|
Dismissal of an employee for absence from the workplace during working hours due to a unilateral change in their work schedule may be deemed a disproportionately severe disciplinary measure, particularly where no adverse consequences have arisen for the employer. |
This conclusion was reached by the First Court of Cassation of General Jurisdiction in its Ruling dated January 13, 2026 (No. 88-711/2026, case No. 2-2445/2025).
A department head and senior inspector responsible for monitoring the technical condition of motor vehicles was dismissed for absenteeism over two working days. The employee disagreed with the dismissal and challenged it in court.
The employee explained that, on his own initiative, he began performing his duties not at 09:00 as required by internal labor regulations and his job description, but at 04:00 a.m. in order to assist inspectors in dispatching vehicles. He worked 8 consecutive hours in good faith. However, he was absent during the officially established working hours from 12:00 to 18:00 and had not agreed on the change of schedule with the employer.
The court of first instance dismissed the claim, concluding that the employee had abused his rights by leaving the workplace without notifying the employer.
Nevertheless, the appellate and cassation courts did not uphold this position. The employer should have taken into account that the employee had in fact worked on the relevant days, albeit having unilaterally changed his working schedule. The severity of the misconduct, the circumstances in which it was committed, the employee’s prior conduct, and his overall attitude toward work should also have been assessed. In light of these factors, a less severe disciplinary sanction could have been applied. The employee’s absence after 12:00 did not result in any negative consequences for the organization, such as disruption of transport operations or passenger services, nor did it affect the normal course of business activities.
The dismissal was declared unlawful. The employee was reinstated, awarded average earnings for the period of enforced absence, and granted compensation for moral damages in the amount of 30 000 rubles.
|
We remind that, when imposing disciplinary liability, the selected disciplinary measure must be proportionate to the severity of the misconduct. It is also necessary to take into account the circumstances of the offense and factors related to the employee’s personality. |
The lawyers of Marillion are always ready to assist clients and offer optimal solutions in complex situations.
