UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements
The UNAT held that the UNDT did not err in concluding that the contested decision to close the staff member’s complaint without investigation was lawful and reasonable. The UNAT found that OIAI properly assessed the allegations and determined they lacked sufficient evidence or indicia of misconduct, and that the incidents described fell within normal performance management rather than harassment or abuse of authority.
The UNAT further held that the UNDT correctly found that disagreements over performance ratings and the implementation of a Performance Improvement Plan do not constitute prohibited conduct under UNICEF policy. It also agreed that allegations of retaliation and the later abolition of the staff member’s post were outside the scope of the contested decision and could not be considered in this case.
Therefore, the UNAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed Judgment No. UNDT/2024/112.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
A staff member of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) contested the decision of the Office of Internal Audit and Investigations (OIAI) to close his complaint of harassment and abuse of authority against his supervisor without initiating a formal investigation. The complaint arose after the staff member received a “performance needs improvement” rating in his 2022 Performance Evaluation Review and was informed that a Performance Improvement Plan would be implemented. He alleged that the performance review process was used to intimidate and humiliate him and constituted prohibited conduct.
The United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT), in Judgment No. UNDT/2024/112, dismissed the application on the merits. It found that the contested decision was lawful and reasonable, that OIAI had properly assessed the complaint and determined it lacked sufficient evidence of misconduct, and that the incidents described fell within normal performance management rather than harassment or abuse of authority. The UNDT also held that allegations of retaliation and the later abolition of the staff member’s post were outside the scope of the contested decision.
Staff member appealed.
Legal Principle(s)
To prove harassment, unwelcome conduct must be shown that might reasonably be expected or be perceived to cause offence, or humiliation to another person, when such conduct interferes with work or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment. By definition, harassment may include words or actions which annoy, alarm, abuse, demean, intimidate, belittle, humiliate or embarrass another person.
Abuse of authority requires proof of the improper use of a position of influence, power or authority against another person, including in a manner which seeks to improperly influence the career or employment conditions, including contract renewal and performance evaluation.