By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive
UNITED NATIONS, June 24, more here -- Planned layoffs at the UN Development Program have been a subject of Inner City Press' reporting since last month.
Inner City Press' inquiries have continued and re-doubled after Ban's deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq, at noon on June 16, refused again to confirm the UN's receipt of a protest letter about the UNDP cut-backs from three UN system-wide unions, UN video here from Minute 30:06.
Now Inner City Press can exclusively report -- and has asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric about, as UNDP refused to take any Press question -- the results of post-June 16 surveying:
The survey was launched on the afternoon of 17 June and closed at midnight on 19 June 2014.
656 of 980 HQ staff completed the survey (2/3 of all at HQ/NY)
*IF you accept the PowerPoint the Structural Change people did last week, which says we have 980 staff at HQ/NY, then the response rate is just over 2/3 of all HQ/NY staff who completed the survey.
Attitudes toward the management of the Structural Change process so far
7% understand the logic of the new structure
4% say the realignment process has been well explained to them
40% have very little trust in the Administrator & the senior management team, 37.5% have no trust at all (total = 75%+)
61% say they are affected by the changes, 39% say they're not (but Comments section many say they don't know yet)
3% can name the members of the Governance Group & describe its function
9% say they have confidence in the Administrator
84% say the process should stop immediately, establish a Staff & Mgmt Committee to review the process and be part of the future movement
Some common trends in the "Comments" section
Many respondents agreed that they support change at UNDP, but they were united in decrying the way the Administrator and her Management Team have gone about the process, citing disregard for UN rules and regulations and any sort of due process.
Respondents asked why no financial or cost-benefit analysis had been provided and explained to staff.
Several respondents asked if the Executive Board approved and supported these measures
Several staff members also asked why the Secretary General had not been heard from yet
Many staff used the term "inhumane" when describing the process and pointed to the hypocrisy of UNDP, as a humanitarian organization, treating its own staff the way it is attempting to do.
Many respondents called on the Staff Council to be more involved (calling for a class action, calling for the involvement of the ILO, convening a Staff & Mgmt Committee, etc.)
Respondents frequently cited the absence of staff involvement and buy-in and the complete lack of a consultative process.
*IF you accept the PowerPoint the Structural Change people did last week, which says we have 980 staff at HQ/NY, then the response rate is just over 2/3 of all HQ/NY staff who completed the survey.
Attitudes toward the management of the Structural Change process so far
7% understand the logic of the new structure
4% say the realignment process has been well explained to them
40% have very little trust in the Administrator & the senior management team, 37.5% have no trust at all (total = 75%+)
61% say they are affected by the changes, 39% say they're not (but Comments section many say they don't know yet)
3% can name the members of the Governance Group & describe its function
9% say they have confidence in the Administrator
84% say the process should stop immediately, establish a Staff & Mgmt Committee to review the process and be part of the future movement
Some common trends in the "Comments" section
Many respondents agreed that they support change at UNDP, but they were united in decrying the way the Administrator and her Management Team have gone about the process, citing disregard for UN rules and regulations and any sort of due process.
Respondents asked why no financial or cost-benefit analysis had been provided and explained to staff.
Several respondents asked if the Executive Board approved and supported these measures
Several staff members also asked why the Secretary General had not been heard from yet
Many staff used the term "inhumane" when describing the process and pointed to the hypocrisy of UNDP, as a humanitarian organization, treating its own staff the way it is attempting to do.
Many respondents called on the Staff Council to be more involved (calling for a class action, calling for the involvement of the ILO, convening a Staff & Mgmt Committee, etc.)
Respondents frequently cited the absence of staff involvement and buy-in and the complete lack of a consultative process.
So only 9% have confidence in Helen Clark, as she runs to replace Ban Ki-moon as Secretary General. We'll have more on this.
Sources in UNDP have provided Inner City Press with more documents, including for now one showing UNDP's focuses on spin rather than responding to protests of the layoffs:
Dear colleagues, Following the roll-out of the Structural Change, you may find it useful to have a short statement for use with external parties including development partners, media and others.
The UNDP "For the Record" spin site was for a time run by Ban Ki-moon's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric, whom Inner City Press has asked about Haq's stonewalling. So could Ban leave and Dujarric remain in place?
Contrary to what appears to some to be Dujarric's (non) communications advice, to Clark when she held few UN press conference to Ban today, for example dodging on the Haiti cholera case, it might be time for Helen Clark to directly address the layoffs, herself, not through proxy or much less spin.
For now, perhaps, the stonewalling and spin are working: some write of Helen Clark's candidacy to replace Ban without even mentioning the layoffs, widely discussed and derided in the UN. But that's just for now. Watch this site.
