text: ____________________________________________________________________ ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Judgement No. 472 Case No. 494: BEYELE Against: The Secretary-General of the United Nations THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, Composed of Mr. Jerome Ackerman, Vice-President, presiding; Mr. Arnold Kean; Mr. Ioan Voicu; Whereas, at the request of François Tewane Beyele, a former staff member of the United Nations, the President of the Tribunal, with the agreement of the Respondent, extended to 16 January 1989, the time-limit for the filing of an application to the Tribunal; Whereas, on 12 January 1989, the Applicant filed an application, the pleas of which read as follows: "II. PLEAS The Applicant requests the Tribunal: 1.To rescind the decision of the Secretary-General of 13 July 1988 (...) which was based on the recommendations of the Joint Appeals Board dated 8 July 1988 (...) on an appeal of the Applicant who was requesting that the special post allowance which was granted to him be paid at the P-5 level in accordance with staff rule 103.11(d) (...). 2.To decide that the level of the special post allowance which had been granted to the Applicant should be paid at the P-5 level, in accordance with the staff rule 103.11(d). 3.To order:- 2 - (a)That the United Nations shall pay to the Applicant the amount corresponding to the difference, for the period from 6 January 1985 to 14 May 1986, between the salary he received and the salary he would have received if he had been paid at the P-5, step I level (corresponding to a special post allowance at the P-5 level); (b)That the payment be done at latest the last day of the full month following the date of the communication of the Tribunal to the Applicant; (c)That, if he does not follow the decision of the
analysis: The text appears to be related to a dispute between a former staff member of the United Nations and the Secretary-General regarding a special post allowance. The dispute seems to be centered around the level of payment and the amount of compensation owed to the former staff member. Given the context of a staff member's claim against the United Nations, it is likely that the category is Employment or Humanitarian aid and relief.