Blog » 4 MUST-KNOWS ABOUT UNLAWFUL RESIGNATION IN HUNGARY
4 MUST-KNOWS ABOUT UNLAWFUL RESIGNATION IN HUNGARY
02 May 2017
Recently, more and more clients complain about employees who are resigning orally or without giving the necessary notice period. Unlawful resignation causes uncertainties, inconvenience or in the worst case, serious damages to the employer. In this short article, we collected the four must-knows about unlawful employee resignation in Hungary.
1. Most common forms
It happens often that the employee goes to the HR department and simply says he is resigning. Although, in several countries an oral resignation is valid, in Hungary the resignation of the employee requires written form.
Another common problem is that the employee resigns “effective immediately” completely forgetting about his notice period. In Hungary, a 30 days’ notice period is provided by the law and a termination without notice period is only possible during the probation period.
Many do not know that in case the employee fails to transfer his job-related tasks or the tools of the employer he is possessing counts as unlawful termination.
2. Prevention by education
We have experienced that in many cases, the root of the problem is that employees are not familiar with their obligations regarding resignation. Often, employees rely on questionable sources such as information of webpages or other colleagues.
You can avoid these misunderstandings if you educate your employees about the procedure of termination at your company. You may do it in the employee handbook or by setting up a specific internal policy about the termination rules. The point is to do it in a form which ensures that in one hand, every employee receives the same information and on the other, you can impose sanctions if the employee does not comply with the rules regarding resignation.
The information package needs to contain that in case the employee resigns unlawfully, he shall bear serious financial consequences.
3. To-dos when it becomes reality
Despite your best efforts, it can happen that on a sunshiny day your employee says to you that he is resigning and this is his last day at the workplace. If the employee is replaceable, the best you can do is to sign a mutual agreement about the termination and forget the employee as soon as possible.
A little more complicated is the situation if you need the employee to work since you do not have other staff yet to replace him. In this case, you should inform the employee in writing that his resignation will only be accepted with the applicable notice period and that he is obliged to work during the notice period.
It is a good idea to highlight the financial consequences the employee will face if he fails to show up at the workplace during the notice period.
Although, the legal consequences of unlawful resignation are not so serious as the consequences of the wrongful termination by the employer, employees have some liability, too.
An employee who resigns unlawfully shall pay to the employer an amount equal to his salary for the notice period but maximally of 3 months’ absence fee. The employer is entitled to claim damages above this amount but in this case, he needs to prove that the employee caused damages.
What employers need to understand is that even when the employee resigns unlawfully, the employer cannot refuse to hand over the employment related documents of the employee (eg. his pink social security booklet) or the salary he has earned. It is nevertheless clear, that the unlawful act of the employee does not justify the non-compliance with the legal obligations by the employer.
IS THE JUDGE BIASED BECAUSE OF UNFAVOURABLE JUDGMENT IN OTHER CASE?
Can a judge be disqualified from deciding the legal dispute on the grounds of bias if he has delivered a judgment unfavourable to the plaintiff in another case? Can a court be biased if the plaintiff has "challenged" a previous decision of the court before the European Court of Human Rights? In this article, we answer these questions by analysing a recent judgment of the Hungarian Supreme Court.Read more »
CAN INCOMPATIBLE WORKPLACE BEHAVIOUR BE A GROUND FOR DISMISSAL IN HUNGARY?
Refusal of employer 's instructions, unjustified absence, intentional damage: some cases where the justification for dismissing an employee is relatively easy to determine. What happens, however, if the employee does not commit a severe breach of duty similar to the one above, but his or her colleagues consider him incompatible, with whom it is impossible to cooperate, or even afraid of him or her. Can dismissal be justified by behaviour that is incompatible with others and creates disharmony in the working environment? In our article, we seek the answer to this question in the light of Hungarian judicial practice.Read more »
CAN A JUDICIAL ERROR CREATE HUNGARIAN JURISDICTION DESPITE A PLACE OF PERFORMANCE ABROAD?
Can a defendant, domiciled abroad, be sued in Hungary under the Brussels I Regulation in the event of defective performance of an international sales contract if the place of performance is abroad? Can the jurisdiction of a Hungarian court be established based on the fact that the lower court expressly established its jurisdiction at the beginning of the litigation? How is the EXW clause to be interpreted within the meaning of the Brussels I Regulation? In our article, we analyse the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Hungary.Read more »