Termination Of The Employment Contract By The Employee Without Just Cause And Without Notice
T.C.
COURT OF CASSATION
9th CIVIL CHAMBER
E. 2016/33150
K. 2017/21641
T. 18.12.2017
* The employer’s demand that the employee submit a written resignation letter under pressure similar to the condition of paying compensation by exploiting the employer’s social and economic superiority (In such cases, there can be no genuine intent to resign on the part of the employee; the termination is deemed to have been initiated by the employer, but the employee must prove that the termination was made without valid cause)
* INVALIDITY OF TERMINATION AND REINSTATEMENT (The employee’s termination of the employment contract without a valid reason and without notice should be considered a resignation/ In practice, the most common form of this is the employee’s request to resign with the condition that severance pay and seniority compensation be paid, which should be evaluated as an offer to enter into a settlement agreement rather than as resignation)
* The Employee’s Termination of the Employment Contract Without Just Cause and Without Providing Notice (It is understood that the plaintiff, who is the workplace physician, terminated the employment contract by submitting a written request of his own volition; however, he failed to provide concrete evidence that this document was obtained from him through the impairment of his will/Since the employee who terminated the employment contract cannot claim the invalidity of the termination, the case will be dismissed)
4857/Art. 20/3
SUMMARY: The plaintiff requested a decision on the invalidity of the termination, reinstatement to work, and legal consequences. The employee’s termination of the employment contract without a valid reason and without notice should be considered a resignation. In practice, the most common form of this is when the employee requests to resign on the condition that their notice and seniority compensation rights are paid. This should not be considered a resignation but rather an offer to enter into a termination agreement (bozma sözleşmesi). If the employer, by exploiting their social and economic superiority, demands that the employee submit a written resignation letter under conditions such as payment of compensation or similar pressures, and the employee complies, there can be no question of a genuine intention to resign. In such a case, the termination should be deemed to have been carried out by the employer. However, this situation requires the employee to prove the defect in intent. According to the file contents, it is understood that the plaintiff, who is the workplace physician, terminated the employment contract with a letter written by his own hand, and it is understood that he could not prove with concrete evidence that this document was obtained from him by impairing his will. An employee who terminates the employment contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination. The acceptance of the case instead of its rejection is erroneous.
CASE: The plaintiff requested a decision on the invalidity of the termination, reinstatement to work, and legal consequences.
The local court decided to accept the case.
Although the defendant’s attorney appealed the decision within the prescribed time limit, the court decided to reject the request for a hearing and to conduct the review based on the documents. After hearing the report prepared by the Review Judge for the case file, the file was reviewed, and the necessary discussions and considerations were made:
DECISION: The plaintiff’s attorney stated that the plaintiff, who worked as an occupational physician at the defendant employer’s premises between January 5, 2015 – 31/12/2015, the plaintiff, who worked as an occupational physician at the defendant employer’s premises, was forced to resign due to numerous complaints and baseless allegations against him, and was informed that if he refused, his employment contract would be terminated on the same day and he would be forced to leave without receiving any wages or compensation. In this situation, the plaintiff, whose pride was hurt and reputation damaged, and who was threatened with being escorted out of the premises by security on the same day, was forced to sign the document presented to him. He claims that there was no valid reason for his dismissal, that he was coerced into resigning through pressure and threats, and requests a ruling on the invalidity of the termination and his reinstatement.
The defendant’s attorney; argued that the plaintiff, being a highly educated medical doctor, had claimed in the complaint that he was forced to sign the document presented to him, but that he had terminated the employment contract with his own free will and in his own handwriting by submitting a resignation letter, and that the plaintiff had the knowledge and competence to foresee the consequences of his resignation, and requested that the case be dismissed.
The court ruled that, given the fact that it is not consistent with the normal course of life for an employee who has worked for nearly a year to resign by waiving all compensation rights, the defendant employer’s decision to terminate the employment contract and dismiss the plaintiff employee was not in accordance with labor law regulations, dismissal procedures, the principle of equal treatment of employees, and the principle that dismissal should be a last resort.” <
The defendant’s attorney appealed the decision.
In order for an employee to benefit from job security provisions, the employment contract must be terminated by the employer. An employee who terminates the employment contract cannot claim that the termination is invalid and request reinstatement.
The termination of the employment contract by the employee without a valid reason and without notice should be considered as resignation. In practice, the most common form of this is the employee’s request to leave with the condition that severance pay and seniority compensation are paid, which should not be considered as resignation but rather as a request to terminate the contract. If the employer, by exploiting their social and economic superiority, demands that the employee submit a written resignation letter under conditions such as payment of compensation or similar pressures, and the employee complies, there can be no question of a genuine intention to resign. In such a case, the termination should be deemed to have been carried out by the employer. However, this situation requires the employee to prove the defect in intent.
According to the file contents, it is understood that the plaintiff, who is the workplace physician, terminated the employment contract with a letter written by his own hand, and it is understood that he could not prove with concrete evidence that this document was obtained from him by impairing his will. An employee who terminates the employment contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination. The acceptance of the case instead of its rejection is erroneous.
Pursuant to Article 20/3 of the Labor Law No. 4857, our Chamber has decided as follows:
CONCLUSION: Based on the above reasons;
1. The court’s decision is REVERSED AND SET ASIDE,
2. The case is DISMISSED,
3. Since the court fee was paid in advance, there is no need to collect it again,
4. The litigation expenses incurred by the plaintiff shall remain with the plaintiff, and the litigation expenses of 205.00 TL incurred by the defendant shall be collected from the plaintiff and paid to the defendant,
5. The attorney’s fee of 1,980.00 TL, determined according to the tariff in effect on the date of the decision, is to be collected from the plaintiff and paid to the defendant,
6. The advance appeal fee is to be refunded to the defendant upon request,
The decision was made unanimously on December 18, 2017.