STATEMENT OF THE CEB HR NETWORK AT THE 62nd SESSION OF ICSC: RESOLUTIONS AND DECISIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND THE LEGISLATIVE/GOVERNING BODIES OF

STATEMENT OF THE CEB HR NETWORK AT THE 62nd SESSION OF ICSC: RESOLUTIONS AND DECISIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
AND THE LEGISLATIVE/GOVERNING BODIES OF
OTHER ORGANIZATIONS OF THE COMMON SYSTEM
(ICSC/62/R.2 and Add. 1)


Mr. Chairman,

The HR Network notes that the General Assembly did not conclude its deliberations of agenda item 131 on the United Nations common system and decided to defer to its resumed sessions a number of decisions on issues of importance to the organizations of the Network.

Of particular importance, as you know, is the introduction of the new Mobility and Hardship Allowance scheme. The proposal before the Assembly was for an implementation date of 1 July 2006. We note in your report that “a number of delegations questioned the reason for delaying the implementation date to 1 July 2006” The Network wishes to point out that the date of 1 July was not proposed in order to delay the implementation. Rather, this date was seen as the earliest possible date at which organizations could be ready to implement the new scheme. You may recall, Mr. Chairman, that we had a lengthy debate on this at the Commission’s session last summer, when organizations explained in detail their reasons for needing a period of six months between the GA’s decision and the roll-out of the new scheme. Perhaps it may be useful to reiterate those reasons here, also for the benefit of the new members of the Commission.

Firstly, the change-over from an allowance scheme that was pegged to the base/floor salary scale to one that operates with a lump sum approach requires organizations to make a host of changes to their IT systems. This is rendered more difficult by the fact that many organizations are currently in the process of introducing new ERP systems. Unfortunately, this work cannot be started unless we know that the Assembly has approved the package as proposed. Secondly, and tied in to the above, is the question of acquired rights and of harmonizing the organizations’ approaches to the phasing-out of the old allowance scheme. This is a rather complex undertaking, given that some staff will get less than before under the new scheme and others will get more. The HR Network has already progressed in this work and reached a better understanding of the issues of concern and the steps to be taken; nevertheless, more work will need to be done once the GA has taken a decision. Last but not least, once a decision has been taken, we will need to inform and educate our staff on the new package and have in place a detailed communication strategy. As you know, we are working with the ICSC Secretariat on this and are confident that it can be accomplished in time – provided that sufficient time is allowed between a decision and the implementation.

Given all the above, Mr. Chairman, the Network wishes to request that, if the General Assembly approves the Mobility and Hardship Allowance scheme at its resumed session, the implementation date be shifted to 1 January 2007.

In addition to the implementation date, the issue of mobility payments for staff serving at “H” and “A” duty stations remains of great concern to the Network. We note that the statements made in paragraph 9 of document R.2 suggest that this continues to be a matter that raises questions about the validity of a mobility allowance for staff assigned to H and A locations. Mr. Chairman, the HR Network has explained at length, and on many occasions, the reasons why we think it critical to distinguish between the hardship element – which reflects the degree of difficulty of a duty station – and the mobility element, which reflects the degree of mobility of a staff member. The latter has nothing to do with whether a staff member serves in New York or Kabul, Dakar or Pyongyang. It only provides incentives to moving from one duty station to another, often six, seven and more times in a career. Rather than going into further detail, once again, on this, the HR Network would like to circulate the statement Executive Heads have issued on the mobility and hardship allowance last year.

Let me now turn to Hazard Pay. The Network notes that in paragraph 14 of R.2, reference is made to the expansion of the criteria for payment to include “life-threatening diseases to which medical personnel were directly exposed in the performance of their duties”. Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, since your last session, a new and potentially devastating threat has emerged in full force – the Avian Influenza, which carries with it the danger of turning into a global human pandemic. Already, UN staff who are not medical personnel are at risk of being directly exposed to the Avian virus in the performance of their duties. I am thinking, for example, of FAO specialist staff whose work requires them to be exposed to the virus. Therefore, the Network wishes to request that the definition provided reflected in paragraph 14 be broadened to include also non-medical personnel.


Thank you, Mr. Chairman.