Search results

The article is devoted to the analysis of the current legislation of Ukraine regarding the rationing of grounds for dismissal of an employee for committing corruption or corruption-related offenses. Scientific points of view and relevant provisions of general and specific legislation on the interpretation of such definitions as "corruption", "corruption offense" and "corruption-related offense" are analyzed. The necessity to study this issue is based on the fact that the European integration direction of Ukraine's development is not possible without effective counteraction to corruption as a negative social phenomenon, which impedes the normal functioning of economic relations and civil society in general. In this context, it is emphasized that an employee who has committed a corruption offense and who has been found guilty of such an offense by a court decision, which has come into force, must be dismissed. Attention is drawn to the fact that following a court decision, it is not always possible to dismiss an employee on the ground of a corruption offense, since a person may be dismissed immediately after the administrative protocol has been drawn up against him. The purpose of the article is to analyze the current legislation of Ukraine on the regulation of grounds for dismissing of an employee for committing a corruption or corruption-related offense. Research methods are defined taking into account the purpose of the research, which is why modern methods of scientific cognition, namely comparative legal and generalization, are used. The application of these methods made it possible to achieve comprehensiveness and objectivity of scientific research, validity and consistency of the formulated conclusions.

It is common practice for employers to appoint external disciplinary hearing chairpersons to preside over a disciplinary hearing which has been convened for purposes of investigating allegations of misconduct against an employee. The external chairperson is ordinarily mandated to decide on guilt, and to the extent that there is a guilty finding, to recommend or impose the appropriate disciplinary sanction. Employers often tend to have expectations that the external chairperson will, after having found the employee guilty of the alleged misconduct, impose a sanction of dismissal. The expected outcome of dismissal, however, does not always occur. An external chairperson may impose a sanction short of dismissal after considering an disciplinary sanction may result in the employer instituting an internal review process to review the external chairperson employers may resort to unilaterally substituting the external disciplinary sanction with a sanction of dismissal. or the collective agreement regulating the disciplinary procedure in the workplace may or may not make provision for the substitution of the disciplinary sanction. In circumstances where there is no provision for the substitution of the disciplinary sanction, t questions regarding the applicability of the double jeopardy principle which means, in an employment context, that an employee should not be subjected to more than one disciplinary hearing on disciplinary charges arising from the same set of facts. It is, however, a well-established principle that employers who are classified as organs of state can review their own decisions. This includes decisions of chairpersons who are appointed preside over disciplinary hearings and decide on the appropriate disciplinary sanction. In the latter case, and in circumstances where the organ of state is dissatisfied with the disciplinary sanction, it may institute review proceedings in the Labour available to organs of state and not private-sector employers. This research seeks to determine whether it is ...

The purpose of the scientific article is to determine the purpose of dismissal of the employee and the reasons for such removal. It is proved that today neither current legislation, nor jurisprudence, nor science contain a single well-considered vision of the place of exclusion in the labor law system. It is noted that termination of work is always an intermediate stage, which will end either with the renewal of the employment contract and return to previous work, or with the change of the employment contract, or, even, its termination. It is substantiated that, upon dismissal from work, the main purpose is to protect the interests of the owner and employees, as well as to prevent possible violations of the rules of labor and labor discipline. Based on the analysis of the current legislation, it has been found that there are a lot of entities that have the right to initiate dismissal. By organizing data on the legal capacity of subjects to initiate dismissal, they are divided into three groups: a) entities that make the decision to dismiss and implement it; b) those requiring mandatory dismissal; c) those who raise the issue of dismissal. It is proposed to supplement the current legislation with a new reason for dismissal of an employee.Key words: dismissal of employee; the right to work; employment contract; the purpose of removing the employee from work; subjects who may initiate the question of dismissal of the employee; protection of the interests of the owner and employees; removal from work. ; Метою наукової статті є визначення мети відсторонення працівника від роботи та підстав такого відсторонення. Зазначено, що відсторонення від роботи завжди є проміжною стадією, яка закінчиться або поновленням дії трудового договору і поверненням на попередню роботу, або зміною трудового договору, або, навіть, його припиненням. Обґрунтовується, що, при відстороненні від роботи основною метою є захист інтересів власника та працівників, а також попередження можливих порушень правил охорони праці та трудової дисципліни. Запропоновано доповнити чинне законодавство новою підставою відсторонення працівника від роботи.Ключові слова: відсторонення працівника від роботи; право на працю; трудовий договір; мета відсторонення працівника від роботи; підстави відсторонення від роботи.

The purpose of the scientific article is to study the features of the exercise of the right to work when suspended from work. It is noted that dismissal is a complex legal phenomenon with its own specific features, which is a kind of mechanism of intrusion into the process of realization of a citizen's right to work in modern conditions. That is why this legal phenomenon must be outlined by the legislator in clear provisions. Taking into account modern socio-economic conditions, the specifics of such a legal category as suspension from work, its content, nature require careful research, since they are of no small importance both for the science of labor law and for the practice of law enforcement. The primary goal of labor law remains to ensure the realization by citizens of the right to work and its protection. Finding a balance between the interests of the employee and the employer, excluding cases of unjustified dismissal are tasks that require clear and unambiguous legal regulation in the process of further reforming labor legislation. ; Метою наукової статті є дослідження особливостей реалізації права на працю в разі відсторонення від роботи. З огляду на особливості сучасних соціально-економічних умов специфіка такої правової категорії, як відсторонення від роботи, її зміст і виникнення вимагають ретельного дослідження, оскільки є значеннєвими не тільки для науки трудового права, але й для практичного правозастосування. Першочерговою метою трудового права залишається проблема забезпечення реалізації громадянами права на працю та його захист. Пошук збалансування інтересів працівника та роботодавця, усунення випадків необrрунтованого відсторонення – це завдання, які вимагають чіткого й недвознач-ного правового регламентування в процесі реформування трудового законодавства

The main purpose of the article is to identify the contradictions and problems arising when both international labor standards and Russian labor law are applied and separate guarantees to workers are provided in the case of their dismissal. The object of the research is the employment relationship which arises between the employer and the employee when social guarantees are given to the workers when the employment relations are terminated. This article considers the regulations of Russian and foreign labor law which provide workers with certain guarantees if the employment contract is terminated at the initiative of the employer. For the first time, these guarantees are considered from a comparative legal perspective. Specific recommendations about improvement of the Russian labor law and its enforcement.