Summary

Of redundancy on economic grounds, the termination of an employment contract due to a lay-off is contested most often. As the employer must evaluate work-related indicators upon laying off employees, the comparison and proving of such indicators, as well as the performance of the duty to offer another job and proving that the lay-off was effected due to the reorganisation of production or work give rise to a lot of disputes in practice. The article examines the judicial practice in the above-mentioned matters and addresses the positions adopted in the judicial practice in issues regarding the determination of the person to be laid off and compliance with the duty to offer another job. On resolving disputes resulting from lay-offs, the courts favour the position that in order to determine the preferential right of an employee to retain his or her job, the employer must compare employees holding similar positions within the limits of the enterprise (business entity). Such comparison is mandatory regardless of the grounds for redundancy. Also, the courts have found that the duty to offer a suitable job to a redundant employee entails the offering of another job in all the enterprises of the company. The provision of the possibility to participate in a competition does not constitute compliance with the duty to offer another job. In offering another job, the employer must inform the employee that the latter’s employment contract is terminated if he or she refuses the other job offered. Based on the judicial practice, a lay-off is illegal if immediately prior to the lay-off new positions were created and filled by new employees although the employees laid off could have been transferred to such positions. The employer is not required to offer another job which requires the organisation of retraining or in-service training for the employee.