Generally, an HR internal investigation is opened due to specific incidents, allegations or legal/operational concerns within a workplace or organisation, including the following:
There are many legal bases for conducting an HR investigation according to Turkish law, and these depend on the reason and scope of the investigation. The regulatory framework that governs carrying out an HR internal investigation includes:
Each employer is able to conduct an HR internal investigation in order to perform the employment contract and comply with legal obligations, and for the vital, public, legitimate and relevant interests of the organisation.
Moreover, court decisions (including those of the Turkish Supreme Court) provide certain legal bases for each specific condition.
According to Turkish law, employers are not required to have certain types of channels that employees may use to report concerns. However, in terms of evidence, it is important that employees can express their concerns in writing. In this context, for the completeness of the means of proof in cases of a possible dispute, it is necessary to prepare and implement written procedures within the organisation and to provide administrative and legal infrastructures for this, especially if the employee’s application also includes a confidentiality/anonymity request for their statements. Thus, a reporting line can be established within the company and/or a special email notification procedure can be provided.
As previously explained, appropriate procedures and policies may be established for carrying out an HR internal investigation. In this context, the HR department is responsible for starting an HR investigation, in order to discover further details in cases of any notification of employee concern. At the beginning, a manager from the HR department can conduct this investigation. However, depending on the nature and scope of the claim and investigation, a board member, other department executives or an external counsel can become involved in this investigation (headed by the HR department).
In cases involving a justified reason for termination of the employment contract, due to situations that do not comply with the rules of morality and good faith (including workplace misconduct, complaints of workplace harassment, sexual harassment or abuse), the employer is able to terminate the employment contract within six working days.
As such, within six working days, an HR internal investigation must be carried out in cases of any potential justified reason for termination of the employment contract.
In cases of any employee claim or allegations, an HR internal investigation must be initiated in accordance with the employer’s obligation to treat all employees equally, as stipulated in Article 5 of the Labour Law. In this regard, there is no exception for not initiating an investigation.
In cases where an investigation is neither obliged nor prohibited, an employer may decide when to move ahead with an HR internal investigation (within a reasonable time), depending on the internal regulations, including employees’ written policies and procedures as well as the nature and all circumstances of the investigation.
As a rule, in accordance with the employer’s governance right and the principle of the protection of personal data, the reporter has no right to be informed as to whether an HR internal investigation will be opened. However, the reporter may be informed as to whether an HR internal investigation will be opened (within a reasonable time) if:
Within this framework, there are no requirements that information must be provided nor regarding the notice period given to the reporter. These issues must be evaluated separately in each concrete case.
As a rule, in accordance with the employer’s governance right and the principle of the protection of personal data, the respondent has no right to be informed as to whether an HR internal investigation will be opened. However, the respondent may be informed as to whether an HR internal investigation will be opened (within a reasonable time) if:
Within this framework, there are no requirements that information must be provided nor regarding the notice period given to the respondent. These issues must be evaluated separately in each concrete case.
In cases where a criminal accusation within the scope of the Turkish Penal Code is under HR internal investigation, the opening of an HR internal investigation must be communicated (providing all required information and documents) to the official authorities, such as:
Specific criminal accusations include:
Furthermore, in cases of a financial crime dispute within the scope of tax legislation, the opening of an HR internal investigation may be communicated to the Financial Crimes Investigation Board and/or the Republic of Türkiye’s Ministry of Treasury and Finance, providing all required information and documents.
Moreover, if an administrative violation within the scope of the Code on Personal Data Protection is under HR internal investigation, the opening of an HR internal investigation may be communicated to the Personal Data Protection Authority (the “Authority”), providing all required information and documents.
Under paragraph (1), Article 12 of the Code on Personal Data Protection, the data controller must:
The data controller is obliged to take all necessary technical and administrative measures to ensure the appropriate level of security for this purpose; if the processed personal data is obtained by others through illegal means, the data controller should report this situation to the person concerned and to the Authority within 72 hours (at the latest) of learning of the situation. The Authority may, if necessary, announce this situation on its own website or through another method it deems appropriate.
The parties may be asked to sign confidentiality agreements and/or NDAs covering an HR internal investigation. More generally, general confidentiality agreements and/or NDAs covering an HR internal investigation are signed at the beginning of the employment relationship. Depending on the sensitivity of the investigation, a special confidentiality agreement may be signed at the beginning of the investigation, especially before conveying the matter to all relevant parties and taking their statements.
A penalty amount may be specified in the confidentiality agreements and/or NDAs for both parties. The parties may be liable to pay a penalty in cases of any violation of the confidentiality agreement or NDA. All employers must take note that the penalty sanction must be granted equally to all parties in accordance with Article 420 of the TCO; otherwise, the penal clause may be deemed invalid.
