(l) At the l5th session (April l954: CO-ORDINATION/R.l62, section A.7) CCAQ confirmed a conclusion reached at its l2th session (April l952) that one meeting a year was not sufficient for the satisfactory conduct of its business. The Committee discussed various suggestions for additional meetings without coming to a conclusion. It left the question for further discussion.

(2) At the 23rd session (March l962: CO-ORDINATION/R.39l, paras. ll7-l22) CCAQ again discussed its working arrangements. It agreed that March-April was the most suitable time for the main annual session, and that the place of the session should continue to alternate, in principle, between North America and Europe. The problems of the smaller organizations in being represented should always be borne in mind. Greater use should be made of advance working parties or specialists, who could formulate clear draft recommendations for discussion in plenary.

For each spring session, 3l January would normally be the latest date for submission of agenda items, exceptions being made only for emergency items. These revised working methods might have limited financial implications which would necessitate review of the scope of joint project financing (see section 16.7).

Responsibility for maintenance and revision of the CCAQ Handbook was transferred from WHO to the Staff Office (called "secretariat" since 1969).

(3) At its 29th session (March l968: CO-ORDINATION/R.669, paras. 84-85 and CO-ORDINATION/R.679, paras. l4-l7) CCAQ, noting that financial and budgetary co-ordination had in recent years been dealt with by ad hoc groups or by a separate section of CCAQ, agreed that CCAQ should be maintained as a single body, dealing with all matters of administrative and financial co-ordination. Agenda items should, however, be grouped according to substance (general administrative, management, personnel, finance and budget) and work scheduled so that organizations could arrange for appropriate representation. Since that time, the two branches of CCAQ have generally met separately (see Annex I).

(4) CCAQ also agreed at its 29th session (March l968: CO-ORDINATION/R.669, para.83) that in future it would hold its regular annual session once in every three years in North America and twice in every three years in Europe.

(5) At its 30th session (March 1969: CO-ORDINATION/R.733, para. 116) CCAQ agreed that subject to prior approval of cost estimates, the Handbook should be reprinted.

(6) See document CCAQ/S.3l/R.4 for a CCAQ Secretariat summary of CCAQ working arrangements as developed from experience and suggestions by organizations in l969-1970.

(7) At its 3lst session (March 1970: CO-ORDINATION/R.798, para.69) CCAQ(PER) agreed that when the CCAQ Secretariat was requesting clearance on a particular matter by organizations it should be authorized to state, in connexion with a reminder after an original deadline had not been met, that failure to reply by a stated date would be construed as assent.

(8) At its 36th session (September l972: CO-ORDINATION/R.960, para. 52) CCAQ(FB), having regard to the fact that it met twice a year, agreed that the Chairman elected for its Spring meeting should remain in office for a year, i.e. until replaced at the following Spring session. The Secretariat should maintain a roster of those organizations which felt that their representation at FB sessions would permit them to provide the Chairman, in order to ensure a proper rotation

(9) At Part II of its 46th session (February-March l977: CO-ORDINATION/R.l208, para. 24) CCAQ(PER) considered the effect of the establishment of ICSC on the organizations' co-ordination activities, and agreed on a number of procedures to govern its own sessions, on arrangements for participating in Commission sessions and on modifications to CCAQ secretariat's work methods.

See also CCAQ/S.46/R.l3(PER). CCAQ(FB) agreed at the same session (CO-ORDINATION/R.l211, para. 67) on arrangements concerning the frequency and documentation of its sessions on financial and budgetary questions.

(l0) New arrangements for distributing CCAQ documents were agreed at the 5lst session (PER) (August 1979) and endorsed at the 51st session (FB) (September 1979). The details are provided in ACC/1979/R.69, para. 49(a)-(c).

(11) At its 5lst session CCAQ(FB) considered guidelines circulated by the UN Office of Secretariat Services for Economic and Social Matters (OSSECS) on the presentation of reports of subsidiary bodies of ACC. It had reservations about limiting the length of its reports - given their functions as reference documents - and about providing separate sections for decisions and for discussions; however, it agreed that when it had matters to put before ACC it would draw attention to them in the opening paragraphs of its reports (ACC/1979/R.69, para. 50).

