Article 237 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Compensation for moral damage caused to an employee (current version)

Reasons for providing compensation

Only an officially registered employee has the right to receive compensation payment. Also, when concluding an employment contract, it is necessary to pay attention to the presence of clauses obliging the management of the enterprise to pay wages on time and in full and to provide the specialist with a workplace that meets all production standards.

But if, nevertheless, the employee believes that due to the fault of the employer he suffers moral damage, then the legislation allows him to exercise the right to receive appropriate compensation. What documents will be required for this, as well as what amount of payment it is advisable to claim, examples of calculations and comments to Art. 237 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation of 2020.

Judicial practice shows that the most common reasons for proceedings are:

• non-payment or delay in payment of wages;
• dismissal without legal grounds;
• sexual harassment;
• various discriminations;
• psychological abuse;
• violation by the employer of requirements for working conditions;
• failure by the management of the organization to comply with collective agreements.

If an employee’s rights are violated, then he needs to defend them. If a situation arises that is not specified in the employment contract, the employee has the right to seek judicial protection of his interests.

https://youtu.be/VmE7fBLstwI

Wrongful dismissal

Sometimes employers fire employees illegally, that is, the employment contract is terminated for personal reasons and without sufficient grounds provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation. It is difficult to determine exactly whether termination of cooperation is legal or not. The main reasons for the legal termination of a contract at the initiative of the employer are:

1. Failure by an employee to fulfill official duties.
2. Showing up to work drunk.
3. Absenteeism and tardiness without good reason.
4. Violations of the employment agreement.
5. Theft and theft.

A complete list of reasons for dismissal at the request of the employer is established in the articles of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. When an employer, through his actions, forces an employee to resign from the organization of his own free will, the citizen needs to collect evidence of this and contact the State Labor Inspectorate.

Work injury

At every enterprise, the manager is responsible for the health and safety of workers. His responsibilities include providing employees with decent working conditions. If an injury occurs during the work process, an employee may require the employer to pay the following costs:

• material damage resulting from loss of ability to work;
• medical treatment expenses;
• harm caused to an employee due to the employer’s failure to comply with safety regulations.

In order for the court to oblige the management of the organization to compensate the victim for all expenses and pay for the damage suffered by him, the employee must have documents confirming the employer’s guilt.

But if the specialist’s health was damaged due to a source of increased danger, then the lawsuit will not be approved, since the injury is not related to the intent of third parties.

Occupational Illness

Moral damage from an occupational disease is expressed in the presence at the employee’s workplace of temporary or permanent negative factors associated with production activities that affect his health. Such diseases are divided into chronic and acute forms. Damage caused to the employee’s health is compensated in the form of a one-time insurance payment or temporary disability benefit.

Personnel claims related to occupational diseases are the most difficult for employers to dispute. This is due to the following reasons:

1. Such cases do not have a statute of limitations, which allows the victim to seek legal protection at any time after the discovery of a chronic or acute occupational disease.
2. The employer is responsible for reimbursing the employee for all financial costs. That is, the manager must pay the specialist temporary disability benefits, as well as compensate for the costs of subsequent rehabilitation.

Russian legislation stipulates that the management of an enterprise that has not provided workers with safe working conditions is obliged to compensate for moral damage caused to personnel in the process of production activities. Such compensation is considered to be the payment of all payments established by law.

Delay of salary

Most often, judicial authorities deal with cases related to compensation for moral damage caused to employees and delays in wages. To resolve the issue in court, the employee must file a claim within three months from the date of delay in payment. In this case, damage to moral health is expressed as:

• psychological problems;
• cancellation of travel, vacation;
• worries due to the lack of funds necessary to provide for the living needs of the family.

To prove the existence of moral damage to an employee, it is necessary to provide evidence, for example, prescriptions and receipts for the purchase of medicines, documents on trip cancellation.

It should be borne in mind that the employer will justify his actions, and therefore the court will make a decision, taking into account the information received from both parties to the process.

Police and military

Categories of citizens such as military personnel and police officers have certain privileges in the field of protecting personal rights and interests.
This situation is due to the fact that their activities are regulated not only by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, but also by several federal laws. Moral damage caused to such an employee according to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation must be compensated if, in the process of performing official duties, the citizen received:

• injuries;
• contusions;
• wounds and injuries;
• occupational diseases.

Pensioners who are former police officers have the right to compensation for damage to moral health. In order to receive the compensation required by law, these citizens must submit to the judicial authority documentary evidence that they suffered moral suffering as a result of performing their official duty.

