DESA's STAFF SPEAK-UP: - INTEGRITY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND EQUALITY

C. Integrity, accountability and equality/non-discrimination (Summary of the issue raised by DESA Staff)

• Managers are perceived as being allowed to take decisions based on their own and often short-term interests versus the broader long-term interests of the organization.

• As better detailed in the sections covering staff selection, career development and other human resources management issues, many staff report discriminatory practices, or the perception thereof, specifically dealing with recruitment and promotion of staff. In particular, matters related to hiring of short-term staff and consultant services are questioned.

• In relation to the management of human resources in the Department, many of the contributions reiterate the expectation that all staff be treated with due respect, regardless of grade and position. Some staff expressed their desire to see the Department, and the Under-Secretary-General himself, reaffirming full accountability as well as a no tolerance policy for discriminatory treatment, especially with respect to staff selection and career development matters.

• Managers are perceived as having been allowed to treat some staff unfairly to the point of professional harassment and discrimination. Supervisors are perceived as being allowed to discriminate among staff based on personal likes and dislikes. Staff expressed a clear perception of lack of oversight for managers and supervisors; particularly the lack of an impartial and effective entity to turn to in case of perceived discrimination. Staff also expressed lack of faith in the willingness of superiors to address the fundamental problems in the staff-management relations, i.e. lack of motivation and the perception that other staff being favored.

• A significant number of staff members expressed concern regarding the lack of accountability at the senior management level. Some have suggested the introduction of managerial reviews/audits. In particular, management styles of certain division chiefs have been described as "tyrannical" or authoritarian.

• Some staff members asked why the integrity survey was not repeated or followed up on since 2004, give the significance of the results and the resources invested. Others asked why the results of a survey by the USG-DM, as part of a project to review the Secretariat's Accountability Framework (see http ://i seek. un. org/webpgdept1357_28 . asp) were not publicized.

• The senior management is perceived as being particularly non-accountable in terms of human resources management. As a staff member put it "We are happy to see that the SG is encouraging transparency, honesty and integrity but unfortunately we do not see the Directors, Chiefs and Deputy Chiefs in DESA following suit". The Executive Office is perceived as providing options by the rules but not tackling issues of staff wellbeing and fairness.

• The managers' decisions, style and practices do not appear to be overseen and/or questioned. This often leads to a very strong perception of favoritism, especially in relation to the long permanence on temporary positions of external candidates who are not selected with due process, or of retirees who are also kept on board at length. In some of the units concerned, such perceptions are strongly linked to the Directors' role, as Dls and lower grade managers are perceived as executing the Directors' unchallenged decisions including those relating to training options, or career development opportunities. (Note: This issue also appears under "Career Development -- Investing in Staff').

• In a few cases the contributions describe unbalanced and informal power-sharing systems, strongly centralized in a small group of people, often alienating most of the remaining staff members. In such settings, basic transparency concerning how priorities are set and decisions are made appears to be lacking. Favoritism, lack of consultation and delays in filling of vacancies and in designing and sharing work plans are also complained about. Staff contributions on this matter highlight the prominence of allegiance to superiors instead of to the organization itself.