Attention to those frequently reassigned at work! Precedent ruling from the Court of Cassation...

A young person working as a computer operator at a district state hospital under a subcontractor firm terminated their contract, alleging that the employer frequently changed their workplace, forced them to perform tasks outside their job description, and subjected them to mobbing (psychological harassment).

The aggrieved worker took the case to the Labor Court, demanding the collection of severance pay and annual leave entitlements. The defendant company's lawyer denied the allegations. The court ruled that the plaintiff's claim of being subjected to psychological harassment was not proven and remained at the level of discomfort with workplace practices. When the decision was appealed by the plaintiff, the 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation intervened.

COURT DECISION OVERTURNED

The ruling noted that the plaintiff, who was understood to be working as a computer operator, had their workplace changed frequently. It was emphasized that the plaintiff was most recently assigned to a job at the operating room door that was unrelated to their duties and previous work, and conflicted with their career. It was recalled that the testimony of the plaintiff's witnesses indicated these changes were made with the intention of forcing the plaintiff to resign. Stating that such practices are defined as mobbing, the court decision was overturned.

PRECEDENT RULING!

In the retrial, the Labor Court decided that the plaintiff had been subjected to mobbing. It was noted that the plaintiff's workplace was changed frequently and that the plaintiff was finally assigned to a task at the operating room door that was unrelated to their duties and previous work, and conflicted with their career. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff's severance pay claim on the grounds that they had been subjected to psychological harassment. This time, when the defendant's lawyer appealed the decision, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation intervened. The Chamber found the Labor Court's decision to be appropriate. It ruled that assigning a worker to a task that conflicts with their career constitutes mobbing.

News Source: 12punto