If a separate confidentiality agreement and/or NDA is not signed, as a rule there is still a general duty for the parties to keep an HR internal investigation confidential. In this regard, within the framework of labour legislation, a relationship of trust must be protected between the employee and the employer during a labour relationship. Otherwise, this relationship may be damaged; in this case, damage to the relationship of trust may give the employee or employer the right to terminate the employment contract for a valid or justified reason, and to be compensated for the material and moral damages owing to such disclosure.
It is possible to conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether a full HR internal investigation is warranted. In this context, depending on the nature and scope of the incident, all digital recordings – including CCTV, electronic systems for recording entry and exit of the workplace, and emails – may be pre-examined, and the interviews regarding the allegations may be held within the organisation, respecting the confidentiality rule.
The witnesses are typically interviewed in the course of an HR internal investigation. A lot of one-on-one interviews are performed with such witnesses, and the information obtained as a result of these interviews is analysed.
If an interviewee refuses to participate or only participates in certain aspects of the investigation/interviews, the employer must, as a rule, comply with this decision of the interviewee, if:
Otherwise, if this right is used arbitrarily, the employer may request a defence from the relevant person and give a warning to this person.
The interviews can be carried out remotely (eg, Teams, Zoom, etc).
There is no requirement regarding number and limitations of the interviewers (such as gender, objectivity, seniority, etc) according to Turkish law.
A neutral third party could be present during interviews as a witness, depending on the nature of the investigation.
The interviewees may not be accompanied by a support person; this is in order to prevent the witness from being influenced in any way and to ensure that the investigation is carried out independently and impartially.
There is no limitation regarding interviewees being accompanied by a lawyer; the interviewees have such right.
According to Turkish law, there is no certain information that the interviewers need to provide to interviewees at the start and/or end of the interview. Only the general outline of the investigation is conveyed, and whether the interviewer has knowledge about it is stated at the start. That the results of the meeting will be evaluated separately by the management may also be stated.
If an interviewee requests to stop the interview, this request is recorded in the minutes. If an interviewee does not sign the minutes, this fact is also recorded accordingly.
In order to ensure that the investigation is carried out independently and impartially, minutes may be taken. In this regard, summarised minutes are allowed, following certain rules (see 3.9 Stopping the Interview). The interviewees may be allowed to review only the minutes concerning their part, and as a rule interviewees may sign the minutes depending on the nature of the investigation. An external party (external to the company or to the department) is not required to take the minutes if the processes are objectively performed.
The interview can be recorded only via audio/videotape in accordance with the protection of personal data legislation. The obligation to disclose personal data to the participant must be fulfilled and, if necessary, explicit consent must be obtained. If the interview is recorded and a transcript is produced, the transcript should be shared with the interviewee upon request of the relevant person.
The process of gathering information in the workplace (fact-finding) involves collecting data and conducting research through methods such as interviews, record reviews, audio/videotape records and observations. Any records that violate the right to privacy, including the protection of personal data, cannot be used during the investigation phase.
The employer may take actions to protect the reporter (eg, physical safety, personality rights, etc). The employer may also take certain measures (eg, remote work, annual leave, suspension, etc), and the general requirements to protect the reporter are the legal bases for doing so. If the employer does not take measures to protect the reporter, the employer may incur legal and criminal liability regarding possible negative experiences of the reporter (eg, reporter’s injury, death, exposure to insult, etc).
The employer may take actions to protect the respondent (eg, reputation, personality rights, etc). An organisation may proceed with confidentiality notices to take such actions. The right of privacy arising from the Turkish Constitution and the Code on Personal Data Protection are the main legal bases for doing so.
If the employer does not take measures to protect the respondent, the employer may incur legal and criminal liability regarding possible negative experiences of the respondent (eg, respondent’s injury, death, exposure to insult, etc).
The employer can take disciplinary measures against the respondent prior to concluding an HR internal investigation. In this regard, in order to protect the interests of all parties, the employer may change the job position – the employer may make some changes to the employee’s job descriptions temporarily, and at the latest until the end of the investigation. If these measures are not taken, the employer may be subject to legal and criminal liability if the reporter(s) or respondent(s) suffer any damage.
The employer can take disciplinary measures to protect other employees (eg, physical safety, etc) prior to concluding an HR internal investigation. In this regard, in order to protect the interests of other employees, the employer may take certain measures (eg, remote work, suspension, etc), at the latest until the end of the investigation. If these measures are not taken, the employer may be subject to legal and criminal liability if the employees suffer any damage.
There are no procedural guarantees that must be put in place (eg, providing certain information, the right to remain silent, information regarding allegations, access to a lawyer, etc) or steps that must be followed according to Turkish law. However, one of the basic criteria is that all processes be carried out in objective evaluations, and that such evaluation should be objectively proven.