Judicial practice on compensation for moral damage to employees

In this section, we will consider the practical aspects of applying the rules on compensation for moral damage to workers. Based on their analysis, we will get a picture of what the employer expects if an employee asks to compensate for moral damage.

The statute of limitations for labor disputes is very short, and employees often miss them, which is a saving straw for the employer. As a rule, courts apply statutes of limitations to claims for compensation for moral damage if this damage was caused through a violation of the property rights of employees.

A typical example is the court decision discussed below.

We invite you to familiarize yourself with the Rules for living in a communal apartment: how to live in a communal apartment according to the law || What to do if a room in a communal apartment is rented out without consent

The appeal ruling of the Stavropol Regional Court dated January 28, 2014 in case No. 33-361/14 states the following: by virtue of paragraph. 2 paragraph 7 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 20, 1994 No. 10 “Some issues of application of legislation on compensation for moral damage” in the case where the claim for compensation for moral damage arises from a violation of property or other rights, for the protection of which the law has established a limitation period or the deadline for going to court (for example, the time limits established by Article 392 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation for going to court for resolution of an individual labor dispute), such a requirement is subject to the statute of limitations or going to court established by law for the protection of rights, the violation of which resulted in moral harm.

Since plaintiffs, as a rule, associate moral damage with a violation of their property rights, the statute of limitations for collecting compensation for moral damage is calculated within the limitation period for property claims (collection of wages, severance pay, etc.).

At the same time, in accordance with Art. 208 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the limitation period does not apply to claims for the protection of personal non-property rights and other intangible benefits, except in cases provided for by law. Thus, if moral damage arose as a result, for example, of discrimination, the issuance of illegal orders, etc., the claim for compensation does not apply to the limitation period.

It should be noted here that plaintiffs in one lawsuit usually make several demands, both property and non-property: for recognition of illegal dismissal, reinstatement, recovery of earnings during forced absence, compensation for moral damage in connection with violations of their rights. And often the courts, if the statute of limitations has passed for all the main claims, do not bother to separate out from these claims those that are non-property and award to the plaintiff on the basis of Art. 208 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, that part of moral damage that is associated specifically with non-property claims.

However, there are attempts by the court to take a flexible approach and recover moral damages if among the plaintiff’s main claims there were non-property ones related to his intangible benefits.

An example is the decision of the Verkh-Isetsky District Court of Yekaterinburg dated March 31, 2011 in case No. 2-1246/2011, in which the court considered that the statute of limitations for claims for compensation for moral damage is three years, which clearly does not correspond to the norm of Art. 208 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (there is no limitation period).

And there is a completely strange judicial practice regarding the limitation period.

The cassation ruling of the St. Petersburg City Court dated February 24, 2011 No. 33-2695/2011 overturned the decision of the district court, in which the plaintiff was denied his claims, including compensation for moral damage, due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for material claims ( about collecting wages, etc.). The cassation court recovered in favor of the plaintiff compensation for moral damage incurred in connection with the violation of the plaintiff’s property rights, pointing out that the statute of limitations for labor disputes is not applicable to this claim by virtue of Art. 208 Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

As you can see, the court clearly ignored the explanation given in paragraph 7 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 20, 1994 No. 10.

Thus, in most cases, the employer is protected by the statute of limitations and the plaintiffs’ claims for compensation for moral damage.

Compensation may also be recovered if the employer voluntarily fulfills the claims.

The appeal ruling of the Pskov Regional Court dated December 24, 2013 in case No. 33-2068/2013 considered a situation in which a disciplinary sanction was wrongfully imposed on the plaintiff. During the trial, the defendant canceled his order, but the plaintiff continued to insist on compensation for moral damage that was caused by the illegal issuance of the order. And this claim of the plaintiff was satisfied by the court, since the cancellation of an illegal order against the plaintiff does not cancel the fact that moral harm was caused to him during the existence of this order.

Thus, even the voluntary elimination by the employer of violations committed against the employee does not fully relieve him of the obligation to compensate for moral damage. The court can only take into account this behavior of the employer as the degree of guilt when establishing the amount of compensation.

Let's consider two court cases in which the question of reducing the amount of compensation for moral damage was raised.

The appeal ruling of the Tomsk Regional Court dated November 19, 2013 in case No. 33-3362/2013 describes a situation where compensation for moral damage was recovered from the employer for delayed payment of wages. The defendant, appealing the decision of the first instance, argued about his deplorable financial situation: the company was in a state of bankruptcy. But even the argument that the recovery of, in the defendant’s opinion, excessive compensation for moral damage may affect the rights of other workers who filed similar claims for recovery of wages, did not shake the position of the appeal court, which did not reduce the amount of compensation.

