Performance report (285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290,-666)
You searched for:
Keywords: Performance report
Total judgments found: 199
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
Judgment 3879
124th Session, 2017
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision not to revise the “unsatisfactory” overall rating of his performance.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; performance report;
Judgment 3866
124th Session, 2017
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant impugns the decision not to confirm her appointment at the end of her probationary period.
Consideration 11
Extract:
It is for the organization to objectively assess the professional performance and behaviour of its employee. Seeking the views of colleagues undermines the objectivity of the assessment. It also shows a lack of respect for the concerned employee and it is humiliating for her or him to know that colleagues are being asked to assess her or his performance and behaviour.
Keywords:
humiliation; performance report;
Judgment 3853
124th Session, 2017
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his contract on the grounds of unsatisfactory service.
Consideration 8
Extract:
[I]f the O[rganisation] intended to terminate his contract for reasons of unsatisfactory service, [the complainant] should have been informed either through a negative performance appraisal report or precise warnings that his service had to improve (see, for example, Judgments 1872, consideration 9, 3224, consideration 7, and 3252, consideration 8). This is a manifestation of the duty of an organisation to act in good faith towards its staff (see, for example, Judgment 3613, consideration 27).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1872, 3224, 3252, 3613
Keywords:
duty of care; performance report;
Consideration 19
Extract:
The Tribunal rejects the complainant’s argument that he was entitled to a performance appraisal concerning his service. Plainly that was not appropriate in the circumstances where the issue was not service at a less than satisfactory level but rather no service because of absence.
Keywords:
performance report;
Judgment 3846
124th Session, 2017
International Telecommunication Union
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant objects to the working conditions to which she was subjected during a secondment and contends that the ITU breached the rules on performance appraisals.
Consideration 14
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal draws attention to the fact that every international civil servant has the right to be informed of her or his supervisors’ appraisal of her or his service (see Judgments 1394, under 5, 2067, under 10, or 3171, under 30). The organisation therefore has a duty to evaluate an official’s work in a timely manner and any failure to do so is a breach of its obligations to its staff.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 1394, 2067, 3171
Keywords:
performance report;
Judgment 3842
124th Session, 2017
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges her 2007 performance appraisal report.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; performance report;
Consideration 7
Extract:
The principles governing the Tribunal’s consideration of challenges to staff performance appraisal reports are well settled. Indeed, they are discussed in Judgment 3378, consideration 6. The Tribunal recognises that such reports are discretionary and will set aside or amend a report only if there is a formal or procedural flaw, a mistake of fact or law, or neglect of some material fact, or misuse of authority, or an obviously wrong inference drawn from the evidence. Nonetheless the Tribunal insists upon observance of procedures established to evaluate performance.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3378
Keywords:
discretion; performance report;
Judgment 3713
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainants challenge the reference value, used by the EPO to plan and measure productivity, introduced for patent examiners working in their technical field.
Consideration 3
Extract:
[I]t is obvious that the setting of a performance objective is merely a step in the process of evaluating the performance of employees. It is firmly established by the Tribunal’s case law that a measure of this kind can only be challenged in the context of an appeal against the final decision taken at the end of the process in question (see for example Judgment 2366, consideration 16, or Judgment 3198, consideration 13). In the present case, there is nothing to prevent the complainants from challenging, through the applicable internal procedures and ultimately before the Tribunal if need be, a staff report in which their productivity has been measured by reference to the contested value.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2366, 3198
Keywords:
performance evaluation; performance report;
Judgment 3697
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision to reject his internal appeal against the written notification issued to him by his Director in the context of the performance appraisal process.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; final decision; performance report;
Judgment 3692
122nd Session, 2016
European Patent Organisation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant who, at the material time, was working as a patent examiner, objects to three of his staff reports, submits that he was subjected to harassment and challenges the rejection of his request for an independent examination of several of his dissenting opinions on patent applications.
Consideration 9
Extract:
[T]he Tribunal can only find that, although ultimately the complainant obtained the rating “good” for his productivity, the comment accompanying that rating detracted from it. In this respect the disputed staff report is open to the same criticism as the report censured by the Tribunal in Judgment 3268, concerning an almost identical case brought by another official of the EPO. This report is therefore unlawful [...].
