ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN BY THE EMPLOYER REGARDING THE EMPLOYEE WHO RECEIVED A SALARY GARNISHMENT LETTER
When you receive a salary attachment letter from the enforcement office, you will first have to respond within 7 days by writing the date of arrival of the notification on the notification envelope.
The employer who receives a salary garnishment notification must make a salary payment to your employee from the date you receive the salary garnishment notification, you must deduct the salary at the rate set by the enforcement directorate and deposit the amount you have deducted to the enforcement file.
Article 35 of the Labour Law No. 4857 states that “No more than one quarter of the monthly wages of the workers cannot be garnished or transferred and assigned to someone else”.
And again, the legislator in Article 83 of the EXECUTION AND INSOLVENCY LAW No. 1241, salaries, allocations and all kinds of wages, usufruct rights and proceeds, alimony not based on the judgement, pensions, insurance or income allocated by pension funds can be seized after deducting the amount appraised by the bailiff as necessary for the livelihood of the debtor and his family, but the amount to be seized cannot be less than a quarter of them. If there is more than one attachment, it is put in order. Unless the deduction of the lien that is ahead in the queue is finished, the deduction cannot be started for the next lien.” It is stated as follows.
THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN IN CASE THE WORKER LEAVES THE JOB WHILE THE GARNISHMENT CONTINUES;
In the event that the employee leaves the job while the seizure deductions are continuing, it is obligatory to send a notification letter to the ongoing and next execution offices that the employee has left the job by attaching the employee’s SSI resignation notice.
IN CASE THE EMPLOYEE QUITS HIS/HER JOB, WILL THE INDEMNITY BE DEDUCTED FROM HIS/HER PENSION BONUS?
If you receive a “salary attachment” letter in accordance with articles 355 et seq. of the BEC, the scope of this letter is salary and wage receivables. Severance pay, retirement bonus are not considered as wage receivables. For this reason, if the employee leaves the job in a way that deserves compensation or retirement bonus after the salary attachment letter is received, this bonus and compensation will not be interrupted.
However, if the employer is notified of the salary attachment letter, but the notice of attachment (89/1 notice), if the employee has a retirement bonus and severance pay receivable on the date of notification of the notice, then the employer must deposit the relevant amounts to the relevant enforcement file.
According to the decision of the 12th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation No. 2016/4997 E., 2016/23632; The attachment of the debtor’s salary and wages is made according to the provisions of Article 355 and the following articles of the EBL. According to Article 355 of the BEC, the execution manager writes an attachment letter to the workplace where the debtor works, stating that the salary and wages are garnished. The employer who receives the attachment letter is obliged to notify the execution office within one week that the attachment has been executed and the amount of the debtor’s salary and wage, and until the debt is over, the execution office is obliged to deduct the amount seized from the debtor’s salary or wage according to the attachment notification of the execution office and deposit it immediately to the execution office. Otherwise, in accordance with Article 356 of the BEC, the money that they have not deducted or sent by the first means shall be taken from their salaries and other property by the enforcement office without the need to obtain a judgement from the court. In this case, the liability of those who do not comply with the provisions of Article 355 of the BEC is limited to the amount not deducted according to Article 356 of the BEC.” It is as follows.
As it is seen, Article 356 of the BEC is about salaries and wages and pension bonuses and compensations cannot be evaluated within the scope of this article. The attachment of the debtor’s receivables from third parties is only possible with the procedure specified in Article 89/… and the following articles of the BEC.
In the decision of the 12th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated 27.12.2004 and numbered E.2004/22540, K.26972, it is stated that notice and severance pay are not wages and therefore all of them can be seized.
In other words, in this case, when you receive the attachment notice called 89/1, not the salary attachment letter, if the employee is entitled to compensation and bonuses on the date of notification of the aforementioned letter, the part of this price that will cover the debt should be deposited in the relevant enforcement office.
CAN THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT OF THE EMPLOYEE WHOSE SALARY IS GARNISHED BE TERMINATED?
The employment contract of the employee whose salary is garnished cannot be terminated, but if the salary garnishment occurs more than once, the employer may terminate the employment contract of the employee “for valid reasons” if it causes additional labour and burden in the accounting and legal service.
However, before this termination, the employer must give a written warning to the employee saying “either eliminate the wage garnishment problem or I will terminate your employment contract”. As a result of the termination for this reason, the employer is obliged to pay the rights of the employee that are dependent on the termination, i.e. severance pay and notice pay and, if any, annual leave pay.
In the decision of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation E. 2008/3737 K. 2008/27673 T. 20.10.2008, the defendant employer argued that the claimant’s defence was taken because he did not take any action despite the warnings to remove the garnishment on his wages, that this behaviour caused negativity in the workplace, that the termination was based on the valid reason arising from the behaviour of the claimant and that the lawsuit should be dismissed.
The court stated that the defendant employer issued a circular in 2004 for the employees whose wages were garnished, asked for their removal and received their defence, and that the employment contracts of 15 employees with high debts out of 164 employees whose wages were garnished were terminated for this reason;
The local court did not consider the frequent garnishment of the employee’s wages as a valid reason, whereas the Court of Cassation, on the other hand, gave the COMPLETELY OPINION in its examination and concluded that this constituted a valid reason according to the form of the event.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking