Volume 4 : 1
New Actors in Global Governance and International Human Rights Law
Exploring Approaches to Accommodating Non-State Actors within Traditional International Law
A Unique Non-State Actor: the International Committee of the Red Cross
The Participation of Civil Society in Environmental Matters: the 1998 Aarhus Convention
Human Rights Obligations and Transnational Corporations: The Limits of Direct Corporate Responsibility
Human Rights Obligations and Accountability of Armed Opposition Groups: the Practice of the UN Security Council
Treat Them as They Deserve!? Three Approaches to Armed Opposition Groups under Current International Law
Non-State Actors in Areas of Limited Statehood as Addressees of Public International Law Norms on Governance
Non-State Actors in Exile: Benefits and Disadvantages of Legitimacy Claims
Workplace Equality in International Organisations: Why is It an Illusory Concept?
New Actors in Global Governance and International Human Rights Law
Exploring Approaches to Accommodating Non-State Actors within Traditional International Law
A Unique Non-State Actor: the International Committee of the Red Cross
The Participation of Civil Society in Environmental Matters: the 1998 Aarhus Convention
Human Rights Obligations and Transnational Corporations: The Limits of Direct Corporate Responsibility
Human Rights Obligations and Accountability of Armed Opposition Groups: the Practice of the UN Security Council
Treat Them as They Deserve!? Three Approaches to Armed Opposition Groups under Current International Law
Non-State Actors in Areas of Limited Statehood as Addressees of Public International Law Norms on Governance
Non-State Actors in Exile: Benefits and Disadvantages of Legitimacy Claims
Workplace Equality in International Organisations: Why is It an Illusory Concept?
Year
2010
Volume
4
Number
1
Page
162
Language
English
Court
Reference
O. JEFFERSON, “Workplace Equality in International Organisations: Why is It an Illusory Concept? ”, HRILD 2010, nr. 1, 162-185
Recapitulation
International organisations are entitled to independent governance of their staff. Whereas scholars and international lawyers may agree that international organizations should be afforded a functional immunity from national courts in employment disputes, there are enduring debates as to whether this functional necessity trumps the constitutional rights of staff, under international law, to gain access to equality guarantees in the employment relationship. In this paper, I investigate the concepts of equality, as understood, used, and valued within international organisations, examine the checks and balances in their internal governance structure, and point to the relevant differences between the formal and substantive laws. By considering the practices of the United Nations (UN), the World Bank, and the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), I report that the internal governing structure has more rules and procedures to govern employees and few, if any, rules to control the discretionary power of executives. While the overall governing structure may give the semblance of a balanced justice system in international organisations, the procedural guarantees of 'due process', the accountability standards, and the enforcement rules are not in place to safeguard the equality rights of staff. Based on these facts, I argue that until there is a major commitment to establish a rules-based approach to the governing structure, enforcement procedures to safeguard individual rights, and the inclusion of an established line of authority to the executive branch of international organisations, anti-discrimination rules will continue to be applied disproportionately among staff members and discriminatory practices will remain very difficult to legally prove or challenge.