The employer can have internal regulations that go beyond the requirements previously mentioned (see 5.1 Requirements), such as the preparation of certain policies to proceed with the HR internal investigation. These policies are binding on the employer. If the internal regulations are not followed by the employer, the employer violates its obligation to treat its employees equally and may be liable for compensation to its employees.
According to Turkish law, as a rule the burden of proof belongs to the person making the claim. However, since the employer has an obligation to treat its employees equally, an investigation must be initiated and all necessary outputs must be collected, depending on the nature of the allegation.
Each claim must be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. However, since it is very difficult to find complete evidence for a potential harassment claim, progress can be made with reasonable suspicion, according to the characteristics of the claim and within the framework of equity.
According to Turkish law, there are no rules governing when an HR internal investigation may be ended. However, a policy for the conducting and conclusion of the internal investigation can be prepared by the employer. If so, the employer has to follow this policy to conduct and conclude the relevant HR internal investigation.
Once the decision to end an HR internal investigation has been made, a decision may also be made to terminate the employment contracts of the relevant parties or to warn the relevant personnel in writing. On the other hand, in cases where warning or termination procedures are not required, this situation is recorded in writing by the HR department and, if necessary, is notified to the relevant parties.
The entire process of the HR internal investigation must be recorded in writing. All decisions and possible sanctions taken as a result of the investigation must also be recorded in written form. It is recommended that these minutes be signed by at least three persons – depending on the entire management scheme of the organisation – including the responsible persons conducting the investigation, in order to obtain written proof.
There are no legal requirements about the information that must be included when written reports are used. However, in order to prove that the objective evaluations are provided, the following are suggested for inclusion in these written reports:
The parties, including the reporter(s) and the respondent(s), have a right to receive information regarding the outcome of an HR internal investigation in accordance with the employer’s obligation to treat equally and the principle of privacy. As a rule, these parties have no right to access directly written reports within the framework of the employer’s right to governance. In other words, the employer has a right to limit the access to these written reports arising from its rights to governance.
In this regard, the employer may provide limited information in writing to these parties. In the case of any conflict, and as a result of an administrative or court decision, these written reports may transfer to the official authorities, such as:
In the case of criminal liability within the scope of the Turkish Penal Code, the key facts and conclusions of an HR internal investigation must be communicated to the relevant authorities (see 6.5 Information), providing all required information and documents. See 2.3 Communication to Authorities for certain specific criminal facts.
Moreover, in the case of an administrative violation within the scope of the Code on Personal Data Protection, the key facts and conclusions of an HR internal investigation must be communicated to the Personal Data Protection Authority, providing all required information and documents.
Furthermore, in the case of a financial crime dispute within the scope of tax legislation, the key facts and conclusions of an HR internal investigation must be communicated to the Financial Crimes Investigation Board and/or the Republic of Türkiye’s Ministry of Treasury and Finance, providing all required information and documents.
Interviewees and team members that have interests arising from an HR internal investigation may have a right to receive information regarding the outcome of such investigation in accordance with the principle of privacy. In this regard, the employer may provide limited information in writing to these parties within the framework of the employer’s right to governance.
In general, if the allegations are substantiated, the employer may take certain disciplinary measures, as follows.
Official Warning
If terminating the employee’s employment contract would be a severe sanction, a written warning may be given to the employee to prevent the situation and events subject to investigation from occurring again. For this, it is necessary to obtain the written defence of the worker beforehand. The warning form must also be delivered to staff upon signature. It outlines performance or misconduct concerns, and an action plan of what the employee needs to do to improve.
Transfer or Change of Function
In light of Article 22 of the Labour Code, the employer can only make a fundamental change in the working conditions resulting from the employment contract, the personnel regulations and similar sources annexed to the employment contract, or the workplace’s practice, by notifying the employee in writing. Any changes that are not made in accordance with this form and that are not accepted in writing by the employee within six working days are not binding on the employee. If the employee does not accept the change proposal within this period, the employer may terminate the employment contract by explaining in writing that the change is based on a valid reason or that there is another valid reason for termination, and by complying with the notice period. If the employment contract is not terminated for a valid reason, the employee can file a re-employment lawsuit.
Dismissal Termination for a Valid Reason
The employer may terminate the employment contract with a valid reason, according to Article 18 of the Labour Code. If the employment contract is not terminated for a valid reason, the employee can file a re-employment lawsuit within one month as of the termination date.
Immediate Dismissal (Termination With Just Cause)
The employer may terminate the employment contract with just cause, according to Article 25 of the Labour Code. If the employment contract is not terminated with just cause, the employee can file a re-employment lawsuit within one month as of the termination date.
Invoking a Contractual Penalty Clause
In the case of violation of the obligation of confidentiality, violation of non-competition provisions, etc, the employer may also demand from the employee the penal clause amounts written in the contract resulting from these violations, after the termination of the employment relationship.
The employers may take other types of measures – whether or not the allegations are substantiated – following an HR internal investigation, as follows:
An employer is allowed to collect personal data for the purpose of an HR internal investigation within the organisation for its employees, according to the Code on Personal Data Protection.
Personal data cannot be processed without the explicit consent of the relevant person, according to Article 5 of the Code on Personal Data Protection. However, for one of the following conditions, it is possible to process personal data without the explicit consent of the relevant person:
In addition to that explained in 7.1 Collecting Personal Data, it is necessary to mention special personal data, as special importance is given to this in Turkish law. This is personal data regarding an individual’s:
Special personal data may also be processed during the investigation process; however, the processing of special personal data is prohibited as a rule. Nonetheless, according to Article 6 of the Code on Personal Data Protection, processing of this data is appropriate if:
In the processing of special categories of personal data, it is also essential to take adequate measures as determined by the board.
Personal data cannot be transferred without the explicit consent of the relevant person. However, if for one of the specified conditions clearly stated in Articles 5 and 6 of the Code on Personal Data Protection, and provided that adequate precautions are taken, the relevant data may be transferred without the express consent of the relevant person.
In this regard, based on the right of management and its being the data controller, the employer has the right to transfer the data to the parties by following the written rules and procedures, and by complying with personal data protection legislation.
The employee’s reporting of non-conformities in the workplace (whistle-blowing) is not a concept defined in detail in Turkish law. It should be clearly stated that there is no clear written regulation in Turkish jurisdiction that obliges employees to report abuse or unlawful behaviour and that at the same time ensures the protection of employees.
Since there are no special provisions in Turkish law protecting employees in terms of whistle-blowing, the issue is evaluated within the framework of international agreements, general provisions and judicial precedents. In Article 396 of the TCO, the general duty of care and loyalty stipulates that the employee is obliged to perform work with prudence and to take into account the justified interests of the employer. In this context, for ensuring the safety of the work environment between the employee and the employer, acting in good faith is very important and should be considered as one of the basic job descriptions of the employee.
On the other hand, within the scope of the crime of not reporting a crime, as regulated by Article 278 of the Turkish Penal Code, a person who does not report a crime to the competent authorities is punishable. As such, if an action leads to a crime, it is thus considered a legal obligation to report this action to the relevant authorities, according to Turkish Law.
The only specific regulation that can be considered relating to whistle-blowing in Turkish jurisdiction falls under occupational health and safety legislation. According to Article 8/2 of the Code of Occupational Health and Safety, numbered 6331, in cases where the necessary precautions are not taken into consideration by the employer following written notification by an occupational physician, occupational safety expert and/or joint health and safety unit management, this situation must be reported by such parties to:
Owing to this notification, the employment contracts of these notifying parties cannot be terminated by the employer, and such parties cannot be subject to any loss of rights.
The European Court of Human Rights’ decision in Guja v Moldova is very important for whistle-blowing practice within Turkish jurisdiction. According to Article 90 of the Turkish Constitution, the decision is also an integral part of Turkish domestic law. As particularly emphasised in this decision, it is necessary to provide a legal balance between the employee’s duty of care and loyalty and corruption/unlawfulness. The criteria set forth in this decision are as follows.
The foregoing criteria can be considered in the evaluation of concrete disputes in Turkish jurisdiction, and the relevant organisational structures for employers may be built within this framework.
As a result, although Turkish legislation has no specific concept of whistle-blowing, it is necessary and recommended to establish a specific, understandable and easily accessible whistle-blowing system for employees to report all non-conformities in the workplace, within the framework of the basic legislation and court decisions previously mentioned.
Sexual harassment and/or violence is a situation that harms a person’s dignity and causes psychological discomfort through verbal, written or physical behaviour. Sexual harassment and/or violence in the workplace not only has irreparable effects on the individual but also reveals individual and social problems in a comprehensive way, including concerning the person’s family, organisations and society; as a result, it affects all of society.
Additionally, in accordance with Article 417 of the TCO, in the case of sexual harassment and/or violence in the workplace, the employer is obliged to protect and respect the personality of the employee. As such, it is especially obliged to prevent employees from being subjected to psychological and sexual harassment and/or violence, and to take the necessary measures to prevent further harm to those who have been subjected to such harassment and/or violence.
Furthermore, according to Article 105 of the Turkish Penal Code, a person who harasses someone for sexual purposes is punishable by imprisonment from three months to two years or with a judicial fine, upon the complaint of the victim. If this situation occurs in the workplace, it constitutes a major crime and involves a higher penalty.
On the basis of labour law, sexual harassment and/or violence in the workplace can be divided into the following basic categories.
Sexual Harassment of Another Employee by an Employee
Pursuant to Article 24/2/d of the Labour Code, if an employee is sexually harassed at the workplace by another employee, the victim is able to report this situation to the employer and to request that the necessary measures be taken. However, if the employer does not take the necessary precautions despite this request, the aggrieved employee may terminate the employment contract for just cause. At the same time, in this case, pursuant to Article 25/2/d of the Labour Code, the employer may terminate the employment contract of an employee who commits sexual harassment, for just cause and without paying any compensation.
Sexual Harassment of an Employee by a Third Party
In accordance with Article 24/2/d of the Labour Code, if the employee is sexually harassed at the workplace by a third party, the aggrieved employee is able to report this situation to the employer and to request that the necessary measures be taken. However, if the employer does not take the necessary precautions despite this request, the aggrieved employee may terminate the employment contract for just cause.
Sexual Harassment of the Employer by the Employee
Pursuant to Article 25/2/b and 25/2/d of the Labour Code, if the employee sexually harasses the employer or their family member, the employer may terminate the employment contract of such employee for just cause, without paying any compensation.
Sexual Harassment of a Third Party by the Employee
Since this situation goes against the rules of morality and good faith, the employer may terminate the employment contract of such sexually harassing employee, for just cause and without paying any compensation.
Moreover, the employee or the employer who are the victim of sexual harassment and/or violence can also file a lawsuit against the other party for material and moral damages, in accordance with general principles, and can demand compensation for all their damages from the other party.
Consequently, all employers must take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their employees.
Any other specific protections for allegations concerning threats, intentional injuries and discrimination (eg, regarding language, race, gender, political thought, philosophical belief, religion and sect, etc) are stipulated in the Labour Code and Turkish Penal Code. In the case of any discrimination and/or harassment, the employee is able to terminate the labour contract for just cause and to request compensation for material and moral damages (see 8.2 Sexual Harassment and/or Violence for more detail).
Bullying and mobbing are two different though closely linked aggressive methods. Workplace bullying has just begun to be discussed in Turkish jurisdiction, and there is no clear regulation. Mobbing is not a clearly regulated concept in Turkish legislation, but has been shaped by court decisions and literature.
Bullying and/or mobbing involves a collective attack on the honour, personality, character, belief, values, abilities, experiences, knowledge, thoughts, ethnicity, lifestyle, culture and similar aspects of the targeted person. This attack is carried out through actions that can affect the person mentally, spiritually and physically, such as by spreading gossip and rumours, slandering, publicly humiliating, underestimating, slandering, denigrating and ignoring.
The person who is exposed to bullying or mobbing can terminate the employment contract for just cause and can claim non-pecuniary damages against the employer. In addition, the employee in question can apply to:
The employer must follow the same procedures as explained in 2.3 Communication to Authorities, if the allegation is also criminal in nature.
Internal HR investigations should be conducted through effective corporate governance and compliance with legal and regulatory obligations. In this regard, an employer must follow procedures under Turkish law for its establishments in the Republic of Türkiye, even in multi-jurisdictional cases.
Foreign employers carrying out HR internal investigations in Turkish jurisdiction should follow the legal and administrative procedures with their local organisation, in light of Turkish law. Similarly, there is no legal limitation for employers in Turkish jurisdiction carrying out HR internal investigations abroad.
Co-ordination and communication within each jurisdiction should occur in accordance with the law in question, with reasonable and verifiable documentation and under the burden of proof system.
Bebek Arnavutköy Caddesi M. Çelikbaş
Yalısı No 58/1 Arnavutköy Mah.
Beşiktaş/İstanbul 34345
Turkey
+90 212 979 86 30
+90 212 924 39 29
info@celikbaslaw.com www.celikbaslaw.comOverview
The transfer of an employment contract may generally come up in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) deals, or for changes in the legal entity or the type of business within this scope. This may occur when:
This article examines the responsibilities arising from the transfer of the employment contract within the transferring and acquiring company, and the importance of HR internal investigations in this regard.
Under Turkish law, an employment contract may only be transferred to another employer with the employee’s written consent. With this transfer, the transferee becomes the employer party of the employment contract. It is important to note that the employee’s rights based on length of service shall be determined from the date the employee began working for the transferor party. In this context, it should be noted that the transfer of employment contracts is not directly regulated by Turkish labour law; rather, it is primarily governed by Supreme Court rulings that have arisen from practical situations encountered in everyday life practices.
The Transfer and Legal Nature of the Employment Contract
The main criterion for business transfer is the preservation of the identity of the economic union. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that the following criteria are acceptable for the transfer of a workplace:
The transfer of employee contracts – which is a key element of economic union – is especially important in labour force sectors.
