Important precedent decision from the Supreme Court: GPRS record considered as evidence for overtime

9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals signed a precedent decision in the appeal of an overtime lawsuit filed by a pharmaceutical representative. In the proof of overtime, it was decided that the phone GPRS records should be considered as evidence along with other evidence.

The young person working as a representative in a pharmaceutical company applied to the Labor Court on the grounds that he would receive overtime from his workplace. The court argued that the overtime wage of the sales representative who works between 07.30 – 22:00 on weekdays and between 08.00 – 14.00 on Saturdays is not paid; He demanded that his debt be collected from the defendant.

Supreme Court overturned the decision

On the other hand, on the employer side, the employer said that the plaintiff’s overtime was arranged by himself and that he had to work overtime voluntarily in order to increase his premium receivable. stated that it could not be accepted as overtime and demanded that the case be dismissed. Court; decided to refuse to receive overtime pay. When the file appealed, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court intervened.

In the precedent decision, it was stated that GPRS records would be considered as evidence in proving overtime, and the sales representative who appealed was found to be right. The following statements were included in the decision:

“The worker who claims to have worked overtime is obliged to prove this claim. The payroll bearing the signature of the worker is in the nature of definitive evidence until its falsity is proven. In other words, unless the forgery of the payroll is claimed and proven, it is assumed that the overtime claim that appears on the signed payroll has been paid.

In the concrete case, it is understood from the scope of the file that the plaintiff works on a fixed wage + quota-based premium method. Although the request was rejected by the court on the grounds that the plaintiff could not prove that he worked overtime, it is implicitly accepted by the defendant that the plaintiff’s overtime work was done in order to earn more premiums.

In the 8th article of the employment contract with the plaintiff, the employer will determine the working hours, and in the 12th article, the employee has to submit the visit plans to the employer and comply with it. The plaintiff relied on the phone, GPRS records, reports submitted to the employer and witness statements as evidence, and stated that when the phone GPRS records and reports are evaluated together, it will prove that it will take overtime work.

The plaintiff’s witnesses are the people who saw the plaintiff on the day and time specified in his program, and the plaintiff meets with many doctors and pharmacists for short-term promotion and sales purposes during the day due to his job. Phone GPRS records were not summoned, the claimant’s witnesses had seen the plaintiff for a short time, so their statements could not be respected, and the defendant’s statement of witnesses stated that the plaintiff’s working time was 44 hours and did not exceed the legal time, and therefore the overtime work could not be proven, and the rejection was unfounded.

While the court should have made a judgment about overtime work by evaluating all the evidence together by calling the phone GPRS records, vehicle records, weekly reports submitted to the employer, which were reported in the evidence part of the plaintiff, the rejection of the request with incomplete examination and written justification was inaccurate. It was unanimously decided to overturn the appealed decision for the reason stated above.”