(12) At its 55th session (July 1981: ACC/1981/3l, paras. 132-137), CCAQ(PER) agreed to meet one week before the opening of the ICSC sessions, usually at the same place where ICSC was to meet. It also decided to make full use of working groups and/or sub-committees to make preparatory studies of technical questions and to exercise restraint in adding to its agenda items of substance for which the relevant document had not been distributed well in advance. The secretariat and others responsible for preparing documents for the Committee were urged to do everything possible to ensure that the documents were distributed to organizations at least four weeks before the meeting.

(13) At its 56th and 57th sessions (March and July 1982) CCAQ(PER) considered requests from the Co-ordinating Committee of Independent Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA) to be granted access to CCAQ. It agreed to study the question of criteria for admitting staff representatives (ACC/1982/5, para. 109 and ACC/1982/23, paras. 124-125). ACC subsequently requested CCAQ to expedite the study (ACC decision 1982/18).

(14) At its 58th session (March 1983), CCAQ(PER) agreed on guidelines for granting staff representatives access to ACC and CCAQ (ACC/1983/9, paras. 84-86 and Annex V). A report was submitted to ACC at its first regular session of 1983; ACC noted the CCAQ report (ACC decision 1983/3). In accordance with the guidelines adopted, CCISUA was admitted to participate in the work of the Committee.

(15) At its 61st session (July 1984) (ACC/1984/16), CCAQ(PER) gave consideration to procedures for ensuring that documentation reached organizations in a timely fashion; it concluded that the Secretary should introduce such changes as he deemed appropriate to improve the situation.

(16) At its special session in October 1984, CCAQ(PER) agreed that the working arrangements adopted at its 55th session should continue (ACC/1984/22, para. 17).

(17) CCAQ(PER) reviewed its working methods at its 66th session (March 1987: ACC/1987/4, paras. 117-122). The Committee confirmed that the date, venue and to a large extent, the duration of CCAQ(PER) sessions were geared to ICSC sessions. It also agreed on comments to be addressed to ICSC concerning the Commission's working methods (ibid, annex III).

(18) At its 66th session (March-April 1987) CCAQ(FB) reviewed matters relating to the location, length and agendas of its sessions. It agreed (ACC/1987/6, para. 48) that:

(a) A spring meeting in Europe and an autumn meeting in North America had advantages for the representatives of member organizations;

(b) The length of the sessions (one week each) should be maintained, but the agendas of one session per year might be more general in nature while those of the other might be centred around a given theme;

(c) The documentation of the sessions should be limited as far as possible and confined to items already provided for in the provisional agenda.

(19) At its 72nd session (February-March 1990: ACC/1990/4, paras. 150, 151) CCAQ(PER) agreed that the tripartite working group on the classification of duty stations might hold an additional meeting every year, starting in 1991.

(20) At the same session (ibid., paras. 174, 175) the Committee considered a number of suggestions for improving its working methods, especially in connection with the time available for meetings in the light of the revised working methods of ICSC. It limited itself to a request that its concerns be taken into account in the preparation of the next session, and to a suggestion that the Field Working Group's agenda be circulated in advance of CCAQ sessions. The Committee was not in favour of longer sessions.

(21) At the same session CCAQ(PER) declined to endorse a proposal by its Sub-Committee on Staff Training that its name be changed to "Sub-Committee on Staff Development"; it asked the Sub-Committee to clarify how it saw its role, and did not agree to its recommendation that it revert to a pattern of annual meetings (ACC/1990/4, paras. 138-140; see also section 9.5).

(22) At its 74th session (March 1991: ACC/1991/5, para. 152) CCAQ(PER) decided that the 17th session of its Sub-Committee on Staff Training should be held in Geneva and not, as proposed, in Florence. It recalled its earlier conclusion that in order to minimize travel costs, meetings of its sub-committees should be held in duty stations where more than one organization was located.

