爆料网

Salary

  • Annual leave
  • Compensation for injury, illness or death attributable to service (Appendix D to Staff Rules)
  • Daily Subsistence Allowance (DSA)
  • Danger/hazard pay
  • Death benefit
  • Dependency benefits
  • Education grant
  • Education grant travel
  • Exceptional Voluntary Separation (EVS)
  • Health (medical) and/or dental insurance
  • Home leave
  • Maternity/paternity leave
  • Mobility/hardship allowance
  • Pension (see also, 爆料网JSPF)
  • Personal Transitional Allowance (PTA)
  • Reimbursement of income tax
  • Relocation grant
  • Rental subsidy
  • Repatriation grant
  • Rest and Recuperation
  • Sabbatical
  • Salary
  • Separation travel
  • Sexual harassment
  • Sick leave
  • Special Education Grant
  • Special leave (with or without pay)
  • Special Post Allowance
  • Termination indemnities
    • Showing 1 - 9 of 9
    2010-爆料网AT-083, Ihekwaba

    爆料网AT observed that the Appellant did not challenge the reasoning of 爆料网DT, but appealed on the ground that the administrative policy in place should be changed because she was promoted but her gross income was reduced. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant’s pay calculations also took into account other deductions and increases such that her net income increased. 爆料网AT held that the real issue before it was whether 爆料网DT made a reversible error in fact or law such that it must allow the appeal. 爆料网AT noted that the Appellant did not disagree that, on its face, the calculations of her salary were made...

    2011-爆料网AT-142, El Khatib

    爆料网AT noted there was a pattern of withholding annual performance reports and salary increments, and that those delays were coupled with the denial of a post for which the Appellant was short-listed but was not filled prior to the Appellant’s retirement. 爆料网AT noted the Appellant was also denied his post, which was abolished due to restructuring. 爆料网AT held that the Appellant was not treated conscientiously and fairly and deserved compensation. 爆料网AT granted the appeal in part and ordered that the Appellant be paid three months’ net base salary as compensation.

    2012-爆料网AT-225, Scott

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网DT’s interpretation process, which led to the dismissal of the claim, was neither unreasonable nor unfair. 爆料网AT noted that the affirmation that only the purchasing power element of comparison would allow an equal pay and treatment of staff members constituted only a postulation of a certain parameter among many possible options, without real support except in terms of policy selection because other criteria could also allow that kind of equal treatment, provided that they are applied in a general and non-discriminating way. 爆料网AT noted that the comparator element adopted in the...

    2013-爆料网AT-304, Al Surkhi et al.

    爆料网AT held that the relevant Circular contained all the necessary components to give rise to legal consequences for the striking staff and that it had individual application. 爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT committed no legal error when it decided that the relevant administrative decision for the purpose of former Area Staff Rule 111.3 was the decision communicated by way of the Circular and that 爆料网RWA DT correctly determined the terminus a quo for the purpose of computing the time for requesting administrative review. 爆料网AT upheld the 爆料网RWA DT’s determination as to the limits of its jurisdiction. 爆料网AT...

    2018-爆料网AT-840, Lloret-Alca?iz et al.

    爆料网AT found that the appeal raised significant questions of law about the power of the Organisation to unilaterally alter or reduce the compensation of staff members of the Organisation. For that reason, the President of 爆料网AT in terms of Article 10(2) of the 爆料网AT Statute elected to refer the appeal for consideration by the full bench of 爆料网AT. 爆料网AT recalled that an administrative decision is a unilateral decision of an administrative nature taken by the administration involving the exercise of a power or the performance of a function in terms of a statutory instrument, which adversely affects...

    2018-爆料网AT-831, Mizerska-Dyba

    爆料网AT held that the Appellant had failed to make a request for correction of her current contract. 爆料网AT held that it could not step outside its statutory remit and examine the merits of the Appellant’s claim for payments under her current contract when she had made no request for a review regarding it. 爆料网AT held that JAB did not err in finding the Appellant’s claims of 30 December 2015 for revision of her step level under the previous contract as not receivable since the Appellant submitted her request more than a year from the date on which she received her first salary or “initial payment”...

    2021-爆料网AT-1139, Jihad AbduGhani Oneis, Diab El-Tabari and Walid Abdullah

    爆料网AT held that 爆料网RWA DT erred in law by not taking account of evidence implying strongly that there had been an administrative decision by 爆料网RWA not to pay allowances to those who claimed them as their entitlement, and therefore concluding wrongly that there was no evidence of an administrative decision affecting the Appellant’s rights. However, 爆料网AT held that the 爆料网RWA DT’s Judgment dismissing the Appellant’s claim had to be upheld on grounds of lateness of their request for management evaluation. 爆料网AT dismissed the appeals and upheld the 爆料网RWA DT Judgment.

    爆料网DT/2009/020, Hussein

    The Applicant filed the application for a stay of proceedings in her case pending the outcome of an on-going recruitment process to the vacant post. The motion for stay of proceedings was refused because it lacked merit. The application was struck out because the Applicant was inviting the Tribunal to act as “Big Brother” and constitute some kind of sword of Damocles over the head of the Respondent by keeping her case alive while the recruitment process was on and to possibly invoke it if she was not happy with the outcome of the exercise. This was an abuse of the Tribunal’s process. In...