgement of the Administration itself - correspond to the FS-5 level.

The Applicant is entitled to a compensation calculated as the difference in salary, allowances, and other entitlements between the FS-5 level and the FS-4 level, for the period November 2018 to September 2022, plus interest at the rate correspondent to the rate of inflation, including the...

Le Tribunal a ¨¦tabli, sur la base des preuves au dossier, que la facture et le rapport m¨¦dical que le requ¨¦rant a soumis ¨¤ Cigna n'¨¦taient pas authentiques. Le Tribunal a estim¨¦ que cela suffisait ¨¤ ¨¦tayer l'accusation selon laquelle le requ¨¦rant avait utilis¨¦ de faux documents pour recevoir des avantages ¨¦conomiques indus de la part de Cigna. Le Tribunal a ¨¦galement conclu qu'aucune preuve de l'efficacit¨¦ du traitement m¨¦dical n'avait ¨¦t¨¦ apport¨¦e. Le Tribunal a donc conclu qu'il existait des preuves claires et convaincantes que le requ¨¦rant avait commis une faute en soumettant une demande...

The Tribunal, based on the evidence on the record established that the invoice and the medical report that the Applicant submitted to Cigna were not authentic. The Tribunal held that this was enough to substantiate the accusation that the Applicant used false documents to receive improper and undue economic benefits from Cigna. The Tribunal further concluded that no evidence was offered of the effectiveness of the medical treatment. The Tribunal, therefore, concluded that there was clear and convincing evidence that the Applicant engaged in misconduct through his submission of a fraudulent...

Les all¨¦gations de la plainte du demandeur [sont tomb¨¦es dans le domaine des d¨¦saccords sur le lieu de travail concernant l'exercice normal de l'autorit¨¦ de gestion. La section 1.1 de ST / SGB / 2019/8 stipule que ?[D] isagrement sur la performance du travail ou sur d'autres questions li¨¦es au travail n'est normalement pas consid¨¦r¨¦e Gestion des performances ?. La conclusion du responsable responsable selon lequel il ¨¦tait peu probable qu'une enqu¨ºte r¨¦v¨¨le des preuves suffisantes pour poursuivre davantage la question en tant que cas disciplinaire (l'article 5.5 (c) de ST / AI / 2017/1) n...

The allegations in the Applicant¡¯s complaint squarely [fell] in the realm of workplace disagreements about the normal exercise of managerial authority. Section 1.1 of ST/SGB/2019/8 states that ¡°[d]isagreement on work performance or on other work-related issues is normally not considered prohibited conduct and is not dealt with under the provisions of the present bulletin but in the context of performance management¡±. The responsible official¡¯s conclusion that it was unlikely that an investigation would reveal sufficient evidence to further pursue the matter as a disciplinary case (section 5.5...

Le tribunal a rappel¨¦ ses observations dans Fultang UNDT / 2022/102 d¨¦pos¨¦es par ce demandeur. La mesure est fournie dans l'int¨¦r¨ºt de l'organisation; et ¨¦tait pleinement justifi¨¦ par la n¨¦cessit¨¦ de pr¨¦server les preuves et d'¨¦viter le risque de r¨¦p¨¦tition ou de continuation d'actes similaires similaires ¨¤ ceux dont le demandeur a ¨¦t¨¦ accus¨¦.

The Tribunal recalled its observations in Fultang UNDT/2022/102 filed by this Applicant. The measure is provided in the interest of the Organization; and was fully justified by the need to preserve evidence and to avoid the risk of repetition or continuation of further acts similar to those the Applicant was accused of.

Le fait que le demandeur ait accept¨¦ un poste de niveau inf¨¦rieur n'a pas rendu sa demande. L'administration n'a pas rempli son obligation d'offrir des postes disponibles au m¨ºme niveau de la publication abolie. Le demandeur a subi et continue de maintenir une perte de salaire pertinente parce que l'administration n'a pas fait de bonne foi pour le placer dans l'une des positions auxquelles il a postul¨¦ au niveau P-5, des postes pour lesquels il ¨¦tait d?ment qualifi¨¦. L'administration n'a pas non plus respect¨¦ son obligation de r¨¦affecter le demandeur en mati¨¨re ou en priorit¨¦ ¨¤ un autre post...

The fact that the Applicant accepted a lower level post did not make his application moot. The Administration failed to fulfil its obligation to offer available positions at the same level of the abolished post. The Applicant sustained and continues to sustain a relevant loss of salary because the Administration failed to make good faith efforts to place him in one of the positions that he applied to at the P-5 level, positions for which he was duly qualified. The Administration also failed to meet its obligation to reassign the Applicant as a matter or priority to another post matching his...

Le tribunal a constat¨¦ que la sanction dans cette affaire n'avait aucun lien rationnel ou relation appropri¨¦e avec les preuves au dossier et le but d'une discipline progressiste ou corrective. Les messages du demandeur ¨¦taient principalement r¨¦actionnaires, et il a montr¨¦ un grand p?t¨¦ en ne r¨¦pondant pas au ton du plaignant. Le demandeur a ¨¦t¨¦ provoqu¨¦. Le demandeur n'a identifi¨¦ aucune situation particuli¨¨re qui justifierait l'anonymisation de cette question, en dehors de l'embarras et de l'inconfort personnels potentiels, qui n'¨¦taient pas des motifs suffisants pour accorder l'anonymat.

