Darbo sutarties nutraukimas darbdavio iniciatyva, kai nėra darbuotojo kaltės ; Employment contract termination under employer's initiative without the employee's fault

Abstract

Employment Contract Termination under Employer's Initiative without the Employee's The relevance of the topic discussed in the paper is determined by the need to have a new attitude towards labour relations, to look at them through the prism of the protection of human rights and legal interests, having effective cooperation between the two subjects of labour relations – the employee and the employer. Such attitude is significant at this time of development of free market in Lithuania and the growth of competitive ability. Taking into consideration the economic and social changes, other circumstances, often there is a situation when the employer at its own initiative has to dismiss the employee without any fault of the latter. This is one of the ways of termination of the employment contract, which may constitute the most serious violation of the employee's interests. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the legislature gives special attention to this way of termination of the employment contract. In regulating the labour relations and the termination of the contract when there is no fault of the employee it is important to make sure that there is neither unsubstantiated domination of any of the parties in such relations nor dependency of one party on the other. The employment contract may be terminated by the employer at its initiative when there is no fault of the employee further to the provisions of the law. The employment contract may be terminated only when there is an important and lawful basis and reason for that. Structural changes in the company may be considered to be an important reason only when they are substantial but not arbitrary. The employment contract also may be terminated by the employer at its initiative due to insufficient qualification of the employee or due to the employee's behaviour. The paper emphasises that in the latter case it is important to indicate in the regulations of the company what qualifications and behaviour the employee should meet. The paper raises the issue of the employer's knowledge about the activities of the employee in the labour union. Since that kind of activities may not be a lawful reason for the dismissal from work, the employer must be informed about the above mentioned activities of the employee. It is also noted that the retirement age of the employee may be a lawful reason for dismissal from work when due to that age the employee may not perform his/her work properly. The termination of the employment contract at the initiative of the employer when there is no fault of the employee must be carried out strictly according to the corresponding procedure. There has been made a conclusion in the paper that the Labour Code laid out more strict requirements for the content of the warning: instead of the standard and abstract formulation of the reason for the dismissal from work the employer now must indicate a specific reason for the dismissal of specific employee. It is suggested to determine the minimum period indicated in the Labour Code taking into consideration the record of service of the employee in the company. There are certain problems encountered with regard to the way of delivery of the warning because the law does not indicate the duty of the employee to sign on the warning. It is suggested that the law should include the requirement that the employee has to sign on the warning indicated that he/she received the warning or refused to accept it. The shortcoming of the law in prejudice of the employer is also considered the fact that the employer is not obligated to make a written record of an alternative job offer to the employee who is being dismissed from work. This may cause problems for the employer in court trying to prove that such offer was made. The analysis of the topic of the paper partially confirmed the hypothesis that the employer encounters much higher requirements when dismissing an employee at its initiative when there is no fault of the employee.