Publication: Aynı İşveren Yanındaki Aralıklı Çalışmalarda Yıllık Ücretli İzin Hakkı
Abstract
4857 sayılı İş Kanununda yıllık ücretli izne hakkazanmak için gerekli sürenin hesabında işçilerin,aynı işverenin bir veya çeşitli işyerlerinde çalıştık-ları sürelerin birleştirilerek göz önüne alınacağıöngörülmüştür. Yargıtay kararlarında ise, işçininaynı işveren yanındaki önceki çalışma dönemin-de yıllık ücretli izinleri kullandırılmış veya iş söz-leşmesi sona erdiğinde kullanılmayan izinlerinkarşılığı ödenmişse, bu dönemdeki hizmet sü-resinin tasfiye edilmiş sayılacağı ve yeni çalışmadöneminde yıllık ücretli izne hak kazanma ve izinsüresinin uzunluğu açısından sanki daha önce oişverene bağlı olarak çalışmamış gibi işlem yapı-lacağı kabul edilmektedir. Makalemizde bu uy-gulamanın yasal bir dayanağının bulunmadığıyönündeki görüşümüz açıklanmış olup, Yargıtayiçtihadında bu yönde değişiklik yapılması öneril-miştir.
In the Labor Law No. 4857, it is envisaged that in the computation of the length of service required to qualify for annual leave, the periods during which the worker has been employed in one or more workplaces of the same employer shall be considered jointly. In the Supreme Court decisions, if the worker used the annual leave in the previous working period with the same employer or the unused annual leave days are paid in the termination of the labour contract, it is considered that length of service is liquidated. It is also accepted in the Supreme Court decisions that, with this liquidation, the new working period is initialled and the calculation will be made as if the worker has not worked in the workplace before, in terms of entitlement to annual leave and computation of it. In this article, our legal opinion is explained in the way that there is no legal basis for this practice and it is suggested that the Supreme Court practice should be changed with regard to in our legal opinion.
In the Labor Law No. 4857, it is envisaged that in the computation of the length of service required to qualify for annual leave, the periods during which the worker has been employed in one or more workplaces of the same employer shall be considered jointly. In the Supreme Court decisions, if the worker used the annual leave in the previous working period with the same employer or the unused annual leave days are paid in the termination of the labour contract, it is considered that length of service is liquidated. It is also accepted in the Supreme Court decisions that, with this liquidation, the new working period is initialled and the calculation will be made as if the worker has not worked in the workplace before, in terms of entitlement to annual leave and computation of it. In this article, our legal opinion is explained in the way that there is no legal basis for this practice and it is suggested that the Supreme Court practice should be changed with regard to in our legal opinion.