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3268
Keywords:
performance report;
Consideration 14
Extract:
[I]t is well settled by the Tribunal’s case law that if the rules of an international organisation require that an appraisal form must be signed not only by the direct supervisor of the staff member concerned but also by her or his second-level supervisor, this is designed to guarantee oversight, at least prima facie, of the objectivity of the report. The purpose of such a rule is to ensure that responsibilities are shared between these two authorities and that the staff member who is being appraised is shielded from a biased assessment by a supervisor, who should not be the only person issuing an opinion on the staff member’s skills and performance. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the competent second-level supervisor should take care to ascertain that the assessment submitted for her or his approval does not require modification (see Judgment 320, under 12, 13 and 17, or more recently Judgments 3171, under 22, and 3239, under 15). Of course, this check must be carried out with particular vigilance when the assessment occurs in a context where it is especially to be feared that the supervisor making it might lack objectivity and, a fortiori, when it takes place, as it did in the instant case, in a situation of overt antagonism (see Judgment 3171, under 23).
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 320, 3171, 3239
Keywords:
organisation's duties; performance evaluation; performance report; supervisor;
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment; performance report;
Consideration 8
Extract:
[A]ssessment of an employee’s merit during a specified period involves a value judgement; for this reason, the Tribunal must recognise the discretionary authority of the bodies responsible for conducting such an assessment. Of course, it must ascertain whether the ratings given to the employee have been determined in full conformity with the rules, but it cannot substitute its own opinion for assessment made by these bodies of the qualities, performance and conduct of the person concerned. The Tribunal will therefore intervene in this area only if the decision was taken without authority, if it was based on an error of law or fact, a material fact was overlooked, or a plainly wrong conclusion was drawn from the facts, or if it was taken in breach of a rule of form or procedure, or if there was abuse of authority (see, for example, Judgment 3006, under 7). This limitation on the Tribunal’s power of review naturally applies to both the rating given in a staff report and the comments accompanying that rating.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 3006
Keywords:
performance report;
Judgment 3679
122nd Session, 2016
European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to renew his contract.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; non-renewal of contract; performance report;
Consideration 11
Extract:
[T]he reason for not renewing a contract must be valid, and where, as in the present case, the non-renewal is for unsatisfactory performance, the staff member must be informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of his performance and be given reasonable time to improve it as an aspect of the organization’s duty of care and good faith.
Keywords:
non-renewal of contract; performance report;
Judgment 3678
122nd Session, 2016
European Organization for Nuclear Research
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to dismiss him at the end of his probation period.
Consideration 4
Extract:
The complainant [...] disputes the assessment of his performance during his probation period which led to his dismissal. It is firmly established in the case law that the Tribunal has only a limited power of review over such a decision. Thus, the decision will be set aside if it was taken in breach of a rule of form or of procedure, if it rests on a mistake of fact or of law, or if there has been abuse of authority, inter alia (see, for example, Judgments 987, under 2, 1817, under 5, or 2715, under 5). But as far as the assessment of the merits of an official is concerned, the Tribunal will not substitute its own opinion for that of the executive head of the organisation or interfere with it unless it finds that that that person has drawn clearly wrong conclusions from the evidence.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 987, 1817, 2715
Keywords:
judicial review; performance report;
Judgment 3670
122nd Session, 2016
United Nations Industrial Development Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges her Staff Performance Appraisal report, as well as the decision not to renew her fixed-term contract.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; performance report; work appraisal;
Judgment 3666
122nd Session, 2016
European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant contests the decision not to promote him in 2012.
Consideration 7
Extract:
The above considerations are enough to dismiss the complaint but, for the sake of clarity, the Tribunal finds it useful to add that the complainant’s claim that the Joint Committee for Disputes (JCD) was incorrect in stating that his performance appraisal report for 2011 could not justify his promotion, is unfounded. Article 45 of the Staff Regulations clearly provides that merit shall be of primary importance in considering eligibility for promotion, and it goes on to specify that the official’s appraisal reports shall be taken into consideration when considering comparative merit. However, the Tribunal notes that the complainant’s performance appraisal report for 2011 does not show that his merit would justify a promotion. Furthermore, the complainant’s criticism towards his 2011 appraisal report cannot be taken into consideration as he did not impugn the appraisal report in accordance with the relevant rules and within the applicable time limits. Therefore the complainant’s 2011 appraisal report is immune from challenge.
