Today, 04/13/2021, my fixed-term service contract will be terminated (part 1, art. | Kaliningrad

The state civil service and all its nuances are regulated by federal legislation, including Federal Law No. 79. Termination of a fixed-term service contract with a civil servant can only be carried out on the basis of established rules. Termination of an employment contract can occur even before the expiration of the contract, but for this to happen all conditions must be met.

Fixed-term service contract

The service contract is concluded for a period of one to 5 years. These terms are the minimum and maximum limits. The contract itself must be concluded with any person who enters government service, including a civilian position.

The contractual service basis is governed by the need for professionals who can perform the duties.

When starting work in a government agency, a person falls under special relations of an official-legal nature, which differ from normal labor practice.

After the conclusion of the contract, a status of special legal significance is established, which regulates the established rights, obligations, restrictions, as well as monetary reward, for example, compensation.

In fact, any civil servant receives additional social guarantees from the state.

It is important to know! The range of service-type relationships is very large, so it cannot be fully regulated by ordinary labor legislation. For this purpose, a service contract has been introduced, which fills the gaps.

By law, a service contract can be of two types: fixed-term and regular. A fixed-term contract is concluded strictly when the term cannot be indefinite. This applies to filling a position and other options of a similar nature.

Read on the topic: Peculiarities of bringing state and municipal employees to disciplinary liability

Lawyer Alla Kondratyeva

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation published a 56-page review of the practice of courts considering cases related to labor disputes between federal and municipal employees, approved by the Presidium.

The document analyzes the practice of courts considering cases over the past three years. The officials' claims related, among other things, to the recognition of illegal termination of a service contract, employment contract, dismissal from service on various grounds, disciplinary sanctions, transfer to another position, and collection of compensation for unused vacation.

The Supreme Court recognizes that the courts make mistakes in certain categories of disputes, and therefore, in order to eliminate them, it is necessary to pay attention to the legal positions on 17 problematic aspects of this category of cases. In particular, the Supreme Court indicates that concluding a fixed-term service contract with an official who has reached the age limit for civil service is the right of the employer’s representative, and not his responsibility.

D. filed a claim with the interdistrict Federal Tax Service to declare the order to terminate the service contract illegal, and asked to be reinstated in the state civil service in the previously filled position. In the statement, the woman indicated that her service contract was terminated in accordance with clause 4 of part 2 of art. 39 of the Federal Law “On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation” (a civil servant reaches the age limit for being in the civil service), but she has the right to extend her service life beyond the age limit for being in it and to conclude, in connection with this, a fixed-term service contract for a period of one year to five years.

In resolving the dispute and refusing to satisfy D.'s claims, the court proceeded from the following. At the time of termination of her service contract, D. had reached the age limit for civil service—60 years. At the same time, according to current legislation, concluding a fixed-term service contract with an employee who has reached the age limit for being in the state civil service is a right, not an obligation. Consequently, the defendant rightfully terminated the service contract with D.

Examining another case, the Supreme Court indicated that the termination of a fixed-term service contract concluded for the period of replacement of an absent employee who retains the position of the state civil service (Part 3 of Article 35 of the Federal Law “On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation”) is legal, subject to withdrawal for the service of that civil servant.

M. filed a claim with the department of foreign economic and international relations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation to declare her dismissal illegal. In justification, she indicated that she was illegally released from the position of the state civil service of the subject in the specified government agency and dismissed due to the expiration of the fixed-term service contract.

The court of first instance refused to satisfy M.'s demands, noting that the defendant had grounds for dismissing the plaintiff due to the expiration of a fixed-term service contract concluded for the period of replacing the absent civil servant I., who was on maternity leave. The court believed that I., whose position was retained, had joined the service.

The appeal, on the contrary, did not agree with this conclusion and overturned the previous decision, pointing out the discrepancy between the conclusions of the trial court and the circumstances of the case and the incorrect application of substantive law. So, in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 35 of the Federal Law “On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation”, a fixed-term service contract concluded for the period of replacement of an absent civil servant, for whom, in accordance with this federal law, a civil service position is retained, is terminated when this civil servant enters the service. In this case, the civil servant who filled the specified position is released from the civil service position being filled and is dismissed from service.

A fixed-term service contract with M. was concluded for the period of absence of civil servant I., who is on maternity leave. On August 21, 2014, the latter contacted the employer’s representative with a request to interrupt maternity leave from August 8. On the same day, the employer’s representative issued an order according to which I. should be considered to have begun performing her official duties. In addition, on August 21, I. contacted the employer’s representative with an application for maternity leave from August 8.

Considering that I.’s maternity leave was interrupted on August 8 and maternity leave was granted from the same day, and the commission of legally significant actions (the civil servant’s application with the relevant statements) was carried out later than the calendar date indicated as the date of entry into service , the appeal, in the opinion of the Supreme Court, came to the correct conclusion that I. did not actually go to work and, therefore, there are no grounds for terminating the service contract with M., releasing her from the position she was filling in the state civil service and dismissal from the civil service in connection with upon expiration of a fixed-term service contract.

The full text of the review of the practice of courts considering disputes related to the service of state civil servants and municipal employees can be found here.

Source - information portal Pravo.Ru

Related materials:

• The appeal examined judicial errors in cases arising from public legal relations
• The Supreme Court will summarize the practice on legal costs for the first time

Grounds for a fixed-term contract

The entire legal framework is regulated by Article 25 of Law No. 79-FZ. For any fixed-term contract that a civil servant enters into, there must be reasons that are listed:

• replacement of a person whose place and position is retained according to legislative norms;
• replacing a person temporarily absent by agreement;
• filling positions that are associated with representative offices and diplomatic missions of the Russian Federation located abroad;
• filling a temporary position;
• filling any positions in bodies that are created for an indefinite period until the assigned task is completed;
• filling any civilian position from the “assistants” category.

