Endemic Coercion Schemes: #UNRWA’s savvy “Separation Agreements”

Consider this.

You are a long-term senior UN staff.

You are invited to a meeting with an Under-Secretary-General.

You are accused of serious misconduct and asked to resign.

You refuse.

A few hours later, you are presented with a termination letter effective the same day.

No investigation, due process, an opportunity to respond, right to submit exculpatory evidence, or disciplinary process. No, No, No. Nothing.

The next day, you are requested instead to sign a “Separation Agreement” or face termination.

“You have two hours left to decide,” as articulately and eloquently conveyed by the Director of Legal Affairs…

In French, there is a saying that perfectly depicts this scenario: it is called “l’épée de Damoclès.” In the figurative speech, it means a sword is hanging above your head, waiting to chop it off. 

The UN coerces you to sign this agreement under duress. You will be left without a job, income, or medical insurance, and your family’s future is at stake. You reluctantly sign and commit not to file any claim against senior management. 

The “Separation Agreement” miraculously rescinds the disciplinary measure and replaces it with a positive performance evaluation and a lengthy full-pay leave. Whatever happened to the serious misconduct? Whatever happened to accountability?

Savvy.

This is #UNRWA. This is the #UnitedNations.

But the same managers still work for international organizations, and you’re not.

Excerpts from the Judgment:

“This Separation Agreement was established in lieu of imposing a disciplinary measure and as a full and final settlement and release of any and all claims. UNRWA will provide the Staff Member with a positive performance evaluation by his supervisor(s) to enable him to seek alternative employment outside UNRWA. 

It is clear that the former CG and the former D/DLA (both representing the Agency), and the Applicant negotiated about the conditions of the Applicant’s separation, which resulted in the Separation Agreement signed. One of the agreed conditions was the issuance of a positive performance evaluation by the Agency. 

The Tribunal reiterates that the Standards of Conduct apply to all staff members within UNRWA.. Managers and supervisors in a position of leadership are supposed to serve as a role model and therefore have a special obligation to uphold the highest standards of conduct. These standards include qualities as honesty, truthfulness, impartiality and incorruptibility.

Supervisors have a duty to evaluate staff members’ performance carefully and honestly. Supervisors are not allowed to issue a better evaluation where a staff member resigns than he would have received had he stayed within the Agency. This would be unfair towards other staff members, but it would also be a risk for future employers, possibly including other United Nations entities.”

Now consider this.

You are a long-term UN staff.

You report misconduct against your supervisors.

You request protection against retaliation.

You testify in an investigation against them.

Senior Management wants you out.

They fabricate allegations against you.

You cooperate with the investigation.

You are not provided the investigation report.

You are not provided any evidence against you.

The due process is completed.

You are invited to a meeting to finalize the disciplinary process.

You are informed by the USG of your immediate termination for serious misconduct in agreement with the Director of Legal Affairs and Director of Human Resources.

Less than a minute after, you are presented by the same USG and a WITNESS with a blackmail and bribery offer of resignation instead of termination, with an excellent performance evaluation report and a highly enticing financial package.

But there is one condition: you must sign an NDA agreeing not to file any claims against him or his Directors. Whatever happened to the serious misconduct?

Savvy.

This is #UNRWA. This is the #UnitedNations.

Excerpts from the Judgment:

“In the present case, it is apparent that the former CG offered the Applicant the option of resigning and receiving a positive recommendation instead of being terminated. If substantiated, such a practice is a blatant violation of the UN’s core values. If a staff member has committed serious misconduct, he/she must be separated from the Agency in accordance with the Agency’s regulatory framework. Under no circumstances should this staff member be provided with a positive recommendation, thus allowing him/her to pursue his/her international career within the United Nations system.”

You refuse.

You are terminated.

You appeal.

You win.

Twice.

But the same managers still work for international organizations, and you’re not.

Now consider also this.

You are accused of serious misconduct.

You fully cooperate with the investigation.

You patiently await the due process letter.

It doesn’t come.

No opportunity to respond, No right to submit exculpatory evidence, No disciplinary process, No due process, No, No, No. Nothing.

One exception: senior Management suddenly decides to place a note in your official status file, unilaterally concluding that you are guilty without giving you the inherent right to defend yourself and to complete the proper disciplinary process.

Savvy.

This is #UNRWA. This is the #UnitedNations.

You appeal.

You are prevented from pursuing gainful employment due to the note to the file.

You fight.

You win.

But the same managers still work for international organizations, and you are not.

Excerpts from the Judgment:

“It is uncontested that the Applicant was not provided with an opportunity to respond to the allegations of misconduct and the findings of the investigation. This failure is an obvious breach of the Applicant’s due process rights. Furthermore, the UNAT consistently held that placing such communications in an OSF has the direct legal consequence that it impacts future careers prospects of the staff member.

The Agency’s agreement to issue positive performance evaluations while the investigation was not completed was an act that was not in compliance with the Standards of Conduct.

The Tribunal finds that obligations deriving from the UN Charter, the Standards of Conduct and UNRWA Regulations and Rules prevail over obligations deriving from agreements concluded by the Agency with an individual staff member. Furthermore, as considered above, the said conditions were not in compliance with the UNRWA and UN regulatory framework. 

The Tribunal thus holds that the conditions in such an agreement that are not in compliance with the regulatory framework of UNRWA and UN values and principles cannot be enforced before and by this Tribunal. “

The authors and advocates of these illegal “Separation Agreements” are still working for international organizations, and some are still with UNRWA. No one was held accountable.

There are hundreds more unlawful “Separation Agreements” coercing staff to leave under duress. The practice is ongoing in the #UnitedNations.

One senior official is awaiting his return to a prominent position in an international organization. A Director of Legal Affairs is occupying a leading post in the legal department of an international organization. The Director of Human resources is still with UNRWA.

You are out. They’re still in.

Accountability. Zero.

REMINDER.

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person…

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained….