Although mobbing is frequently encountered in today’s business life, termination of employment is increasing due to mobbing. According to the International Labor Organization, mobbing is called malicious, cruel, humiliating attitudes for intimidating, harassing and attrition of one or a group of workers. The main factor that differentiates mobbing and workplace roughness, job dissatisfaction or dissatisfaction is that mobbing is done for the purpose of achieving a certain purpose against a certain person. In this context, mobbing occurs when the injustice towards a specific target is systematic, continuous and frequent.
It is not a mobbing that is incidental or insulting at work. However, these behaviors may also give the employee the opportunity to terminate the employment contract due to mobbing. In Article 24 of the Labor Law No. 4857, it is stated under which situations workers can terminate the employment contract rightly. Although mobbing is not explicitly counted as one of these reasons, the Court of Cassation considers it a reason for termination for the right reason by evaluating it within the scope of behaviors that do not comply with the moral and benevolence rules stated in the second paragraph of Article 24 of mobing.
The termination of the employment contract due to mobbing is justified for termination and the employee is entitled to severance pay. Furthermore, if it has conditions, it may also be entitled to discrimination compensation according to Article 5 of Labor Law No. 4857. It should also be stated that, although the employee did not qualify for termination notice for the rightful termination, the 22nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation took a different approach in terms of termination of employment due to psychological harassment. 22. According to the decision of the Law Department 2014/946 Principle, 2015/12165 dated 31.03.2015, the defendant had to resign because of the psychological pressure of the employer, his will was terminated and thus the termination would be deemed to be made to the employer. The decision of the Court of Appeals 22nd Chamber of the Court of Appeals as a precedent and the provision of notice compensation may provide a significant benefit in favor of the claimant worker in terms of termination of the employment contract due to mobbing.
Proof of Mobbing
Another important issue is the problem of proof. Mobing is sometimes done when everyone is in the absence of anyone. In such a case, there may be question marks as to how to prove mobbing. However, the Supreme Court of Appeals does not seek doubt in the proof of mobing. For the Supreme Court, the existence of signs that strongly indicate that mobbing has taken place is sufficient to prove. After this stage, the employer is obliged to prove that there is no mobbing. Moreover, there is no need for a serious violation of personal rights for the existence of mobbing. An injustice that violates personality rights is sufficient for the existence of mobbing.
Material and moral compensation for mobbing
Personality rights of plaintiff workers are violated due to mobbing. Employees whose personal rights have been violated have the right to claim pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages due to the violation of personal rights under the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. However, the Turkish judiciary judges very low compensation compared to the European and American judiciary. That is to say, the Court of Cassation has many judgments that find even five thousand TL non-pecuniary damage. In this respect, although it is possible for people whose personal rights have been violated due to mobbing to claim non-pecuniary damages, it is a fact that they will have to settle for very low sums except in exceptional cases.
Applications Accepted as Supreme Court Mobing
> Untrue rumors about plaintiff workers,
> Changing the city where the employee frequently works without showing the justification of the need,
> Constant exposure, frequent reprimand, psychological pressure on the employee,
> Continuous use of offensive and disrespectful style,
> Providing the employees with the same position as the passwords and key in the workplace and not giving them to the employee without just cause,
> Continuous performance of others,
> The use of humiliating phrases via e-mail,
> Desiring to work in an inappropriate position or place contrary to the professional experience and training background of the employee,
> Opening disciplinary investigations about the employee without any reason and requesting his / her defense,
> While such a situation has not been established on the basis of concrete information, the employee is paid less premiums and less raise due to poor performance.
Yanıt yok