Sicil, 2023/I Sayi 48: Sayfa 145-165
Dr. Ögr. Üyesi Ayça IZMIRLIOGLU
Izmir Demokrasi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Is ve Sosyal Güvenlik Hukuku Anabilim Dali
Toplum yararina programlar (TYP’ler) Türkiye Is Kurumu tarafindan yürütülen temel faaliyetler arasinda yer almaktadir. Toplum yararina programlarin hedefi, issiz bireylerin çalisma aliskanlik ve disiplininden uzaklasmalarini engellemek ve bu kisilere geçici gelir destegi saglamaktir. Yargitay kararlarina konu oldugu üzere toplum yararina program kapsaminda is görme ediminin yerine getirildigi kamu kurumu ile katilimci arasinda is iliskisi kurulmakta ve katilimci isçi olarak kabul edilmektedir. Hâl böyle olunca TYP katilimcisi ile yüklenici (hizmet saglayici) arasinda yapilan sözlesme is sözlesmesi olarak nitelendirilmektedir. Taraflarin ve özellikle toplum yararina programlar kapsaminda geçici süre ile çalisan isçilerin kidem tazminati ile sair tazminat ve alacaklari ile ise iade talep haklarinin bulunup bulunmadigi bakimindan ise öncelikle çalismamizin konusunu olusturmakta olan toplum yararina program kapsaminda yapilan is sözlesmelerinin türünün tayin edilmesi önem arz etmektedir. Yargitay 9. Hukuk Dairesi’nin güncel bir kararina toplum yararina program katilimcisinin kidem ve ihbar tazminati talebi ile açtigi dava konu olmus ve Yüksek Mahkeme toplum yararina program kapsaminda çalisan katilimcilarin isçi statüsünde olduguna, taraflar arasinda is sözlesmesi bagitlandigina ve sözlesmenin belirli süreli is sözlesmesi olarak kabulünün gerektigine karar vermistir. Çalismamizda, toplum yararina programlar kapsaminda yapilan is sözlesmelerinin türü; belirli süreli ve belirsiz süreli is sözlesmesi ayriminin ölçütleri, toplum yararina programlarin özellikleri ve TYP’ye iliskin mevzuat degisiklikleri incelenecektir. Ayni zamanda Yüksek Mahkeme kararina konu isin temizlik isi olmasindan hareketle, temizlik isinin niteligi itibariyle belirli süreli is sözlesmesine konu olup olamayacagi hususu tartisilarak konu yargi kararlari isiginda degerlendirilmeye çalisilacaktir.
Toplum yararına program, iş sözleşmesi, belirli süreli iş sözleşmesi, temizlik işi.
Public workfare programmes are among the main activities carried out by the Turkish Employment Agency. The aim of the the public workfare programme is to prevent unemployed individuals from moving away from their working habits and discipline and to provide temporary income support to these people. As the subject of the Supreme Court decisions, an employment relationship is established between the public institution where the act of working for the public workfare programmeis fulfilled and the employee, and the unemployed individual is accepted as a worker. As such, the contract concluded between the parties is considered as an employment contract. It is important to determine the type of employment contracts made within the scope of the program for the public workfare programme which is the subject of our study, in terms of whether the parties and especially the workers working temporarily within the scope of the programs for the public workfare programme have the right to demand severance pay and other compensation and receivables and reemployment. In a recent decision of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, it became the subject of a lawsuit filed by the program participant employee demanding severance and notice pay, and the Supreme Court decided that the contract of the workers working within the scope of the public workfare programme should be accepted as a fixed-term employment contract. In our study, the type of employment contracts made within the scope of programs for the public workfare programme; by examining the criteria of the distinction between fixed-term and indefinite-term employment contracts, the characteristics of programs for the public workfare programme and the legislative changes regarding programs for the public workfare programme And also by discussing whether the cleaning work can be subject to a fixed-term employment contract due to its nature, considering that the work subject to the Supreme Court’s decision, cleaning work tried to be evaluated in the light of judicial decisions.
Public workfare programme, employment contract, fixed-term employment contract, cleaning work.