0 8000 12 11

FREE Hotline to report human rights violations

The Appeal Court found groundless the judgment of the First Instance Court

September 10, 2021

Labor Rights | Activities | Legal Support | Legal Support | Publications | News

On 20 July 2021, the RA Civil Appeal Court overturned  the judgment of the RA Tavush Region General Jurisdiction Court and referred the case to be examined anew, as the First Instance Court made a judgment  without examining the circumstances that were the basis of the appeal.

 

The conclusion made as a result of checks conducted by the inspectorate during January 2014-September 2018 confirmed  that the school where A.G. works has 12 classes, one of which is composite, i.e., includes two grades. Therefore, during that period, A.G. was supposed to be remunerated for one full-time workload, and according to the employment contract, he was also supposed to be paid additional amount of money in line with the established military rate: as he has a military rank of senior lieutenant, the rate is AMD 5,740.

 

Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor advocate Arayik Zalyan undertook protection of A.G.’s rights and applied to the Court claiming to levy the unpaid salary and the penalty imposed. The Court of First Instance refused the claim, and an appeal was filed. 

 

The Appeal Court recorded that the Court of First Instance did not examine the plaintiff’s military rank issue, as a result of which the Appeal Court could not assess how substantiated that ground is. 

 

The Appeal Court overturned the claim - the parts regarding refusal of military rank additional payment and levying the relevant penalty - and referred it to the Court of First Instance for a new examination.

 

A.G.’s employment contract does not specify the amount of the main salary, rather, clause 4.1. of the contract specifies that the military instructor is provided with remuneration according to the rate established by that academic year’s lessons and also additional payment.

 

Moreover, the overall salary paid for January 2014 - January 2018 does not specify the amount of the main salary as compared to September 2018.

 

The military rank additional payment was included in the salary of AMD 84.164 in 2015-2017, of which the main salary and the additional payment are not specified for that position. At the same time, in the staff list of 20.08.2014, the staff unit of the teacher of Initial Military Preparation and Safe Living was set as full-time with the salary of AMD 110.000, and a salary of AMD 3939 - and not AMD 5740 - was set for the title of military instructor. 

 

The Appeal Court recorded that the above-mentioned facts do not confirm what the main salary is for A.G. as a teacher of Initial Military Preparation and Safe Living. And it is not possible to decide which part of AMD 84.164 salary is A.G.’s main salary and which part is the rank additional payment and to find out the amount of the factual additional payment provided to A.G. 

 

Based on this, on 20 July 2021, the Appeal Court overturned the judgment of RA Tavush Region General Jurisdiction Court and sent that part of the case to be examined anew.

 

It should be mentioned that the additional payment provided to an employee is considered an additional salary, which is a payment calculated in relation to the basic salary for his qualification, including rank. Therefore, in order to find out the fact of additional payment, it is necessary to specify what the basic salary of the employee is. 

 

views: 68

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feedback

Select the relevant connection

  • Font size
    A A A
  • Font
    arial verdana tahoma
  • Thickness
    regular light bold
  • Spacing
    1px 2px 3px
  • Color scheme
    Black on a white background White on a black background
  • Background color
  • Text color