In the most common hypothesis, the employer invites the employee to his office, where he invites him to sign a leave application by mutual agreement or on his own initiative. If the employee refuses, the employer motivates him, threatening him that if he does not sign the application for leaving, he will be fired disciplinarily. So, worried about his future job opportunities in disciplinary dismissal, the employee rushes to sign. Make sure to book an appointment now.

However, once the signature is affixed, the worker begins to wonder if he or she has entered it correctly. Unfortunately, only then did he seek legal assistance. But in most such cases, and given the lack of witnesses, the defense becomes extremely difficult.

Why do employers use the layoff method when they want to terminate an employee’s employment?

The legal framework for employment is extremely strict, and the worker enjoys special protection. This is because, although the employment relationship is civil and therefore equal, the legislator considers that the worker is in an economically weaker position than his employer and therefore needs greater safeguards against abuse his vulnerable position. Therefore, the grounds for termination of employment at the initiative of the employer are exhaustively listed. In addition, in most cases, the employer owes a notice of at least 30 days. On the other hand, if the employer does not wish to comply with the period of notice, he owes the worker compensation in the amount of the gross monthly remuneration. Too often, however, employers are reluctant to pay benefits, nor are they inclined to go through the cumbersome redundancy process, which is why they resort to the threat of dismissal.

In these cases, unscrupulous employers rely precisely on the economically weaker position of the employee. They also take advantage of the fact that workers are often unaware of their labor rights.

So, by sending a threat of dismissal, employers save time from carrying out statutory procedures for termination of employment. They also need to pay compensation for late notice, as well as potential problems with the National Revenue Agency.

What are the consequences for the worker who has signed a threat of leaving?

Logically, in the first place, the worker remains surprisingly unemployed and hence without income. In principle, it is for this reason that the law provides that, in the event of a sudden termination of an employment contract (i.e., if the notice period is not respected, when required), the employee is paid compensation. This benefit serves as a guarantee that the worker will not be left without any means of subsistence next month. On the other hand, notice plays the role of a ‘warning’ for the worker to seek a new job.

Second, but not less important, for a signatory to a threat of leaving, there are also social security consequences. In the case of registration as an unemployed person, the worker will receive the minimum amount of unemployment benefit. If, of course, he has the necessary length of service to receive such compensation.

Find us on Tupalo and HotFrog.