CRIMES AT OUTSIDE WORKPLACE AND SEVERANCE PAY
In working life, complex questions can arise about how legal issues an employee faces outside the workplace might affect their employment contract. Specifically, if an employee is convicted of a crime committed outside workplace, it becomes crucial to determine the employer's right to terminate the employment contract and whether the employee is entitled to severance pay in such a termination. This situation is comprehensively regulated by the relevant articles of the Labor Law No. 4857 and established precedents of the Court of Cassation.
1. Employer's Right to Just Cause Termination and Conviction
Labor Law No. 4857 grants employers the right to terminate an employment contract for just cause under certain circumstances. However, an employee's mere imprisonment does not always give the employer the right to terminate the contract without severance pay. The nature of the crime committed by the employee and its connection to the workplace play a critical role in establishing the right to termination.
2. Situations Where the Law Grants the Employer a Right to Just Cause Termination
- Committing a Crime at the Workplace or Related to the Workplace: If an employee commits a crime directly at their workplace or a crime that directly affects the workplace's operations, the employer can exercise their right to just cause termination under Article 25/II-e of the Labor Law. In this scenario, the employer gains the right to terminate the employment contract without severance pay. For example, an employee stealing material from the workplace falls into this category.
- Crimes Undermining Employer Trust or Damaging Reputation: An employee's conviction for a crime that abuses the employer's trust due to their position or seriously damages the employer's reputation can also be considered a just cause for termination. Such crimes are typically directly related to the nature of the employee's work. For instance, a bank employee being convicted of fraud or embezzlement would undermine the employer's trust, constituting a just cause for termination. In this case, the employee would not be entitled to severance pay.
- Imprisonment for More Than Seven Days with No Suspension of Sentence: According to Article 25/II-e of the Labor Law, if an employee is sentenced to more than seven days of imprisonment for a crime committed at the workplace or related to the workplace, and this sentence is not suspended, the employer can terminate the employment contract without paying severance pay. The key here is that the crime must be connected to the workplace.
Unless these conditions are met—meaning the employee's conviction does not fall under the above criteria—the employee's mere imprisonment does not automatically terminate the employment contract, and the employer cannot directly dismiss the employee without severance pay.
3. Severance Pay Rights for Crimes at Outside Workplace
When a conviction arises from a crime committed outside the workplace, the employee's right to severance pay is evaluated from a different perspective. The established precedents of the Court of Cassation serve as an important benchmark for protecting severance pay rights in such cases.
4. Situations Where the Employee is Entitled to Severance Pay
- Conviction Not Affecting the Workplace (Within the Scope of Labor Law Article 25/III): If the crime for which the employee is convicted does not directly affect the workplace order or the trust relationship within the workplace, meaning it has no connection to the workplace, the employer will be obliged to pay severance pay even if they terminate the employment contract. The Court of Cassation considers imprisonment resulting from a final conviction for a crime at outside workplace unrelated to the workplace as a "force majeure event preventing the employee from working for more than one week at the workplace" under Article 25/III of the Labor Law. This is because the absence from work occurs due to an involuntary force majeure event. In this situation, although the employer has the right to immediate termination, the employee's right to severance pay remains preserved under Article 14 of the repealed Labor Law No. 1475.
- Example: A factory worker is convicted of assault due to a personal dispute and imprisoned. This situation is not directly related to the employee's work or the workplace and does not undermine the employer's trust. Even if the employer terminates the employment contract in this case, they must pay severance pay.
- Provisions in Collective Bargaining Agreements: Some collective bargaining agreements may contain provisions stating that "employees convicted of crimes of moral turpitude will have their employment contracts terminated" or "will not be re-hired." However, the Court of Cassation emphasizes that such provisions do not imply that severance pay will not be paid and that they cannot contradict the absolute mandatory provisions of the law. This means that a collective bargaining agreement provision stating that severance pay will not be paid in cases of conviction for a crime at outside workplace is invalid because it contradicts an absolute mandatory provision of the law. Collective bargaining agreements can only make changes in favor of the employee regarding relatively mandatory provisions (provisions favoring the employee).
5. Concrete Example and Justifications from a Court of Cassation Decision
The decision of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, numbered 2020/5440 E., 2021/7876 K. (details of which were provided in the original text), clearly demonstrates the impact of a crime at outside workplace conviction on the right to severance pay.
- Reason for Termination and the Principle of Adherence: The Court of Cassation determined that the plaintiff's employment contract was terminated due to convictions for theft committed outside the workplace. However, it stated that this act could not be considered within the scope of "abusing the employer's trust, committing theft, etc., behaviors inconsistent with honesty and loyalty" as specified in Article 25/II-e of the Labor Law. Such acts typically refer to situations within the workplace or directly affecting it.
- Evaluation as a Force Majeure Event: The state of conviction and imprisonment was accepted as a force majeure event preventing the employee from working at the workplace for more than one week (Labor Law Article 25/III). In this case, the employer had the right to immediate termination of the employment contract.
- Preservation of Severance Pay Rights: The Court of Cassation explicitly stated that if an employment contract is terminated based on Articles 25/I, 25/III, and 25/IV of the Labor Law, severance pay must be paid even if there is a just cause. Since the termination by the defendant employer was based on a force majeure event, it was concluded that the employee was entitled to severance pay.
- Invalidity of Collective Bargaining Agreement Provision: The defendant employer's defense, arguing that severance pay was not required based on a collective bargaining agreement provision stating that "employees convicted of crimes of moral turpitude cannot be re-hired," was rejected by the Court of Cassation. It was stated that provisions in collective bargaining agreements cannot contradict the absolute mandatory provisions of the law, and such a provision cannot abolish the right to severance pay.
In conclusion, the Court of Cassation's decision clearly demonstrates that a conviction for a crime at outside workplace that does not directly affect the workplace does not abolish the employee's right to severance pay. In such cases, the termination is considered within the scope of force majeure, and severance pay must be disbursed.
6. Conclusion
When an employee is imprisoned or receives a conviction, the termination of the employment contract and the right to severance pay must be evaluated based on the specific circumstances of each individual case. Factors such as the nature of the crime committed, the employee's role in the workplace, the crime's impact on the workplace, and the duration of the conviction directly influence the legal assessment.
To protect themselves from potential legal disputes (such as severance pay lawsuits, reinstatement lawsuits, etc.) that may arise from improper termination or non-payment of severance, both employees and employers should seek advice from a lawyer specialized in labor law. Taking the correct steps in legal processes is critical to prevent loss of rights.