The Tribunal found that the sanction in this case bore no rational connection or suitable relationship to the evidence on the record and the purpose of progressive or corrective discipline. The Applicant¡¯s messages were mainly reactionary, and he showed great pateince in not responding to the complainant's tone. The Applicant was provoked. The Applicant identified no special circumstances which would warrant the anonymization of this matter, apart from potential personal embarrassment and discomfort, which were not sufficient grounds to grant anonymity.

Le tribunal a constat¨¦ que la candidature du demandeur n¡¯a pas ¨¦t¨¦ pleinement consid¨¦r¨¦e. De nombreuses questions ont ¨¦t¨¦ supprim¨¦es apr¨¨s le test, une m¨¦thodologie de notation a ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦velopp¨¦e apr¨¨s le test et m¨ºme la note de passage a ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦termin¨¦e apr¨¨s le test. S'il y avait en effet un besoin l¨¦gitime de faire une correction, ce qu'il n'y avait aucune preuve qu'il y avait, l'action autoris¨¦e que l'administration aurait pu prendre selon Chhikara 2020-UNAT-1014 ¨¦tait: (a) administrer un nouveau test ¨¦crit ¨¤ tous les candidats; ou (b) mettre en ?uvre des variations de la m¨¦thodologie d...

The Tribunal found that the Applicant¡¯s candidature was not given full and fair consideration. Many questions were deleted after the test, a grading methodology was developed after the test and even the passing grade was determined after the test. If indeed there was a legitimate need to make a correction, which there was no proof that there was, the permitted action that the Administration could have taken as per Chhikara 2020-UNAT-1014 was either: (a) administer a new written test to all candidates; or (b) implement variations to the assessment methodology that would not have prejudiced any...

The Applicant was found suitable for available positions. Indeed, for one job opening, he was one of the eight candidates short-listed and convoked to interview. By shortlisting him, the Administration tacitly acknowledged that he was deemed suitable for the position; per Timothy UNDT/2017/080, as a continuing appointment holder facing termination, the Administration was obliged from that point to consider his candidacy on a preferred, non-competitive basis.

The Tribunal found that the Administration failed in its obligation to make good faith efforts to absorb the Applicant into a new post...

Il ¨¦tait crucial pour le tribunal d'examiner la relation entre le demandeur et la victime pr¨¦sum¨¦e de son comportement. Il y avait des preuves claires d'un soutien financier constant au plaignant / victime. La requ¨¦rante a ¨¦tabli une relation de confiance avec la plaignante / victime. Le lieu o¨´ elle a pu compter sur lui pour soutenir et ¨¦tait ¨¤ l'aise pour le rencontrer en dehors du bureau de campagne du Malawi de l'UNFPA. La victime a ¨¦t¨¦ plac¨¦e dans une position tr¨¨s vuln¨¦rable. Les abus de la part du demandeur n'¨¦taient pas un ¨¦pisode isol¨¦, car le demandeur est ¨¦galement accus¨¦ d...

It was crucial for the Tribunal to examine the relationship between the Applicant and the alleged victim of his behaviour. There was clear evidence of constant financial support to the complainant/victim. The Applicant built a relationship of trust with the complainant/victimthe where she was able to rely on him for support and was comfortable to meet with him outside of the UNFPA Malawi Country Office. The victim was placed in a very vulnerable position. The abuse by the Applicant was not an isolated episode, as the Applicant is accused also for sexual assault and harassment in different...

Le tribunal a constat¨¦ que l'utilisation du rapport d'enqu¨ºte n'¨¦tait pas soumise ¨¤ l'accord de confidentialit¨¦ entre les parties; C'¨¦tait un document autonome, qui a ¨¦t¨¦ l¨¦galement utilis¨¦ devant le tribunal. La d¨¦cision ne constituait pas une mesure disciplinaire. Il a ¨¦t¨¦ pris en attendant l'ach¨¨vement du processus disciplinaire et ¨¦tait sans pr¨¦judice aux droits du demandeur. Plus d'une circonstance justifiant le placement du membre du personnel sur ALWP s'est produite. Le requ¨¦rant pourrait ¨ºtre rejet¨¦ ou s¨¦par¨¦ du service avec les Nations Unies pour violation du devoir de confiance et de...

The Tribunal found that the use of the investigation report was not subject to the confidentiality agreement between the parties; it was an autonomous document, which was lawfully used in court. The decision did not constitute a disciplinary measure. It was taken pending the completion of the disciplinary process and was without prejudice to the Applicant¡¯s rights. More than one circumstance warranting the placement of the staff member on ALWP occurred. The Applicant could be dismissed or separated from service with the United Nations for breach of the duty of trust and confidence, in...

L'affaire a ¨¦t¨¦ d¨¦cid¨¦e par un banc de trois juges. La majorit¨¦ a d¨¦cid¨¦ de rejeter la demande avec un juge dissident. Selon la cr¨¦ation des faits de l'affaire, la majorit¨¦ a conclu que l'intim¨¦ avait justifi¨¦ des preuves claires et convaincantes la base factuelle de la d¨¦cision contest¨¦e. En ce qui concerne l'inconduite, la majorit¨¦ a soutenu que l'acte de forcer les rapports sexuels, par le requ¨¦rant sur le plaignant - (c'est-¨¤-dire le viol), ¨¦quivalait ¨¤ des abus sexuels sous une forme grave et, en tant que tel, constituait une fausse inconduite prescrite par le r¨¨glement 10.1 du personnel...