T.C.
SUPREME

LEGAL DEPARTMENT
E. 2016/33150
K. 2017/21641
T. 18.12.2017

A CONDITION OF PAYING COMPENSATION USING THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SUPERIORITY OF THE EMPLOYER
Similar pressure to demand that the worker submit a written resignation petition ( the worker does this
An Actual Resignation Will Cannot Be Mentioned If It Complies/In This Case, The Termination Will Be Terminated By The Employer
It Will Be Accepted That It Has Been Carried Out, But This Will Be Proven By The Worker
Needed )

Return to work with the invalidity of the Fez ( without relying on a justifiable reason of the worker and with notification prefixed
Termination Of An Employment Contract Without Recognition Should Be Considered As A Resignation/Most In Practice
Payment of the severance payments which is the common form of separation of the worker on condition of notice and demand the resignation
Although Not As An Ikale Contract In The Direction Of Making The Need To Be Evaluated In The Form Of An Icap )

Termination of the labor contract without a justified reason and without recognizing the notification prefix ( it is understood that the plaintiff, a workplace physician, has terminated the labor contract with a petition for his own hand crop, and this document cannot prove with concrete evidence that his Will was obtained from him by injury/the employee who terminated the labor contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination )
4857 / m.20/3

Summary: The plaintiff requested that the decision be made on the invalidity of the termination, its return to work and its legal consequences. Termination of the employment contract of the employee without a justified reason and without recognizing the notification prefix should be considered as resignation. In practice, the most common form, the employee’s request to leave, provided that the rights to notice and severance pay are paid, should not be considered as a resignation, but in the form of an agreement to make an ikale (violation contract). A real will to resign cannot be mentioned if the employer, using its social and economic superiority,demands that the employee submit a written resignation petition with the condition of paying compensation, similar pressures, and the employee complies with it. In this case, it must be accepted that the termination was carried out by the employer. But this must be proven by the worker of the will.According to the contents of the file, the plaintiff, a workplace physician, is understood to have terminated the employment contract with his own hand, and it is understood that he cannot prove with concrete evidence that this document was obtained from him by mutilation of his will. An employee who terminates an employment contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination. Instead of dismissing the case, its acceptance is wrong.
Case: the plaintiff requested that the decision be made on the invalidity of the termination, its return to work and its legal consequences. The Local Court has decided to accept the case.
Although the sentence was appealed by the defendant’s lawyer during the trial period; due to the nature of the work, it was decided that the hearing request was rejected, the examination was made on the document, and after the report issued by the examination Judge for the case file was heard, the file was examined, the need was spoken and considered:
Verdict: acting plaintiff; 05/01/2015 before the defendant employer – 31/12/2015 dates between occupational physicians working as many complaints about unfounded accusations plaintiff himself was forced to resign as it was received, otherwise the workmanship will be terminated on the same day and no labor contract and the compensation to be paid, if specified, will receive won’t be forced to leave this situation in the face of broken pride, reputation, and security was undermined as of the same day, accompanied by faced with the threat of the door being kicked in, you had to sign the minutes of the plaintiff presented to him, that has no reason to quit, claiming that he had been resigned by pressure and threat, he asked for a decision on the invalidity of the termination and the return of the plaintiff to work.

Although the defendant’s attorney claimed that the plaintiff was a highly trained medical doctor and had to sign the protocol presented to him in the petition, he prepared it entirely of his own free will and in his own handwriting
he asked for the dismissal of the case, arguing that he had terminated the employment contract with the petition he submitted, and that the plaintiff had the knowledge and competence to predict the consequences of his will to resign.
By the court, “giving up all their rights to worker’s compensation for a year, resign, are not appropriate to the nature of life in the face of the fact that a defendant by the employer, the worker’s termination the process of termination of an employment contract and the plaintiff, labor law and procedure dismissal procedures, the principle of equal treatment between employees and termination is a last resort that is not appropriate” to the acceptance of the case on the grounds that it has been judged. <
The defendant’s attorney appealed the decision.
In order for the employee to benefit from the provisions of job security, the employment contract must be terminated by the employer. An employee who terminates an employment contract cannot request invalidity of the termination and return to work.
Termination of the employment contract of the employee without a justified reason and without recognizing the notification prefix should be considered as resignation. Notice and severance pay rights of the employee, which are the most common form in practice
a request to leave, provided that it is paid, should not be considered as a resignation, but in the form of a request to make an ikale (breaking agreement). A condition of paying compensation using the social and economic superiority of the employer,
if the worker requests a written resignation petition with similar pressures and the worker complies with it, no real resignation will can be mentioned. In this case, it must be accepted that the termination was carried out by the employer. But this must be proven by the worker of the will. According to the contents of the file, the plaintiff, a workplace physician, is understood to have terminated the employment contract with his own hand, and it is understood that he cannot prove with concrete evidence that this document was obtained from him by mutilation of his will. An employee who terminates an employment contract himself cannot claim the invalidity of the termination.
Instead of dismissing the case, its acceptance is wrong.
In accordance with Article 20/3 of the Labor Law No. 4857, our department has decided as follows.
Conclusion: with the justification described above;
1.Overturning the court’s decision,
2.Dismisses case,
3.Since the mortar was received in advance, there is no room for re-receipt,
4.205.00 TL, which the defendant made, to be left above the cost of the trial made by the plaintiff. judgment expense
payment to the defendant with collection from the plaintiff,
5.1,980.00 TL,determined according to the tariff in force on the date of the decision. the fee is taken from the plaintiff of the power of attorney
giving to the defendant,
6.Return of the appeal fee received in advance to the defendant if requested,
The final was decided by unanimous decision on 18.12.2017.