(23) At its 73rd session (July 1990: ACC/1990/10, paras. 108, 109), discussing difficulties facing job classifiers in the UN system, CCAQ concluded that they were symptomatic of a broader problem: the lack of linkages between personnel sub-systems. There was a lacuna in the common system treatment of personnel management issues, since no forum existed where they could be discussed in depth. While not wishing to establish another standing sub-committee, CCAQ felt some mechanism was needed which would permit such discussion, with the aim of producing not general recommendations but practical strategies and programmes to help the organizations put into practice existing principles. The Committee decided to consider at its next session how that gap might be filled and the necessary linkages drawn between personnel sub-systems.

(24) Pursuant to the above decision, at its 74th session (March 1991: ACC/1991/5, paras. 132-135 and 152) the Committee agreed to a suggestion by the secretariat that a workshop/retreat be organized, in conjunction with the 75th session, to discuss priority concerns. It was understood that initiatives in this area would primarily involve the sharing of information and ideas, rather than seeking to impose solutions on organizations.

(25) At its 75th session (July-August 1991: ACC/1991/17, para. 155) CCAQ welcomed the initiative for the retreat which had taken place on 3 and 4 August.

(26) At its 74th and 75th sessions (March and July-August 1991: ACC/1991/5, paras. 168, 169; ACC/1991/17, paras. 143-149) CCAQ(PER) returned to the question of its working methods. It agreed to experiment, during its 75th session, with an arrangement under which agenda items would be broken down into three categories depending on how much discussion (if any) they required. Reservations were expressed about in-session working groups: in general it seemed preferable for working groups to be established between sessions. The Committee could see no way at this stage of changing the timing of its meetings.

(27) At its 76th session (March 1992: ACC/1992/6, para. 115), the Committee requested its Secretary to develop proposals for a workshop that might take place duringthe next session.

(28) At its 77th session (July 1992: ACC/1992/23, para. 119), CCAQ held a one-day management briefing on the subject of "total quality management". The Committee also reviewed requests for observer status from the International Organization for Migration and from the Common Fund for Commodities. Since the World Bank and the IMF, which did not apply the common system of salaries and allowances, had observer status by virtue of membership in ACC, and the two petitioning organizations, although not members of ACC, did apply the common system, the Committee was inclined to accede to their request but asked the Secretary to study the ramifications of the matter first.

(29) At its 78th session (March 1993: ACC/1993/6, paras. 146-147) the Committee agreed in principle with a proposal that any organization not a member of ACC could be granted observer status, provided that it was an inter-governmental, international body applying the common system of salaries and allowances, that it was an organization whose work had a direct bearing on UN activities, i.e., a UN related agency, and was an organization which could be considered a competitor in the labour market. Such bodies working under the auspices of an organization already represented in ACC would not normally be considered for observer status. Observers would be expected to make a voluntary contribution. In the light of these criteria the International Organization for Migration and the Common Fund for Commodities would be invited as guests to CCAQ meetings, with the understanding that CCAQ would revert to the matter if these arrangements proved impracticable.

(30) At the 79th session of CCAQ(FB) (September 1993), participants were informed of suggestions made by CCAQ(PER) that there should be increased cooperation between the two components of the Committee and concurrent meetings at the same place. While understanding this position, participants recalled that the venues of the sessions of the Committee's two components were controlled by different factors, so that concurrent meetings in the same place could not easily be arranged. A special session of joint working party could, however, be considered if an important matter of mutual interest should arise; consultations could also take place between the Chairmen (ACC/1993/23, para. 69).

(31) At its 80th session (February-March 1994), CCAQ(FB) noted recent action by the Organizational Committee, on behalf of ACC, concerning the functioning of ACC subsidiary bodies, having to do with the format of reports, the dates of meetings, and draft ACC comments on reports of the JIU (ACC/1994/5, para. 59).

(32) At its 81st session (August-September 1994), CCAQ(FB) was also informed of similar action by the Organizational Committee in relation to the election of Chairmen (ACC/1994/15, para. 43).

(33) CCAQ(FB) was also informed, at its 82nd session (February 1995), of the position taken by the Organizational Committee in relation to the admission of observers and noted with satisfaction that the text relating to payments by observers answered its concerns as expressed at its 78th session (cf. Section 16.7, A14) (ACC/1995/6, para. 58).

