' ( )' - ' ' - NotaBene.ru
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Council of editors > Redaction > Peer-review process > Peer-review in 24 hours: How do we do it? > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Publication in 72 hours: How do we do it? > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

72 - !
. 72 DOI .
!
MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Legal Studies
Reference:

Particularities of the Procedure of Discharging a Head of an Organization As a Result of a Decision Made by a Property Owner of an Organization (the Case Study of Discharging a Municipal Official)

Osina Dina

Lecturer of Chair of Legal Theory and Comparative Law, Moscow State Institute of International relations (MGIMO-University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation

119454, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Prospekt Vernadskogo, 76

osina_d_m@mgimo.ru

 

 

DOI:

10.25136/2409-7136.2018.5.26177

Review date:

10-06-2018


Publish date:

12-06-2018


Abstract.

In her article Osina studies the case of discharging a municipal official and analyzes particular features of implementing Article 2 of Clause 278 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation that regulates the procedure of dismissing a head of an organization as a result of a decision made by a property owner of an organization. Base on the literal interpretation of the provisions of Article 278 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation, an employer does not have to explain grounds for his or her decision about discharge of an employee. However, actual situations are not so explicit. For this regard, the question about the balance between public and private interests and inadmissibility of abuse of rights and discrimination in the labour sphere based on discretionary authorities of a property owner is emerging full blown. These issues have been focused on by the researcher, as well as a few others. The research was carried out using such methods as analysis, structured system analysis, formal law method and comparative law method. As a result of her research, Osina makes a number of conclusions including the following: 1) an individual who is, on a pro forma basis, runs an organization but does not perform a particular labour function, cannot be regarded as a head for purposes set forth by Clause 2 of Article 278 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation; 2) a lack of legal clarity of Article 279 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation causes a situation when an employee may be punished twice for his or her disciplinary violation which, on the one hand, cannot be the cause of discharge but, on the other hand, creates grounds for denial of a compensation; 3) public interests of a municipal unit should be taken into account when discharging a head of an organization (municipal official). However, a comprehensive answer to the question about a particular manner public interests should be taken into account is provided neither by legislation nor judicial practice. 

Keywords: Discharge procedure, Constitutional Court, Municipal official, Public interests, Supreme Court, Nuisance, Discrimination, Emplyment contract, Labour code, Discharge of head
This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
SPS Konsul'tantPlyus soderzhit bolee 3 tysyach sudebnykh pozitsii, tak ili inache zatragivayushchikh p.2. st. 278 TK RF.
2.
Kovalev A. Kak uvolit' rukovoditelya organizatsii bez ego soglasiya? // Trudovoe pravo, 2015, 11.
3.
Punkt 4.1 postanovleniya KS RF ot 15.03.2005 3-P // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
4.
Ershova E.A. Trudovye pravootnosheniya gosudarstvennykh grazhdanskikh i munitsipal'nykh sluzhashchikh v Rossii. M.: Statut, 2008. 668 s. // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
5.
Radevich E.R.Dopolnitel'nye osnovaniya dlya rastorzheniya trudovykh otnoshenii s rukovoditelem organizatsii (Okonchanie) // Kadrovik. Trudovoe pravo dlya kadrovika, 2008, 8 // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
6.
Opredelenie Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 04.05.2012 18-V12-19.
7.
S uchetom polozhenii ch. 1 st. 15 i ch. 2 st. 57 Trudovogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
8.
Postanovlenie Plenuma ot 02.06.2015 21 O nekotorykh voprosakh, voznikayushchikh u sudov pri primenenii zakonodatel'stva reguliruyushchego trud rukovoditelya organizatsii i chlenov kollegial'nogo ispolnitel'nogo organa organizatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
9.
Reshenie Maloderbetovskogo raionnogo suda Respubliki Kalmykiya ot 22.07.2016 po delu 2-282/2016.
10.
Postanovlenie Plenuma VS RF ot 02.06.2015 21 O nekotorykh voprosakh, voznikshikh u sudov pri primenenii zakonodatel'stva, reguliruyushchego trud rukovoditelya organizatsii i chlenov kollegial'nogo ispolnitel'nogo organa organizatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
11.
Chast' 3 st. 41 Federal'nogo zakona ot 06.10.2003 131-FZ Ob obshchikh printsipakh organizatsii mestnogo samoupravleniya v Rossiiskoi Federatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
12.
Abzats 3 p.2 Postanovleniya Plenuma VS RF ot 02.06.2015 21 O nekotorykh voprosakh, voznikshikh u sudov pri primenenii zakonodatel'stva, reguliruyushchego trud rukovoditelya organizatsii i chlenov kollegial'nogo ispolnitel'nogo organa organizatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
13.
Opredelenie VS RF ot 04.06.2009 10-V09-5 // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
14.
Punkt 50 Postanovleniya Plenuma VS RF ot 17.03.2004 2 O primenenii sudami Rossiiskoi Federatsii Trudovogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
15.
Postanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF ot 15.03.2005 3-P // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
16.
Punkt 60 Postanovleniya Plenuma VS RF ot 17.03.2004 2 O primenenii sudami Rossiiskoi Federatsii Trudovogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
17.
Punkt 10 Postanovleniya Plenuma VS RF ot 02.06.2015 21 // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
18.
Kurevina L.V. Verkhovnyi Sud ob osobennostyakh truda rukovoditelya // Otdel kadrov gosudarstvennogo (munitsipal'nogo) uchrezhdeniya, 2015, 7 //SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
19.
Punkt 4.3 Postanovleniya KS RF ot 15.03.2005 3-P // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
20.
Punkt 9 Postanovleniya Plenuma VS RF ot 02.06.2015 21 O nekotorykh voprosakh, voznikshikh u sudov pri primenenii zakonodatel'stva, reguliruyushchego trud rukovoditelya organizatsii i chlenov kollegial'nogo ispolnitel'nogo organa organizatsii // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
21.
Punkt 3 Postanovleniya Plenuma VS RF ot 28.01.2014 1 O primenenii zakonodatel'stva, reguliruyushchego trud zhenshchin, lits s semeinymi obyazannostyami i nesovershennoletnikh // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
22.
Konventsiya Mezhdunarodnoi organizatsii truda 1958 g. 111 // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
23.
Opredelenie Sudebnoi kollegii po grazhdanskim delam Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 15.08.2008 46-V08-5, Apellyatsionnye opredeleniya Irkutskogo oblastnogo suda ot 17.11.2015 po delu 33-10695/15 i ot 06.09.2012 po delu 33-7355/2012, Verkhovnogo Suda Karachaevo-Cherkesskoi Respubliki ot 08.10.2014 po delu 33-1711/2014, Samarskogo oblastnogo suda ot 01.08.2012 po delu 33-7062/2012, Kassatsionnye opredeleniya Verkhovnogo Suda Respubliki Dagestan ot 07.09.2011 po delu 33-2428-2011 i Vologodskogo oblastnogo suda ot 26.05.2010 po delu 33-2070 // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus.
24.
Karabel'nikov B.R. Uvol'nenie rukovoditelya organizatsii po p. 2 st. 278 TK RF: pozitsiya Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii. S. 135.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website