Almost all options are standard replacement for a position or another civil servant. Also, the bulk of fixed-term contracts are replacements for the management category. This category is not defined in the legislation. This option means any position in the territorial or regional government apparatus.

It is important to know! Any fixed-term contract can be extended an unlimited number of times.

If the contract ends or there are grounds for breaking it, then a termination procedure is carried out.

Read on the topic: Peculiarities of dismissal of municipal and civil servants from the civil service at their own request

Civil service under a fixed-term service contract: legislative norms

Replacement of civil servants temporarily absent from the workplace due to maternity leave, long-term illness, other reasons, as well as by rotation, is carried out by attracting another employee to work and concluding a fixed-term employment contract with him.

The procedure for concluding a fixed-term civil service contract and the conditions for its termination are in the table below:

Based on paragraph 1 of Art. 35 of Law No. 79-FZ “On Civil Service”, upon termination of a fixed-term service contract, a civil servant must be notified at least 7 days before the day of release from public office.

Termination

Before the end of the period on the specified date, which is specified in the contract, the civil servant must be notified a week before this moment. Any countdown of the validity period begins from the moment the documents are signed.

Early dismissal is possible if there are certain reasons. In most cases of early termination, you will need to give the employee a couple of months' notice. There is also the option of not warning him about the termination, but this option is only possible with the written consent of the dismissed person.

Options for early termination of contracts may be different:

• return of a key worker;
• incapacity for work of the substitute, except for cases prescribed by law;
• gross violations of duties;
• inconsistencies in psychological or professional qualifications;
• the certification was not passed or a sufficient number of points were not scored during the test.

It is important to know! The employee himself can terminate the contract based on the reasons that he must indicate in the application. In this case, termination is carried out according to the standard plan.

There are also generally accepted rules among the termination options. This includes job reduction or liquidation of the organization. It is worth considering that when a position is reduced or reorganized, the person being laid off may be offered another position if possible.

Today, 04/13/2021, my fixed-term service contract will be terminated (part 1, art. | Kaliningrad

Article 112 of the Federal Law “On Enforcement Proceedings”.
Executive fee. 1. The enforcement fee is a monetary penalty imposed on the debtor in the event of his failure to comply with a writ of execution within the period established for the voluntary execution of a writ of execution, as well as in the event of his failure to comply with a writ of execution, subject to immediate execution, within 24 hours from the date of receipt of a copy of the bailiff’s decision - the executor on the initiation of enforcement proceedings. The performance fee is credited to the federal budget.

2. The enforcement fee is established by the bailiff after the expiration of the period specified in Part 1 of this article, if the debtor has not provided the bailiff with evidence that the execution was impossible due to force majeure, that is, extraordinary and unpreventable circumstances under the given conditions. The bailiff's decision to collect the enforcement fee is approved by the senior bailiff.

3. The enforcement fee is established in the amount of seven percent of the amount subject to collection or the value of the property being recovered, but not less than one thousand rubles from a debtor-citizen or a debtor-individual entrepreneur and ten thousand rubles from a debtor-organization. In the event of non-execution of an enforcement document of a non-property nature, the enforcement fee from a debtor-citizen or a debtor-individual entrepreneur is established in the amount of five thousand rubles, from a debtor-organization - fifty thousand rubles.

3.1. In relation to several debtors for joint collection in favor of one collector, the enforcement fee is established from each of the debtors in the amount of seven percent of the amount to be recovered or the value of the recovered property, but not less than one thousand rubles from a debtor-citizen or a debtor - individual entrepreneur and ten thousand rubles from the debtor organization.

4. The enforcement fee for non-payment of periodic payments is calculated and collected from the amount of each debt separately.

5. The enforcement fee is not collected in cases where enforcement proceedings are initiated:

1) according to an executive document received in the manner established by Part 6 of Article 33 of this Federal Law;

2) upon repeated presentation for execution of a writ of execution, according to which a resolution of the bailiff to collect the enforcement fee was issued and not cancelled;

3) by order of the bailiff on the collection of expenses for carrying out enforcement actions and the enforcement fee imposed by the bailiff in the process of executing the enforcement document;

4) according to judicial acts on interim measures;

5) according to executive documents containing requirements for the forced expulsion from the Russian Federation of foreign citizens or stateless persons;

6) according to executive documents containing requirements for serving compulsory labor;

7) at the request of the central authority to search for a child.

6. The debtor has the right, in the manner established by this Federal Law, to apply to the court to challenge the bailiff’s decision to collect the enforcement fee, with a claim for a deferment or installment plan for its collection, to reduce its amount or exemption from the collection of the enforcement fee.

7. The court has the right, taking into account the degree of guilt of the debtor for failure to fulfill the writ of execution on time, the property status of the debtor, and other significant circumstances, to defer or defer the collection of the enforcement fee, as well as reduce its amount, but not more than one quarter of the amount established in accordance with part 3 of this article. In the absence of grounds for liability for violation of an obligation established by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the court has the right to release the debtor from collecting the enforcement fee.

8. If the court accepts for consideration the application or claim specified in Part 6 of this article, the collection of the enforcement fee is suspended until the court makes a decision. The court's decision to fully or partially satisfy them applies to immediate execution.

9. If the court reduces the amount of the enforcement fee, the order of the bailiff to collect the enforcement fee is considered changed accordingly. In this case, the debtor is returned the excess amount of money collected from him.

10. The enforcement fee is returned to the debtor in full in cases of cancellation:

1) a judicial act, an act of another body or official, on the basis of which the executive document was issued;

2) executive document;

3) resolution of the bailiff to collect the enforcement fee.

11. The return of the enforcement fee to the debtor is carried out in the manner determined by the Government of the Russian Federation.