On the specifics of compensation for material damage by an employee
According to Art. 404 of the Labor Code of the Republic of Belarus (hereinafter - the Labor Code), employees bear full material liability for the damage caused through their fault to the employer, in cases where a written agreement on the employee assuming full material liability for the failure to ensure the safety of property and other valuables transferred to him for storage or for other purposes has been concluded between the employee and the employer in accordance with Article 405 of this Code.
In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 406 of the Labor Code, when employees jointly perform certain types of work related to the storage, processing, sale (release), transportation, or use in the production process of valuables transferred to them, when it is impossible to delimit the material responsibility of each employee and conclude a full material liability agreement with him, collective (team) material liability may be introduced.
One of the Vitebsk Open Joint-Stock Companies filed a lawsuit with the court, requesting to recover from the loader who worked in the store the damage caused by the shortage of товарно-материальных ценностей (inventory and material assets). The basis for recovery, in the opinion of the plaintiff, was the collective material liability agreement concluded with the loader for the failure to ensure the safety of the entrusted товарно-материальных ценностей.
The court's decision satisfied the stated claims.
This decision is illegal due to the incorrect application of substantive law by the court.
When making the decision, the court did not take into account that for the introduction of collective (team) material liability, it is necessary that the duties of each employee of the collective (team) include one of the duties listed in Art. 406 of the Labor Code (storage, processing, sale, release, transportation, or use in the production process of товарно-материальных ценностей). Employees whose labor relations do not include the performance of these types of work are not subject to inclusion in such a list.
The case materials indicate that the loader's job description, approved by the employer and signed by the defendant upon employment, includes loading and unloading operations as part of his job duties. The plaintiff has not provided the court with any evidence of the transfer of material assets to the defendant or the performance of any other type of work.
Considering the characteristics of a loader's work, as set forth in the Unified Tariff and Qualification Handbook of Workers' Jobs and Professions, approved by the Resolution of the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Republic of Belarus of March 30, 2004, No. 33, as well as the job description for a loader developed by the employer on its basis, there were no legal grounds for concluding a collective material liability agreement with the defendant, since the loader's job duties include performing loading and unloading operations, which are not directly related to the storage, processing, sale, release, transportation, or use of transferred material assets in the production process.
Due to the incorrect application of substantive law by the appellate court, upon the prosecutor's protest, the court's decision was overturned, and a new decision was issued in the case, denying OJSC's claims.
Senior Prosecutor of the Department of the Vitebsk Regional Prosecutor's Office for Supervision of the Legality of Court Decisions in Civil Cases M.V. Dukhnova