Homel court turns down human rights defender’s claim against employer

2014 2014-01-31T17:14:00+0300 2014-02-01T15:14:52+0300 en http://spring96.org/files/images/sources/paplauny_ablsud.jpg The Human Rights Center “Viasna” The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
Human rights defender Anatol Paplauny outside the Homel Regional Court building

Human rights defender Anatol Paplauny outside the Homel Regional Court building

The Court of Homel’s Chyhunachny district turned down a claim by local human rights defender Anatol Paplauny, who was dismissed from work, despite alleged violations of labor rights found by the State Labor Inspectorate. A decision, which has not yet entered into force, was announced on January 29 by judge Vital Kozyrau.

Anatol Paplauny appealed to the state labor inspection to report on systematic violations of the terms of payment of wages by the employer. The government authority confirmed the allegations, stressing the employee’s right to dismissal at his request - in this case, the employer must pay to the dismissed three additional average monthly payments.

Having the carte blanche, Mr. Paplauny did not wait for the expiry of a dismissal notice, and demanded the dismissal at his own request. The employer refused to grant the request, then the activist went to court.

"The company’s managers refused to recognize the authority of the labor inspection, and now I see that it is not an authority for this Court, either. According to Article 41 of the Labor Code, in the case of violations of the employer's rights the latter has the right to demand a dismissal. The Labor Inspectorate says there are violations – and the Court refuses to recognize its findings," says Mr. Paplauny.

Representative of the employer refused to comment on the circumstances of the case.

Leanid Sudalenka, legal inspector of the independent trade union of radio industry in Homel region, who represented the worker in court and won more than a dozen cases of this kind, says he does not remember such treatment of the court towards a public authority.

"After reading the motivational part of the court's decision I can say more, but it is now obvious that the court actually questioned the conclusions of the Homel regional office of the State Labor Inspectorate of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection. The answer to this question will be found in an appeal to the Regional Court,” sums up the lawyer.