0

Activity Report and recommendations by

the ILO Office of the Mediator

Annual

Report 2013 January 2013

December 2013

Marc Flegenheimer Mediator International Labour Office

1

Contents Glossary ................................................................................................................................................. 2

Task of the Mediator at the ILO ........................................................................................................ 3

Summary of the Mediator’s observations and recommendations ............................................ 4

Section I: A story to illustrate the reality ........................................................................................ 6

II.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 15

Demographic data ......................................................................................................................... 15

Case reporting ............................................................................................................................... 15

Breakdown by sex and by professional category (Grades) ........................................................... 16

Breakdown field - headquarters ................................................................................................... 16

II.2 Analysis of the three main categories and their sub-categories ................................................. 17

Organization, leadership and management (30 cases, 24% of the total in 2013) ........................ 17

Evaluative relationships (29 cases, 23% of the total in 2013) ....................................................... 18

Peer and colleague relationships (14 cases, or 12% of the total in 2013) .................................... 19

Advice, exploration and coaching ................................................................................................. 19

II.3 Impact and quality of services, as evaluated by the users of the Office of the Mediator ........... 20

Duration of the situation ............................................................................................................... 20

Impact and case resolution ........................................................................................................... 22

The importance of better information on the ILO’s system of internal justice ............................ 23

Section III: Other activities and contacts ...................................................................................... 24

Network of facilitators .................................................................................................................. 24

Field visits ...................................................................................................................................... 24

External relations .......................................................................................................................... 24

Conclusion and thanks ..................................................................................................................... 25

Annexes ............................................................................................................................................... 26

Annex I. Role and function of the ILO Mediator ........................................................................... 26

Annex II. IOA Ethics Code of the International Ombudsman Association (IOA) .......................... 28

Annex III. Standards of Practice of the IOA ................................................................................... 29

Annex IV. IOA Case Reporting Categories ..................................................................................... 32

2

Glossary VISITOR: A term in the jargon of ombudsman and mediation practice; a visitor is a person who seeks advice from the Mediator,

whether only for an orientation and better understanding of his/her situation, or to use the Mediator as a sounding board, to discuss options and approaches, as well as to engage in active mediation with the other party.

CASE: A case corresponds to a problematic situation in the workplace, potentially leading to a conflict if not addressed. The

conflict may also be declared already and quite open when the visitor comes to the Office of the Mediator. A case usually starts with one person reporting a situation to the Mediator, but depending on the visitor’s request and expectations, the Mediator will interact with one or several other persons in the resolution process following the first intake. A case may also be a situation concerning an entire team or office. Cases are registered and listed according to a specific terminology, see Case Reporting

Categories below. ISSUE: A case is usually made up of a variety of issues, some aspects of the situation presented to the Mediator may be

administrative of nature, others may have to do with unclear communication, others with disrespectful language, etc… the Case Reporting Categories comprise a definition of issues.

OMBUDSMAN: A word that finds its origin in Scandinavian languages and can be traced back to ancient Norse, Danish and

Swedish texts. It roughly translates as “representative”. The word is not gender sensitive (the term ombudswoman is not in use, neither is the plural ombudsmen). In the modern acceptation of the term two kinds of practices are to be distinguished: the “classic” Ombudsman, a state official appointed to provide a check on government activity in the interests of the citizen, and the “organizational” Ombudsman who works as a designated neutral party in an organization. An organisational ombudsman can provide options to staff members, coaching, shuttle diplomacy, mediation, track problem areas and make recommendations for changes to policies or procedures in support of due and equitable process. The ILO uses the term Mediator for that function.

Case Reporting Categories: Developed under the auspices of the IOA – see below – the reporting categories allow

professionals to identify and keep track of data related to their practice while using a common vocabulary, which allows in turn the organisation they work for to benchmark their management practices and better equip themselves to address problems that will be identified in the course of an ombudsman’s or mediator’s practice. There are nine categories, each of them consists of a number of sub-dimensions, these are the Issues described in the paragraph above. A complete description of the IOA taxonomy is given in this report’s annexes (Annex III).

IOA: International Ombudsman Association. It is setting standards of practice and a code of conduct for practitioners, the IOA also

offers training and development opportunities as well as an on-going learning and exchange platform for professionals in the sector. The ILO Mediator is an active member of the IOA as are all other mediators and ombudsmen working for a UN agency, and most other international organisations (see UNARIO below). More about the IOA can be found here: http://www.ombudsassociation.org/ UNARIO (UN and Related International Organisations): under the auspices of the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman in

New York, UNARIO brings together Ombudsmen and Mediators from organisations of the United Nations and similar organisations (International Committee of the Red Cross, European Centre for Nuclear Research, International Organisation for Migration, etc.) http://www.un.org/en/ombudsman/about.shtml ICRC: International Committee of the Red Cross, http://www.icrc.org/eng/

ITU: International Telecommunication Union, http://www.itu.int/en/about/Pages/default.aspx

CERN: European Centre for Nuclear Research, http://home.web.cern.ch/

WIPO: World Intellectual Property, http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en WFP: World Food Programme seated in Rome http://www.wfp.org/ UNOMS: UN Ombudsman and Mediation Services http://www.un.org/en/ombudsman/index.shtml

3

Task of the Mediator at the ILO The Mediator of the ILO performs three main tasks: assist staff and heads of departments to solve problems that may arise in the workplace; develop, promote and support the conducting of conflict prevention activities; and finally inform the Organisation of trends and new issues that should be considered in order to improve the working environment. Annex I describes the role and functions of the Mediator, as well as the work principles, practices and methods that guide his actions. Annexes II and III recall the Ethics Code of the International Ombudsman Association (IOA) and the Standards of the IOA applicable to practising the profession. These two texts form the basis of the guidelines for the Office of the Mediator at the ILO. The ILO Mediator’s mission and role are carried out at different levels and mainly:

At the individual/interpersonal level where the Mediator brings his support to the parties helping them to reframe the way they understand their situation and look for perspectives that open onto re-conciliation. When the one who speaks isn’t audible while the one who listens remains incredulous, form becomes more important than issues of substance: this pattern of communication unfortunately applies to a number of cases brought to the knowledge of the Mediator.

At an organisational level the Mediator gives an Upward Feedback to raise awareness on organisational trends and systemic causes of conflict.

NOTE

For the sake of simplicity, the masculine gender has been used in the wording of this report. When reference is made to directors, members of staff, collaborators, facilitators, technicians, etc. both sexes are concerned.

4

Summary of the Mediator’s observations and recommendations

General remarks

The 2013 Annual Report of the Office of the Mediator breaks no new ground, many of the questions raised

in 2011 and 2012 remaining pending1 in 2013. Nevertheless, the atmosphere at the ILO is in general visibly

less tense (see following point).

Specific issues relating to the cases reported by the Mediator (126 cases2) are discussed in Section II,

Statistics, using the customary format. The main issues are summed up under Case reporting below.

