At
UN, "Scam" of
Promotions
& Exam Hit
Again by
Overworked
Judge
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
Aug 2, updated
Aug 21 -- Two
full months
ago the UN
Dispute
Tribunal put
on its web
site a
preliminary decision
which
confirmed
criticisms
long made of
fairness in
the UN
Department of
Safety and
Security by
whistleblowing
Security
officers and
Inner City
Press.
Now belatedly
the
second ruling
is out, put
online here
by Inner City
Press.
Explaining the
delay by a
lack of
resources for
the UN Dispute
Tribunal,
Judge
Ebrahim-Carstens
says the
parties have
to go back to
the drawing
table.
A
staff analysis
to Inner City
Press
"notes
the way the
judge said
that S1 and S2
of the service
have been
discriminated
by
management...We
are very sad
and
disappointed
on how the UN
has dealt with
this issue. It
is our believe
that the whole
of SSS
management
should be
asked to
resigned
including the
head of the
Admin Section
of SSS.
"All this goes
beyond SSS as
OSLA, MEU, and
other
departments in
the UN are
involved. The
UN can go to
any country in
the world and
talk about the
rule of law
but cannot do
it in house.
"Furthermore,
the last class
of officers
2011 where
recruited as
temporary
staff. To be
able to issue
a temporary
staff contract
the staff
member has to
work less than
365 days, so
the UN gave
them 364 days!
Isnt that
nice? The UN
using every
dirty trick in
the book used
by big
corporations
in the private
sector to
avoid giving
these guys
better working
benefits."
We will have
more on this.
Update
of August 21:
when Inner
City Press,
Ban Ki-moon's
spokesperson's
office had no
response to
the decision.
And on August
21, Nanci St.
John of the
UN's iSeek
intraweb
declined to
publish a
staff member's
three
paragraph
summary of the
case, saying
that
"iSeek
is a platform
to inform
staff members
all around the
world about
subjects than
can interest
the largest UN
population and
not only a
smaller group
of people, on
a subject that
is not shared
by all.
"We would like
to suggest you
contact the
Office of
Administration
of Justice
and, with
them, draft a
story about
the new
administration
of justice in
the UN system,
using this
particular
case as an
illustration.
This will echo
the numerous
stories that
have already
been posted on
iSeek on this
new system.
The angle
would be to
show staff,
through a
concrete
example, how
this system
works and how
staff can
benefit from
it."
Hmm. It all
began, in a
sense, with a
leaked master
plan of
promotion
which Inner
City Press obtained and
published in
2009
entititled Possible
Transfers
and
Assignments /
Reassignments." The
list
undermined the
credibility of
interviews
that were
being
conducted,
implying that
some decisions
have already
been made.
Here
is from the UNDT
decision put
on the
Internet in
late May:
45.
Thus,
there are
significant
doubts whether
the reason for
the proposed
exercise is
bona fide as
it appears
unsupported by
the facts. If
this exercise
were due to
the CMP budget
limitations,
then the 24
regular budget
posts would
not be
included in
the list of
posts open for
vacancies.
Furthermore,
the existence
of an actual
restructuring
plan, as
submitted by
the
Respondent, is
doubtful. No
evidence of
the existence
of an actual
restructuring
plan has been
provided. The
only remotely
relevant
record
provided to
the Tribunal
is an undated
document
“Basic
information on
evaluation
criteria for
the Security
Officer
selection
process”,
which
generally
explains the
proposed
assessment
process.
However, the
status and the
authorship of
this document
have not been
explained to
the Tribunal.
Further, the
internal
vacancy
announcement
issued in
April 2012
does not
indicate how
many posts are
being
advertised. In
addition,
although the
Respondent
submits that
the funding
for the
Applicants’
posts will no
longer be
available, he
does not state
when exactly
such funding
will cease—in
fact, it
appears that
CMP-related
funding may be
available at
least until
2013 (see
Report of the
Secretary-General,
“Associated
costs related
to the capital
master plan”,
A/63/582 (3
December
2008),
providing
estimated
costs for
2008–2013). It
is unclear on
what basis the
Respondent
submits that
“cutbacks
demand a
reduction from
85 Security
Officer
positions to
49 Security
Officer
positions”.
The sole
document
proffered in
support of
this
proposition—A/63/582—
does not
appear to
contain this
information.
Thus, in view
of the factors
above,
substantial
doubts exist
with the
lawfulness of
the proposed
exercise.
56.
The
Tribunal gave
serious
consideration
to the issue
of the
duration of
the suspension
and finds
that, on the
information
before it, the
exercise in
its present
form cannot
continue and
the suspension
on the
exercise in
its current
parameters
will remain in
place until
this case is
disposed of on
the merits.
There is
obviously a
need to have
some form of
resolution of
the situation
in SSS, and
the present
judgment
should not be
interpreted
otherwise.
Whatever
process is
going to be
eventually
applied, even
in the absence
of a properly
promulgated
administrative
issuance, such
process must
be conducted
in compliance
with the basic
standards of
fairness and
reasonableness
and it must be
properly
documented.
Order
57.
The
decision
requiring the
Applicants to
undergo a
competitive
process
announced in
the SSS
bulletin for
6–9 April 2012
being found
prima facie
unlawful, the
Tribunal
orders
suspension of
the
implementation
of the
decision to
carry out the
said
competitive
process until
the present
case is
disposed of on
the merits.
We'll
have more on
all this -
watch this
site.
, 
