Executive committee of working group of
the directing council the regional committee
PAN AMERICAN
WORLD
HEALTH
HEALTH
ORGANIZATION
ORGANIZATION
120th Meeting Washington, D.C.
June 1997
Provisional Agenda Item 6.1 CE120/27 (Eng.)
28 April 1997 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
STATEMENT BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
PAHOWHO STAFF ASSOCIATION
The Staff Association presentation to the 120th Meeting of the Executive Committee is made possible by a decision taken by the Executive Committee at its 80th Meeting in 1978. The objective of this presentation is to convey to the Executive Committee Members the opinion of the Staff Association on matters that are directly or indirectly related to staff members and the Organization. The issues contained in this document were discussed during the XVI Council Meeting of the Staff Association, which took place in Washington, DC, from 28 October to 1 November 1996.
They relate to staff management relations; PAHO’s financial situation; the grade compression exercise and the subsequent salary survey; human resource development; work-related accident costs; WHO personnel policy; creation of a post of ombudsman; and participation on the Classification Review Committee.
The Staff Association remains concerned about the consequences for the Organization and the staff of the changing organizational conditions in the United Nations system. These organizational changes have resulted in reductions of staff and stem from the financial conditions imposed on the institution as a whole by one of its major contributors.
CONTENTS
Page
1. Introduction 3
2. Staff Management Relations 3
3. Staff Concerns 3
3.1. PAHO’s Financial Situation 3
3.2. Grade Compression Exercise 3
3.3. Human Resources Development 4
3.4. Work-related Accident Costs 5
3.5. WHO Personnel Policy 5
3.6. Creation of an Ombudsman Position 5
3.7. Participation in the Classification Review Committee 6
1.
Introduction
Since the Staff Association had the opportunity to address the PAHO Executive Committee last year, it has continued to enjoy a healthy working relationship with the Director. The good relations with the Director, Dr. George A. O. Alleyne, have made possible the constructive discussion of issues of great concern for the Association.
2.
Staff Management Relations
The good relations with Dr. Alleyne have resulted in the Staff Association’s participation in the Director’s Cabinet Retreat for two consecutive years, and in the Joint Advisory Committee (JAC), which provides the Staff Association with an opportunity to give its opinion to the Director on staff matters before policies are implemented. For the first time in many years, the Staff Association was fortunate to have the presence of the PAHO Director at its XVI Council Meeting, which was held in Washington, DC, from 28 October to 1 November 1996. On that occasion, the Director answered questions from the delegates and clarified issues of concern to them. The Chief of Personnel and the Chief of the Staff Development and Training Unit also made presentations during the Council Meeting. The Council was very pleased with such presence by the Administration.
3.
Staff Concerns
3.1. PAHO’s Financial Situation
The financial analysis discussed in the Director’s Retreat on 8 January 1997 has become a source of concern for the Staff Association. This concern stems from possible consequences to staff, as any reduction in the budget might mean staff cuts as well. The 1998-1999 biennium projection indicates that WHO’s allocation will remain the same as for the 1996-1997 biennium or below. However, in real terms this allocation is lower because of normal cost increases.
The Staff Association would like to be involved in any financial decisions affecting the staff. This participation is sought in order to contribute suggestions on staff training in preparation for relocation and other personnel actions.
3.2. Grade Compression Exercise
The lack of post descriptions also has another dimension in that it affects the mandatory salary survey. The methodology indicates that a Comprehensive Salary Survey has to be conducted every four to five years. At PAHO this was due in 1995. However, because of the lack of post descriptions, the survey cannot be fairly conducted, as post descriptions are the basis for developing job matches with the comparators.
As mentioned before, because of the method used to carry out the compression, the salary survey has been delayed two years. The salaries of the General Services staff have not been adjusted to the local conditions for that length of time. The interim salary adjustments made by the Organization during those last two years do not reflect the changes made by our official local comparators.
