text: explanations provided by him in respect of his shipment claim were not found fully satisfactory, the U.N. was no longer considering his re-employment. On 27 April 1987, the Applicant asked for submission of his appeal directly to the Tribunal but on 19 May 1987, the Assistant Secretary- General for Human Resources and Management rejected his request. The Board adopted its report on 6 September 1988. Its findings and recommendations read as follows: "Findings and Recommendations 82.The Panel unanimously, (a)Finds that while a regrettable error was committed in the medical classification of the appellant, his medical record was properly corrected; (b)Finds that the Secretary-General attempted in good faith to correct this error by offering to continue- 8 - the appellant in his employment and that he was within his right when he withdrew the offer since the appellant had not accepted the offer; (c)Finds that the erroneous medical classification of the appellant could not be considered as resulting from medical malpractice; (d)Finds that the appellant has produced no evidence that his separation from service was discriminatory; (e)Finds that the Secretary-General had no obligation, under staff rule lll.2(a) to enter into negotiations with the appellant to settle the appeal. 83.The Panel unanimously considers that the finding in paragraph 82(a) above is sufficient to grant the appellant the redress he requested in respect to his erroneous medical classification. 84.The Panel unanimously concluded that in submitting an unsubstantiated claim for reimbursement of the cost of his shipment the appellant had not met the high standard of integrity expected of a staff member, as provided for in the Charter. 85.The Panel unanimously decides to make no recommendation in support of the appeal." On 8 September 1988, the Officer-in-Charge for the Department of Administration and Management informed the Applicant that the Secretary-General, having re-examined the case in the light of the
analysis: The text appears to be related to a staff member's appeal to the United Nations regarding a shipment claim and employment dispute. The language used is formal and official, suggesting a bureaucratic or administrative context. The focus on employment, medical classification, and staff rules further support this analysis.