Change of guard and expectations

In 2012, the arrival of a new management team and its entry into service on the basis of the work done by

the transition team had been highly appreciated. The change in tone and a generally relaxed atmosphere,

which affected in particular relations between the Administration and the Staff Union, had a positive impact

overall on the work atmosphere in 2013. This trend is reflected – sometimes with startling clarity – in the

2013 statistics. Towards the end of the year, however, staff members started to grow impatient, some of

them complaining about the sluggish pace of reform or the lack of process transparency, others concluding

that in any case “nothing will change”. Managing the expectations generated by the Transition was a major

challenge for the new management.

A conflict at the ILO, day by day

Section I presents the classic mechanisms of a conflict in the form of a story. It is not customary to resort to

fiction; doing so has the merit of giving a down-to-earth picture of the obstacles to dialogue and

communication. If only one section of this report were to be read, the Mediator recommends it be this one.

The story, presented in the form of an exchange of e-mail messages between the Mediator and the persons

in conflict, brings to light the recurrent questions that the Mediator so frequently encounters in the

situations submitted to him in reality. Why is it so common at the ILO to turn down an offer of facilitation?

Why do so many officials feel that the conflict-resolution system offers them scant protection and fear

reprisals? Why do supervisors (the “bosses” in question) have the feeling they have been left to cope with

difficult situations on their own? The dual constraints resulting from this series of questions result in

situations that become unbearable, can turn into latent conflicts, conclude with the collapse of one or even

both of the parties, and end up, as has happened in many cases, before the Administrative Tribunal.

Case reporting

In 2013, 126 cases were reported and gave rise to a number of questions3 and observations.

The number of requests made for preventive purposes continued to increase, a trend first observed in 2011 and a positive development.

All trends reflect a more relaxed atmosphere overall, following the change in guard at the end of 2012. The detailed analysis of the three main types of conflict (see Section XXX) shows what is behind those trends.

The principle of equal treatment for field and headquarters officials means that the Mediator’s services are simultaneously accessible to all. However, as the comparative data for 2011 to 2013 show, the structure of the Office of the Mediator (one full-time position and 10 per cent of a post for

1 TC contracts (discussed in 2013), long-term sick leave and the exorbitant cost of workplace conflicts, lack of human resource expertise in country

offices, the internal justice administration system and the introduction of an updated anti-harassment policy, an instrument for obtaining an overview of conflicts at the ILO, headquarters-field relations, mobility policy (discussed in 2013). These points were already raised in the 2011 and 2012 reports. 2 See Glossary. 3 See Glossary.

5

administrative support) is such that the Office cannot ensure a true balance between headquarters and the field. Absent an expansion of the Office,4 the solution might be to rotate the function between headquarters and the regions.

The statistical breakdown by case reporting category5 (according to the taxonomy established by the International Ombudsman Association, or IOA6) remained remarkably stable and showed, after three years of tracking, that there exist systemic constants that it would be wise to examine, the better to counter them. The data are described in detail in Section II.2.

The proportion of women visitors7 is systematically higher (year in, year out, roughly 60% women to 40% men), contrary to the ILO’s demographic composition8. The Mediator had called on the relevant officials9 already in 2013 to study the possible causes.

Training

Training has a key role to play when it comes to conflict dynamics and the management of difficult

situations, and the ILO is acting responsibly in this regard, making available to officials a course on such

matters. However, the underlying strategy remains unclear, which is a problem. The report has more to say

on this subject, notably in Section II.2 and in the third paragraph of the Conclusion.

Facilitators

A group of facilitators for the offices in the Europe Region and headquarters was trained in 2013, i.e. 18

people who attended a four-day workshop organized in Geneva. The programme nevertheless requires

greater support to be truly effective (see Section II for further thoughts on this subject).

4 Which implies a second mediator, or regional posts. 5 See Glossary and Annex IV. 6 See Glossary. 7 See Glossary. 8 See GB/320/PFA, March 2014 , available at: http://www.ilo.org/gb/GBSessions/GB320/pfa/WCMS_236669/lang--en/index.htm. 9 Department of Human Resources, Deputy Director-General concerning reform.

6

Section I: A story to illustrate the reality

Preamble

The story below deals with conflict management in the workplace and the Mediator’s activities –

the subjects of this annual report. It is a fictional illustration of the systemic and relational

questions underlying the situations brought to the Mediator’s attention.

This unusual manner of presenting information in a report from the Office of the Mediator shows,

much better than figures and statistics, how difficult people can find it to engage in facilitation, the

reluctance and fears they feel towards an exercise that is in fact a reasonable approach providing a

response in most situations.

The story is purely imaginary and unfortunately just fizzles out, with everyone blaming everyone

else but not really trying to help find a solution. It is based on an all-too-familiar scenario: on the

one hand, a subordinate who prefers to avoid the issues and wait for matters to resolve

themselves, convinced that in any case she’ll be subject to reprisals, given that the Administration,

according to her, always sides with management; on the other, a supervisor who also prefers to

avoid the issue, convinced he’ll find himself without support or advice and end up the target of a

formal appeal procedure. The Mediator hears tales of this kind every day and watches as the

parties stare each other down and refuse to give an inch; dialogue becomes difficult and ends up

breaking down completely.

It goes without saying that any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

7

A couple of months in the life of the HAR40 unit

March 2014

From: Marc Flegenheimer, Mediator To: Members of the Harmony 2040 Unit (HAR40) Date: 7 March 2014 - 18:43 Subject: Contact with the Mediator Sir, Madam,

I recently had a conversation with Mr. Forrest about the tension between the members of the Unit and the sparks that have apparently flown as a result.

Mr. Forrest suggested that I contact each member of the team individually so that each of you can express yourselves about the situation. These talks will also allow me to see if proposals can be made for improving the atmosphere within the team.

If you would like to participate in this effort, I would be happy to talk with you, at a time that suits you.

As you know, action taken under the auspices of the Office of the Mediator is based exclusively on voluntary participation. You are therefore not obliged to reply to this invitation.

Please note that I will be absent from 11 to 22 March, while on mission to Benin. Our talk, if you are interested in having one, could take place after 25 March.

Best regards, Marc Flegenheimer Meditator

From: Libertad F. Goodlife, HAR40 Unit To: MEDIATOR Date: 07.03.2014 - 18:55 Subject: Re: Contact with the Mediator Dear Mr. Flegenheimer,

Unfortunately (but for a happy event), I will be on maternity leave until the end of August. Could we meet when I return, if the matter is still on the table then?

Best regards, Libertad F. Goodlife Senior Specialist

8

From: Pierre Rocher, HAR40 Unit To: MEDIATOR Date: 10.03.2014 - 19:39 Subject: Re: Contact Dear Marc,

Thank you for the invitation. I’ve been working in the unit for nearly eight years. I’ve never seen such a demoralized team. I would therefore be pleased to meet with you.

The wording of your message would nevertheless seem to suggest that Mr. Forrest is trying to give the impression that the members of his “team” are to “blame” for the current tensions. I do not agree with that interpretation.

Mr. Forrest’s management style, which is confrontational in nature, is the main cause of the current situation. I therefore hope that you will be meeting with him as well.

