爆料网AT Held or 爆料网DT Pronouncements
爆料网AT first dismissed the cross-appeal, finding that although the Administration has the discretion to reassign staff members, such reassignment must be reasonable in the particular circumstances and cause no economic harm to the staff member. It must also respect the procedural and substantive rules of law and must not be arbitrary. 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT that the reassignment was performance-related and yet the staff member was never allowed the opportunity to address his performance issues prior to being reassigned. Regarding the appeal, 爆料网AT disagreed with the staff member that the 爆料网DT had to order rescission. The Tribunal explained that the 爆料网DT has the discretion to either order rescission or specific performance under Article 10 (5)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute or compensation for harm under Article 10 (5)(b). It may also order both of these remedies or just one of the two. In the instant case, the 爆料网DT decided to order compensation only under Article 10(5)(b) of the 爆料网DT Statute, and it has the discretion to do so. Regarding the staff member’s claim that he suffered economic harm, 爆料网AT agreed with the 爆料网DT since he was transferred to another position at the same P-5 level, he suffered no economic prejudice. Regarding the staff member’s request that moral damages be increased from one month to six months’ net base salary for the stress and anxiety he suffered, 爆料网AT disagreed and found that the 爆料网DT did not commit any error of law in its assessment. Finally, as to reputational harm, 爆料网AT disagreed with the 爆料网DT. 爆料网AT noted that despite the 爆料网DT finding on the staff member’s poor performance being communicated to others in the hierarchy, 爆料网DT nevertheless deemed that the damage to his reputation was purely speculative. 爆料网AT explained although there is no evidence of the staff member applying to jobs and being rejected as a result of his tarnished reputation, he nevertheless experienced this harm to his reputation, through increased stress and anxiety, which was documented. As such, 爆料网AT ordered an additional one month’s net base salary for moral harm, as a result of the damage to his reputation. Regarding the staff member’s request for an apology, the Tribunal explained it was not within its remit to order such, and instead it ordered that the Judgment be placed in the staff member’s official status file. The request that the supervisor be referred for accountability was rejected on account that the breach in question did not exhibit the most serious flaws. The supervisor thought it was within his discretion when he decided to reassign the staff member.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
A staff member, previously serving as a Child Protection Officer at the P-5 level, challenged the decision of the Administration to reassign him to the position of Political Affairs Officer at the P-5 level within the same Mission. His supervisor had received complaints about his work and communication style and instead of addressing his unsatisfactory performance through the proper procedures, the supervisor decided to reassign him to a different unit to work in political affairs. The reassignment happened in April 2018, and the staff member received notice in October 2018 that his fixed term appointment will not be renewed after its expiration on 31 December 2018. The 爆料网DT found the reassignment unlawful. It concluded the administrative decision was performance-related, and yet the proper procedures were not followed to address the staff member’s performance issues. The 爆料网DT also said there was a lack of transparency behind what truly motivated the reassignment decision, and it amounted to a veiled disciplinary measure. Notably, the tribunal did not order reinstatement because it found that the staff member was already separated from the organization, and that his separation was the subject of other proceedings. Because the staff member was reassigned at the same P-5 level, the tribunal found that he suffered no economic harm. Regarding the staff member’s request compensation because of the harm to his reputation, the tribunal found that such claim was purely speculative. Regarding his request for moral damages for stress and anxiety, the tribunal credited the medical evidence the staff member provided and found a causal link between the administrative action and the harm he suffered. Accordingly, it awarded the staff member one month’s net base salary. The staff member appealed the 爆料网DT Judgment arguing inter alia that the tribunal erred because it did not rescind the reassignment decision and failed to recognize the reputational harm he suffered. The Secretary-General filed a cross-appeal arguing that the 爆料网DT erred in finding the reassignment unlawful.
Legal Principle(s)
A reassignment must respect the procedural and substantive rules of law and must not be arbitrary. The 爆料网DT has the discretion to order rescission or specific performance under Article 10 (5)(a) of the 爆料网DT Statute or compensation for harm under Article 10 (5)(b). It may also order both of these remedies or just one of the two. A transfer to a position at the same level does not show any economic prejudice on its face. The 爆料网DT is best positioned to determine the level of compensation to be given based on its appreciation of a case. Damage to reputation can be compensated as moral harm, if the staff member can demonstrate that the harm to his reputation has caused him stress and anxiety. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to order the Administration to issue an apology. The exercise of the power of referral for accountability under Article 9(5) of the 爆料网AT Statute must be exercised sparingly and only where the breach or conduct in question exhibits serious flaws.
Outcome
Outcome Extra Text
The staff member's appeal is granted, in part. The Tribunal increased the compensation awarded for moral harm with an additional one month's net base salary, in consideration of the reputational harm suffered by the staff member. The Tribunal also ordered that a copy of the present Judgment be placed in the staff member's official status file. The cross-appeal is dismissed.