(34) At its 82nd session (April 1995: ACC/1995/5, paras. 156-157) CCAQ(PER) considered a request from the ILO's Staff Union Committee to participate in sessions of CCAQ and ACC. It noted that the Union did not meet the established criteria and therefore could not participate in these sessions.

(35) At the same session, the Committee decided to hold two more sessions in July and September 1995 in order to prepare for ICSC's 42nd session in July and ACC's session in October (ibid., paras. 163-164).

(36) At the first part of its 83rd session (July 1995: ACC/1995/19, para. 55) the Committee decided to hold a retreat before a forthcoming session to discuss issues related to the structure of the salary scale and its applicability to the programmes of work of the organizations.

(37) At the same part of the session, the Committee considered preliminary comments by the Secretary on the functioning of CCAQ. The Committee felt that this review should be ongoing and agreed on a number of matters related to its meetings and working arrangements. The Committee agreed to revert to the matter in light of developments relating to the functioning of ICSC (ibid., paras. 103-107).

(38) At its 87th session (July 1997: ACC/1997/13, para. 16) CCAQ noted that it had continued to make changes to its work programme and that its 85th and 86th sessions were reduced to four from five days and that for at least a day of each session the Committee met in two working groups at the same time.

(39) At its 88th session (April 1998: ACC/1998/5, paras. 1-3) the format of CCAQ's session reports was changed to take account of the new CCAQ web site and the intention of posting CCAQ documents on it and to provide a summary of ICSC's conclusions and decisions on the issues discussed. A list of selected references was attached to the report (ibid., annex VI).

(40) At its 89th session (July 1998: ACC/1998/9, para. 21) CCAQ, noting that meetings of its sub-committees in recent years had all been task-related and responded to specific concerns raised by the Committee and that the Medical Directors had expressed the wish to work more closely with the Committee, decided to re-examine its sub-committee structure in its entirety in the context of ACC's review of the inter-agency coordination machinery.

(41) At its 90th session (April 1999: ACC/1999/5, para. 22) CCAQ noted, within the context of the structure and functioning of CCAQ, that the convening of ad hoc events, such as the Ad Hoc meeting on Recruitment and Selection (see section 9.2, para. (35)), which brought together a range of specialists from organizations within and outside the common system, provided an effective forum for furthering more modern and holistic approaches in the HR area and considered that such events were preferable to the fixed and more structured, agenda-driven sub-committee activities. CCAQ therefore decided to discontinue its two standing sub-committees on job classification and on staff training on the understanding that (a) job classification concerns would be dealt with in a wider context, inter alia through bringing together a cross-section of specialists, and (b) staff training matters would be pursued by the Chiefs of Learning, inter alia in the context of the development of the UN Staff College Project (UNSCP). CCAQ also requested its secretariat (i) to organize an ad hoc meeting on a broad spectrum of job classification concerns in autumn 1999 and (ii) to review the question of meetings of the Chiefs of Learning with the Director of the UNSCP to ensure that the needs of those responsible for learning and staff development were fully and cost-effectively met.

(42) At its second regular session in 2000, ACC decided inter alia that issues on the current work programme of the HR Directors would be pursued through task forces and that common system HR directors would meet immediately before sessions of ICSC – normally for not more than three days – to review, on behalf of ACC/HLCM, all matters under consideration by ICSC in order to determine common positions to put forward before ICSC, to select their spokesperson or persons and authorize them to make representations on behalf of ACC/HLCM. The HR Managers of the UN System or their representatives met for the first time under these new arrangements at UN Headquarters in June 2001 prior to the fifty-third session of ICSC, held at the headquarters of ICAO as the Human Resources (HR) Network (ACC/2001/HLCM/7, paras. 1-2). Organizations' representatives and the ACC secretariat were also invited to participate in an ICSC retreat on organizational change the weekend immediately preceding the ICSC session. The retreat was meant to serve as a backdrop to ICSC's consideration of the reform of the pay and benefits system.

(43) At its April 2002 meeting (CEB/2002/HLCM/8, para. 2) the HR Network designated a convenor and spokesperson and a second spokesperson for the network at sessions of ICSC.

