T.C.
SUPREME
- law office
E. 2016/29524
K. 2017/12122
T. 6.7.2017
The plaintiff decides on the invalidity of the termination, the return to work and the legal consequences of the decision
he probably did.
The local court has decided to accept the case.
Having been appealed by the defendant’s lawyer within the period of conviction, the Examining Judge for the case file
after listening to the report edited by, the file was reviewed, discussed and considered as necessary:
DECISION : A-) Summary of the Plaintiff’s Request:
The acting plaintiff is the dec’s latest Editor at the defendant’s workplace from 09/05/2011 to 31/08/2015
in the article of the defendant employer’s termination statement, that he works as; his client often gets sick and reports
his opinion that various diseases are caused by work stress and the location of the company where he works
also take into account the fact that there will be no change in the conditions of the media sector that it receives
considering that the situation in which it is located affects the normal functioning of the workplace,
it is claimed that it causes disruption and negativity and prevents the maintenance of the service relationship
termination of the employment contract by being terminated, termination of the employment contract by the employer is not based on a valid reason,
in the first three years that his client started working, he almost never took a leave of absence due to illness, and
he took sick leave not exceeding one or two days a year, but in the last year of his work he was suffering from stress
it is necessary to receive reports more often due to the diseases caused by the diseases in question
the resulting reports do not exceed a total of 10-12 days within a year, as well as the client’s reported
that he continues to work from home even on days when he is, that he works almost 7 days a week,
that he did not even use the annual leave granted by the plaintiff, that his client was ill and that he took a leave
It is possible that it can cause disruptions and negativity in the workplace (such as shingles and Diabetes)
that his client is in constant contact with his teammates as long as he works at the employer,
that he directs and informs his friends from home even on the days when he is reported, the plaintiff’s employee
stating that the employment contract has been terminated without valid reason, it is necessary to note the invalidity of the termination and the fact that the plaintiff
he has requested that his extradition be decided.
B-) Summary of Respondent’s Response:
The defendant is the deputy employer, the plaintiff is the owner of Haber Türk TV, and the plaintiff is Haber Türk
That he worked as an Editor in the Cultural and Artistic Department of TV, that he was asked to defend the plaintiff and
prior to the termination process; he received a report 20 times and used a report for a total of 40 days, moreover, the plaintiff
in addition to the days of reporting, doctor’s examinations, traffic jams, etc. many times for reasons allowed
by taking the excuse that he did not come to work full time or half a day, without termination of the plaintiff’s employment contract
during the last 6 months before, the Administrator told me that he would be late due to a migraine, due to traffic
by sending an SMS that he will not be able to catch up with the meeting, stay on the road, go to the doctor’s examination
he dec that he is reporting to the news meeting with the unit managers, which takes place every day between 9.25-10.15
constantly experiencing discomfort, inspection, traffic jams, etc. that he disagrees by citing the circumstances, the plaintiff
in this way, he often receives reports and reports excuses that lead to negativity in the workplace, the last
as a result of the fact that he did not appoint someone instead of him to enter the meeting, and the plaintiff lived in relation to his job
his statements about the troubles, stating that the work stress has reached the point where he will get sick, have been for a long time
her approach to work is being evaluated, which causes disruptions and negativity in the workplace and service
by accepting that it is an obstacle to the maintenance of the relationship, all legal rights of the employment contract are paid
he argued that it had been terminated and that the case should be dismissed.
C-) Summary of the Decision of the Local Court:
At the end of the trial conducted by the court, the defendant of the plaintiff who is not in the position of the employer’s deputy
he started working at his workplace under an indefinite employment contract on 09/05/2011, most recently as an Editor
according to the Labor Code No. 4857 of the employment contract signed by the respondent employer on 31/08/2015 while he was working - and 18. who has filed this lawsuit within the period of 1 month of right reduction, which has been terminated in accordance with the article
as of the date of termination of the plaintiff, his seniority is more than 6 months, and in the workplace there are also more than 30 workers
where the employee is employed, the plaintiff is covered by the employment guarantee and the legal
it has been determined that the benefit has been found and accepted. As a result of all these determinations, the burden of proof is on
from the examination of all records belonging to the plaintiff employee submitted to the file by the found defendant; termination
according to the justification in the notification, the plaintiff’s job description, efficiency, corporate principles of the employer, compliance
whether the required workplace rules have been determined objectively and concretely in advance
during the examination together with the witness statements, the plaintiff often receives reports and reports excuses
it leads to negativity in the workplace, and finally someone instead of about to enter the meeting
failure to assign and plaintiff’s statements about his/her problems related to his/her job indicate that the work stress itself
stating that he has reached the point where he is going to get sick, when his approach to his job for a long time is evaluated, he is in the workplace
it is claimed that it causes disruptions and negatives and prevents the maintenance of the service relationship
although the basis for termination has been made, the plaintiff is reported on the specified dates
that there is no conflict between the parties, with what decency of the act attributed to the plaintiff worker, and
the defendant has acted contrary to the contract and as a result his business relationship has been adversely affected
it is not specified by the employer in full and concretely, on what material basis it is based, it is clearly
it is contrary to the contract that it cannot be revealed, which, in turn, is not based on the defect and negligence of the worker
since the employee cannot be held responsible for his/her behavior, the employee’s behavior
the duty of the plaintiff, the working conditions of which the valid reason for termination arising from cannot also be mentioned
direct work without any warning or warning due to the actions attributed to the plaintiff
on the grounds that termination of the agreement would constitute a violation of the principle that termination is a last resort, the case
it has been decided to accept it.
