Note on the Extraordinary General Meeting
Held on 9 February 2006 in New York
Nearly 1000 concerned staff packed the
ECOSOC Chamber on Thursday, 9 February
to hear developments that would
affect their jobs, pensions, insurance,
and working conditions. The meeting was alternately
informative and emotional as participants
made it clear, through their statements and
applause, that they are disappointed in the way
reform measures in these areas are proceeding.
Rosemarie Waters, Staff Union president,
opened the meeting by conveying the contents of
a letter she received that morning from the Chef
de Cabinet, Mr. Mark Malloch Brown. In that letter,
Mr. Malloch Brown stated that the United
Nations is not considering any changes to the current
Pension Fund. The meeting burst into
applause upon hearing this good news.
The Staff Union had been concerned because
of a report issued by consultants, Deloitte and
Touche in 2005, recommending the outsourcing
of certain types of investments and alternative
investments to seek improvement in the
risk/return profile of the Fund. This recommendation
to diversify and restructure the Fund would
be an attempt to raise our return on investments
by including more risky investment. It was
reported that the review of this proposal would
be undertaken by the Pension Board at its next
meeting this year.
Although the Chef de Cabinet gave his
assurance, it was also clear from a statement
by USG Christopher Burnham, who participated
in the meeting as a member of the staff,
that he still had questions about the pension
fund and suggestions for changes. The staff
made it clear that they were happy with the
performance of their pension fund and were
apprehensive about making changes. The Staff
Union president also briefed the meeting on
several issues:
Outsourcing
The largest department – General Assembly
and Conference Management — with
more than 1,500 staff, has retained consultants
to review the efficiency, cost-effectiveness
and space utilized by its operations with
a view to determining areas where outsourcing
would have little impact. In only three
weeks, the two consultants submitted a draft
report making proposals, without any input
from the Staff Union. The Department of
Management has also retained a consultant to
review its operations and make similar recommendations.
The Union position on this matter is clear. Outsourcing
violates the principles of the Charter and
destroys the international character of the Organization.
Moreover, contract workers
have no accountability to this Organization.
There is an SMCC agreement which requires managers
to provide staff representatives with all proposals
for outsourcing and allow them an opportunity
to develop counter-proposals. This
agreement must be respected.
And last, staff must be prepared for a fight.
They must rally, walk around the circle, attend
emergency and extended meetings — whatever it
takes. Managers don’t outsource their jobs; they
outsource jobs of those they believe have no
voice. On this issue, the voice of staff must be
strong, clear, and united. The international civil
service will not be destroyed in this manner.
Review of the Staff Regulations and Rules
In December 2005, staff were asked to provide
the administration with proposals for the
review of all rules, regulations and policies
on human resources. Although the Administration
has asked for staff opinions, it has not
shared nor consulted with staff representatives
on the proposals the Secretary-General
is intending to make to the Member States.
The report will be submitted to the General
Assembly at the end of this month.
The Staff Union has a right to be consulted,
under Article VIII of the Staff Regulations,
and the Organization has a moral obligation
to consult and share with the staff representatives
and staff such far-reaching proposals
that will impact upon every member of this
Organization.
OHRM agreed on 7 February 2006 to provide
the Staff Committee with a summary of
the proposals received from staff on this
issue. While the Staff Committee is pleased
with this development, they still believe that
it is essential to have meaningful consultation
on this matter with staff representatives.
Adoption of a resolution
The meeting unanimously adopted a resolution
which can be found as an annex to
this briefing note. The original draft resolution
proposed to hold a subsequent meeting
and seek a vote of "no confidence" in the
Secretary-General and his senior managers.
It was recommended that a separate vote be
taken on this point.
A few speakers felt that the no confidence
vote was justified; however, the majority of the
participants felt that such an action was premature
and requested deletion of this proposal.
Nevertheless, it was evident from the statements
and applause regarding this matter, that there
was a high level of frustration and anger among
the staff.
A unanimous decision was taken to
authorize the Staff Committee President to
convey, in writing, to the Secretary-General,
the sense of disappointment and abandonment
felt by many staff in the Secretariat,
as well as, the staff’s displeasure
with recent developments and appeal to
him to take charge of the Secretariat or
possibly be held accountable by the staff
for the actions of his senior managers. The
Staff Committee President stated that she
would call another meeting within one
week if there was no clear sign from the
Secretary-General and senior management
of their intent to establish a sustainable
consultation, in accordance with the Staff
Regulations and Rules. At that meeting, an
expression of no confidence would be considered.
© 2006 UN Special |