(44) At its March 2003 meeting (CEB/2003/HLCM/12, para. 24) the HR Network noted that there was the need for improved coordination on human resources management issues which were currently being discussed in a number of forums, including the issues of mobility and spouse employment which were on the agenda of HLCM. It agreed that coordination issues with UNDG should be a standing item on the agenda of future meetings of the HR Network.

(45) At its June 2003 session (CEB/2003/3, para. 33) HLCM agreed to reinvigorate the FB Network and encourage virtual exchanges, as well as video-conferences, with a view to receiving input in respect of ongoing HLCM projects, including the changing relationship between regular and voluntary funding, the development of United Nations Accounting Standards and the future FB agenda and requested that the secretariat urgently look into the possibility of updating and maintaining the FB website and of preparing appropriately to recruit in 2004 a focal point for FB issues in the secretariat.

(46) At its February 2004 meeting (CEB/2004/HLCM/12/Rev.1, para. 39) the FB Network expressed its appreciation for the work of the UNHCR Convenor in managing the meeting and welcomed the appointment of the WHO as the new Convenor. The Network agreed that it should, in principle, meet not more than once a year, mid-way through the year, and for a duration of 2-3 days, depending on the agenda. The Network should continue to review the progress of each Working Group, as well as focus on those issues which responded to requests of the HLCM. The Network, and its Working Groups, should also work via electronic means and videoconferencing in order to move ahead on key issues requiring attention. The Network would be action and results-orientated in its work. The Bretton Woods institutions and related inter-governmental organizations should also be encouraged to attend FB Network meetings. Each yearly meeting should include a key note speaker from inside or outside the UN system with high level financial expertise.

(47) At its 7th session (March 2004: CEB/2004/3, paras. 47-48) HLCM, after hearing a report by the UNHCR Convenor of the FB Network, (a) agreed to the proposal by the Network for the creation of a joint FB/HR Working Group on the issue of long-term care, as this was an important human resource issue that might have financial implications; (b) agreed to include in the agenda of the next session of the Committee the issues of: (i) cash management and investment policy and (ii) tax reimbursement policy; and (c) requested the FB Network to review all cost-sharing arrangements, including those for security.

(48) At its 8th session (October 2004: CEB/2004/6, paras. 67-68) HLCM reviewed a document regarding the establishment of an inter-agency travel network. A recent meeting of travel managers from UN entities and other interested international organization had concluded that it would be useful to form an inter-agency travel network to cooperate on all aspects of travel, to share best practices in the management of travel services and to cooperate on global airline agreements and contractual agreements for travel management services so as to leverage resources relating to travel services. The Committee welcomed and encouraged the professional exchange, sharing of best practices and strengthening of inter-agency cooperation of travel managers of the UN system.

(49) At its July 2005 meeting (CEB/2005/HLCM/26, paras. 44-47) the FB Network was given a demonstration of the secretariat’s re-designed website, with a specific focus on the FB Network section and its objectives, structure and content were described and explained. The Network appreciated the new website as an advanced tool with multiple potential uses: document repository, event planning, management of contacts, working platform for common activities, communication, all with different levels of access, depending on role and authorization. The Network agreed that work should proceed section by section, without waiting for the completion of the entire CEB Secretariat’s web site for implementation of the FB Network section.

(50) At its eleventh session (CEB/2006/3, para.54), HLCM requested the Secretariat to provide documentation in time sufficient to allow for the digestion of information, and, if impossible, to remove the item from the agenda. Papers should be concise, summarising the main points and issues. Whether the item is for information, discussion or decision should be made clear and, if the latter, what the proposed action was. Intersessional HLCM meetings via videoconferences were to be considered standard practice for both decision-making and information sharing purposes.

(51) At its twelfth session (CEB/2006/5, paras. 87-90), the Committee decided that the HR Network meetings were now divided into three parts: a) an initial meeting of HR policy experts to review the items on the agenda of the ICSC, (b) a full meeting of the Network, which included observers and staff representatives and (c) a closed session focusing on specific strategic HR issues attended only by the Heads of HR and senior HR managers. This part also included a private session of Heads of HR only. In addition, the process of preparing for the sessions of ICSC was now initiated several weeks prior to the session. Ad-hoc working groups were established on items of particular importance to analyse the ICSC documentation and develop recommendations for the Network positions. The Committee noted with appreciation that the Network had undertaken a review of its functioning and adopted a new format for its meetings and working methods.

