Call Leave a request
CCU: it is also impossible to fire a contract worker on vacation

CCU: it is also impossible to fire a contract worker on vacation

The CCU, by its decision on the constitutional complaint in case No. 6-r(II)/2019 of 09/04/2019, categorically “forbade” employers to fire their employees who are on vacation or do not work due to temporary disability!

At the same time, the KSU noted that the situation absolutely cannot be influenced by the fact that the labor relations between the employee and the employer are formalized by an employment agreement (contract).

That is, no employee on vacation cannot be dismissed, since this is a violation of his constitutional rights. There is an exception to this rule, and it is strictly specified in legislation.

Dismissal of an employee which is on vacation is possible if the company is completely liquidated!

The reason for the promulgation of the decision of the Constitutional Court was the appeal of a citizen who was dismissed during her stay on vacation, who, by her situation, “put” before the court the issue of compliance with the Constitution with the provisions of part 3 of Art. 40 of the Labor Code of Ukraine.

Specifics and conclusions in the context of the incident

The citizen applied to the KSU with a request to review the compliance of the KU with the provisions of part three of Art. 40 of the Labor Code, which determines that the dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer is unacceptable if the employee is on vacation.

“The applicant pointed out in the complaint that the conclusion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in her case was incorrect! He determined that the above provisions of the Labor Code do not apply to labor legal relations based on an employment contract. Thus, the Supreme Court of Ukraine violated her constitutional rights, since it “artificially worsened” her working conditions, referring her to a certain category of workers”.

CCU investigated the complaint and established the constitutionality of the provisions of part 3 of Art. 40 of the Labor Code, indicating to the courts of all instances that the solution of similar labor disputes should be carried out taking into account the following:

  1. Part 3 of Art. 40 of the Labor Code “guarantees” employees protection against dismissal initiated by the employer if the employee is temporarily disabled or resting on a well-deserved vacation.
  2. An employment contract is one of the forms of legalizing “urgent” labor relations, and its essential conditions (validity period, grounds for termination / termination, etc.) are agreed by the parties.
  3. The fact that the employment relationship is secured by a contract is not a legal reason for the non-application of the provisions of part 3 of Art. 40 Labor Code.
  4. It is obvious that the dismissal of a “contract worker”, which is on vacation violates his labor rights, as it discriminates against him, which is unacceptable, since labor guarantees are spelled out in the law for everyone.
  5. It follows from this that, the conditions which worsening the position of the employee in comparison with the current legislation, prescribed when drawing up the contract (employment contract) are invalid, and the dismissal is illegal.

18.09.2019

447

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
What does it cost to build a house? Explanations of the Ministry of Regional Development!

Having your own home is the norm! You can buy it, get it from the state, or build it yourself! The last method is the most laborious, but quite realistic, because … The current legislation provides for the right of every citizen to build a house for himself and this can be done according to […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine on the recovery of unreasonably acquired property

The risks of investing in construction in Ukraine are obvious, nevertheless, they still continue to invest in this industry, because the demand for housing in our country remains steadily high. When investing, the contribution “grows” along with the construction, the closer the date of its commissioning, the more expensive it becomes. At the same time, […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine stopped family showdown over a shopping pavilion

By decision in case No. 202/3788 / 18 of 04.08.2020, the Supreme Court of Ukraine stopped the family showdown regarding the shopping pavilion, which the spouses had been sharing for several years. The court determined that the trade tent is movable property, transactions in respect of which are not subject to state registration, but it […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine on the interpretation of treaties on the basis of contra proferentem

The Ukrainian Supreme Court “remembered” about the “contra proferentem” principle! By the decision in case No. 756/1381/17-c of 03/25/2020, he consolidated the legal conclusion based on this doctrine. It reads: “If the interpretation of the content of a written agreement by means of general methods is impossible, the contra proferentem interpretation is used – the […]

The role of an attorney during interrogation: more than just presence

Being called in for questioning by law enforcement is always a stressful situation, even if the person is not a suspect. In such cases, it would be a good idea to seek legal assistance from a lawyer specializing in criminal law. At first glance, the role of a criminal lawyer during interrogation may seem minimal: […]

Recovery of damages caused by military actions of the Russian Federation

Russian armed aggression against Ukraine caused colossal losses for Ukrainian business and the private sector. Destruction and damage to assets, loss of ability to conduct activities, lost profit – all this requires an adequate legal response. In this publication, we will consider in detail the current issues related to the recovery of damages caused by […]

Address

01133, Kyiv, blvd. Lesi Ukrainky 26 (block L26), office 613

Email

info@grandliga.com.ua

Phone number

+380443395088

We work

Schedule: from 10:00 to 18:00
Weekend: Sunday

Make a route