| Abstract [eng] |
Summary The Termination of Employment Contracts Due to Gross Breach of Labour Duties whereas Encroaching on the Labour Treatment (Pursuant to Item 8, 9, 10, part 2, art. 235 of Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania) The Paper presents review of the grounds for termination of an employment contract without notice in case of gross breach by an employee of work duties as provided for in Paragraphs 2(8), (9), and (10) of Article 235 of the Labor Code. The indicated paragraphs have been reviewed from the legal as well as historical point of view, and compared with other labor relations-regulating national legal acts as well as legal acts of neighboring countries. The Paper also contains analysis of the gross breach associated civil cases which were subject to hearing at the Supreme Court of Lithuania, and indicates the problems and drawbacks associated with termination based on the indicated grounds. In addition, the Paper considers correlation of the cases of collective redundancies and individual termination under the 20th July 1988 EU Directive No. 98/59, as well as the specifics of termination of employees of certain categories for gross breaches of labor discipline in comparison with norms regulated by the Labor Code. The Paper underlines the main criteria based on which an employee may be terminated without notice in case of gross breach of labor discipline as provided for in Paragraphs 2 (8), (9), and (10) of Article 235 of the Labor Code: 1. Paragraph 2(8) of Article 235 of the Labor Code - where, during the working time, the employee is under the influence of alcohol, narcotic or toxic substances, with the exception of cases where intoxication was caused by the industrial processes at the enterprise: - fact of alcohol influence determined; - an employee is under the influence of alcohol during work hours; - an employee is under the influence of alcohol in his/her work place (i.e. in his/her workplace or other place where he/she is obliged to stay for performance of the job functions or employer’s assignments). 2. Paragraph 2(9) of Article 235 of the Labor Code - absence from work throughout the day/shift without any substantial cause: - an employee is absent from work throughout the day (shift); - absence is not due to any substantial cause. 3. Paragraph 2(10) of Article 235 of the Labor Code - refusal to undergo a medical examination where such examinations are obligatory: - an employee is assigned to a category where medical examinations are obligatory; - an employee was included in the employer-approved list of employees with obligatory health examinations; - an employee was acquainted by signing with medical examinations schedule coordinated by an employer with a health care institution; - an employee refuses to timely (as established) undergo a medical examination. If one of the above facts having legal significance is not determined, the termination of an employment contract on the indicated grounds shall be considered as illegal. Legal relations applicable to the public service are the legal relations between public servants and the state being an employer with respect to such persons. Therefore, public service associated legal relations are not identical to the labor relations between an employee, not a public servant, and an employer. It should be noted that today the legal practice of termination on the described grounds is not well-established. The problem has not been completely analyzed and considered. Nearly all norms analyzed in the Paper are new in the labor law, and therefore the subject of this paper is relevant. |