In another judicial act - the cassation ruling of the Supreme Court of the Udmurt Republic dated 08/11/2010 in case No. 33-2625 - the defendant asked to cancel the district court's decision to recover compensation for moral damage. The court did not overturn the decision completely, but reduced the amount of compensation for moral damage, citing general rules on the principles for determining the amount of moral damage and without providing specific arguments about the reasons for its reduction.

Of course, you can appeal the amount of moral damage if the employer believes it is too high, but it is likely that the court in this case will be guided solely by its own inner conviction.

Keep in mind: practice in labor disputes knows cases of joint recovery of moral damage.

An employee had an accident during construction work. The court of first instance recovered compensation for moral damage jointly (based on Article 1080 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) from the employer and from the owner of the source of increased danger (excavator), through which harm was caused to the plaintiff’s health.

The cassation court considered it incorrect to collect moral damages from the defendants jointly and severally, since the grounds for liability to the plaintiff are different. The employer must compensate for moral damage due to the fact that he did not provide safe working conditions, and the owner of the source of increased danger - by virtue of Art. 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Therefore, the cassation instance recovered compensation for moral damage from each of the defendants separately (ruling of the Chelyabinsk Regional Court dated December 5, 2011 in case No. 33-12475/2011).

We invite you to familiarize yourself with working with the law on consumer protection

This is a particularly interesting case, since sometimes employers come up with ideas to add the dismissed employee to the “black list”, provide information about him to the new employer, etc. However, even those actions of the employer that did not have such malicious intent, but contributed to the disclosure of personal data of a former employee, can serve as the basis for compensation for moral damage.

In the cassation ruling of the Penza Regional Court dated September 13, 2011 No. 33-2371, the plaintiff’s demand for compensation for moral damage caused, in particular, by the fact that the defendant handed over the plaintiff’s disability certificate to a third party, thus disclosing personal data about her health.

In another judicial act - the cassation ruling of the Supreme Court of the Udmurt Republic dated September 11, 2010 in case No. 33-2625 - the following case was considered. After the employee was dismissed, his photograph and passport information were posted at the entrance of the enterprise. The plaintiff said that due to non-compliance with the confidentiality regime of his personal data, clients of the company called him and asked if he was a criminal. The court of first instance awarded compensation for moral damage in the amount of 5,000 rubles, and the cassation reduced it to 2,000 rubles. The courts unequivocally recognized the fact of causing moral damage.

Let us recall that compensation for moral damage can be regulated by agreement of the parties to the employment contract, and if an agreement is not reached, then by the court (Article 237 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). There are many legal disputes regarding the application of this rule. Let's give a few examples.

In the appeal ruling of the judicial panel for civil cases of the Murmansk Regional Court dated November 20, 2013 in case No. 33-3897, the court recovered an amount of compensation for moral damage greater than that provided for by the agreement of the parties. In this case, the plaintiff, working at an enterprise with hazardous conditions, received an occupational chronic disease, which caused him moral damage. Moreover, before the disease was identified, an agreement was concluded between the plaintiff and the employer on the amount of compensation for moral damage with reference to the Regulations on Remuneration, which contained the procedure for calculating the amount of compensation for moral damage depending on the percentage of loss of professional ability. However, after diagnosis and termination of employment, the plaintiff was not paid compensation in accordance with the agreement. The court awarded compensation for moral damage in a larger amount than was provided for in the agreement, since it considered that in this case a dispute arose regarding the amount of compensation that the defendant did not voluntarily pay. The court motivated the increased recovery of compensation compared to the agreement by the fact that at the date of conclusion of the agreement the plaintiff was not yet aware of the extent of the harm caused to his health, and he could not fully assess the proportionality of the compensation.

A similar case is described in the appeal ruling of the Kemerovo Regional Court dated June 18, 2013 in case No. 33-5284. A collective agreement was concluded between the defendant and his employees on the procedure for compensation for moral damage in the event of loss of ability to work. The plaintiff suffered a work injury, was fired for health reasons, and then filed a lawsuit for compensation for moral damage.

The court noted that the employer did not pay the compensation voluntarily established by the collective agreement, and did not take into account the defendant’s objections that the plaintiff did not apply for compensation. The employer's arguments that the amount of compensation was established by a collective agreement, and the compensation for moral damage collected by the first instance did not meet the requirements of reasonableness and fairness, also did not help change the court's decision in the cassation instance.

