Thèmes - Redeployment
Bien que les titres des documents soient en anglais, tous les documents sont disponibles en français quand vous cliquez sur la cote du document désiré.
21. In its resolution 58/270, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to commence, on an experimental basis, during the course of the programme budget for the biennium 2004-2005, with the redeployment of up to 50 posts, as necessary, to meet the evolving needs of the Organization in attaining its mandated programmes and activities, in accordance with a number of principles, as listed in paragraph 51 of the performance report. The Committee was briefed in detail on the steps taken to comply with the General Assembly resolution, as summarized in paragraphs 52 to 54 of the performance report. In 2004, it was not possible to identify such posts. Explanations were provided on the inherent difficulties in arriving at a listing of surplus staffing resources within a particular programme and therefore available for redeployment to another programme. During the preparation of the budget proposal for the biennium 2004-2005, some 800 posts were considered for redeployment, taking into account the priority of mandated activities. Moreover, the difficulty of identifying posts for redeployment was partially the result of very low vacancy rates for Professional posts (4.9 per cent in October 2004). The Committee was provided with a graph of changes in vacancy rates in 2004 for Professional posts (see annex V to the present report).
22. The Advisory Committee recalls that, in paragraph 65 of its first report on the proposed programme budget for 2004-2005,4 it pointed out that, as part of normal personnel practice, the continuing need for a post should be evaluated prior to filling that post again. Staff turnover does provide an element of flexibility, especially if the staffing table is managed as a whole. In this regard, the Committee stressed the need to view the allocation of posts as dynamic, rather than static; posts need to be reviewed periodically to ensure that their functions are consistent with current objectives. Moreover, the Committee indicated in paragraph 75 of the above-mentioned report that departments would not âownâ particular posts at particular grade levels. The Committee is disappointed with the apparent reluctance of the Secretariat thus far to comply with the General Assemblyâs directives in resolution 58/270. The Committee believes that there should be greater efforts made to utilize the flexibility given to the Secretary-General in implementing mandated programmes, rather than proceeding automatically to propose new posts.
53. The Advisory Committee continues to discern a lack of central direction in the management of the staffing table. Resource planning in the Secretariat should be undertaken on an Organization-wide basis to make judgements on new needs and challenges that must be responded to and on opportunities for redeployment. The responsibility for this should be clearly defined. The Administration has not fully exercised its authority to manage the utilization and deployment of the staffing resources Organization-wide. The Committee is of the view that the staffing table of the Secretariat will need to be administered with considerably greater flexibility and creativity if the Organization is to respond to new challenges. The Committee reiterates its contention that departments do not âownâ particular posts at particular grade levels and, in this regard, again stresses the need to view the allocation of posts as dynamic, rather than static (see A/59/601, para. 22).
54. The Secretary-General is entrusted, under Article 97 of the Charter, with the role of Chief Administrative Officer of the Organization. Although General Assembly resolution 51/226 may be interpreted by some as limiting the authority of the Secretary-General, the Committee finds nothing in that resolution which is inconsistent with the Charter. The Secretary-General must be willing to exercise his authority to administer the staff of the Organization, and the departments subordinate to him must accede to that authority. The Committee therefore urges the Assembly to strengthen the Secretary-Generalâs role as Chief Administrative Officer by granting him the flexibility necessary to effectively manage the staff and other resources of the Organization and by encouraging him to fully utilize his authority, it being understood that all personnel actions must be consistent with the Staff Regulations and that any which have financial implications should be treated in accordance with the Financial Regulations.
|A/60/7/Add.13||13.The calculation of additional requirements should have taken into account fully and systematically the potential for carrying out new or different tasks and activities without requesting additional resources. The Advisory Committee regrets that the revised estimates lack convincing evidence that an effort has been made to accommodate new and expanded mandates through a redeployment of resources. Such an analysis should have been carried out, even on the basis of the existing mandates and prior to the review of all mandates older than five years mentioned in paragraph 160 of the report of the Secretary-General (see para. 5 above).||2005|
|A/60/7/Add.13||25.The Advisory Committee points out that that many ethics-related activities are already carried out in different parts of the Secretariat, including the Executive Office of the Secretary-General, the Office of Human Resources Management, the Office of Internal Oversight Services, the Office of Legal Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations. The Secretary-General has not provided a clear picture of all the elements in the Organization that deal with ethics matters, nor is any attempt to redeploy resources apparent in the documents before the Committee. The Committee requests, therefore, that the Secretary-General describe, in his comprehensive follow-up report (see para. 11 above), the various ethics activities carried out by different organizational entities within the Secretariat, laying out a plan for coordination among them and exploring the possibility for redeployment of resources to the ethics office if needed. The Committee considers this essential to the planning of a rational structure for the ethics office.||2005|
|A/60/7/Add.25||7.In making its recommendation, the Advisory Committee is fully cognizant of what it stated in paragraph 67 of its first report on the proposed programme budget for 2000-2001 (A/54/7), in which it expressed the view that it is the responsibility of the Secretariat to inform the General Assembly thoroughly and accurately about whether there are enough resources to implement a new activity. In the case at hand, while the Secretary-General is within his right to inform the Assembly that he believes that additional resources are necessary, it is incumbent upon him to fully justify that position, with a full analysis of the possibilities for absorption and redeployment. In this regard, the Committee has been informed that, in view of the novel functions of the envisaged support office, it is not possible to utilize existing Secretariat capabilities to staff it. The Committee is not convinced by this explanation and points out that there is no evidence of a sufficient attempt to redeploy resources or otherwise accommodate this activity from within existing resources (see A/60/7/Add.13 and Corr.1 and 2, para. 13). In the opinion of the Committee, the Secretary-General should therefore be requested to revisit the matter and to submit a proposal that would be consistent with the intent of the Assembly.||2005|
|A/62/781/Add.15||. . . the Committee cautions that, in the interest of budgetary transparency, posts proposed for redeployment should cover comparable or related functions; vacant posts that are no longer required should be abolished, and requests for new posts should be fully justified (see also the Advisory Committeeâs reports on the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (A/62/781/Add.1, para. 18) and on the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (A/62/781/Add.3, para. 24)).||2008|