Keywords:
decision; performance report; time bar;
Judgment 3654
122nd Session, 2016
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to maintain on his personal file a disputed performance appraisal report issued after the expiry of his temporary appointment, and the decision to reject his application for inclusion on a roster of candidates eligible for temporary contracts.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; performance report;
Judgment 3613
121st Session, 2016
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges the decision to terminate his employment for alleged unsatisfactory performance, the Global Fund’s refusal to retract a News Release published on the date of the termination of his employment, and the decision to maintain the News Release on the Fund’s website and its refusal to award compensation for excessive publication, defamation and continued breach of privacy.
Consideration 27
Extract:
It is well settled in the Tribunal’s case law that a staff member whose performance is not considered satisfactory is entitled to be
informed in a timely manner as to the unsatisfactory aspects of her or his performance so that steps may be taken to remedy the deficiencies. The staff member is also entitled to have objectives set in advance so that she or he will know the basis upon which future performance will be based and that their appointment is in jeopardy if there is no improvement. As well, an organization may not terminate a staff member for unsatisfactory performance unless it has complied with its own rules to evaluate that performance. As stated in Judgment 2414, under 23, “[t]hese are fundamental aspects of the duty of an international organisation to act in good faith towards its staff members and to respect their dignity”.
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2414
Keywords:
fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; performance report; unsatisfactory service; work appraisal;
Judgment 3612
121st Session, 2016
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: After her separation from service in December 2012 on the basis of a separation agreement, the complainant challenges the Global Fund’s failure to follow the proper procedure with respect to her performance appraisal report for 2011.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; performance report; separation from service;
Judgment 3585
121st Session, 2016
World Health Organization
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant challenges a decision to dismiss her internal appeal against her performance appraisal reports and the reclassification of her post.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint dismissed; failure to exhaust internal remedies; performance report; post classification;
Judgment 3436
119th Session, 2015
Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: Following the abolition of her post in the context of the CTA restructuring, the complainant successfully impugns the decision to terminate her appointment.
Consideration 9
Extract:
By thus commissioning an extraneous body to undertake a task which entailed interfering in the assessment of staff members’ suitability for the available positions, whereas the Staff Regulations made no provision for this, the Centre established an assessment system parallel to that which existed officially and which, moreover, did not offer staff members the safeguards inherent in the official system.
Keywords:
performance report;
Judgment 3417
119th Session, 2015
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The Tribunal found that IOM's failure to ensure compliance with its performance evaluation procedures warranted an award of moral damages to the complainant.
Consideration 6
Extract:
"[W]hile there is an undoubted right of an organisation to decide not to renew a fixed-term contract, it does not follow that an organisation is, additionally, immune from any liability if it has failed to follow its own procedures designed to monitor, assess and evaluate staff performance and progress. The fundamental purpose of such procedures is to explicitly alert a staff member to identified deficiencies in her or his performance and thus give the staff member an opportunity to address those deficiencies and improve performance. The interaction of such procedures and decisions not to renew fixed-term contracts was discussed by the Tribunal in Judgment 2991, under 13 [...]."
Reference(s)
ILOAT Judgment(s): 2991
Keywords:
fixed-term; non-renewal of contract; performance report; work appraisal;
Judgment 3416
119th Session, 2015
International Organization for Migration
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: As the complainant's allegation of harassment was not supported by specific facts, the Tribunal dismissed the complaint.
Consideration 8(d)
Extract:
[T]he absence of appraisal reports is a sign of administrative malfunctioning open to criticism [...].
Keywords:
performance report;
Judgment 3400
119th Session, 2015
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Extracts: EN,
FR
Full Judgment Text: EN,
FR
Summary: The complainant successfully challenges the decision in relation to the FAO's response to her harassment claim and her performance appraisal for 2009.
Judgment keywords
Keywords:
complaint allowed; decision quashed; harassment; joinder; performance report;
< previous | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | next >
|
