The case of three Karen Demirjian Metro workers who were fired for demonstrating against a private pension reform bill was once again pushed back this past Thursday. Representing the workers is the Foundation Against the Violation of Law’s (FAVL) attorney Kristina Gevorkyan.
The case is being heard by the Arabkir and Kanaker-Zeytun Court of First Instance under the presiding judge Simizar Hovsepyan. The case was initiated over a year ago, on February 14, 2014, and the court’s decision was expected to be handed down as early as December 12, 2014. However, the case has been restarted with countless delays, with the only justifiable one being a postponement due to the judge being ill.
For over a year, the unemployed former metro workers have been insisting that they were fired last February for participating in a demonstration against a controversial pension reform law. They presented a petition to the Metro administration signed by 67 employees regarding the law.
The Metro administrators deny the claim and instead insist that the workers were removed for “regularly” failing in their duties. However, until today, after 13 hearings, they have not presented one piece of credible evidence in court that proves such misconduct was carried out. Even the court concluded in the latest hearing that none of the worker logs presented in the case point to any performance shortfalls in their work.
It is important to recall that the three workers were dismissed based on Article 113, Paragraph 1, Section 6 of Armenia’s Labor Code, which relates to “losing confidence in an employee.” This law does not apply to this case because the right to terminate an employee on such grounds is laid out in three points in Article 122 of the Labor Code. It states:
The employer has the right to terminate the employment contract with the employee towards whom the confidence is lost on the basis envisaged by clause 7 of section 1 of article 113 of this code, if the employee:
- Carried out actions in relation to financial or commodity value in a way that resulted in material damage suffered by the employer
- An employee responsible for educational functions committed or allowed acts which are inconsistent with such work.
- Publicized state, service, commercial, or technological secrets or disclosed them to competitors.
In other words, on the conditions of this legal regulation the Metro side is trying to show that the workers “regularly” failed to carry out their work. As to when the court or the defense will show for how long the misconduct was carried out, the Metro representatives claim it was for the month of January 2014, compared with the fact that they have worked there without incident since 1999.
Article 223, Paragraph 1, Section 3 of the Armenian Labor Code states that a worker may be terminated as a disciplinary action based on Article 113, which is what the Metro side is claiming. However, that would only be applicable if they were to show violations in conformity with the grounds laid out in Article 122.
Both the defense and judge are constantly referring to putting the lives of passengers in danger and financial damage that could have resulted from the workers’ supposed misconduct. This is occurring despite the fact that, until today, not one piece of evidence has been presented regarding the lives of passengers being put in danger or financial damage occurring. Furthermore, the law on which the workers were fired clearly states that discipline can only occur if an employee “carried out actions in relation to financial or commodity value in a way that resulted in material damage suffered by the employer.”
Judge Hovsepyan’s groundless request to bring in all of the worker logs, when evidence of shortcomings has already been clearly missing in those registries, is serving only to violate and contradict the principle of administering justice within a reasonable timeframe. It is also going against the principles laid out in Article 125, Paragraph 2, Section 3 of the Armenian Civil Procedure Code regarding the expediting of judicial proceedings dealing with labor disputes.
These actions by the court in requesting material to be investigated that have nothing to do with the case is prompting the side in the sense that the court already had 10 hearings to investigate such material. Asking for such material again after restarting the case gives grounds to suggest that a political approach is being taken in the case of the three metro workers.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for May 15.
Foundation Against the Violation of Law NGO
