24 Apr The Fact That Statements Not Related To The Dossier Were Written On The Grounds Of The Decision Requires A Retrial
Summary:
in the file, it was not claimed that the plaintiff had entered the computer containing information about the illness of the institution’s doctor, that such an event was not justified for termination, that the writing of statements unrelated to the file on the grounds of the decision was incorrect, that the decision could not be supervised, that the decision was therefore unprovoked, that the
T.C.
Supreme
9. Legal Department
Principal No: 2014/24361
Decision No: 2014/37164
K. Date: 4.12.2014
COURT: ISTANBUL ANADOLU 15. EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
Date: 10/06/2014
Number: 2013/1703-2014/341
Case: the plaintiff requested that the termination be void and that he be returned to work.
The Local Court has decided to dismiss the case.
Although the sentence was appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney during the trial period, it was decided to reject the request for a hearing due to the nature of the work and to make the examination on the paperwork.
The Auditing Judge .. after listening to the report held by the file was examined, the need to be discussed and considered:
DECISION
A) Summary Of The Plaintiff Request:
Acting plaintiff; the plaintiff works with the title of Occupational Health and Safety Manager at the defendant’s workplace, has no conduct which may cause termination of the employment contract for neither justifiable nor valid reason, has not received any negative notification or warning during the period of employment, has not responded to the demands and calls for cooperation made by the plaintiff in order to, on 24.11.2012, the defendant company’s human resources manager and the draft of the defense letter to be requested from the workplace physician were shared, following all these findings, the workplace physician complained to the plaintiff by claiming that the plaintiff had access to the personal health files, and a disciplinary investigation was opened against the plaintiff due to the audit., the defendant has requested the return of the plaintiff by declaring that the audit conducted at the Workplace Health and Safety Unit in the notice of termination is unauthorized access to personal health files and therefore claims to be contrary to the law and ethical principles, but that these claims are completely false and unlawful, and that if the old OHS regulations under Labor Law No. 4857 and OHS regulations under law No. 6331 are examined,
B) Summary Of Respondent’s Response:
The defendant’s attorney stated that the claimant’s employment contract was terminated by the decision of the Disciplinary Committee and by the written termination notice dated 29.03.2013 for a valid reason and all rights paid based on the conduct, in order to provide occupational health and safety services to the employer. to appoint occupational safety expert, workplace physician and other health personnel among their employees, to ensure that employees are subjected to health supervision by taking into account the health and safety risks they will be exposed to at work, to ensure that the private life and reputation of the employee who is given a health examination
the plaintiff’s files and documents are examined, Kamuran Bayraktar, the workplace nurse who is in charge of examining the plaintiff’s files and documents, declared that “the plaintiff came at a time when the workplace physician was not present and examined the files and documents, and that there was also private information about the persons in the documents”; that the examination of such documents, it is possible with the support of the company audit department and legal department, that the said documents and files contain the private information of the persons and must be kept confidential by the employer, otherwise the employer will lose confidence in the employees that the employer has to keep the health information of the employees Confidential, that the plaintiff has to examine the documents and files of the employees, in this regard, the negative relationship between the parties undermines work-related coordination and even eliminates it with the said incident, whereas the co-ordinated work of the plaintiff and the workplace physician is very important in terms of the conduct of the business., in question the trust relationship between the plaintiff and the employer as a result of the actions become impossible disappearance of the continuation of the business relationship, the plaintiff made about the subject of disciplinary complaints that are based on valid reasons of employment as a result of evaluation by stating that to dismiss the case was dissolved as asked.
C) Summary Of Local Court Decision:
The court decided to dismiss the case on the grounds that the termination of the plaintiff’s employment contract was in place.
D) Appeal:
The plaintiff’s attorney appealed the decision.
E) Citing:
On the grounds of the court’s decision in the concrete case “…..while only the institution doctor can access the computer containing the information about the institution doctor’s illness, it is believed that the case should be dismissed because it is seen that the institution doctor has damaged the trust in the institution itself by intruding on the institution doctor’s computer in order to access this information, and that he has been dismissed for this reason.” He is called. However, in the file, it was not claimed that the plaintiff had intruded on the computer containing information about the illness of the institution’s doctor, that such an event was not justified for termination, that the writing of statements unrelated to the file on the grounds of the decision was wrong, that the decision was not possible to be supervised, that the decision was
F) Result:
It was decided unanimously on 04.12.2014 that the appeal fee received in advance should be returned to the relevant person upon request.
No Comments