Best Pierre Senior Officer

From: Macha Forte, HAR40 Unit To: MEDIATOR Date: 11.03.2014 - 08:42 Subject: Re: Meditator Thanks for the message. I don’t really see how a meeting with you will be different from all the other meetings I’ve already had, with X and Y. Can you tell me what angle it will take? I agree to take part in this exercise, on condition that the entire HAR40 unit is involved. Macha Forte Senior Officer

From: MEDIATOR To: Pierre Rocher Date: 11.03.2014 - 09:30 Subject: Re: Contact Dear Pierre, Thanks for the feed-back. I’m sorry if my message could be misinterpreted. Mr. Forrest in no way “blamed” the team – I probably expressed myself badly. If you want additional clarification, I can ask him to explain directly to the team the purpose and spirit of his request. Whatever the case, I look forward to meeting with you face to face and will call you to arrange a time and date. Best regards, Marc

9

From: Pierre Rocher To: MEDIATOR Date: 12.03.2014 - 08:51 Subject: Re: Contact

No need for further clarification. Looking forward to meeting you. Pierre

From: Joy Leben-Right, HAR40 Unit To: MEDIATOR Date : 19.03.2014 - 13:46 Subject: Re: Contact with the mediator Dear Mr. Flegenheimer, I was not personally involved in the most recent incident you refer to. But I think it would be useful to talk with you about the present situation in the HAR40 unit, which is characterized by:

constant tension

serious communication shortcomings

a lack of courtesy and mutual respect Three times I have tried to act as an intermediary, to ease this difficult situation. To no avail. And I have to admit that, as the situation stands today, I have little hope that things will improve. I am nevertheless willing to try again, at least to get the ILO’s recommendations about how to protect myself from the verbal daggers thrown by certain members of the unit … Please note that I only work mornings. Cordially, Joy Leben-Right Administration Coordinator

From: Macha Forte To: MEDIATOR Date : 21.03.2014 - 11:20 Subject: Fwd : Re: Mediator Dear Mr. Flegenheimer, I’ve thought about it, and I agree to meet with you. I feel able to present my situation at HAR40 and to describe the constant bullying and humiliation I suffer. I wonder what you can do or advise. Because I don’t see how I can change the situation. I have the feeling that the time has come for me to leave this toxic environment, which is detrimental to my health and peace of mind. Please let me know what day you want to meet. Best regards, Macha Forte

April 2014

10

From: MEDIATOR To: Gap Forrest Date: 07.04.2014 - 16:22 Subject: Follow-Up Dear Mr. Forrest, I have now met with most members of the HAR40 unit. I think this is a good time to review and discuss the situation. Could we meet next week? Have a nice weekend. Best regards, Marc Flegenheimer

From: MEDIATOR TO: Gap Forrest Date: 17.04.2014 - 13:38 Subject: Follow-up Dear Mr. Forrest, I have had no reply from you. I trust all is well. Let me know if there is anything I can do. Happy Easter. Best regards Marc Flegenheimer

From: Gap Forrest To: MEDIATOR Date: 22.04.2014 - 10:39 Subject: Re: Update Dear Marc – I’m just back from a trip to New Delhi. There is no real news. During my absence, I had appointed Mrs. Forte as the officer in charge of the unit. Two members of the team went on sick leave or decided to work at home and one was on mission. I find it increasingly difficult to put up with Mrs. Forte’s attitude, although there are ups and downs – depending on her mood. I’ve talked to HRD about a change of assignment for her but am not really hopeful. I hope you have better news about a possible re-assignment. OK, let’s meet next week. Best Gap

December 2014

From: Macha Forte To: MEDIATOR Date: 09.12.2014 - 15:16 Subject: Serious incident Dear Mr. Flegenheimer,

I would like to meet with you as soon as possible to talk about a recent incident which I consider serious.

11

On Thursday, 4 December, from 2 to 2.30 p.m., there was a meeting between Employers’ Delegates from the Republic of Bravitad, my supervisor Gap Forrest and myself, in Mr. Forrest’s office. The meeting concerned the “2040 thematic report”, on the future of labour. Gap started the discussion. Then I presented the main points of the report, on which I have been working for over two years and of which I consider myself the principal author. Gap suddenly interrupted me in the middle of my presentation, glaring at me, to make a minor point. I calmly resumed my presentation but he kept interrupting me, to brusquely add other points. The Delegates looked surprised at his behaviour and exchanged knowing looks. At the end of the meeting, Gap made a conclusion, without thanking me, without mentioning my decisive contribution. He showed the Delegates to the door, giving me barely enough time to say goodbye to them. I work regularly with Delegates from the countries in this region. Gap’s behaviour is inappropriate and detrimental to my professional reputation. Furthermore, this is not the first time this has happened with people from outside but also from inside the unit, during team meetings. This time, I’ve had enough. I am very angry, I can’t sleep and I can’t work. I have taken two days of sick leave because I cannot face Gap or his remarks. I would like to talk to you about what I can do to obtain an apology for his behaviour. I also intend to contact a doctor to assess the medical implications of his behaviour and of two years of verbal attacks on his part. After having promised to help me six months ago, HRD recently informed me that there was no other job for me and that I had to find another way to get out of this hostile environment. I look forward to hearing from you. I can meet whenever you want. Thank you, Macha Forte

From: Macha Forte To: MEDIATOR Date: 11.12.2014 - 11:20 Subject: Dear Mr. Flegenheimer, Thank you for yesterday’s talk. Very useful. I am interested in official mediation with Gap Forrest. We have agreed that the best time would be early January. I will be back on 5 January. Macha Forte

From: MEDIATOR To: Macha Forte Date: 11.12.2014 - 15:24 Subject: Re: Serious incident Dear Mrs. Forte,

12

Thank you very much for your message. I am happy to have been of service. As I told you during our discussion, mediation can take place and have a good chance of success if certain conditions are agreed and there is a shared understanding of the goals of the mediation. I trust we will be able to start in early January. As you requested, I will contact Mr. Forrest to inform him of your wishes. In the meantime, best regards, Marc Flegenheimer

From: MEDIATOR To: Gap Forrest Date: 12.12.2014 - 11 :59 Subject: Request to talk Dear Mr. Forrest, I trust you are well. Can we talk before the end of the year, by telephone if you are too busy to meet? Looking forward to hearing from you, Marc Flegenheimer

From: Gap Forrest To: MEDIATOR Date: 12.12.2014 - 12:02 Subject: Re: Request to talk Dear Marc – I’m snowed under. Too much to do before the end of the year. In 20 years at the ILO, I’ve never seen anything like it. I’m exhausted, my heart is no longer in my job. The atmosphere with my colleagues is abysmal. It’s mainly Macha Forte’s fault. And I can do nothing. Let’s try and meet in the New Year. Merry Christmas! Gap Forrest

February 2015

From: Gap Forrest To: Mediator Date: 15.02.2015 – 08.00 Subject: Mediation Dear Mr. Flegenheimer, Following our recent meetings, I’ve given the matter serious thought. I will not enter into mediation. I would be laying myself open to unfounded accusations and tacitly admit to a guilt I refute. Nor do I want to undermine my authority and no longer be able properly to exercise my role of leader and manager. Thank you for your efforts. Best regards, Gap Forrest

From: Macha Forte

13

To: MEDIATOR Date: 15.02.2015 – 09.30 Subject: Dear Mr. Flegenheimer, Thank you for the meetings we have had. I have given the matter serious thought and unfortunately am not in a position to follow up on the proposal for mediation. I’m sorry about that but I know that I will be the target of reprisals for having dared to speak out against Mr. Forrest’s methods. No one will be able to help me, or stand up for me or protect me. I therefore prefer not to do anything. Your power is limited and I can see that the problem will not be solved. I am grateful for your help and thank you for your support. Have a nice day. Best regards, Macha Forte Senior Officer

14

2020

HRD BROADCAST 01/06/2020 2:02 pm

Please do not reply to this message

International Labour Office

Distribution: C

1 per official at headquarters and the field

Departure of Mr. Gap Forrest

Mr. Gap FORREST will leave the Office on 30 June 2020. Being unable to do so

individually, he wishes to express his gratitude to all those who have given him the

benefit of their help and friendship during his years with the Office.

