T.C.
SUPREME
- law office
E. 2016/33150
K. 2017/21641
T. 18.12.2017
- THE EMPLOYER REQUESTS THE EMPLOYEE TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN RESIGNATION PETITION WITH SIMILAR PRESSURES AS A CONDITION OF PAYING COMPENSATION USING HIS SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SUPERIORITY (If the Employee Complies with This, There Can be No Real Resignation Will / In This Case, The Termination Will Be Accepted by the Employer, But The Violation of the Will Must Be Proven by the Employee)
- RETURN TO WORK WITH THE INVALIDITY OF TERMINATION (The Need to Consider the Termination of the Employment Contract as a Resignation Without Relying on a Justified Reason and Without Prior Notification / The Need to Consider the Request to Leave in the Form of an Icap in the Direction of Entering Into a Replacement Contract, Even If the Employee’s Rights to Notice and Severance Pay are Paid, Which is the Most Common Form in Practice, and Not as a Resignation)
- TERMINATION OF THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT BY THE EMPLOYEE WITHOUT A JUSTIFIED REASON AND WITHOUT PRIOR NOTIFICATION (It Is Understood that the Plaintiff, Who Is a Workplace Doctor, Terminated the Employment Contract with His Own Hand on a Petition, And This Document Cannot Prove With Concrete Evidence That It Was Taken From Him by Injuring His Will / The Case Will Be Dismissed Because the Employee Who Terminated the Employment Contract Himself Cannot Claim the Invalidity of the Termination)
4857/m.20/3
SUMMARY : The plaintiff requested that the decision be made on the invalidity of the termination, the return to work and the legal consequences. Termination of an employee’s employment contract without relying on a justifiable reason and without recognizing the notice period should be considered a resignation. In practice, the most common form, provided that the employee’s rights to notice and severance pay are paid, the request to leave should be considered not as a resignation, but in the form of an icap in the direction of entering into a substitution (termination agreement), even if it is. If the employer, using his social and economic superiority, demands the employee to submit a written resignation petition with the condition of paying compensation, similar pressures, and the employee complies with this, there can be no real mention of a will to resign. In this case, it must be accepted that the termination was carried out by the employer. However, this situation must be proven by the worker of the corruption of will.According to the contents of the file, it is understood that the plaintiff, who is a workplace physician, terminated the employment contract with a petition of his own hand, and it is understood that he cannot prove with concrete evidence that this document was taken from him by his will to be disabled. The employee who terminates the employment contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination. Acceptance of the case instead of refusal is erroneous.
LAWSUIT : The plaintiff requested that the decision be made on the invalidity of the termination, the return to work and the legal consequences.
The local court has decided to accept the case.
Although the verdict was appealed by the defendant’s lawyer during the trial period; As a matter of nature, it was decided to refuse the request for a hearing, to conduct the examination on the documents, but after hearing the report prepared by the Examining Judge for the case file, the file was examined, as necessary, it was discussed and considered:
DECISION : Deputy plaintiff; the defendant is in front of the employer 05/01/2015 – 31/12/2015 dates between occupational physicians working as plaintiff himself was forced to resign as it was received many complaints about unfounded accusations, otherwise labor contract will be terminated on the same day will receive no compensation to be paid and workmanship and will be forced to leave if specified, broken pride, in the face of this situation, reputation was undermined and accompanied by security as of the same day, faced with the threat of being kicked in the door, you had presented to him to sign the minutes of the plaintiff, that has no reason to quit, claiming that he was forced to resign by pressure and threat, he asked to decide on the invalidity of the termination and the return of the plaintiff to work.
Attorney for the defendant; plaintiff’s highly trained medical doctor, and although he has had to sign the petition presented in the minutes, has become angry with their own free will and is entirely your own handwriting, your employment with the dissolution of a letter of resignation, resignation to the will of the plaintiff’s knowledge and competence that can predict the outcome of a dismissal of the case by arguing that it has requested.
By the court, “giving up all their rights to worker’s compensation for the year, resign, are not appropriate to the nature of life in the face of the fact that a defendant by the employer, the worker’s termination and the process of termination of an employment contract the plaintiff, labor law, dismissal procedures and procedure, the principle of equal treatment between employees and termination is a last resort that is not appropriate” to the acceptance of the case on the grounds that it has been judged. <
The decision was appealed by the deputy defendant.
In order for the employee to benefit from the provisions of the labor guarantee, the employment contract must be terminated by the employer. The employee who has terminated the employment contract cannot request the invalidity of the termination and the return to work.
Termination of an employee’s employment contract without relying on a justifiable reason and without recognizing the notice period should be considered a resignation. In practice, the most common form, provided that the employee’s rights to notice and severance pay are paid, the request to leave should be considered not as a resignation, but in the form of an icap in the direction of entering into a substitution (termination agreement), even if it is. If the employer, using his social and economic superiority, demands the employee to submit a written resignation petition with the condition of paying compensation, similar pressures, and the employee complies with this, there can be no real mention of a will to resign. In this case, it must be accepted that the termination was carried out by the employer. However, this situation must be proven by the worker of the corruption of will.
According to the contents of the file, it is understood that the plaintiff, who is a workplace physician, terminated the employment contract with a petition of his own hand, and it is understood that he cannot prove with concrete evidence that this document was taken from him by his will to be disabled. The employee who terminates the employment contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination. Acceptance of the case instead of refusal is erroneous.
In accordance with Article 20/3 of the Labor Code No. 4857, our Department has decided as follows.
CONCLUSION : With the justification described above;
1.TO OVERTURN AND ELIMINATE the court’s decision,
2.REFUSAL OF THE Case,
3.Since the fee is received in advance, there is no place for its re-receipt,
4.205.00 TL, which the defendant made, should be left above the trial expenses incurred by the plaintiff. paying the trial costs to the defendant by collecting them from the plaintiff,
5.TL 1,980.00, determined in accordance with the tariff in force at the date of the decision. the fee is charged to the defendant by taking the power of attorney from the plaintiff,
6.Refund of the appeal fee received in advance to the defendant at his request,
To be precise, it was decided by unanimous decision on 18.12.2017.