It should be emphasised that the written consent of the employee is required for the transfer of the employment contract, and the employee is not obliged to accept this transfer.
Owing to its legal nature, the transfer of an employment contract involves a unique three-party contract; with this, the employment contract between the employee and the employer is transferred to another employer – which is a third party – together with all its rights and obligations. The employee’s consent must be included in the contract for it to be valid. The existence of the employee’s written consent is reviewed ex officio in all related disputes. Without this consent, significant changes regarding liability law may occur. Article 429 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No 6098 (TCO) states that “a service agreement may only be permanently transferred to another employer with the employee’s written consent”. With the transfer, the new employer becomes a party to the service contract, assuming all rights and obligations. In this scenario, the employee’s rights based on their length of service shall be calculated from the date they began working for the previous employer.
This regulation emphasises that obtaining the employee’s written consent is essential for the successful transfer of the employment contract.
It is important to note that the transfer of the employment contract is not subject to any particular formal requirement, nor is the employee’s consent to the transfer subject to any formality.
Does the Transfer of the Employment Contract Create a New Contract?
It should be emphasised that in such case the legal relationship between the employee and the transferor employer – ie, the employment relationship – ends. After this, the employment relationship continues without interruption with the new employer upon the transfer of the employment contract. With this approach, it is not possible to establish a new employment contract between the new employer and the employee. The transferor employer shall not be responsible for the rights arising from the cancellation, and the employee shall not lose their severance rights. The transferee employer, on the other hand, shall be liable for not only the seniority-related rights of the employee but for all rights of the employee for the period of service with the transferor employer. In other words, upon the transfer of the employment contract, all seniority-related and non-seniority-related rights shall pass directly and automatically to the transferee employer.
The Conceptual Difference Between Transfer of Workplace and Transfer of Employment Contract and Liability
In business life, just as workplace transfers are frequently made between employers, employment contracts are also transferred. In the transfer of the workplace, the contracts of all employees are collectively transferred to the new employer, whereas in the transfer of an employment contract, only one employee’s contract is transferred to the new employer. In both scenarios, a change of employer is a consistent element.
Although the Labour Code numbered 4857 (“Law No 4857”) explicitly regulates the transfer of the workplace, it does not regulate the transfer of the employment contract. However, due to the similarity of legal transactions between a transfer of the workplace and a transfer of an employment contract, it is stated in doctrine that the regulations governing the transfer of the workplace could be applied by analogy to employment contract transfers.
Consequently, the provisions outlined in Article 6 of Law No 4857, which details the responsibilities of employers, as well as Article 14 of the Labour Code numbered 1475 (“Law No 1475”), should be applied by analogy to the transfer of an employment contract. This means that the transferee employer could not be held solely responsible for only the debts regarding its operation time. The transferee employer shall also be responsible for the debts accrued before its employment period.
Liability Arising From Wage Claim
When transferring an employment contract, the provisions of Article 6 of Law No 4857 and Article 14 of Law No 1475, which address employer responsibilities regarding rights accrued prior to the transfer, should be applied by analogy. In this situation, the original employer (transferor) shall be jointly liable with the new employer (transferee) for any debts incurred during the employee’s period of employment, for a duration of two years.
According to legal opinion, Article 429/f2 of the TCO provides regulations that run parallel to Article 6 of Law No 4857 and Article 428 of the TCO. For this reason, the legal consequences of the transfer of the workplace shall be applied by analogy both to the transfer of employment relations and to the status of labour rights and rights based on length of service. On the other hand, Article 429/f2 of the TCO does not stipulate that the transferor and transferee employers are jointly liable for debts of the company for at least two more years after the transfer of the workplace.
Owing to the similarity between the transfer of the employment contract and the transfer of the workplace, Article 6/3 of Law No 4857, which regulates the transfer of the workplace, must be applied by analogy to the transfer of the employment contract; therefore, the transferor employer should be jointly liable with the transferee employer for two years (Süzek, Employment Law, 10th Press, Beta, 2014: s 333–334).
Article 429 of the TCO does not contain clear regulation regarding the liability of the transferor employer. In other words, there is a gap in the law in this regard – one that needs to be filled. Until then, the protection of the employee must form the basis of the transaction. For this reason, under doctrine it is generally advocated that the legal regulations in the transfer of the workplace shall be applied by analogy in the transfer of the employment contract, and by doing so, effective protection to the employee shall be provided.
