Summary:
The complainant filed two complaints against the acting and then the indeterminate appointment of the appointee – he claimed that the appointee did not meet an essential qualifications or the occupat...
Summary:
The respondent appointed the complainant and two co-workers to similar positions on an acting basis in an advertised process – the respondent terminated the complainant’s appointment before her acting...
Summary:
The complainant was eliminated from the appointment process at the written exam stage – he claimed he was improperly eliminated because he was a whistleblower – he also maintained that the respondent ...
Summary:
The complainant claimed that an appointment was not based on merit and that there was discrimination, personal favouritism, and inequity in the appointment process – the complainant failed to respond ...
Summary:
The complainant was precluded from applying to two appointment processes – he claimed that the respondent abused its authority by choosing to make them non-advertised – he also claimed that they were ...
Summary:
The complainant alleged that the respondent committed an abuse of authority in the appointment process for a team-leader position when the statement of merit criteria (SOMC) was modified, which disadv...
Summary:
The complainant alleged that she was not assessed fairly and that there was a reasonable apprehension of bias in the assessment process, which gave rise to an abuse of authority – according to her, it...
Summary:
The respondent had circulated a notice for expressions of interest for acting appointments to positions classified at the WP-05 group and level – the opportunity was made available only to persons wit...
Summary:
The complainant filed a complaint, alleging that the respondent abused its authority by choosing a non-advertised appointment process – he believed that the stated rationale for using a non-advertised...