Non-governmental organization Invent a New World (INW)

Bulletin board

APPOINTMENT

Mrs. MACHA FORTE has been appointed to the position of Adviser in charge of special

and specific questions at INW, as of 1 September 2020. Mrs. Forte was previously

employed as Senior Officer at the headquarters of the International Labour Office in

Geneva.

We extend a warm welcome to Mrs. Forte.

Invitation

To Joy Leben-Right

Henry and Libertad Goodlife

Are pleased to invite you to the birthday party of their daughter

Hope who will turn six on 15 June.

Rue des Eaux Vives 105 1205 Genève RSVP before 1 June

15

Section II: Statistics

II.1 Overview

Demographic data

The table below provides an overview of visitor demographics between 1 January and 31 December 2013. The three main categories, in red in the table, are considered in detail in the second part of this section.

Overview of demographic data

Case reporting

COMMENTS:

Roughly the same number of cases was reported as in 2011 and 2012 (120 and 117 cases respectively).

The breakdown by category was in line with past observations; the IOA uniform reporting categories10 introduced in 2011 serve to track developments over time.

Relations between superiors and subordinates (evaluative relationships) and questions relating to Organization, leadership and management account for the largest number of cases. That was already the case in 2011 and 2012. The category in third place, Peer and colleague relationships, also trended strongly, albeit to a lesser extent overall.

10 See Glossary.

Percentage

(rounded)

Case Reporting

categories (IOA

classification)

Number

of cases

M F D P4-P5 P1-P3 G NO Field HQ

24%

Organizational,

Leadership and

Management

30 10 20 5 12 2 9 2 9 21

23%Evaluative

relationship29 9 19 5 12 2 7 3 9 20

12%

Peer and

colleague

relationship

14 5 9 2 4 1 6 1 4 10

10%Values, ethics

and standards13 6 7 4 5 1 3 0 6 7

10% Job and career 13 5 8 2 5 1 4 1 4 9

9%

Legal,

Regulatory,

Financial11 5 6 1 5 1 2 2 5 6

5%

Safety, health,

well-being and

physical

environment

7 1 6 1 2 0 4 0 1 6

4%Administration

and services 6 3 3 1 2 0 2 1 4 2

3%Compensation

and benefits3 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 2 1

All categories 45 81 21 48 8 38 11 44 82100% Total 126 126 126 126

By Gender Number of cases by Professional Grade category By Location

16

Difficulties concerning Services/administrative issues were most common in the field: field staff perceive headquarters and its centralized services as distant and inscrutable. The same holds true for the services of the Mediator: there were fewer requests from the field in 2013, reinforcing the conclusion reached in 2012 (need for greater proximity).

The category Legal, Regulatory, Financial and Compliance accounted for 8 per cent of cases, as in 2012. Given the gravity of the cases reported in this category,11 even one allegation of this kind is one too many. Staff reported that they now had greater faith in the inquiries launched in the wake of such allegations. As in 2012, however, (a) staff members did not feel they were sufficiently well informed about existing mechanisms,12 and (b) those mechanisms were considered to be relatively ineffective. Whistle-blower protection was described as unreliable.

As in 2011 and 2012, the number of visitors wishing to discuss Prevention continued to rise (see below), which is a positive trend.

Breakdown by sex and by professional category (Grades)

COMMENTS: The data once again show that women call on the services of the Office of the Mediator with greater frequency; with a ratio of 64 per cent women to 36 per cent men, that trend is even stronger than in 2011-2012, when the proportions were roughly 60 per cent and 40 per cent. Those figures do not reflect the Organization’s overall demography. Their significance must be examined so as to understand the reasons and to act on them. The Mediator calls on the Human Resources Department to conduct a study of that point.

When it comes to professional categories, the number of requests made by officials in the D and P2-P3 grades increased, while those made by NO fell sharply. There are two possible explanations for the rise in D cases: more managers are asking for advice on preventive action, which is positive; the other main cause is growing uncertainty relating to reform, the feeling of being insufficiently involved/informed. The fall in the number of requests from NO staff is related to the less frequent presence of the Mediator in the field in 2013 (see next point).

Breakdown field - headquarters

COMMENTS: Proximity and facilitated access have a direct impact on the origin of cases: logically, when the Mediator visits offices, the number of requests from the field rises. This raises a structural question in terms

11 Criminal activities, waste and misappropriation of funds, reprisals, sexual and psychological harassment. 12 Dispute resolution mechanisms, Office of the Mediator, whistle-blower protection policy, Ethics Office.

67%

31%

2%

HQ Siège

Field Terrain

Turin

17

of equality of treatment between headquarters and field personnel. The Office of the Mediator works for all, but implementation is hamstrung by a minimal structure.13 That imbalance is even more striking when it comes to access to project teams (Decent Work Teams) working in countries in which there is no ILO office.

The International Training Centre in Turin appears in the statistics for the first time, following the agreement signed in 2012 to extend the Mediator’s services to the Centre.

II.2 Analysis of the three main categories and their sub-categories This section describes in detail the three most commonly encountered categories, Evaluative relationships, Organization, leadership and management and Peer and colleague relationships, and their sub-categories.

Organization, leadership and management (30 cases, 24% of the total in 2013)

This category is among the top three every year. In 2013, there was a major shift within the category itself:

the number of cases involving abuse of power fell, accounting for only 12 per cent in the category (over 35%

in 2011 and 2012). According to what the Mediator was told, the explanation lies in the change that took

place after the arrival of the new Director-General and his Administration. The confidence officials had in

the new senior management, the more relaxed atmosphere and improved dialogue between the

Administration and the Staff Union contributed to that result.

Quality of leadership, on the other hand, became the main cause for complaint. Two observations can be

made in respect of these changes:

an open culture based on confidence has an immediate impact on the culture of dialogue;

13

One full-time position and 10 per cent of a post for administrative support.

14%

12%

9%

12%7%

34%

12%

Organisational, Leadership and Management

Organisational Climate/Morale

Organisational Culture

Organisational Communication

Change Management

Restructuring and Relocation

Leadership & ManagementQuality/Capacity

Abuse of Authority/Positional Power

18

secondly, an outstanding expert does not a good manager make. The training, supervision and support

given to managers, who are often left to fend for themselves in delicate situations, are crucial to a more

effective organizational culture in that regard.

