UNITED
NATIONS, June
18 -- Blame
for the
breakdown in
UN labor
relations is
being passed
to the General
Assembly by
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon. But
is the GA the
reason why the
Staff
Union voted
"no
confidence" in
Ban earlier
this year?
On
June
17, Inner
City Press
asked Ban's
deputy
spokesperson
Eduardo Del
Buey about a story it
had
exclusively
published the
day previous:
the
abrupt
termination of
the UN Staff
Management
Committee
meeting in
Mexico City on
June 14.
The
Staff Union
said that
Ban's
Secretariat
gave a
proposal late
that
sought to
abrogate their
negotiating
rights. But
Del Buey on
June 17
blamed it all
on the General
Assembly, and
said the
proposal had
been
given four
weeks in
advance. From
the UN's
transcript:
Inner
City Press:
there was this
meeting in
Mexico City of
the Staff
Management
Committee and
the staff
union has said
that,
basically,
the
Secretariat
tried to
abrogate their
negotiating
rights and
ended
the meeting
several days
early,
including
wasting
resources of
people
that flew down
there. Is
there some
response from
the
Secretariat to
the claim by
their union
that they are
not
negotiating in
good faith
and wasted
resources?
Deputy
Spokesperson
Del Buey: As a
matter of fact
there is.
Inner
City Press:
Great. Let’s
do it.
Deputy
Spokesperson
Del Buey: The
Staff-Management
Committee
meeting in
Mexico City
(SMC-II) ended
prematurely on
Friday, as you
have well
noted. The
impasse arose
related to the
role of the
Committee
itself
which, since
2011, has been
governed by
the
Secretary-General’s
bulletin
(ST/SGB/2011/6),
which provides
that issues be
resolved by
consensus. The
General
Assembly, in
its resolution
67/255,
requested
that the
bulletin be
revised in
line with
existing staff
regulations. A
draft revised
bulletin was
shared with
members of the
Staff-Management
Committee,
which removed
the
requirement
for
agreement by
consensus.
Staff
representatives
disagreed with
the General
Assembly.
While we
recognize the
importance of
this issue to
staff
representatives,
the
position of
the Member
States is
clear and the
administration
cannot
revisit the
issue with the
General
Assembly, as
suggested by
staff
representatives.
Management
demonstrated
flexibility
and encouraged
the staff
representatives
at
the SMC-II on
several
occasions to
provide
constructive
suggestions
that could be
incorporated
into the draft
revision of
the said
resolution.
Regrettably,
staff
representatives
at SMC-II were
not
prepared to
stick to the
program of
work that had
been agreed
upon
and discussed
the many other
important
agenda items.
It was,
therefore, not
possible to
continue this
meeting.
Inner
City Press:
Can I just
ask, because I
have seen the
president of
the
union’s e-mail
saying that
management’s
presentation
of this
issue was done
after the
document
submission
deadline, at
the
eleventh hour,
so if it was
so clear, why
didn’t the
Secretariat
tell them in
advance?
Probably you
could have
figured it out
it was
going to break
down in
Mexico. Is it
the case that
this was
turned
into, to the
other side too
late?
Deputy
Spokesperson:
I don’t
believe it
was; I believe
it was sent
about
four weeks
prior to the
meeting.
We'll
have more on
this. But it
is clear that
the Staff
Union's "no
confidence" in
Ban Ki-moon
resolution,
overwhelmingly
adopted
earlier this
year,
cannot be
blamed on the
General
Assembly.
Watch
this site.
, 
