BRIEF ON THE NEW MOBILITY FRAMEWORK
UNOG Staff Coordinating Council
Context
Between 13 and 23 June, negotiations took place between staff and management on a
mobility framework for the organization. The outcome is explained below.
These negotiations took place in the following context:
 The Secretary-General has for three years been advocating a mobility policy
and made it the central plank of his reform agenda.
 The General Assembly requested that a policy be presented to it this year.
 The Secretary-General has the right under Staff rule 1.2 to reassign staff.
Prior to the negotiations, management put forward a foreign-service style proposal
that would have seen all staff reassigned on a regular basis with limited choice of
when and where to apply. Geographic moves would be required every second posting.
From our consultations with you, we knew this would not be helpful to career
development. We therefore entered the negotiations with a counter-position,
circulated for comments to all staff on 7 June. It was based on inputs from an online
survey (including that two-thirds of Geneva staff said that a career should be over
several duty stations), focus groups and four townhalls on the issue, while accounting
for preferences within different job networks. It also borrowed from prevailing
practices elsewhere. The main difference with the management proposal is that it
would allow staff to choose when and where to apply with only a limited number of
reassignments for those who reach their maximum post incumbency.
The final outcome balances what was desired by staff in Geneva with staff in other
duty stations, all of whom have mobility aspirations. We worked as hard as possible
to limit constraining elements.
The framework will need to be adopted by the General Assembly this fall and would
not be implemented until 2015 at the earliest given its complexities. Various
transitional periods have also been negotiated, meaning that this framework would
mainly apply to staff less than halfway through their career.
Key aspects






Within a seven-year post incumbency limit, staff choose when and where to
apply – mobility needn't be geographic.
Staff selection goes back to being centrally managed as was the case before
Galaxy and as is the case currently in many civil services.
Vacancies are advertised internally first.
New provisions to help staff with families.
Eligibility rights of current P-4 and P-5 staff grandfathered until end of 2018.
Little impact on staff within 14 years of retirement.
1
Brief
How does it work?
Mobility means a change of post, whether in the same or different division, function,
(e.g. economist, lawyer, programme officer), department (e.g. OHCHR, UNCTAD,
OCHA etc.) or duty station. Staff are free to apply for another post in the same or
different department or duty station after one year in their post. After five years in
post, staff have priority in all applications.
You choose when and where to apply subject to the post incumbency limit. There is no
obligation to change duty station and contrasts with management's original proposal
that you be moved every five years with a mandatory geographic move with every
other change of post.
There is a maximum post incumbency of seven years in Geneva and other H and A
duty stations, four in B and C duty stations and three in D and E duty stations. Staff
who have not changed post after seven years are reassigned by the job network board
(see below) to a post in line with their experience and skills. If no suitable post is
available, staff remain on their current post for another year.
We pushed for and obtained seven years as maximum post incumbency for H and A
duty stations (management had proposed five). Currently 93 percent of staff move
before the seven year mark. This will increase with the new staff selection system. The
regular reassignment system desired by management is therefore minimized and will
affect a fraction of staff; instead the aim is for staff to choose as far as possible.
A new staff selection system is created with central job network boards, similar to
practice in many civil services. The boards are based around global job networks of
similar functions (such as Econet, Polnet etc.), not duty stations or departments. Their
members are staff and management representatives drawn globally from those job
networks. All posts that fall vacant are advertised in batches four times a year. Staff
express interest and are selected by the job network board, based on an assessment
made by the HR officers servicing that job network. The assessment includes the
comments of the post manager. Staff can apply to posts within their job network or
another one.
Staff will now find it easier to move and will no longer need to know the manager of
the post they are applying to. Selection decisions are made on a global level by job
network, not at the duty station and not by the head of department. This is in line with
concerns reported about perceived failings and stagnation of the current system.
Posts are advertised internally before being advertised externally.
This is a big change obtained in our favour. You no longer have to compete with the
rest of the world for each post, especially as under mobility you will have acquired a
broad knowledge of the organization, setting yourselves further apart from outsiders.
Staff applying to a post in a different duty station will benefit from priority
consideration. At the same time, staff who go to a D or E duty station have the right to
move out after a maximum of three years.
This responds to two-thirds of staff in Geneva and four-fifths of staff overall agreeing
in the survey that it is important to work in different duty stations. It is now easier to
2
move geographically and at the same time not get stuck in the field. This provision
will mainly affect staff in job networks with a heavy field presence.