Steps should be taken in 2014 to ascertain to what extent the change is a paradigm shift or whether the

variations are due to the “honeymoon period” granted any new management team.

Evaluative relationships (29 cases, 23% of the total in 2013)

The term evaluative, according to the IOA taxonomy used by the ILO Mediator, refers to the hierarchical

nature of the relationship between the people in conflict. The complainant may be the hierarchical superior

or the subordinate.

The changes noted in this category confirm what we said earlier: fewer cases involved Respect/ Treatment

in 2013 than in 2012 (18% as opposed to 33%), adding weight to the hypothesis that the environment had

improved. The biggest increase was noted in respect of complaints related to Communication: 14 per cent

in 2012, 29 per cent in 2013. Relationship skills and information-sharing know-how could stand to be

improved at the ILO; this is a problem that concerns all categories of personnel across the boards.

14%

18%

4%29%

15%

12%

7%

1%

Evaluative Realtionships

Interpersonal Differences

Respect / Treatment

Reputation

Communication

Team Climate and Morale

Performance Management andFeedback

Performance Appraisal and grading

Other

19

Peer and colleague relationships (14 cases, or 12% of the total in 2013)

This category traditionally occupied fourth place but moved into the top three in 2013; it therefore

represents a stable trend on which the aim must be to act.

Here, too, communication was the most acute problem. The Mediator noted the frequent and sometimes exclusive use of e-mail14 to communicate in cases marked by tension; this is a poor solution liable to exacerbate tensions and to make a return to dialogue difficult.

Advice, exploration and coaching

This is not one of the IOA categories. The Office of the Mediator registers requests made for the purpose of

prevention or to seek advice on how to handle a tense or potentially conflictual relationship.

14

Sometimes on the recommendation, usually misguided, of a third party (a colleague, the Human Resources Department or a hierarchical

superior).

21%

21%

5%

30%

21%

2%

Peer and Colleague Relationships

Interpersonal Differences

Respect / Treatment

Reputation

Communication

Team Spirit and Morale

Other

20

Such requests continued to increase in number (10% of visits to the Office of the Mediator in 2011, 20% in

2012, more than 30% in 2013). This is a positive sign confirming and encouraging the more relaxed

atmosphere noted earlier.

II.3 Impact and quality of services, as evaluated by the users of the Office of the

Mediator

Since 2012, the Office of the Mediator has sent an anonymous online survey to all officials having used its

services. The survey serves to collect (anonymized) demographic data on the respondents: field-

headquarters, man-woman, duration of the problem presented and type of service evaluated.

The survey also allows the respondents to evaluate the quality of the services and reliability of the practices

of the Mediator (availability, response time, confidentiality, independence, etc.).

Thirdly, the survey allows the respondents to appraise the impact the interaction had on their work

environment.

Duration of the situation

Facilitation and informal conflict-resolution methods have the best results when the case is not too old. This

is a useful indicator for weighing the rates of conflict resolution/non-resolution. It is also an indication of

the presence or absence of a culture of dialogue, and of the way in which internal systems of appeal and

administration of justice are accepted and used by staff members.

65%

35%

Purpose of the request

Visitor submitting a case

Prevention and seeking advice

21

Duration of the situation before the person contacted the Office of the Mediator

COMMENTS: The proportion of “old” cases (one year or longer) fell compared to 2011-2012, but not

significantly. As in 2012, the Mediator considers that the ILO would be well advised to do all it can to make

sure conflicts do not endure. In line with what is done elsewhere in terms of facilitation and mediation, the

Organization has everything to gain by taking measures to encourage officials to endeavour to resolve

conflicts as soon as possible and whenever it seems necessary.

26%

21%40%

3% 10%Des années! - Years! - Años

Un an - One year - Un año

Quelques mois -A few months - Algunosmeses

Quelques semaines - A few weeks -Algunas semanas

Cela vient d'arriver - It just had happened- Acaba de suceder

22

Impact and case resolution

The people calling on the Mediator’s services are under no obligation to keep him informed of developments in their situation. In 2013, of the 126 people who approached him, a little over 80 replied to the visitors’ satisfaction survey; the data below are indicative.

Percentage of cases resolved following action by the Office of the Mediator

COMMENT: The percentage of cases resolved grew, but the figure is somewhat misleading because the data exclude people who decided against facilitation after an exploratory interview with the Mediator: sometimes out of fear of reprisals, sometimes for reasons of “comfort”, to avoid a meeting with the other party. In all, 20 to 25 per cent of visitors decided not to seek facilitation, even when the situation appeared open to mediation. Everyone would benefit from greater incitement to have more systematic recourse to mediation. The figure above shows that this is an effective means of resolving a matter once and for all.

71%

12%

10%7%

Impact of mediation, excluding visitors who opted out and cases still open

on 31.12.2013

Resolved Résolu et clos

Improved/Dialogue re-opened Amélioré /

Dialogue rétabli

Status Quo Status Quo

Décision de suivre la voie formelle Décision

de suivre la voie formelle

23

The importance of better information on the ILO’s system of internal justice

The online survey asks the respondents whether better knowledge of the ILO’s systems of internal justice

would ensure better prevention. Almost 80 per cent of respondents said that a greater effort had to be

made to promote existing mechanisms.

33%

44%

15%

4%

4%

A better information about the systems has a preventative effect on the ëmergence of conflicts

Tout à fait d'accord - Completelyagree - Completamente de acuerdo

Plutôt d'accord - Tend to agree -Más bien de acuerdo

Plutôt pas d'accord - Tend todisagree - Más bien en desacuerdo

Pas du tout d'accord - Completelydisagree - En total desacuerdo

Je ne sais pas - I don't know - No séqué contestar

24

Section III: Other activities and contacts

Network of facilitators

The Office of the Mediator provides independent training for facilitators. In 2013, the Office completed the cycle of training for the new network of facilitators started in 2012. A final regional training workshop was held; 17 people from headquarters and offices in the Europe Region were trained.

The training consists of a four-day workshop. Detailed information on the workshop programme and objectives was provided in the 2010-2011 report.15

The challenge ahead is to keep the network active and to give it enough weight to be effective. This is an area in which the ILO invests too little, as suggested by the comparison with the means made available elsewhere in support of this kind of programme.16

Field visits

As stated above, the Mediator seeks to maintain the closest and most active possible ties with the field, so as to ensure equitable access to the Office’s services for all members of staff. In 2013, the Mediator travelled less often than in 2012, and this had a significant impact on the breakdown between field and headquarters visitors, as the statistics show.17

During field missions, the Mediator is available to staff members for confidential interviews and organizes information and training sessions in response to demand. The sessions are preventive in purpose; Section II.3 shows that staff reported that they considered this service useful.

In 2013, missions were conducted to four country offices; for reasons of confidentiality, the destinations are not named in this report.

External relations

The table below gives an overview of the Office’s professional contact and exchange activities in 2013.

Exchanges with external counterparts and with professional associations are of vital importance in this

constantly changing sector, the sensitive and confidential practice of which requires that it be held up

against that of other organizations.

