353 / 521
claims is an obstacle for re-employment claims to be decided
upon and finalized in accordance with timely hearing proce-
dures within the time limits regulated by the legislator. The
rights and receivables other than re-employment claims are
subject to oral hearing procedures. Consequently, if claims
pertaining to the rights of the employee, other than re-employ-
ment, are brought within the same lawsuit, these claims
must be separated, and the proceedings will move forward,
accordingly.
Principally, the fact that the employee brings forward claims
of payment in lieu of notice and severance payment in a re-
employment lawsuit is a contradiction. As a claim for re-
employment is made due to invalid termination, compensation
related to the consequences of termination cannot be claimed
at the same time.
In the case at hand, the court erred in its ruling on payment in
lieu of notice in addition to the re-employment of the employee.”
Pursuant to the decision, above, in practice, an employee who is
not re-employed upon determination of invalid termination is required
to claim his/her receivables by initiating a new lawsuit. On the other
hand, in practice, whether the employee requests his/her re-employ-
ment within the statutory limits, and whether said worker is re-
employed by the employer or not are not definite at the time when the
decision of the court is pronounced
3
. Consequently, a decision pertain-
ing to collection of compensation at that stage cannot be rendered.
The refusal of the employee to start to work
Pursuant to Art. 21/5 of the Labor Law, for the worker to be re-
employed, the employee must make an application to the employer
within ten working days of the date upon which the finalized court
decision is communicated. If the employee does not apply within the
said period of time, the termination shall be deemed valid, in which
case the employer shall be held liable only for the legal consequences
of such termination.
LABOR LAW
337
3
Süzek
, p. 631.