By Nathalie Meynet
GENEVA, Aug 1 2025 – The Coordinating Committee for International Staff Unions and Associations of the United Nations System (CCISUA)* staff federation has conducted a quick survey of staff in its member unions of their thoughts on the UN80 initiative.
The respondents expressed a lack of confidence in the way UN80 is being led and implemented, their disappointment in the lack of consultation and strong concerns about the outcome, and potential damage for the organization’s mandate and staff.
https://www.ccisua.org/about-us/
A summary is below:
Headline findings
72% do not feel that the proposed post cuts and relocations are based on a sound rationale
62% do not think the reforms will improve effectiveness and relevance
73% do not believe the decision to not reduce the number of USG posts is justified
60% do not believe it will make the UN more relevant to the needs of beneficiaries
51% do not have confidence in Guy Ryder’s leadership of UN80
18% have confidence in Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’s leadership and 48% do not
55% are willing to support collective staff actions
Further findings
78% do not feel consulted or included in discussions on UN80
59% do not believe the overall impact will be positive
60% do not believe senior management understands staff concerns and needs
57% do not believe that senior management are the right people to lead the reforms
63% do not believe it will rebuild faith in the multilateral system
65% believe management has not communicated clearly on UN 80
56% do not have confidence in the overall leadership of their entity
Of those supporting collective staff actions, at least 40% supported one or more of the following: a petition, participating in symbolic workplace actions, joining peaceful protests, participating in staff assemblies, supporting walkouts or work stoppages
Analysis of the comments
The comments convey deep dissatisfaction with process, fairness, and leadership trust, alongside calls for genuine, inclusive reform that addresses inefficiencies without undermining staff morale or organizational credibility. The comments can be broadly categorized as follows:
Lack of transparency and communication
Many respondents feel UN80 reforms are poorly explained or not at all, with insufficient updates or details from senior management.
Staff perceive decision-making as opaque, with major announcements made without meaningful consultation.
Sample quote: “We have nearly no information about UN80; leaders act based on favoritism and retaliation.”
Disproportionate impact on lower-level staff
Cuts are seen as targeting GS and junior P-level positions, while USG/ASG posts remain untouched, leading to top-heaviness.
There is widespread frustration over perceived inequities: senior management’s high costs are maintained while frontline staff bear the brunt.
Sample quote: “Cuts are only foreseen at working level; USG and higher management are untouched.”
Low confidence in leadership
Many express distrust in the Secretary-General, USG Ryder, and other senior leaders, citing a lack of accountability and unwillingness to lead by example.
Some staff report that leadership appears disconnected from ground realities.
Sample quote: “Our senior management leadership have no idea what is going on at the ground level.”
Morale and anxiety
Staff morale is described as extremely low, with widespread anxiety about forced relocations, arbitrary cuts, and potential retaliation for speaking out.
Some note fear of participating in protests or even surveys.
Sample quote: “Morale is at an all-time low. Staff are anxious about relocations and post cuts.”
Perceived political motives and favoritism
Multiple comments allege favoritism, political appointments, and protection of allies in senior ranks.
There is skepticism about whether cuts are based on organizational need versus political convenience.
Sample quote: “It is illogical to have the same senior management that caused the crisis lead the reforms.”
Support for reform – but not this way
Many agree reforms are needed to address inefficiency, duplication, and outdated structures.
However, they criticize the approach as rushed, top-heavy, and lacking strategic vision.
Sample quote: “Reforms are necessary, but this rushed process without consultation will harm the UN.”
Broader concerns about UN credibility
Several comments link the crisis to a decline in multilateralism, lack of member state support, and the UN’s shifting priorities.
There is worry that the reforms risk making the UN less relevant and effective at serving beneficiaries.
Sample quote: “UN80 sends the wrong message to member states: cutting staff by 20% without impact will only lead to more reductions.”
About the survey
The survey was conducted by the Coordinating Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations.
It took place between 21 and 27 July 2025. A total of 3,850 staff took part. The results are statistically significant at a 95 percent confidence interval and thus representative of the views of staff in the respective entities.
The results presented above relate specifically to responses received from staff of the UN Secretariat as they are directly affected by UN 80. Responses from non-Secretariat entities will be shared with their respective governance mechanisms and in many cases show equal concern at the situation.
The member unions of CCISUA are: ECA, ECLAC, ESCAP, ESCWA, UNOG, UNON, ICC, ICJ, ILO, ITU, IRMCT, UNICEF, UNHCR, UNITAR, UNU, WFP.
The CCISUA is an international federation comprised of UN common system staff unions and associations committed to an atmosphere of constructive cooperation in order to provide equitable and effective representation of staff at all levels. CCISUA primarily represents member interests in inter-agency bodies that make decisions and recommendations on conditions of service.
Nathalie Meynet is President, CCISUA.
IPS UN Bureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);
Euro Exchange Rate