46 of the Labor Code No. 4857. In Article 63 of the same law before the employee’s holidays. It is stated that he has the right to rest for twenty-four hours within a seven-day time frame, provided that he has worked during the working days established in accordance with the article. It is decided by collective bargaining agreement or employment contracts whether to work at the workplace on national holidays and general holidays. In the absence of provisions in the contracts, the approval of the employee is required to work on the days in question.
The week off leave is used without interruption and is twenty-four hours. If a week’s leave is granted for a shorter period of time than this, it cannot be mentioned that a week’s leave is duly used. By dividing the week break, it cannot be used piecemeal. For this reason, if the week break is used for less than twenty-four hours, the week break is considered not used at all.
article 3 of the Law No. 2429 on National Holidays and General Holidays. According to the article, the week break is on Sunday. This general rule is not absolute, and it is also possible to use the week break permit on a day other than Sunday.
A worker who claims to work during the week holidays is obliged to prove this claim. Workplace records, especially documents showing entry and exit to the workplace, workplace internal correspondence, are written evidence to prove that they were worked during the week holidays. However, if the study in question cannot be proved with such written documents, the conclusion should be reached with the witness statements that the parties have listened to.
It is possible to prove the work of the week break with written evidence or a witness. The accounts of witnesses who do not know and are not able to know the working order in the workplace cannot be valued. If it seems that the signed payrolls pay for the week off, it is impossible to assume that the employee is working more. However, the proof of the employee’s work during the week break can be made with all kinds of evidence. However, even if the payrolls are signed and passion is unregistered, it is possible for the employee to prove the work with written evidence during the week holidays other than what is written on the payroll. If the payment of various amounts of wages every month, including the accruals of weekday wages, is made through a bank, if there is no registration of passion, it must be proved by written evidence that there is a weekday work other than the amount that is paid, except for the amount paid.
DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT ON THE ISSUE:
SUPREME COURT 22. 2015/11679 E OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. 2016/19295 K. DECISION NO. 27 DATED 06.2016
…A worker who claims to work on a week off day is obliged to prove this claim in accordance with the norm theory. The rules on payslips also apply here. The counterfeiting of the payroll bearing the employee’s signature is conclusive evidence until proven. In other words, unless the falsification of the payroll is asserted or proven, it is assumed that the payment of the week holiday pay included in the signed payroll is made. If the relevant section of the payroll is empty or the payroll does not have a signature, the employee can prove with all kinds of evidence that he is working during the week break.
Workplace records, especially documents showing entry and exit to the workplace, workplace internal correspondence, are written evidence to prove that they were worked during the week holidays. However, if the study in question cannot be proved with such written documents, the conclusion should be reached with the witness statements that the parties have listened to. In addition, some common cases that are known to everyone can also be considered at this point.
In concrete cases, for weeks during the holidays written evidence presented by witnesses that the claimant was working as there was not a public holiday in the country of Libya stated that it was Friday the day of, and days on vacation Friday 15 days to one of the plaintiff’s plaintiff’s witnesses, the other doesn never take a vacation shaped contradictory statements, he shaped the face of the statements of witnesses for the defendant the plaintiff in the day off Friday for the week of a holiday because he can’t prove by sufficient and convincing evidence that it would take this request has required denial of admission decision is incorrect and instead to break it.
In addition, although the plaintiff requested legal interest on other receivables other than severance pay in the lawsuit and reclamation petition, the court’s request was exceeded and the provision of the highest bank deposit interest on all claims for receivables was invalid and required to be overturned…
Source: https://www.kazanci.com/kho2/ibb/files/dsp.php?fn=22hd-2015-11679.htm&kw=11679#fm
T.C. SUPREME COURT 22. DEPARTMENT OF LAW E. 2016/33047 K. 2017/626 T. 23.1.2017
…If it is understood that the week off wages are paid in signed payrolls, it is impossible to suggest that the employee is working harder. However, if there is a record of disagreement that the employee will take a week off is more than appears on the payroll, proof of his work during the week off can be made with any evidence. However, even if the payrolls are signed and passion is unregistered, it is possible for the employee to prove the work with written evidence during the week holidays other than what is written on the payroll. If the payment of various amounts of wages every month, including the accruals of weekday wages, is made through a bank, if there is no registration of passion, it must be proved by written evidence that there is a weekday work other than the amount that is paid, except for the amount paid.
It has become a stable practice that week break studies should be calculated for a long time and if the amount is high, our apartment should be discounted in recent years. However, if the discretion of the week break study is based on written documents and employer records, rather than evidence-based witness statements, such a discount should not be taken
In the concrete case, it is fixed even with the statement of the defendant’s witnesses that the plaintiff is looking at 3 blocks consisting of 24 apartments, and one of the plaintiff’s witnesses is the 10th of 2009. the plaintiff’s witness residing on the site from January to the date of termination is L. C. , the plaintiff works every day of the week, including Sunday, plaintiff’s witness G. He. he has stated that he has no knowledge based on etiquette. One of the defendant’s witnesses is Ü, who was a resident of the site and also an administrator during the period when the plaintiff worked. Y. , he stated that there are 5 janitors on the site, that he works on Sundays when the plaintiff’s turn comes to him, and that he uses his week break leave outside of this.
So, the plaintiff’s witness is L. C. 10 of 2009, when he declared his residence on the site. from May to the date of termination, the plaintiff works every week during his vacation. the 10th of 2009. and before the month, the defendant became a witness. Y.based on the statement of the company, it is necessary to conclude that it will receive a week break fee with a calculation based on the acceptance that it works on 1 week break day in 5 weeks, while it is erroneous to decide on the rejection of the request with a false assessment…
You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.