In the appeal ruling of the Rostov Regional Court dated May 14, 2012 in case No. 33-5175, the plaintiff asked to recover an additional payment of compensation for moral damage, since, in his opinion, it was not calculated in accordance with the provisions of the collective agreement in the coal industry. The plaintiff also demanded to pay him an additional 30,000 rubles, already beyond the limits established by the contract.

The court satisfied the plaintiff’s demands, collecting in his favor both the underpayment of compensation for moral damage under the industry agreement, and an additional 30,000 rubles, since the plaintiff considered additional compensation to be appropriate to the degree of moral damage he suffered. The court indicated that since a dispute arose about compensation for moral damage, the right to determine its amount belongs to the court, and the court has the right to establish the amount of compensation at its discretion, including higher than that provided for by the industry agreement or collective agreement.

Drawing up a statement of claim

The amount of compensation is established within the framework of a written agreement concluded by the parties, but only if such a clause is specified in the employment contract. If the employee believes that the payment does not cover the damage caused to him, then he has the right to file a claim in court. The claim must include the following items:

• basic information about the parties to the dispute;
• full name of the judicial institution;
• a summary of the plaintiff's claims;
• request for satisfaction of the claim;
• full list of attached documentation.

The amount of compensation payment is determined by the court after careful examination of all the evidence presented during the trial.

To appeal to a judicial authority for compensation for moral damage in accordance with Art. 237 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, an employee is given no more than three months. Only pregnant women can file a claim later than this deadline.

Evidence of damage

You can receive the required compensation either by agreeing with the employer or by going to court.
The employer will pay the benefit voluntarily if such a condition is established in the provisions of the employment contract. Otherwise, the employee will have to resort to judicial protection of his interests. It must be borne in mind that damage is best supported by documents, since the fact of its occurrence is obvious only if the employer violates the labor rights of a specialist. If such a violation on the part of the employer existed, then the citizen experienced psychological discomfort that could lead to deterioration in health. But when the suffering was purely moral, it is much more difficult to prove the fact of moral damage.

The employee can confirm his words with the help of medical reports. For example, under psychological pressure from management or colleagues, a specialist could experience stress and insomnia. The applicant's relatives and friends can testify to this in court. If, due to the employer’s guilty actions, the employee’s chronic diseases have worsened, then all prescriptions, receipts and medical documents must be submitted to the court.

If an employee proves that his health has deteriorated due to poor working conditions, then his claims will certainly be satisfied.

Thus, evidence supporting the plaintiff’s position may be:

• medical certificates about deterioration of health;
• receipts for the purchase of medicines;
• recipes;
• certificates from medical institutions about the health status of family members if the employee is the sole breadwinner;
• written and oral testimonies from colleagues, friends and relatives.

https://youtu.be/Y_4wUPbpQu4

The legislation considers compensation for moral damage as an independent requirement and does not depend on repayment of damage to property. Thus, not only the monetary costs of treatment, but also psychological discomfort are subject to compensation.

Payment amount

Judicial practice suggests that an employee will not be able to receive a large amount of compensation for moral damage. Most often, compensation amounts to several thousand rubles. Only in exceptional cases, when harm is caused to the life and ability of an employee, are payments increased. When considering the case, all circumstances affecting the amount of compensation must be taken into account:

• the degree of involvement of the employer in causing the damage;
• what is the harm?
• requirements of reasonableness and fairness;
• circumstances of the damage.

There is no pre-approved amount of compensation, since all cases are considered in court strictly individually.
There are also no established restrictions on the amount of payment. But it should be noted that often the amount requested by the plaintiff is reduced. In some cases, during the performance of work duties, the moral health of employees of organizations is damaged. Most often this is expressed in moral suffering due to delayed wages and unacceptable working conditions.

Russian legislation gives citizens the right to recover compensation for such damage from their employer. To do this, you must either enter into a payment agreement with the employer or file a claim in court.

Conditions necessary for compensation for moral damage

It is possible to talk about compensation for moral damage if there is a simultaneous set of conditions (Article 233 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). Firstly, the existence of suffering itself, that is, moral harm, is necessary. Secondly, moral damage caused to the employee by unlawful actions on the part of the harm-doer is compensated. Third, there is a causal link between the harm and the illegal act. Fourthly, the guilt of the perpetrator must be proven.

In certain cases, an employer can be held liable without fault. This occurs in situations where harm to the employee was caused by a source of increased danger belonging to the employer, or if the harm occurred through the dissemination of information discrediting honor, dignity and business reputation.