Immoral misdemeanor incompatible with the continuation of work as a ground for termination of the employment contract at the initiative of the owner or authorized body

Keywords: morality, misdemeanor, immoral misdemeanor, employment contract, termination of employment contract, evaluation concept.

Abstract

The Constitution of Ukraine enshrines and guarantees the right to work as an opportunity to earn a living by work that a person freely chooses or agrees to. One of the guarantees of the inviolability of the right to work is the impossibility of unreasonable and arbitrary termination of the employment contract on the initiative of the owner or authorized body. Such a guarantee follows from the provisions of Art. 40 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, which outlines an exhaustive list of grounds for termination of the employment contract with the employee. Guaranteeing the right to work for certain categories of workers is no exception. Such a guarantee is expressed in the provisions of Art. 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, which provides an exhaustive list of additional grounds for termination of the employment contract at the initiative of the owner or authorized body with a certain category of employees under certain conditions. A separate category of employees, whose employment contract may under certain conditions be terminated at the initiative of the owner or authorized body, include employees who perform an educational function. In particular, paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Art. 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine provides such an additional ground for termination of the employment contract, as the commission of an employee who performs educational functions, an immoral misdemeanor, incompatible with the continuation of this work. However, the legislator, enshrining this additional basis for equalization of the employment contract, does not specify the legal content of immoral misconduct, incompatible with the continuation of work, which creates difficulties in its substantive understanding and therefore significantly weakens the protection of labor rights of workers. Based on a comprehensive analysis of domestic legislation and a wide range of theoretical and legal approaches to understanding immoral misconduct, incompatible with the continuation of work, it is clarified the legal content of the concept and formulated its definition. Emphasis is placed on the inexpediency of outlining at the legislative level an exhaustive list of acts that should be regarded as immoral, given their evaluative nature. Particular attention was paid to the provisions of the draft Labor Code of Ukraine and a comparative analysis of the normative content of paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Art. 92 of the draft LC of Ukraine under paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Art. 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine. The peculiarities of the legal regulation of the termination of the employment contract under paragraph 3 of Part 1 of 41 Article of the Labor Code of Ukraine are highlighted and generalized, which are as follows: a) immoral misconduct is an evaluative concept that is not specified at the legislative level, and therefore, the establishment of its existence is carried out in each case, taking into account all the circumstances of the case; b) dismissal for committing an immoral misdemeanor is possible if such misdemeanor is incompatible with the continuation of work; c) the subject of dismissal may be an employee who performs the labor function of education; d) termination of the employment contract on the specified grounds is not a measure of disciplinary action and can be carried out only if there are specific facts that confirm the immoral behavior of the employee.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

V. V. Sychova, Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs

Candidate of Law, Associate Professor.
Secretariat of the Academic Council.

References

Abolina, T., & Nadolnyi, I (2002). Philosophical encyclopaedic dictionary (V. Shynkaruk, Ed.). Abrys.

Babenko, Ye. V. (2018). Subjective reasons for termination of employment at the initiative of the employer. Scientific Journal of Public and Private Law, 4, 65–69.

Bihun, T. Yu., & Poltavets, F. S. (2019). Problems issues of discharge of employee for amoral treaty. Young Scientist, 11(75), 7–11.

Boieva, O. S. (2016). The interpretation of the definition “incompatible with the continuation of this work” under the dismissal according to para 3 part 1 Art. 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine. Court Appeal, 1, 85–91.

Chernous, S. M. (2005). The place of evaluation concepts in labor law of Ukraine. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 67, 26–28.

Hulatkan, S. V. (2020). Immoral misconduct as a reason for dismissal of an employee in the field of education. Juridical Scientific and Electronic Journal, 3, 152–155. http://www.lsej.org.ua/3_2020/38.pdf.

Inshyn, M. І. (2018). Problem questions on the use of estimated concepts of labor law in Ukraine: theory and practice. Social Law, 2, 8–11.

Kolodii, A. M. (2002). Theory of state and law. Yurinkom Inter.

Komarnytska, M. V. (2020). Problems of legal regulation of termination of employment. Social Law, 1, 158–165.

Kononenko, V. A. (2019). Features of acceptance to work and dismissal from work for scientific and pedagogical workers [Candidate dissertation, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University].

Konstantinov, F. V. (Ed.). (1964). Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Vol. 3). Soviet encyclopedia.

Kostiuchenko, O. (2018). Limitation of the scope of disciplinary authority of the employer. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, 2, 74–79.

Kozin, S. M. (2014). To the question of dismissal for immoral misconduct. Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, 29(1), 206–209.

Krasiuk, T. V., & Shchehlakov, I. E. (2019). Distinction between an immoral offence and a violation of academic integrity: legal problems. Law and Innovations, 4(28), 40–48.

Kyselova, O. I., & Nomyrovska, Yu. V. (2020). Peculiarities of termination of the employment agreement at the initiative of the owner or the authorized authority. Legal Horizons, 22(35), 58–64.

Melnyk, M. I. (2002). Law enforcement bodies and law enforcement. Atika.

Popova-Koriak, K. O. (2017). An immoral misconduct incompatible with the continuation of the scientific and pedagogical worker of his work as the basis for the termination of the employment contract. Comparative and Analytical Law, 4, 141–145.

Prokopenko, V. I. (1998). Labour law of Ukraine. Konsum.

Protsevskyi, V. O. (2017). On the features of the application of the concept of «immoral offense» in termination of the employment contract at the initiative of the owner or the authority authorized by him under P. 3 of Art. 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine. The Journal of G. S. Scovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University. Series: Law, 26, 5–16.

Puzyrnyі, V. F. (2018). Termination of an employment agreement in case of an amoral offense commitment by an employee. Actual Problems of Juridical Science and Practice, 1(4), 63–67.

Shvets, N. M. (2011). Legal aspects of discharge of employee for amoral misconduct. Problems of Legality, 113, 83–91.

Tykhonovych, L. A. (2013). Immorality and lawful consequences of its accomplishment. Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, 23(2), 44–48.

Tyshchenko, O. V. (2002). Legal problems of conclusion, alteration and discharge of a laboure contract with pedagogical employees of secondary schools in Ukraine [Candidate dissertation, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev].

Vailenko, H. O. (2018). Some problems of the understanding of general social and specially legal disciplines to determine the salary of the labor contract in paragraph 3 of st. 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine. The Journal of G. S. Scovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical University. Series: Law, 29, 151–156.

Zelenko, I. P. (2019). Valuable concepts in law: functional purpose. Scientific Notes. Series: Law, 7, 10–13.

Published
2022-01-13
How to Cite
Sychova, V. V. (2022) “Immoral misdemeanor incompatible with the continuation of work as a ground for termination of the employment contract at the initiative of the owner or authorized body”, Law and Safety, 83(4), pp. 118-127. doi: 10.32631/pb.2021.4.12.