Fired without severance after lying about completing military service

A worker who was fired over allegations of forging military service documents took the case to the Labor Court.

THE SUPREME COURT INTERVENED

The defendant's attorney stated that one of the institution's hiring requirements for male employees was the completion of military service. The attorney noted that although the plaintiff was asked to provide documentation proving they had completed their service during the hiring process, they failed to do so, but was hired based on their verbal declaration. The attorney argued that the plaintiff later claimed they were leaving work because they had been called up for an additional mobilization duty, but subsequent investigations revealed that the plaintiff had not completed their military service and that the document provided regarding the mobilization order was not genuine. The attorney stated that the plaintiff had misled the employer, and therefore, the employment contract was terminated for just cause, requesting the dismissal of the lawsuit. Based on the collected evidence and an expert report, the court ruled in favor of a partial acceptance of the case, reasoning that the actual termination due to military service occurred at an earlier date. When the defendant's attorney appealed the decision, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court intervened.

BEHAVIOR INCONSISTENT WITH HONESTY

The ruling recalled that an employee providing misleading information to an employer upon hiring constitutes behavior inconsistent with honesty and loyalty. The decision, which emphasized that a worker who lies should be fired without severance, stated: "It is clear that the plaintiff worker declared during the job interview at the defendant's workplace that they had completed their military service and could provide the document later. It is understood that the defendant employer also believed the plaintiff had completed their military service and hired the worker on that basis. After working for a period, when the plaintiff worker could no longer postpone their mandatory military service and had to leave the workplace, it was revealed that they had submitted a mobilization order that was found to be fake to avoid the exposure of their initial misleading statement that 'I have completed my military service,' and that they had made further misleading statements claiming they were leaving due to a mobilization order when they were actually going to perform mandatory military service. Thus, it is established by the information and documents in the file that the plaintiff provided a document contrary to the truth and that the employment contract was terminated due to these actions once they came to light. Considering that the aforementioned act of the plaintiff constitutes a violation of the rule of honesty and loyalty and that the defendant employer was justified in the termination, the rejection of the plaintiff's claims for severance and notice pay was required, and the acceptance of these claims based on the written reasoning was erroneous and necessitated a reversal of the decision."

News Source: 12punto