The Decision of the Supreme Court of Cassation to Terminate the Employee for a Justifiable Reason is That the Person in the Position of His Supervisor Calls the Employee İmpertinent

T.C.
Supreme
9. law office

Issue No:2014/17182
Decision No:2014/21855
K. Date:25.6.2014
LAWSUIT: The plaintiff requested that severance pay, annual leave, overwork, week break, general vacation be decided to pay the wage receivables.

The local court dismissed the case.
Although it was appealed by the plaintiff’s lawyer during the sentencing period, after hearing the report prepared by the Examining Judge for the case file, the file was examined, discussed and considered as necessary:

THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT

A) Summary of the Plaintiff’s Request:
The plaintiff’s attorney, the defendant, according to company officials, work on morality and benevolence 09/02/2011 himself in front of her friends bulunulurak since he was hurt in contrary to the rules of the honor and dignity of the plaintiff a right of termination of your employment by using the right of dissolution, citing annual leave with severance pay, overtime, weekends and public holidays fee from the defendant is asked to decide on the collection of receivables.

B) Summary of Respondent’s Response:
The defendant’s deputy stated that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated by resigning with an unfair and invalid unilateral will, that the plaintiff did not follow the orders and instructions given to him,….. the branch did not attend the meeting because of a fire in the electrical wiring for emergency response from the manager when asked the reason for inability to attend the meeting, he called himself “this is not my job,” by giving the answer is not correct this behaviour by maintaining the same stance when it was stated that “you do need it if you want,” he answered, a justified reason for plaintiff’s termination, arguing that a dismissal has asked for.

C) Summary of the Decision of the Local Court:
Based on the evidence collected and the expert report, the court decided to dismiss the case.

D) Appeal:
The plaintiff appealed the decision.

E) Justification:
1-According to the evidence collected from the articles in the file and the legal reasons on which the decision is based, the plaintiff’s appeals that fall outside the scope of the following paragraph are not valid.

2-It is a matter of dispute between the parties whether the employee terminates the employment contract for Dec reason of the promise in a way that touches his honor.

in accordance with subparagraph (b) of subparagraph (II) of Article 24 of the Labor Code No. 4857, it provides that the employer insults the employee or one of his family members, commits the act of swearing, gropes, gives the employee the opportunity to rightfully terminate the employment contract. The fact that the words and behaviors that will touch honor and honor have been performed by the employer or the employer’s deputy does not change the legal result. It is also not necessary that these actions constitute a crime according to the Turkish Criminal Code.

In a concrete case, the fact that the person in the position of the employee’s supervisor insults the plaintiff employee by saying “indecent” is the rightful reason for termination from the employee’s point of view. Therefore, instead of accepting the claimant’s request for severance pay, his refusal was erroneous and required to be overturned.

F) The result:
It was unanimously decided on 25.06.2014 that the appealed decision should be OVERTURNED for the reason written above, and that the appeal fee received in advance should be returned to the relevant person upon request.

You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.