Place Date Event

Rome May 2013 UNARIO18 interagency conference at WFP headquarters19

Miami April 2013 IOA annual conference Geneva Monthly Ombudsmen and mediators

members of UNARIO based in Geneva

15

Available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/mediate/download/2010-2012-report3.pdf. 16

The World Bank has two full-time positions at headquarters alone for this programme. 17

See Section II.1. 18 See Glossary. 19

See Glossary.

25

Conclusion and thanks

The systemic problems described in 2011 and 2012 remained unchanged in 2013,20 with certain categories of conflict regularly topping the list21. Concrete measures to remedy those problems are not very much in evidence; towards the end of 2013, doubt started to emerge as to the possibility for a real change in managerial culture. The Mediator considers the criticisms harsh and too impatient, but greater determination and will are needed, otherwise the good will is going to evaporate and hope will give way to frustration.

Earlier in this report, the Mediator welcomed the efforts made with regard to training; but catalogue training22 does not suffice. The experience of other organizations has shown that training must be part of a policy understood by all,23 accompanied by tools designed specifically for managers, better support for and supervision of those managers and a declared willingness to hold those that do not make good use of the precepts promoted by the training to account.

Conflicts should, whenever the situation lends itself, be the subject of an attempt at facilitation. For the time being, however, facilitation is undertaken as a gesture of good will and on an optional basis. The Mediator does not believe facilitation should be obligatory – that would run counter to the principle of voluntary involvement inherent in mediation – but he does feel that there is scope for enhancing that option in the system as it exists at the ILO. The Office of the Mediator is ready; a strong political will within the Organization is lacking, however. At present, the double constraint of the story in Section I will regularly continue to limit the parties to a costly form of trench warfare.24

That being said, 2013 ended on a generally positive note: the terms “relaxed” and “confidence” appear several times in this report. The optimism and hope spawned by a change of style and vision, i.e. the arrival of a new senior management team at the end of 2012, contributed to this. The ILO can be satisfied that this is the case, and the Mediator trusts that the trend will be confirmed in the long term; 2013 therefore hinted at the emergence of a culture more conducive to dialogue and mutual respect. Relations between the Staff Union and the Administration are more relaxed, a welcome development. Beyond disagreements – which will continue to exist – the capacity of each party to see themselves as part of the solution rather than in a confrontation is a concrete illustration of the subject of the Mediator’s reports: the resolution of differences through open action taken in good faith.

The Mediator thanks all those striving at all levels of the Organization to make the ILO a more tolerant and

open organization, one that promotes dialogue and respect for people and their diversity. He also thanks

all those who placed their trust in him by requesting his services and who, thanks to their comments,

enlightened points of view and criticisms, enabled him to develop his activities the better to meet the

Organization’s needs.

20

See footnote in the Executive summary. 21

See Section II.2. 22 Meaning a list of courses made available to all, without systematic coverage of target groups identified in line with a training policy. 23

The many comments collected on this subject in the past three years show that this is not the case. 24

In time, money, energy and human costs.

26

Annexes

Annex I. Role and function of the ILO Mediator

I. Role of the Mediator

The role and functions of the ILO Mediator can be categorized broadly as follows:

Resolving differing viewpoints, disputes and conflicts: this involves mostly facilitating dialogue and mediation, including conflict resolution and finding mutually acceptable solutions to disputes in the workplace.

Working with managers, teams and departments in order to either prevent or contain conflict or to find solutions to potential problems at the earliest possible stage.

Provide “upward feedback” when necessary: this entails apprising managers of relevant issues that might need to be addressed within their Units/Departments. It is important to note that it is only issues, and not individual cases that are brought to the attention of the manager, which allows the Mediator to maintain confidentiality. Individual cases are discussed only if the staff member makes a specific request for the Mediator to do so.

The role of the Mediator is, unfortunately, too often, interpreted in its narrowest sense – i.e. mediating between two or more individuals and/or groups. This is totally incorrect. The Office of the Mediator can and should provide a wide spectrum of services in addition to mediation:

Exploring available options and/or strategies to address a problem; Working with managers who are faced with a conflictual situation or difficulties with a staff

member; Coaching;

Referral to relevant support services (Medical, Social Welfare, HRD, etc.); Active listening for staff that need to discuss perceived problems in a confidential and neutral

environment; Serving as a sounding board/doing a reality check;

Act as a founding board/doing a reality check.

In addition, the Mediator can develop and facilitate team-building workshops: while team-building may not be part of the Mediator’s TORs in the strictest sense, it is a preventive strategy – good team work and spirit helps avoid conflict and increases productivity.

27

II. Principles of Practice

The Mediator is independent and is autonomous from both the Administration and the

Staff Union. She does not have decision-making powers. However, she may make suggestions or recommendations, as appropriate, to resolve conflicts;

In the resolution of or mediation in a conflict, the Mediator is totally neutral and without bias or prejudice to any party. She does not act as an advocate for any party – contrary to an all too common misconception, the Mediator is not an advocate for the complainant;

Contact between staff and the Mediator is on a strictly confidential basis. Discussions with third parties can only be undertaken with the consent of the staff member. No files and/or written materials pertaining to a case are maintained;

Interaction with staff needs to be based on sound judgment and honesty: while acknowledging the perceived problem(s) and being constructive in finding solutions, the Mediator needs to remain honest and frank;

An extremely important and fundamental principle is the informal nature of the Mediator’s work. In addition to being required to function in a neutral, confidential and independent manner, the Mediator seeks to resolve conflicts/find acceptable solutions using informal processes: it is an alternative to formal mechanisms, no records are kept and the Office functions outside of any formal proceedings;

Interaction with staff needs to be based on sound judgment and honesty: while acknowledging the perceived problem(s) and being constructive in finding, solutions, the Mediator needs to remain honest and frank;

All staff, regardless of the type of contract, have access to the Mediator; The Mediator also provides follow-up for a couple of months after a case has been

resolved in order to ensure that the conflict has not resurfaced and, if so, encourages further mediation.

28

Annex II. IOA Ethics Code of the International Ombudsman Association (IOA)

Note: IOA documents refer by default to the role of Ombudsman; this is a generic label as these precepts also apply to the practice of mediators who are members of the IOA.

International Ombudsman Association

IOA Code of Ethics

PREAMBLE

The IOA is dedicated to excellence in the practice of Ombudsman work. The IOA Code of Ethics provides a common set of professional ethical principles to which members adhere in their organizational Ombudsman practice.

Based on the traditions and values of Ombudsman practice, the Code of Ethics reflects a commitment to promote ethical conduct in the performance of the Ombudsman role and to maintain the integrity of the Ombudsman profession.

The Ombudsman shall be truthful and act with integrity, shall foster respect for all members of the organization he or she serves, and shall promote procedural fairness in the content and administration of those organizations' practices, processes, and policies.

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

INDEPENDENCE

The Ombudsman is independent in structure, function, and appearance to the highest degree possible within the organization.

NEUTRALITY AND IMPARTIALITY

The Ombudsman, as a designated neutral, remains unaligned and impartial. The Ombudsman does not engage in any situation which could create a conflict of interest.

CONFIDENTIALITY

The Ombudsman holds all communications with those seeking assistance in strict confidence, and does not disclose confidential communications unless given permission to do so. The only exception to this privilege of confidentiality is where there appears to be imminent risk of serious harm.