(52) At its March 2007 session (CEB/2007/3, paras. 139-141), HLCM asked the CEB Secretariat to draft “Procedures and criteria for the preparation of agendas and for submission of documents for consideration and discussion by the HLCM at its sessions”, and to submit this proposal to the Committee for approval before its next session.

(53) At its fourteenth session (CEB/2007/6, para.148), the Committee endorsed the criteria outlined in document CEB/2007/HLCM/26 concerning the procedures and criteria for the preparation of agendas and for submission of documents.

(54) At its sixteenth session in New York (CEB/2008/5, paras. 59-63), HLCM agreed that a letter be sent in response to the JIU request, informing that the Unit could be invited to participate in HLCM Network meetings for consideration and discussion of specific issues (proposals for studies, draft recommendations, etc.) that are of relevance to each particular Network.

(55) In the future, HLCM member organizations would continue the practice of providing individual responses to requests for input in the JIU programme of work, remaining mindful of the need to limit their input to issues that are organization-specific, and instead bringing proposals on issues with system-wide implications to the attention of the relevant technical Network of HLCM, for subsequent transmission to JIU.6 HLCM also requested its Networks to take up for formal discussion at their next meeting the modalities and procedures for their interaction with the JIU, and to report thereon to HLCM at its next session. The CEB Secretariat would compile the proposals received for the JIU programme of work for 2009 and transmit them to the Unit by 15 October 2008. The Committee encouraged its members to review communication procedures within their respective organizations, to ensure a good information flow between HLCM/Network representatives and JIU Focal Points and a coordinated action on JIU’s recommendations, programme of work, etc.

(56) At its seventeenth session (CEB/2009/HLCM/HR/27, paras. 41-42), the HR Network agreed to strengthen the links with the Medical Doctors Working Group (MDWG) and proposed that, in future, a representative of the medical group should participate in HR Network meetings. In addition, a list will be developed of all the matters the MDWG and the HR Network are working on, and all the matters that would merit further discussion.

(57) At the same session (CEB/2009/HLCM/HR/27, para. 67), the HR Network took note of the Outcome of the HR Directors Strategic Meeting held in Paris in November 2008 and agreed to continue having strategic meetings annually; it was briefed about the creation of the “HR Directors” folder (https://hr.unsystemceb.org/hrdirectors/) within the CEB Website.

(58) At its eleventh session (CEB/2009/HLCM/FB/11, paras.53-55), the FB Network recalled that the normal practice for the Network is to meet twice a year. Nevertheless, given that HLCM and CEB would meet in fall 2009 and considering the number of important issues identified by the Network for urgent discussion, the Network agreed that a third meeting for the year 2009 would take place in November, possibly face-to-face.

(59) At its twelfth session (CEB/2010/HLCM/FB/9, paras.43-47), the FB Network decided to regularise the FB Network face-to-face meetings to be convened within the fixed timeframe from the last week of August to the first week of September and requested the organizations to confirm their interest in identified face-to-face meeting topics, highlight additional topics of interest and volunteer to develop discussion papers for selected topics for the next face-to-face meeting.

(60) At its seventeenth session in Turin (CEB/2011/HLCM/FB/21, para.54), the FB Network also considered the possibility to discontinue practice of having a back-to-back meeting with the Task Force on Accounting Standards.

(61) On Reporting Procedures for internal audits of One UN programmes’ joint activities, the FB Network requested, at its seventeenth session in Turin (CEB/2011/HLCM/FB/21, paras.59-60), the CEB Secretariat to collect necessary information and to draw up a 2012 calendar consolidating official holidays and block-out dates for member organizations.

(62) At its twenty second session in Washington D.C. (CEB/2011/5, paras.130-139), the Committee advised the FB Network and other HLCM Networks that their meetings should take place at least two weeks before HLCM meetings, allowing adequate time for the review of Network conclusions.