The Staff Association wishes to make clear that it was never opposed to the compression exercise, but does object to the negative effects that it has had on staff morale.
3.3. Human Resources Development
The Staff Association is fully aware and understands that the world and the international system are in the process of change. PAHO, of course, is not exempt from this procedural revolution, and its jobs could therefore suffer changes of one kind or another. The staff should prepare for these changes.
The Staff Association requests the Director’s support for the strengthening of human resources development. The objective is to provide the staff with the specialized training that PAHO’s mission demands and to equip the staff for future reassignment inside or outside the Organization. So far the emphasis has been on personnel administration. Administration entails the recruiting and placing of people according to organizational needs, drawing of contracts, personnel actions, vacation requests, etc. Personnel administration does not enhance or improve the capacity of staff and its importance has changed as many administrative functions can now be carried out more easily by the use of computers. The need now is to prepare the staff to be able to meet the challenge of new trends and conditions and to tailor them to new organizational needs.
3.4. Work-related Accident Costs
3.5. WHO Personnel Policy
The Staff Association disagrees with the new WHO personnel policy creating core and non-core staff and the hiring of staff under a variety of salaries and employment conditions. The PAHOWHO Staff Association, in coordination with other WHO Staff Associations, will prepare a document providing their views and the reasons why they are opposing this policy.
3.6. Creation of an Ombudsman Position
The Staff Association requests that an ombudsman be selected as soon as possible. In democratic societies, a public figure known as an “ombudsman” exists in almost every institution. The ombudsman’s primary role is to mediate between contending parties by fostering dialogue, facilitating communication, preventing conflicts related to misunderstandings, and promoting the reaching of agreements based on mutual trust and common sense. The ombudsman is not, in essence, a litigator, but a defender of good and equitable relations within an institution, and hisher interventions should be absolutely impartial.
To perform her/his duties, the ombudsman should combine different skills and expertise. In an international organization, this individual should have perfect knowledge of the working languages; exceptional ability to listen and understand the points submitted by the parties; tact, empathy, respect, vigil, tolerance, patience, and objectivity; excellent knowledge of the Organization; deep knowledge of laws, codes, and regulations; and ability to express others’ concerns and points of view with clarity. The ombudsman reports to the Governing Bodies and informs the Director and the Staff Association. An ombudsman’s office has existed in WHO Headquarters and other international organizations for many years.
The ombudsman’s office would address and deal with grievances and harassment cases properly and confidentially. At this level, mechanisms can be established to hear complaints and mediate disputes without escalation, avoiding the involvement of the Personnel Department and/or the Director.
3.7. Participation in the Classification Review Committee
Right now, the reclassification process is conducted in virtual secrecy. Once a staff member seeking reclassification submits the necessary forms to the Personnel Department and is interviewed by a classification officer, nothing more is heard until a decision is announced. There is no deadline for a decision, so one may not hear anything for a year or more. When the decision is announced, one has no idea of the reasons for it because this information is considered confidential. Therefore, staff has no way to check whether any mistakes occurred during the consideration of their request for reclassification.
secrecy stifles the appeal process because an appellant, who bears the burden of proof, rarely has sufficient evidence to prosecute an appeal.
It is well known that in WHO Headquarters staff are represented on reclassification committees (see Manual provision II. l Annex A, paragraph 10) and, therefore, PAHO should have the same provision, in keeping with the policy of the Member Governments to make working conditions in PAHO as similar as possible to those in WHO.
The Personnel Department’s rationale for maintaining secrecy is not logical. It argues that classification is a “management tool” and for this reason confidentiality is justified. However, every administrative procedure designed to accomplish a task is a “management tool.” Selection committees, RIF committees, meritorious increase committees, career appointment committees, pension committees, salary survey committees, and other committees and joint working groups are all “management tools” and yet staff are officially represented on all of them. There is no difference between a post classification review committee and other types of committees.
Because of the preceding, a large majority of staff have no respect for the classification process in PAHO. This will not change until staff is given representation in that process.
