UN80 reforms face backlash over lack of transparency

The UN in Geneva

As the UN continues with its plans to restructure the world body, designated UN80, the complaints continue to pour in—first, the Staff Union in New York and now, the Staff Union in Geneva.

After a meeting with management last week—to discuss UN80 through the Staff-Management Committee (SMC)—a memo addressed to staffers says that among the issues raised was “the continuing lack of transparency and lack of consultation.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres is quoted as having told the staff that “leaks and rumours may create anxiety.”
“But how else are staff expected to find out about UN80?” the 4,500-strong Staff Union asked in a May 27 memo.

The Union points out:

• The requirement to move staff out of Geneva and New York: Staff found out from The New York Times.

• The initial proposals, marked “strictly confidential,” for organisational mergers: Staff found out from Reuters.

• The requirement to cut budgets by 20%: Staff had to pay attention to a two-hour video of an informal session of the General Assembly, where the information was buried in a side remark.

• Discussions between the UN and Qatar on hosting organisations in Doha: Staff found out from Tribune de Genève.

• A proposal from Rwanda to host organisations in Kigali: Staff found out from Devex.

• Discussions between OHCHR and Austria to move staff to Vienna: Staff found out from Le Temps (management later stated that the number of posts moving to Vienna was much lower).

Currently, over 40 UN system organizations and entities, along with the secretariats of numerous international treaty bodies, are based in or have regional offices in Geneva.

This includes major UN agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO), the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and the International Labour Organization (ILO), among others.

Asked for her comments, Stephanie Hodge, a former UNDP staff member (JPO 1994–1996; BDP staff 1999–2004) and UNICEF Education staff member (2008–2014), told IPS:
“As an external observer who has worked closely with this institution for many years, I would like to express my support for the concerns raised by staff regarding recent developments.”

“While I do not speak on behalf of any internal constituency, I believe it is important to acknowledge how these issues resonate beyond the organization’s walls.”

Staff voices are the backbone of any institution’s credibility and effectiveness, she pointed out. “When their insights, contributions, and lived experiences are sidelined in major reform efforts, it weakens not only internal morale but also the trust of partners and stakeholders who rely on the institution’s integrity. Many of us in the wider development and humanitarian community have long admired this organization’s ability to deliver in challenging environments.”

That capacity is built on the dedication and expertise of its staff, said Hodge, who now serves as an independent evaluator and consultant for development programmes worldwide.

The current climate of uncertainty, she noted, combined with the perception that staff are being informed through leaks or informal channels, is concerning. Transparency and consultation are not luxuries—they are preconditions for sustainable, mission-driven reform.

No change initiative, however well-intentioned, can succeed without the active engagement of the very people tasked with carrying it forward, she argued.

Meanwhile, the Staff Union further says:
“We also asked for clarification on what would actually be consulted on with staff unions (the Secretary-General has stated several times that the initiative is subject to consultation and that a meeting will take place in Kosovo).”

The reply was that any consultation would be limited to so-called mitigation measures, which could include:

• Imposition of external recruitment freezes

• Priority consideration for internal candidates for the new positions

• Facilitated relocation of GS staff to other duty stations, although at their own cost and subject to agreement by the new host country

• Training courses

• Separation packages (although we already know that there will be no enhanced packages).

“As you can imagine, both the lack of transparency and lack of willingness for any meaningful consultation renders hollow the words of the Secretary-General,” says the Staff Union.

Added to this is a lack of clarity on how the proposed cuts and relocations will strengthen the UN, improve support for multilateralism in a transactional era, or resolve the liquidity crisis.

“Some have described a sense of panic among New York management. We fear this will lead to an outcome that weakens and undermines the organization we believe in and work for.”

“As you may have seen, we are not the only ones with this view. Member states and civil society have been vocal too.

“We are therefore reaching out to all actors (member states, media, academia, civil society) to make our case. We have also been raising these concerns with you and through traditional and social media. We are in close contact with senior managers who share these concerns.”

“Our aim is to bring reason and sense to any reforms that take place, knowing that the UN must evolve to survive.

“At the same time, we are reviewing all legal options and coordinating with other staff unions on these matters. We will continue to keep you updated and rely on you in our next steps as we define our collective response.”

The memo was authored by Laura Johnson, Executive Secretary, and Ian Richards, President of the Staff Union.

Meanwhile, the New York Staff Union, which was also critical of being left out of the discussions on UN reforms, was expected to:

• Call on the Secretary-General to formally include the United Nations Staff Union (UNSU) as a full participant in all aspects of the UN80 Initiative, including by having designated representatives of the Union in the UN80 Task Force, notably in its Working Group, with a view to ensuring staff representation in the deliberation and decision-making processes.

• Request that the Staff Union be granted equal consultative status within the Task Force, including its Working Group, alongside other stakeholders, to provide input on matters directly impacting staff welfare, organizational efficiency, and institutional reform.

• Emphasise that Staff Union involvement in a change management process with such a global scale/impact is critical to provide insights into daily operations and identify potential inefficiencies and challenges for improving the effectiveness of the organization.

Mandeep S. Tiwana, Interim Co-Secretary General of CIVICUS, told IPS that for all intents and purposes, the United Nations is the secular conscience of the world. Hence, its leadership is expected at all times to act with good faith, professional integrity, and principled courage.

For too long, he said, the UN’s top decision-makers have impeded the institution from achieving its full potential by resorting to bureaucratic ways of functioning, submission to perceived political realities, and personal ambition.

The current frustration expressed by the UN Staff Union in Geneva about lack of consultation and transparency by the UN’s leadership is a symptom of a much larger problem that pervades the institution, including not taking responsibility for one’s own failures and seeking to place the blame wholly on the belligerent actions of UN member states.

Elaborating further, Hodge said that from the outside, what appears most pressing is the need to centre reform not just on financial savings or structural shifts, but on strengthening the institutional culture and protecting the human capital that makes success possible.

Efficiency is important, but it should never come at the cost of dignity, fairness, or clarity of purpose.

“I urge leadership to approach this moment not as a public relations challenge, but as an opportunity to reset the tone of internal dialogue. Meaningful inclusion of staff in shaping the future of the organization would not only improve outcomes—it would set a positive example for the entire multilateral system.”

“Those of us who care deeply about the UN as an institution want to see it thrive. That means listening to staff, acting with integrity, and making space for shared problem-solving. Reform done with people—not to them—is always more powerful and enduring,” she declared.