Article 429 of the TCO does not govern the transferor employer’s liability for the debts arising before the transfer and due on the transfer date in the event of a voluntary transfer of the employment contract, such as in the case of the transfer of the workplace under Article 6 of Law No 4857. In other words, unlike Article 6, Article 429 of the TCO does not anticipate joint and several liability. Therefore, other than severance compensation, there is no agreement in practice regarding the employer’s obligation to transfer labour rights such as salary, bonuses, overtime, weekly holidays and general holiday pay.
This viewpoint holds that the employer that transferred the employment contract is liable for the employee’s accrued rights. As such, it is acknowledged that each employer has limited liability for the time that they hired the employee. From this perspective, the employer that transferred shall only be liable for the debts incurred after the transfer date, and the employer shall be held accountable for the employee rights accrued during its own time. This perspective holds that both employers shall be held personally liable for the rights of their employees during their respective employment periods.
From a different perspective, since the transfer of the contract with all rights and obligations is mentioned in Article 429/f2 of the TCO, it is impossible to determine that the transferee employer shall not be held responsible for the rights before the transfer, since the purpose of the provision indicates its mandatory nature. Furthermore, the fact that rights such as wages and social rights accrued before the transfer may only be claimed from the transferee may create an insecure situation, due to reasons such as the transferee’s insufficient ability to pay (Gülsevil Alpagut, Transfer of the Workplace and the Right to Terminate the Employment Contract, 2010, Beta, p 117–184). Accordingly, considering the nature of Turkish labour law, Article 6/p2 of Law No 4857 should be applied by analogy to the transfer of the employment contract.
Another argument is that the legislature intentionally included a gap in Article 429 of the TCO, as the liability of the transferee employer is unclear, unlike in Article 6 of Law No 4857. Furthermore, due to this intentionally left gap, the transferor employer may not be held responsible for two years. However, in the case of a transfer of the employment contract, it would be appropriate to apply Article 6, as it benefits the employee (Albayrak Zincirlioğlu, Candan: Transfer of the Employment Contract, TC Kocaeli University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Private Law, Division of Labour and Social Security Law, PhD Thesis, Kocaeli, 2015, p 170).
In the transfer of the employment contract, the employee must, within five years from the date of entitlement, demand from the transferee employer the wages that have accrued, since the contract is transferred with all its rights and obligations. Here it is supposedly accepted that Article 6 of Law No 4857 shall be applied by analogy to the transfer of the employment contract. In such case, the transferee employer’s liability for these debts shall be two years from the date of transfer.
It has been stated that the transferee employer is liable for all the receivables that are ruled, and it has also been accepted that the transferor employer shall be liable for its employment period. Moreover, it has been stated that the overtime and general holiday receivables should be calculated separately for the transferor and the transferee employer. In the authors’ opinion, the transferor employer and the transferee employer hold distinct and limited liabilities during their respective employment periods.
Liability in Terms of Severance Pay
Any contracts designed to exempt the employer from responsibility when transferring an employment contract for severance pay shall not be regarded as valid. It should be noted that, in accordance with the “principle of interpretation for the benefit of the employee” and the protection of the employee and their rights, the above-mentioned two-year limitation period foreseen for the transferor employer is not applicable in terms of severance pay. In that case, severance pay should be calculated for the entire period before and after the workplace transfer, but the liability of the transferor employers or transferee employers should be limited to their own period and wage on the date of transfer.
In other words, in the transfer of the employment contract based entirely on the will of the parties, the provisions of Article 6 of Law No 4857 regarding the transfer of the workplace and Article 14/f2 of Law No 1475 regulating severance pay should be applied by analogy. The similarity between the transfer of the employment contract and the transfer of the workplace in terms of the protected rights – in other words, the need to protect the employee and their rights – allows comparisons to be made in this direction. In this case, Article 14/f2 of Law No 1475 should be applied, and the employee should be able to claim severance pay from the transferee employer based on the total time they spent with the transferor and transferee employers. However, the transferor employer must be responsible for the part of this compensation limited to the periods during which the employee was employed and the wage level received by the employee at the time of the transfer.
Court Decisions Regarding Severance Pay Liability
A decision of the Supreme Court has stated the following:
“[In the] case of a workplace transfer, the transferring employer is liable for severance pay limited to his/her employment period. The two-year period [of] limitation for the transferor employer mentioned in Article 6 of Law No 4857 shall not be a guide to determine the liability for severance pay. In that case, severance pay should be calculated for the entire period before and after the workplace transfer, but a liability limited to the own period and wage on the date of transfer should be determined for the transferor employer or employers.” (See Supreme Court, 9th Civil Chamber, dated 23 October 2009, 2008/10743 E, 2009/28895 K.)
It has been emphasised in high court decisions that the liability of the transferor employer for severance pay is not limited by two years. (see Decision of the 9th Civil Chamber, Supreme Court, dated 12 February 2008, 2007/31303 E, 2008/106 K; Decision of the 9th Civil Chamber, Supreme Court, dated 27 June 2008, 2008/11195 E, 2008/17898 K).
