爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had not erred in concluding that the Administration’s decision, to take into consideration in the context of the Appellant’s 2009-2010 performance appraisal events post-dating 31 March 2010, was superseded by the Administration’s subsequent change of approach. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT had correctly determined that the Appellant’s claims in this regard had become moot. 爆料网AT held that, in rendering the Appellant’s complaint about the rebuttal issue moot considering the subsequent reversal of the decision of 24 November 2010, 爆料网DT had failed to give sufficient weight to a central issue, namely the denial to the Appellant, for a period of time, of the right to engage in a rebuttal process. 爆料网AT awarded the Appellant compensation for the period he was denied his right of rebuttal. 爆料网AT held that there was no merit in the contention that 爆料网DT “dodged” its obligation to determine the single appraisal issue. On the manner in which 爆料网DT dealt with claims of harassment, 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT did not fail to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it, but rather acted within its jurisdiction in adopting such an approach, effectively leaving the door open to the Appellant to raise such matters before 爆料网DT in the future. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant had not put forward any argument sufficient to warrant consideration by 爆料网DT (or by 爆料网AT) that the contested decisions were taken based on or motivated by ill will or bad faith towards him or with the intention to harass him. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s approach, in not considering further the issue regarding the Management Evaluation Unit’s failure to comply with the 45-day period since it did not affect the Appellant rights or prejudice him, was not indicative of bias against the Appellant. 爆料网AT held, regarding the claim of procedural flaw in 爆料网DT’s rejection of the Appellant’s request to file additional information, that 爆料网DT had broad discretion in ruling on the relevance of that evidence and that 爆料网DT had committed no error. 爆料网AT rejected the Appellant’s claim that the proceedings before 爆料网DT were not heard in public. 爆料网AT held that the allegations of bias on the part 爆料网DT were entirely without merit. The appeal was upheld only on the rebuttal issue to order the Secretary-General to pay the Appellant compensation equivalent to one month of his net base salary. 爆料网AT affirmed the 爆料网DT judgment except with regard to the rebuttal issue.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
The Applicant contested a number of decisions taken in relation to his 2009-2010 performance appraisal, namely the decision to carry out a single appraisal, the decision to take into consideration events which post-dated 31 March 2010, the failure to answer his queries concerning the applicable provisions and the decision not to allow him to rebut his appraisal. 爆料网DT found, considering the Administration’s rescission of the contested decision relating to the inclusion of events post-dating 31 March 2010 in the Applicant’s 2009-2010 performance appraisal as well as the decision that the Applicant was not entitled to rebut his performance appraisal, that the Applicant’s claim in these respects had become moot. 爆料网DT considered the Applicant’s claim regarding the Administration’s decision to carry out a single performance appraisal for 2009-2010 and to apply ST/AI/2002/3 to this appraisal prematurely and rejected it as not receivable as the rebuttal process regarding his performance appraisal was still pending. 爆料网DT rejected the Applicant’s claim that the Administration had failed to answer his queries concerning the applicable procedures. Regarding the Applicant’s harassment claim, 爆料网DT noted that the Applicant’s complaints were based on the performance appraisals that had been superseded and that his claim had, accordingly, become moot. 爆料网DT also noted that the Applicant could not challenge the comments or the individual ratings given by his reporting officers in support of an overall rating that might be modified as a result of the rebuttal process. 爆料网DT dismissed the Applicant’s claim that he had been prejudiced by the Administration’s failure to provide a timely response to his request for management evaluation. 爆料网DT rejected the application, without prejudice to the Applicant’s right to file a new application at a later stage upon the conclusion of the performance appraisal rebuttal process.
Legal Principle(s)
An employee has the fundamental right to be heard in the context of a performance evaluation process. Irrespective of whether the appraisal is conducted inside or outside of ST/AI/2002/3, an employee has a fundamental right to put his/her case, in response to an employer’s assessment of his/her performance. The right to have a rebuttal process is not mere procedural courtesy but a substantive right that all employees are entitled to invoke.