Staff are assigned a career development officer, who works with staff to create a
career development plan. They then support staff in their application process.
We insisted on this based on positive experience at UNHCR.
Selections at the D-1 and D-2 levels are made by a Senior Review Board. The SRB
will not have staff representatives.
Management did not accept that staff representatives be on this board; currently only
the practice at the D-2 level. The concept of the SRB is likely to come under heavy
scrutiny.
Who does it affect?
Posts are classified as rotational or non-rotational. Only rotational posts are subject to
mobility. There is no post incumbency limit on non-rotational posts. The definition of
non-rotational posts is one "that requires an advanced level of expertise, knowledge
and qualifications in a technical field and where there is no comparable position at the
same level in another organizational unit or duty station in the UN Secretariat."
This takes account of concerns expressed by some of you during consultations about
the difficulties that mobility would pose for staff recruited to specialized post or for
those working on special projects.
Staff within five years of retirement do not have to be geographically mobile.
Combined with a maximum post occupancy of seven years and a minimum two year
preparation period, if you are 14 years from retirement you may stay in Geneva, no
matter what. We insisted on the five year provision so that staff nearing retirement
could if they wish obtain a residence permit to retire in their final duty station.
Further considerations
The Secretary-General demanded that as of 2015, to apply to a managerial post at P-5,
D-1 or D-2, staff should have a prior geographic move (reflecting the wish of 64
percent of global staff). This affects current P-4 and P-5 staff who don’t meet that
condition. We therefore secured waivers for P-4 staff who don't have prior geographic
moves but who have made their lateral moves as of 31 December 2012 to be able to
apply to P-5 positions until 31 December 2018. We secured the same duration for
current P-5 staff to be able to apply to D-1. Certain field-facing job networks such as
Polnet, Magnet and Securitynet may have additional requirements (to be agreed at
SMC) to enable “burden sharing”.
Staff who have worked under the expectations of the previous system are not
penalized in the medium term and have a reasonable time to adjust. This responds to
a request made in the townhalls. This provision took two days of negotiation.
The framework will be phased in from 2015 with job networks most exposed to the
field likely to move first. The timetable will be communicated this September. Staff
who have reached their maximum post incumbency will not be reassigned until end
2016 for the first networks.
3
We obtained that staff be given time to prepare, as requested by you when we
circulated the staff counter-position.
The framework includes provisions for extensive staff training at all levels focusing
on managerial skills. Outside applicants to managerial positions will go through an
assessment process to ensure they have the required skills.
This responds to demand at focus groups both to improve management training and
to ensure that managers who come from outside actually know how to manage.
In order to facilitate where necessary the mobility of staff and their families,
especially where a partner is working, management agreed to a number of measures,
including reviewing host country agreements for visas and work permits, exploring
the transfer of medical credits, better provision of relocation information, provisions
to reunite couples at the same duty station (easier with a centrally managed selection
system) or to allow one partner to go on special leave but be able to work as a
consultant, and long-distance telecommuting.
These measures were proposed by staff but will need further elaboration to ensure
they are truly meaningful.
A Special Constraints Panel will be set up to review requests for exceptions to
situations where a staff member may have been reassigned geographically following
their reaching maximum post incumbency. The panel will consider constraints related
to medical reasons or compelling personal circumstances that would cause "undue
hardship."
This was requested following concerns raised by you. Tbe criteria for exceptions will
need to be further worked on.
Additional issues to consider in the next rounds of negotiations
Assuming the framework is approved by the General Assembly, additional issues will
need to be considered and agreed. They will include:
 how to treat temporary assignments and liens on posts;
 undertaking an audit of non-rotational posts;
 protection from being reassigned to downsizing posts;
 how the job networks will be defined;
 the new staff selection policy;
 criteria for consideration of the special constraints panel;
 the terms of reference of the job network boards, senior review board and
special constraints panel;
 how to strengthen performance management; and
 options to support staff and their families.
The General Assembly will also need to consider the costs of additional mobility.
Staff unions obtained a written assurance from the Secretary-General that the cost of
increased mobility would not be met by cutting posts or benefits. However, these
costs are significant. Where there were financial issues elsewhere, such as UNDP,
mobility was put on hold temporarily.
The full framework can be viewed at www.staffcoordinatingcouncil.org.
4