D-) Appeal:
The decision was appealed by the defendant’s deputy.
E-) Justification:
20 /II of the Labor Code No. 4857.c.article 1 clearly proves that the termination is based on valid reasons
the burden is placed on the respondent employer.
When fulfilling the burden of proof, the employer will first of all prove that he complied with the formal conditions of termination.
Accordingly, having made the termination process in writing, in certain cases the employee wants to defend
documentation of the reasons for termination, which are based on the content of the written termination process, in concrete and clear
he must have shown it. After it becomes clear that the employer has fulfilled the formal conditions, the content
the stage will be moved on to prove that the reasons for termination are valid (or justified).
18 of the Labor Code No. 4857. the employer is responsible for the employee’s behavior and competence
he has given the authority to terminate the employment contract for the reasons arising. From the behavior of the worker
the purpose pursued in the resulting termination is the conduct of the employee in violation of the employment contract that he has previously committed
not to punish or sanction; to continue to violate its contractual obligations,
to avoid the possibility of recurrence. Termination of the employment contract due to the employee’s behavior
for this, the presence of an employee’s behavior that is contrary to the employment contract, in violation of the contract, is required. The worker’s defective
with his behavior, he acted contrary to the contract, and as a result, his business relationship was negatively
if it is affected, there will be a valid termination caused by the employee’s behavior. In turn, the worker
a liability to the employee for his non-contractual behavior that is not based on defects and negligence
since it cannot be loaded, it is also due to the valid reason for termination caused by the employee’s behavior
it cannot be mentioned.
The reasons arising from the behavior and competence of the employee are determined by Article 25 of the same Law. in the article
in addition to the reasons mentioned, although not of this nature, it is important that work is seen in workplaces
the causes that affect the degree of negativity are. Caused by the behavior or incompetence of the employee
for reasons, it is important and reasonable for the employer to maintain the employment relationship
in cases where it cannot be expected, it will be necessary to accept that the termination is based on valid reasons.
The employer, who has the burden of proof on himself, must ensure that the plaintiff’s behavior or incompetence for a valid and justified reason
he must also prove that it leads to negativity in the workplace and that the business relationship has become unbearable.
On the other hand, in what cases is the termination valid due to the incompetence of the employee on the grounds of the Labor Code
he is considered one of the exemplary talents that he will give the right to, and one of them is that he often gets sick and receives reports.
In case of receiving reports frequently, the employer will not be able to benefit from the employee’s job performance, even if it is intermittent. Often
a worker who is often ill and receives a report, so his absence will lead to negativity in the workplace
it is a clear phenomenon. The reason for frequent illness in the justification of the Labor Code is due to the adequacy of
as an example, it is accepted that it leads to negativity in the workplace.
18/3 of the Labor Code No. 4857 of the Employer. 25/I of the same law in accordance with article F.in accordance with article b
in addition to the preliminary, it cannot terminate the employee’s employment contract within a six-week waiting period. However, the worker
it is not covered by the fact that he receives reports frequently, intermittently. In case of frequent reports, the total
even if the period during which he is being reported remains within the waiting period, receiving reports often leads to negativity in the workplace
if it is opened, the employee’s employment contract may be terminated with notice or on a temporary basis. In this case, the termination is valid
it is based on the cause.
According to the contents of the file, the plaintiff had 9 cases in 2015, 5 cases in 2014, 3 cases in 2013 and 2 cases in 2012
in total, he received a report for 39 days, which he repeated often in 2015, although other years are not taken into account,
in fact, it is understood that this situation is also accepted by the court. The plaintiff is often
as there are minutes that he was late for meetings or did not attend, stating that he would go to the doctor
minutes have also been kept that he did not participate and did not inform. The plaintiff received the most recent
in his defense, he reported that he had problems with his supervisor, his psychology was impaired, and because of his discomfort
he stated that he had received it.
According to these concrete material and legal facts, the plaintiff attended the meetings late whether he received a report or not
or he does not attend, there are problems with his superiors at work, he often receives reports and attends meetings
it is understood that his non-participation led to negativity in the workplace. How to determine the behavior and efficiency of
termination from the point of view of a worker who causes negativity in the workplace and makes the business relationship unbearable for a long time
the principle of being a last resort cannot be mentioned. For these reasons, the termination of the case is based on the valid reason
acceptance with written justification 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.Leaving the plaintiff above the cost of the trial,
5.The fee of TL 1,980.00 determined according to the tariff in force at the date of the decision is determined by the attorney’s office from the plaintiff
to be taken and given to the defendant,
6.On 06.07.2017, the amount of the appeal fee received in advance will be returned to the defendant in strict accordance with the request
it was decided by unanimous decision.
