Reason for Expulsion from Reading News on the Internet during Overtime

What comes to mind when you think of the reasons for dismissal without compensation? We guess that things like coming to work constantly outside of the required time, harassment, physical or verbal violence, or simply failing to fulfill work responsibilities are happening. Do you think looking at the news on the phone is a reason? We think your answer is that it depends on the amount.

This controversial issue was the reason for a recent layoff. The employer fired the employee without compensation, alleging that he was constantly late for work and was reading the newspaper on the phone. With the employee’s application to the court, the contradictory decisions came one after another.

Supreme court makes final decision

According to the employer’s statements, an employee who “makes a habit of being late for work” and “reads newspapers on the Internet” was fired without compensation on the grounds that he did not fulfill his responsibilities and “neglected the job”. The applicant to the Labor Court denied the allegations that he read newspapers on the internet, that he always came to work late, and that he came to the workplace without permission outside of working hours. After the court found the dismissal valid, the employee who took the decision to the court of appeal was reinstated to his job with the decision taken. Because none of the accusations made were proven by the workplace with concrete evidence.

The employer, who appealed this decision of the Regional Court of Justice, took the case to the Supreme Court. The high court accepted these allegations, which were confirmed by witnesses, and allowed the employee to be dismissed without compensation. The following statements were included in the decision:

The minutes were recorded regarding the acts of reading the newspaper while working at work, arriving late to work frequently, and entering the workplace without permission after working hours, and the contents of the minutes were also verified by the witnesses. While it is clear that this behavior does not comply with the workplace rules, it is not necessary to accept the action with a written justification. It was unanimously decided to annul the decision of the District Court of Justice.