'Sigma formula regulation' on the Constitutional Court's agenda
The legal battle by family physicians against salary deductions made for reasons beyond their control has been moved to the Constitutional Court.
The amendments to the Family Medicine Contract and Payment Regulation, known in the public eye as the 'Sigma formula regulation' and which entered into force on November 1, 2024, have been submitted for review by the Constitutional Court.
In the lawsuit filed by the Hekimsen Union, the cancellation of the regulation in question was requested on the grounds that it is contrary to law and the Constitution.
Upon Hekimsen's application, the Council of State, which is hearing the case, concluded that many articles in the regulation were unconstitutional and sent the file to the Constitutional Court.
The articles sent to the court cover deductions and punitive sanctions made from the salaries of family physicians and family health workers based on conditions beyond their control.
Some of the articles highlighted in Hekimsen's legal objection include the non-renewal of contracts if screening and monitoring targets are not met, the termination of a physician's contract by the governor's decision if they receive a disciplinary penalty, the application of salary deductions if patients do not visit the physician, the reduction of wages due to shift deficiencies, the reduction of incentive payments due to external factors such as patients preferring other health institutions, and the reflection of subjective criteria such as patient satisfaction and rational drug use on salaries.
Similarly, the fact that family health workers also face deductions based on criteria such as shift hours, patient satisfaction, and application rates is among the grounds for objection.
Arguing that some authorization expressions within the Family Medicine Law No. 5258 and Law No. 209 are far from legal certainty, a lawsuit was filed against the Ministry of Health with a request to apply to the Constitutional Court. The Council of State stated that the legal articles forming the basis of the regulation in question might be unconstitutional and that the Constitutional Court must first decide on the cancellation of these articles. For this reason, it was emphasized that the decision regarding the requests for a stay of execution or cancellation would be made according to the ruling to be issued by the Constitutional Court.
News Source: İHA
Most Read
Historic words from Özgür Özel at the CHP group meeting
Air Force Academy student Veli Bilgin has died
Tuncer Bakırhan calls for a framework law
Here are the names that will be in Özgür Özel's new party!
Major crisis in CHP
AKP mayor held responsible
Kılıçdaroğlu's 'controlled' shopkeeper visit
He killed his wife by slitting her throat: Their children witnessed the moments
Güler leaves questions regarding Özgür Özel unanswered
Resignation activity in CHP following Özgür Özel's new party decision