All news

STU/66th Council/14/005
8 April 2014

STU says Yes to the reform! But not no matter how ....

Human Resources Management: Facts and Figures

Ø Delay in the Redeployment Process

The redeployment process, following the identification of post abolitions in line with the established programmatic priorities, is delayed by three months.

The cost of this delay is twofold:

1. The cost of pursuing activities that are not a priority and of maintaining staff on programmes known to be reduced.
2. The cost of non-redeployment of staff, whose programs have been completed since 2013, to other priority programmes, and whose future functions are performed by precarious contractors.

Furthermore, why was it not possible to carry out the AO/EO reform in conjunction with the current redeployment process?

Ø  Since 1 January 2012, there have been over 60 external recruitments and more than 50 promotions of which more than half were reclassifications, that is non-competitive promotions.

The Administration justifies external recruitments by the lack of internal skills available. However, internal promotions at this crisis moment tend to prove that staff skills can evolve.

Is the Administration developing internal competencies as advocated by the Independent External Evaluation?

In contradiction with the assessment presented a year ago (191 EX/5), human resources management tools (i.e. My Talent) are not yet operational in an effective manner. Therefore, without a reliable management tool, to what extent is the Administration able to establish that there are no available internal skills and thus justify the high number of external recruitments?

Ø  Will the redeployment process be carried out with tools which are ineffective to identify and improve internal skills?

Why have no trainings and skills assessment been planned especially for the staff to be redeployed?

STU has repeatedly requested in vain for an effective skills assessment tool to be put in place as well as for maintaining a training programme.

Ø  Transfers and internal staff movements immediately prior to the establishment of post abolitions proposals

STU condemned the large number of transfers in certain sectors, internally and with field offices, immediately prior to the redeployment process.

Given the absence of skills assessment, on what basis were these transfers made?

Was the aim of these staff movements and transfers place some staff whose posts could be abolished due to programmatic priorities identified by Member States in safe positions?

Ø  The hidden aspects of the redeployment process

Whereas the reform started over twelve months ago, the programme and budget was adopted four months ago and the abolition and recreation of posts were submitted jointly to HRM by ADGs and Field Offices in December 2013, why, then, is it still not possible to know today the exact job descriptions of the posts available for redeployment?

Why has the Administration accepted so many disparities between Sectors in their proposals of structures, abolition and creation of posts?

Thus, key posts for accomplishing the Organization’s mission are being abolished while among posts created some are not key posts. Are they tailor-made for staff members benefiting from the support of their hierarchy?

Despite the fact that the staff associations have already sent their comments on the proposals of post abolitions to HRM, why does the Administration continue to make last minute adjustments and to modify vacant posts available for redeployment to suit specific profiles or persons?

Proceeding in such a non-transparent and non-equitable manner, UNESCO is exposing itself to a high number of appeals. Contrary to the assertions made by Administration, recent legal cases have condemned discriminating dismissals.

It is not possible to go back. However, there is still time establish a process of rational human resources management.

STU requests that the redeployment exercise is made truly based on the skills of staff.

For this reason, the STU requests that job descriptions, established by HRM and Sectors, be communicated to the relevant staff and members of the Redeployment Group so that the redeployment exercise be truly made on the basis of the competencies of staff members.