Using Phrases Such as ” Stupid, Stupid” to a Profession

Using Phrases Such as " Stupid, Stupid" to a Profession

Summary:

Although the court decided to accept the case on the grounds that the plaintiff was not the one who caused the incident, it is fixed that the plaintiff used the expression “stupid, stupid” for another employee when the defendant’s witness statements and the written statements of other workers referred to in the workplace investigation are also taken into account.

TC
Supreme

law office
Number: 2014/22068
Decision No:2014/37710
K. Its history:

STATUS :

The plaintiff requested that the termination be invalidated and that his return to work be decided.
The local court has ruled on the request.

Despite the fact that the defendant was appealed by his lawyer during the conviction decision, the file was examined, discussed and deemed necessary upon hearing the report issued by the Investigating Judge on the case file:

THE SUPREME COURT

A) Summary of the Claimant’s Request:

The plaintiff was subjected to swearing and insults by his colleagues on 17/07/2013, as a result of the investigation initiated on 29/07/2013 on these insults, the plaintiff was terminated for “insulting his friend”, but it was decided to terminate the plaintiff’s employment contract for unfair and unlawful reasons, accordingly, a decision to return to work and charge a fee, on the grounds that this claim is not valid and does not reflect the truth.

B) Summary of the Respondent’s Reply:

The defendant claims that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated for just cause in accordance with article 25/II-d, the plaintiff ….. he stated that he was working as an overseas tour conductor in his company, that he filed a lawsuit on the same day, alleging that he was insulted and blasphemed on 17/07/2013, filed a complaint, an investigation was opened on the complaint, according to witness statements, the plaintiff insulted his colleague and started a fight, claiming that he wanted the case dismissed.

C) Summary of the Local Court Decision:

According to the witness statements heard by the court, although the chief of foreign tours sent an email to the plaintiff informing the quality chief that the plaintiff wanted to respond to this email, the chief of foreign tours who left the room said, “you’re talking about me, I’ll tell you those words”, both employees were dismissed due to this argument, according to the way the incident occurred, the chief of foreign tours could not listen to the plaintiff, it was decided to accept the case on the grounds that the plaintiff did not cause the incident.

D) Appeal:

The decision was appealed by the defendant’s attorney.

E) Justification:

Although the court decided to accept the case on the grounds that the plaintiff was not the one who caused the incident, it is fixed that the plaintiff used the expression “stupid, stupid” for another employee when the defendant’s witness statements and the written statements of other workers referred to in the workplace investigation are also taken into account.

In this case, it is understood that the plaintiff said these words to another employee working at the workplace are hurtful, and the acceptance of the case instead of rejection is erroneous, because it is understood that the employer’s termination is based on a just cause according to Article 25/2-d of the Labor Law No. 4857. Our Apartment
The following decision has been made in accordance with Article 20/3 of the Labor Law No. 4857.

JUDGMENT : For the reasons explained above;

TO THE VIOLATION AND ELIMINATION of the court’s decision,
DENIAL OF THE CASE,
Since the fee is received in advance, there is no place for it to be collected again,
4.The above-mentioned trial expenses of the plaintiff are left, and the defendant’s trial expenses amounting to TL 136.00 are collected from the plaintiff and paid to the defendant,
5.According to the tariff in force on the date of the decision, a fee of TL 1,500 is charged for obtaining a power of attorney from the plaintiff and granting it to the defendant,
Upon the request of the defendant, the refund of the previously received appeal fee to him,
a unanimous decision was made on 09.12.2014.

Bir yanıt yazın

E-posta adresiniz yayınlanmayacak. Gerekli alanlar * ile işaretlenmişlerdir