UNDT/2020/176, Pedreyra
UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements
The job description for the position under review contained the same requirements as those agreed for the other services. There was therefore no evidence of ulterior motive in the design of the job description. The position was among those newly created following the reorganization of the concerned Division. While the Applicant disagreed with the way the restructuring was conducted, he was unable to show that the Administration exceeded its discretion. The Applicant failed the test which was eliminatory, therefore, his score at the interview was not taken into consideration. The written assessment methodology was agreed among the different services, therefore, there is no evidence that it was designed to disfavor the Applicant. The documentation of the grading of the test revealed that the Applicant was graded fairly and failed the written test. The qualifications of the selected candidate are irrelevant given that the reason why the Applicant was not selected is that he failed the written test.
Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed
Decision not to select the Applicant for a post.
Legal Principle(s)
The Administration has broad discretion in matters of staff selection. The Dispute Tribunal will only examine whether the procedure was followed and whether the staff member received full and fair consideration. The Dispute Tribunal is not to substitute its judgment for that of the Administration. In matters of staff selection, when the Administration minimally shows that the staff member was given full and fair consideration, the burden shifts to the applicant to show by clear and convincing evidence that he/she was denied a fair chance of selection.