Accordingly, it has been emphasised that the transferor employer shall be responsible for the severance pay limited to the wage on the date of transfer and their employment period. (see Decision of the 9th Civil Chamber, Supreme Court, dated 2 June 2015, 2014/9148 E- 2015/19247 K).
Regarding severance pay, it is important to note that, according to the added Articles 3 and 8 of Law No 4857, the statute of limitations differs based on when employment contracts are terminated. For those whose employment contracts are terminated on or after 25 October 2017, the statute of limitations is limited to five years. In contrast, for those whose employment contracts were terminated before this date, the statute of limitations is ten years.
Liability in Terms of Notice Compensation
The transferor employer cannot be held responsible for the notice compensation. In fact, the transferor employer is not liable for the notice compensation and labour rights regarding the annual paid leave receivables that have not yet accrued at the time of transfer. In this situation, the transferor employer is liable for the employee’s ongoing and future rights based on seniority.
The Importance of HR Internal Investigations in the Transfer of Employment Contracts
In sectors where labour force is important, budget and economic scope planning are critical for transferee and transferor employers. It is vital to conduct HR internal investigations as preparation for the transfer of employment contracts. These investigations and audits are especially important for the transferor employer in the selection of employees and in determining the economic liabilities that arise. This process constitutes one of the economic inputs of the new potential investment.
For the transferee employer, the following are important in the selection of employees and in the evaluation of the economic consequences that may be encountered after the transfer:
At this point, great significance should be given to the protection of the employees’ personal data. Otherwise, legal, administrative and criminal sanctions may arise for the transferor and transferee employer – high administrative penalties may be imposed especially in companies where compliance with the protection of personal data is not ensured. In this case, it is critical for the transferor employer to prepare storage and destruction policies, to provide a personal data inventory and to make disclosure notifications for the protection of personal data.
In particular, if the employment contract is transferred to a company located abroad or to a company with foreign shareholders, it is necessary to obtain explicit consent from each employee or to sign the standard contract published by the Personal Data Protection Authority (the “Authority”) between the transferor and transferee. If signed by both parties, this contract should be submitted to the Authority.
Moreover, considering the number of employees to whom the employment contract is transferred, in some cases there may be unforeseen large financial burdens for the transferee business and company. Here, the scope of investments might be determined by evaluating the outputs following a legal audit (especially involving calculation experts), under the leadership of HR departments.
Conclusion
After the transfer of the employment contract, the employee shall be able to claim employee receivables, including the wages that the employee was entitled to at the time of the transfer, from the transferor employer. The employee may claim the receivables from the transferee and the transferor employer within two years from the date of transfer of the contract. The liability for these receivables is limited by the statute of limitations.
The severance pay should be calculated for the entire period before and after the transfer, though the liabilities of the employers should be determined based on their employment periods.
As a rule, the last employer is responsible for the other rights related to termination, such as notice pay and unused leave wages, and the transferor employer has no responsibility for those.
The transferor employer and the transferee employer are jointly and severally responsible for the accrued wages, such as overtime pay and general holiday wages accrued until the date of transfer. The liability of the transferor employer is limited to two years from the date of transfer. The transferor employer is not responsible for the labour receivables arising from the work after the transfer date. In this respect, the transferee employer shall be solely responsible for labour receivables such as wages, overtime, weekly holiday work, holidays, and general holiday wages accrued after the transfer.
It is important to indicate the responsibilities of the transferor and transferee employers – such as damage compensation and recourse compensation claims – in the transfer contract. Regarding the principle of interpretation in favour of the employee, it should be noted that as a rule these records shall not be effective against the employee. However, the transferor employer and the transferee employer shall be able to file recourse compensation lawsuits against each other according to the transfer contract.
Determining an employee’s seniority, duties, responsibilities and important records in their personnel file are crucial factors in assessing the financial implications of an investment. At this stage, the legality of sharing information about the employee between the transferor employer and the new employer is essential. It is vital to prioritise the protection of employees’ data in this context. In order to avoid potential legal, administrative and criminal penalties, it is necessary to comply with personal data protection laws and to fulfil all relevant legislative requirements.
When transferring an employment contract, seeking legal and financial advice from experts is important, and the process should be guided by the HR team. The involvement of accountants, HR specialists and lawyers is crucial for evaluating the outputs and income of the new company.
Bebek Arnavutköy Caddesi M. Çelikbaş
Yalısı No 58/1 Arnavutköy Mah.
Beşiktaş/İstanbul 34345
Turkey
+90 212 979 86 30
+90 212 924 39 29
info@celikbaslaw.com www.celikbaslaw.com