“No.”
That was the short answer of UNHCR.
For a staff member who has been serving with them for sixteen years.
Sixteen years.
Yes.
Let’s first recap the recent statements of the Secretary-General and his global advocacy efforts before delving into the shocking details of this fresh appeal.
In his own words, the Secretary-General proudly proffered:
“Let us all be part of a healthier workforce as we work for a better world for all.”
Then there were significant #unitednations statements celebrating the launch of the new workplace #mentalhealth and #wellbeing strategy in October 2018.
The HLCM’s Duty of Care Task Force’s name was changed to the Taskforce on Occupational Health and Safety Forum to accompany these groundbreaking initiatives.
And finally, the cherry on the cake was the introduction of the New Parental Leave Framework in January 2023.
Announcing the new policy, the Chairman of the ICSC noted that the New Parental Leave Framework replaces the current maternity, paternity, and adoption leave provisions with a parental leave provision of 16 weeks for all parents; and it also provides an additional period of 10 weeks to birth mothers to meet the specific pre-and post-natal needs.
In his own words, the Chairman noted that the new policy
“will allow women to have more equitable career opportunities with men because they are not forced to suspend or abandon their careers to provide childcare.”
and that;
“the enhancement of the current provisions further demonstrates the values of the United Nations common system.”
Returning to the appeal and the UNDT Judgment issued yesterday in the case of Rechdan.
Rechdan, a staff member who entered the service of #unhcr in 2006, went on special leave without pay for two years. At the end of the leave period and coinciding with the COVID-19 outbreak, a global pandemic in March 2020, UNHCR requested her to confirm whether she intended to return to her post or relinquish her lien to the post and submit her resignation.
Rechdan confirmed in writing her intention to return to the office but informed UNHCR that she was nearing the end of a high-risk pregnancy and asked whether she could be granted telecommuting arrangements under the covid policy.
The UNHCR Medical Unit confirmed that given the high-risk pregnancy, the staff member should be put on a 100 % telecommuting arrangement from Zug, Switzerland, for two months until the start of her maternity leave.
The Applicant’s Supervisor denied the request on the same day based on “operational requirements .” On a side note, Operational requirement is an expression the Organization invariably uses without a genuine reason to justify unlawful decisions.
The Medical Unit persisted and recommended that the staff member be at least placed on special leave with full pay for two months until the start of the maternity leave.
In an appalling reaction and decision, the UNHCR Head of HR informed Rechdan that her failure to report to duty meant that there was no option left but to accept her letter of resignation from service or else her absence from work would be considered unauthorized, thus leading to the abandonment of post.
….. this space is left intentionally blank to allow readers time to process their emotions and reactions………….
Two months later, the staff member gave birth and resigned.
Briefly:
- UNHCR did not approve Rechdan exceptional placement on telecommuting arrangements for two months, pending the start of her maternity leave, against the recommendations of the Medical Unit.
- UNHCR did not approve exceptional approval for the placement of Rechdan on special leave with full pay for two months pending the start of her maternity leave, against the recommendations of the Medical Unit.
- UNHCR did not approve nor pay Rechdan her maternity leave entitlement.
- UNHCR coerced Rechdan into a forced resignation.
Below are excerpts from the Judgment describing UNHCR’s conduct:
“49. .. the Administration refused to accommodate the Applicant’s needs solely on the vague ground of “operational requirement .” In doing so, it failed to properly consider the Applicant’s compelling personal circumstances.
56. …the Administration gave the Applicant more difficult options such as resignation and the extension of her SLWOP until 31 December 2021.
This undoubtedly constitutes discriminatory treatment towards a pregnant woman on account of sex (see, e.g., ILOAT Judgment No. 3861, In L. G. (No. 2) (2017), para. 7). I
In this respect, the Tribunal wishes to highlight that art. 1 of the United Nations Charter has established that the purpose of the United Nations is to, inter alia, promote and encourage “respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.
57. ..the Tribunal finds that the Administration failed to properly exercise its discretion in not granting the Applicant telecommuting arrangements for around two months. As such, the Organization failed to fulfill its duty of care towards the Applicant under staff regulation 1.2(c).
66. The Tribunal fails to understand how a reasonable decision-maker could have ignored the Applicant’s compelling personal circumstances, including the fact that she could not return to her duty station given her high-risk pregnancy and the travel restrictions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
70. ….the Tribunal recalls that “a staff member’s right to maternity leave during service is a fundamental human right and cannot be denied, limited, or restricted for any reason” (see Barbulescu, para. 41). “
Not surprisingly, MEU decided to uphold the decision of the Administration in the first place.
It is astounding that at one point, the Administration suspended the proceedings to discuss whether they could reach an informal dispute resolution exit, and even though two international female counsels represented the Administration, none of them saw it fit to resolve the issue in the interest of Rechdan and grant her fundamental human right: to take care of her newborn baby.
Let us recall here that Rechdan is a locally recruited staff at the GS-6 level.
What difference does it make if the Secretary-General issues a new workplace mental health and well-being strategy if the HLCM’s TaskForce’s name changes to an Occupational Health and Safety one; if a celebrated New Parental Leave Framework is issued when in practice, Rechdan was denied her basic human right, denied her maternity leave and denied the right to continue her career while providing childcare to her newborn baby?
UNHCR’s mandate is one of the noblest in the United Nations. Before protecting and assisting millions of displaced and stateless people around the world, you can start by protecting your own staff.
#unitednations #unhcr #humanrights #accountability #dutyofcare #mentalhealth
image credit of Gender and Society blog https://gendersociety.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/pregnant-women-on-the-firing-line/
Thanks! Keep up the good work holding people accountable. As hard as these stories are to hear, it’s important work.