INFORMALITY

The Ombudsman, as an informal resource, does not participate in any formal adjudicative or administrative procedure related to concerns brought to his/her attention.

29

Annex III. Standards of Practice of the IOA

International Ombudsman

Association IOA Standards of Practice PREAMBLE

The IOA Standards of Practice are based upon and derived from the ethical principles stated in the IOA Code of Ethics. Each Ombudsman office should have an organizational Charter or Terms of Reference, approved by senior management, articulating the principles of the Ombudsman function in that organization and their consistency with the IOA Standards of Practice.

STANDARDS OF PRACTICE

INDEPENDENCE

1.1 The Ombudsman Office and the Ombudsman are independent from other organizational entities. 1.2 The Ombudsman holds no other position within the organization which might compromise independence. 1.3 The Ombudsman exercises sole discretion over whether or how to act regarding an individual’s concern, a trend or concerns of multiple individuals over time. The Ombudsman may also initiate action on a concern identified through the Ombudsman’ direct observation. 1.4 The Ombudsman has access to all information and all individuals in the organization, as

permitted by law. 1.5 The Ombudsman has authority to select Ombudsman Office staff and manage Ombudsman Office budget and operations. NEUTRALITY AND IMPARTIALITY

2.1 The Ombudsman is neutral, impartial, and unaligned. 2.2 The Ombudsman strives for impartiality, fairness and objectivity in the treatment of people and the consideration of issues. The Ombudsman advocates for fair and equitably administered processes and does not advocate on behalf of any individual within the organization. 2.3 The Ombudsman is a designated neutral reporting to the highest possible level of the organization and operating independent of ordinary line and staff structures. The Ombudsman should not report to nor be structurally affiliated with any compliance function of the organization. 2.4 The Ombudsman serves in no additional role within the organization which would compromise the Ombudsman’ neutrality. The Ombudsman should not be aligned with any formal or informal associations within the organization in a way that might create actual or perceived conflicts of interest for the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman should have no personal interest or stake in, and incur no gain or loss from, the outcome of an issue. 2.5 The Ombudsman has a responsibility to consider the legitimate concerns and interests of all individuals affected by the matter under consideration. 2.6 The Ombudsman helps develop a range of responsible options to resolve problems and facilitate discussion to identify the best options.

30

CONFIDENTIALITY

3.1 The Ombudsman holds all communications with those seeking assistance in strict confidence and takes all reasonable steps to safeguard confidentiality, includingthe following: The Ombudsman does not disclose confidential communications unless given permission to do so in the course of informal discussions with the Ombudsman, and even then at the sole discretion of the Ombudsman; the Ombudsman does not reveal, and must not be required to reveal, the identity of any individual contacting the Ombudsman Office, nor does the Ombudsman reveal information provided in confidence that could lead to the identification of any individual contacting the Ombudsman Office, without that individual’s express permission; the Ombudsman takes specific action related to an individual’s issue only with the individual’s express permission and only to the extent permitted, unless such action can be taken in a way that safeguards the identity of the individual contacting the Ombudsman Office. The only exception to this privilege of confidentiality is where there appears to be imminent risk of serious harm, and where there is no other reasonable option. Whether this risk exists is a determination to be made by the Ombudsman. 3.2 Communications between the Ombudsman and others (made while the Ombudsman is serving in that capacity) are considered privileged. The privilege belongs to the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman Office, rather than to any party to an issue. Others cannot waive this privilege. 3.3 The Ombudsman does not testify in any formal process inside the organization and resists testifying in any formal process outside of the organization, even if given permission or requested to do so. 3.4 If the Ombudsman pursues an issue systemically (e.g., provides feedback on trends, issues, policies and practices) the Ombudsman does so in a way that safeguards the identity of individuals. 3.5 The Ombudsman keeps no records containing identifying information on behalf of the organization. 3.6 The Ombudsman maintains information (e.g., notes, phone messages, appointment calendars) in a secure location and manner, protected from inspection by others (including management), and has a consistent and standard practice for the destruction of such information. 3.7 The Ombudsman prepares any data and/or reports in a manner that protects confidentiality. 3.8 Communications made to the ombudsman are not notice to the organization. The ombudsman neither acts as agent for, nor accepts notice on behalf of, the organization and shall not serve in a position or role that is designated by the organization as a place to receive notice on behalf of the organization. However, the ombudsman may refer individuals to the appropriate place where formal notice can be made.

INFORMALITY AND OTHER STANDARDS

4.1 The Ombudsman functions on an informal basis by such means as: listening, providing and receiving information, identifying and reframing issues, developing a range of responsible options, and – with permission and at Ombudsman discretion – engaging in informal third-party intervention. When possible, the Ombudsman helps people develop new ways to solve problems themselves. 4.2 The Ombudsman as an informal and off-the-record resource pursues resolution of concerns and looks into procedural irregularities and/or broader systemic problems when appropriate. 4.3 The Ombudsman does not make binding decisions, mandate policies, or formally adjudicate issues for the organization. 4.4 The Ombudsman supplements, but does not replace, any formal channels. Use of the Ombudsman Office is voluntary, and is not a required step in any grievance process or organizational policy.

31

4.5 The Ombudsman does not participate in any formal investigative or adjudicative procedures. Formal investigations should be conducted by others. When a formal investigation is requested, the Ombudsman refers individuals to the appropriate offices or individual. 4.6 The Ombudsman identifies trends, issues and concerns about policies and procedures, including potential future issues and concerns, without breaching confidentiality or anonymity, and provides recommendations for responsibly addressing them. 4.7 The Ombudsman acts in accordance with the IOA Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice, keeps professionally current by pursuing continuing education, and provides opportunities for staff to pursue professional training. 4.8 The Ombudsman endeavors to be worthy of the trust placed in the Ombudsman Office.

32

Annex IV. IOA Case Reporting Categories

UNITED NATIONS OMBUDSMAN AND MEDIATION SERVICES

ISSUE DEFINITIONS

1.Compensation and Benefits Salary, pension, leave, health insurance, various entitlements

2.Evaluative Relationships Issues between colleagues with supervisory relationships

3.Peer and colleague relationships Issues between colleagues with NO supervisory relationships

4.Job and Career Issues impacting job conditions or the career progression of the visitor: recruitment, contract, job description/classification, training, promotion,

transfer and rotation, separation, abolition of post and retirement processes.

