Hurriyet.com.tr/INTERNATIONAL NEWS
The concept of ‘remote working’, which has become well established in our lives after the coronavirus epidemic, continues to radically change the habits related to the workplace and working conditions. However, the rules about this new way of working that are not in place yet can create troublesome situations from time to time. The last example of this happened on the Netherlands-Florida line…
Dutch court awarded 73,000 for wrongful termination of a remote employee of a Florida-based company. dollar He decided he was in debt.
The employee worked remotely from the Netherlands for Chetu, a US software company. According to media details, the company told the employee that he had to keep his webcam on all day for a virtual training program on August 23.
“I DON’T WANT TO BE WATCHED 9 HOURS A DAY”
In response, the employee told Chetu that he “did not feel comfortable being watched by a camera for 9 hours a day,” as detailed in court documents submitted in the Netherlands, where the case was heard. “This is a violation of my private life and it really bothers me,” he told the company, according to a translation of Dutch court documents in the NL Times report. ‘This is why my camera isn’t on.’
class=”medianet-inline-adv”>
The employee, who was not named in the lawsuit, noted that he was already able to monitor the company’s activities from his laptop and also shared his screen.
NO DIFFERENCE FROM THE OFFICE?
But another employee at Chetu said that, according to court documents, the requirement for employees to keep their webcams on is “no different” than when an employee is seen by everyone in a physical office all day.
Three days later, on August 26, the virtual worker was fired for ‘refuse to work’ and ‘disobedience’, according to court documents.
The fired employee took Chetu to court in the Netherlands, where he was based, saying that he had not been given an urgent reason to “justify the immediate dismissal” and that the company’s request to keep his webcam on was a violation of his privacy rights.
COURT: NOT LEGALLY APPLIED
The Dutch court sided with the employee in its decision last week, saying the dismissal was ‘not legally valid’. The court said, ‘The employer did not sufficiently explain the reasons for the dismissal’ and added the following sentence to its decision: Moreover, there is no evidence that he refused to work and there is no reasonable instruction regarding it.
class=”medianet-inline-adv”>
The court added that leaving an employee’s camera on is against the employee’s right to respect for private life. That decision referred to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which in the case said it was ‘subject to strict conditions for observing workers’.
INTERVENTION IN PRIVATE LIFE!
In addition, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in a case dated 2017 that ‘the video surveillance of an employee, whether confidentially or not, should be considered as an important interference in the employee’s private life’, was also influential in the decision made in this case.
Experts reviewing the matter concluded that if the Dutch employee was working in Florida or any city in the US, the employee would most likely be subject to other rights-of-employment laws at any time, for any reason, including possibly refusing to keep the webcam working at all times. He stated that he could be forced to resign or be fired.
TOTAL 73 THOUSAND DOLLARS COMPENSATION
class=”medianet-inline-adv”>
However, the Dutch court ruled that Chetu must pay the former employee $48,500 in fair compensation, $2,600 in unpaid wages, $8,126 in wrongful termination and unpaid vacation pay.
It is not yet clear whether there is an appeal process for such a decision.
.