5.Legal, regulatory, financial and compliance Harassment, discrimination, retaliation, gender and geographic balance; investigative/disciplinary processes, waste, fraud and abuse of funds

6.Safety, Health, Wellbeing, Stress and Work/Life Working conditions; general wellbeing and stress; accommodation for disability or health conditions; issues with health, safety and security

7.Services/Administration Responsiveness, timeliness, or administrative actions by sections providing services to staff (HR, pension fund, tax unit, etc…)

8.Organizational, Leadership and Management Organizational climate, morale, culture, communication; change management, issues with leadership in the organization and management

styles

9.Values, Ethics and Standards Issues pertaining to United Nations core values and code of ethics

33

1.COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS

1a. Compensation: Rate of pay, salary amount, job salary

category

1b. Payroll Administration

1c. Pension

1d. Leave: annual; sick; maternity; excluding special leaves,

sabbaticals, suspension for disciplinary reasons

1e. Health Insurance and Medical Entitlements (including

medevac; DSA; companion ticket, etc…)

1f. Dependent Benefits (including child education grant)

1g. Taxes

1h. Recruitment Entitlements (relocation grant; shipment; etc…)

1.i. Separation Entitlements (repatriation grant; shipping; sep.

indemnities, etc…)

1j. Travel Entitlements (Ticket, DSA, Hotel, excluding medical

travel)

1k. Special Operations/ Hazard Entitlements (Including R&R)

1l. Other_____________________

2. EVALUATIVE RELATIONSHIPS

(Excluding harassment, discrimination and retaliation)

2a. Interpersonal Differences Interpersonal conflict involving

differences in personalities/ suspicions of hidden

motives/mistrust/different work styles

2b. Respect/ Treatment: Demonstrations of inappropriate

regard for people, not listening, dismissive or rude behavior, unfair

or preferential treatment

2c. Reputation: Potential impact of rumors or gossip about

professional or personal matters

2d. Communication: Quality or quantity of communication

2e. Team Climate & Morale: Prevailing norms, behaviors or

attitudes in work unit

2f. Performance Management & Feedback: supervisory

effectiveness in performance coaching, work assignment and

support; feedback (or lack of) given outside of regular

performance appraisal

2g. Performance appraisal and grading: Disagreements with

the fairness of performance evaluation or grading

2h. Other______________________

3. PEER AND COLLEAGUE RELATIONSHIPS

(Excluding harassment, discrimination and retaliation)

3a. Interpersonal Differences Interpersonal conflict involving

differences in personalities/ suspicions of hidden

motives/mistrust/different work styles

3b. Respect/ Treatment: Demonstrations of inappropriate

regard for people, not listening, dismissive or rude behavior, unfair

or preferential treatment

3c. Reputation: Potential impact of rumors or gossip about

professional or personal matters

3d. Communication: Quality or quantity of communication

3e. Team Climate & Morale: Prevailing norms, behaviours or

attitudes in work unit

3f. Other_____________________

34

4. JOB AND CAREER

4a. Job Application/ Selection & Recruitment Processes:

recruitment and selection processes, facilitation of job

applications, short-listing and criteria for selection, disputed

decisions linked to recruitment and selection

4b. Post Classification and Description

4c. Involuntary Transfer/ Change of Assignment:

Removal from prior duties, unrequested change of work

tasks

4d. Terms/ Conditions of Contract: Position

security/Ambiguity/Contractual limitations

4e. Career Progression or Opportunities: Delay/Denial of

promotion; lack of opportunities for career advancement

4f. Rotation & Duration of Assignment: Non-completion or

over-extension in a job or location; area of rotation

4g. Resignation

4h. Termination

4i. Non-renewal of Contract

4j. Abolition of Post

4k. Career Development: Coaching/ Mentoring/

Training/lack of opportunities for skill development

4m. Retirement Process

4n. Special Leave: Approval of; return from SLWOP,

SLWFP, excluding suspension for disciplinary reasons

4o. Loan/ Secondment/Transfer: Inter-agency mobility;

terms of loan, return from loan

4p. Other______________________

5. LEGAL, REGULATORY, FINANCIAL AND

COMPLIANCE

5a. Criminal Activity: Threatened, planned, observed;

fraud

5b. Waste and abuse of funds: inappropriate actions that

abuse or waste

organizational finances, facilities or equipment; property

damage

5f. Gender Discrimination: Different treatment compared with

others or exclusion from some benefit on the basis of gender

5g. Retaliation: Punitive behaviors for previous actions or

comments; whistleblower

5h. Investigative/ Disciplinary processes: fairness/duration/

adherence to rules and regulations during investigations

/disciplinary measures.

5j. Visa Status: Issues arising in acquiring or relinquishing travel

or residency status for international staff members or their

dependents

5k. Geographic & Gender Representation: non compliance with

policy or issues arising from the application of policy

5l. Other______________________

6.SAFETY, HEALTH, WELLBEING AND PHYSICAL

ENVIRONMENT

6a. Safety: Physical safety, injury,

meeting local requirements for training and equipment, including

transportation

6b. Physical Working/ Living Conditions: Temperature, odors,

noise, available space, smoking, ergonomics

lighting, cleanliness, etc

6c. Security: adequate lighting, metal detectors, guards, access

to building by outsiders, anti-terrorists measures

6d. Work/ Life: issues with flexible working arrangements/

schedules

6.e. Stress: stress deriving from work related issues; Post-

Traumatic Stress.

6.f. Disability & Accessibility: Temporary, permanent,

reasonable accommodation, assistive technology

6.g Other_____________________

7. SERVICES/ADMINISTRATION

7a. Quality of Services: How well services were provided,

accuracy or thoroughness of information, competence

7b. Responsiveness/ Timeliness: Response time or time to

8. ORGANIZATIONAL, LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT

8a. Organizational Climate/ Morale

At the organizational level: distinct from 2e and 3e

8b. Organizational Culture

8c. Organizational Communication: Content, style, timing,

effects and amount; quality of communication about strategic

issues at the organizational level (distinct from 2d and 3d)

8d. Change Management: making, responding or adapting to

organizational changes, quality of leadership in facilitating

organizational change on a large scale

8e. Restructuring & Relocation: effects of reprofiling,

organizational /unit downsizing relocation or reorganization

8f. Leadership & Management (Quality/ Capacity of

Management): Quality/capacity of management/ leadership

decisions; management styles; accountability and transparency,

priority setting and/or funding

8g. Abuse of Authority/ Positional Power: Improper use of a

position of influence, power or authority against subordinates

8h. Other______________________

9. VALUES, ETHICS AND STANDARDS

9a. Core values : non adherence to core organizational values

(integrity, professionalism, respect for diversity)

9b. Accountability and transparency: issues with taking personal

ownership for responsibilities and deliverables/operating in

compliance with organizational rules and regulations, secrecy

9c. Personal conduct: issues with fulfilling private obligations,

respecting local laws and using the privileges and immunities of the

organization

9d. Conflict of Interest: appearing to benefit improperly or to have

a third party benefit improperly from certain associations,

relationships or financial interests (including honors, gifts or

remuneration; favoritism to family or friends; outside

employment/activities; business interests…)

9e. Use & Protection of Information: using or divulging

confidential information without proper authorization

9f. Other______________________

35

5c. Harassment (Excluding Sexual): Behaviour that

creates a hostile or intimidating work environment ;

bullying/mobbing, abusive, threatening or coercive behavior

5d. Sexual Harassment: Unwelcome sexual conduct

5e. Discrimination (Excluding Gender): Different

treatment compared

with others or exclusion from some benefit on the basis of

race, age,

national origin, religion, etc…

completion

7c. Interpretation or Application of rules: impact of administrative

actions based on the interpretation of policy

7d. Behaviour of Service Provider(s): How an administrator or

staff member spoke to or dealt with a constituent, customer, or

client, e.g., rude, inattentive, or impatient

7e. Other___________________