Since the declaration of state of emergency in Republic of Serbia on March 15th, 2020, several Government regulations and conclusions, as well as recommendations and guidelines of the competent Ministries have been adopted, which should facilitate emergency management and fight against the COVID-19 virus. In the first week after the emergence of a zero patient in Serbia, a number of questions already arose with employers, on how to organize work, whether it is possible and how to introduce work from home, whether an annex with employees must be concluded, how to provide protection of employees and ensure safety and health at work, etc.
Following the declaration of the state of emergency, the pressing questions that have arisen are how to reduce the costs and negative effects of the pandemic, given that many employers’ work is threatened and workload is reduced and some of employers are forced to interrupt the work. Frequently asked questions also concern how to protect vulnerable categories of employees – chronic patients, employees older than 60 years, parents or single parents with children up to 12 years. On the other hand, there are numerous problems in practice when it comes to the period of self-isolation and how to record such absence of an employee if the competent authority has not issued a decision on self-isolation and there is no certificate of temporary incapacity for work. That’s just part of the issues employers face on a daily basis. Finally, the declaration of a package of economic measures and assistance to the economy has raised several issues and concerns that are being gradually clarified.
One of the issues that has become more relevant as it is approaching June 30th, 2020 is the use of the remaining annual leave for year 2019. According to the Labor Law, employees can take the remaining annaul leave from the previous latest until June 30 of the following year. It was expected that this deadline would be changed in the light of the new circumstances, so the Government adopted Conclusion 05 No. 53-3041 / 2020 of 6 April 2020 by which the Goverment is recommending to employers that they enable the use of vacation from 2019 till 31 December 2020 to employees who have an obligation to regularly perform their duties in a state of emergency.
Regarding the employees who are allowed to perform work outside the premises of the employer (working remotely and working from home), the employer is obliged to allow the use of part of the annual leave for 2019 in accordance with the Labor Law, ie till June 30, 2020. Also, employers are advised to give priority to the use of annual leave, especially in the situation when considering interruption of work, ie referring employees to the so-called “forced paid leave” under Article 116 of the Labor Law.
In ordinary circumstances, the provisions of the Labor Law on the use of annual leave are imperative in nature and the employer and the employee cannot agree to take the employee’s annual leave from the previous year after 30 June of the current year. The Government’s conclusion allows an exception to be made and to allow employees who “have an obligation to perform regular tasks” to use annual leave after the statutory deadline.
However, the question is whether such a recommendation is fair and justified. What are the reasons that have led to a distinction between employees who regularly perform their work tasks from home and employees who regularly perform work tasks in the premises of the employer? One of the reasons could be that employees who are constantly performing work tasks on the premises of the employer are at higher risk of becoming infected with the COVID-19 virus. It is possible that such a conclusion was influenced by the fact that many employees in the public sector – such as health, police, and military have a defined work obligation under the Law on Defense and the Law on military, material and labor required. Considering the formulation of the Conclusion, it can be concluded that this recommendation applies to all those who perform work in the employer’s premises, and not only employees who have been assigned a work obligation. There is an initiative to amend the Conclusion so that no division is made between employees but to allow the remaining 2019 vacation to be used by the end of 2020, depending on the need for work and organization of work with the employer. However, the question is whether the initiative will be accepted in the light of the already adopted Conclusion.
In this regard, all employers should develop a plan of annual leave in consultation with employees and make the appropriate decision in the procedure prescribed by the Labor Law(If the employee has not submitted a request for annual leave) to allow employees annual leave, in accordance with the needs of the work process. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this topic, we invite you to follow our newsletters and/оr can contact Ana Popovic, Partner in the employment department at the Zivkovic Samardzic law office, as well as the regular contact at the Zivkovic Samardzic law office at office@zslaw.rs.
Korišćenje godišnjeg odmora u doba pandemije
Od uvođenja vanrednog stanja u Srbiji 15.03.2020.godine donet je niz uredbi i zaključaka Vlade, preporuka i smernica nadležnih Ministarstava koji bi trebalo da olakšaju snalaženje u vanrednoj situaciji i borbu sa virusom COVID-19. Već prve nedelje nakon pojave nultog pacijenta u Srbiji, brojna pitanja su se pojavila kod poslodavaca, od toga kako organizovati rad, da li je moguće i na koji način uvesti rad od kuće, da li mora da se zaključuje aneks sa zaposlenima, kako obezbediti zaštitu zaposlenih i osigurati bezbednost i zdravlje na radu i sl.
Nakon uvođenja vanrednog stanja, aktuelna pitanja koja su se pojavila jeste na koji način smanjiti troškove i negativne efekte pandemije s obzirom na to da je rad mnogih poslodavaca ugrožen i da je smanjen obim posla, a pojedini su primorani i da prekinu sa radom. Česta pitanja se odnose i na to kako zaštiti ugrožene kategorije zaposlenih – hronični bolesnici, stariji od 60 godina, roditelji ili samohrani roditelji sa decom do 12 godina. Sa druge strane, postoje brojni problemi u praksi i kada je reč o periodu samoizolacije i kako evidentirati takvo odsustvo zaposlenog ako nadležni organ nije izdao rešenje o samoizolaciji i ne postoji potvrda o privremenoj sprečenosti za rad. To je samo deo pitanja sa kojima se poslodavci susreću svakodnevno. I na kraju, objavljivanje paketa ekonomskih mera i pomoći privredi je pokrenulo niz pitanja i nedoumica koje se postepeno razjašnjavanju.
Jedno od pitanja koje se aktuelizovalo s obzirom na to da se bliži 30.06.2020.godine jeste i korišćenje preostalog godišnjeg odmora iz 2019.godine. Prema Zakonu o radu, preostali odmor iz prethodne godine zaposleni mogu iskoristiti najkasnije do 30. juna tekuće godine. Očekivalo se da će ovaj rok biti promenjen s obzirom na novonastale okolnosti, tako da je Vlada donela Zaključak 05 broj 53-3041/2020 od 06.04.2020.godine kojim se preporučuje poslodavcima da zaposlenima koji imaju obavezu redovnog obavljanja radnih zadataka u uslovima vanrednog stanja omoguće korišćenje godišnjeg odmora iz 2019.godine zaključno sa 31.12.2020.godine.
Što se tiče zaposlenih kojima je omogućeno obavljanje poslova van prostorija poslodavca (rad na daljinu i rad od kuće) poslodavac je dužan da omogući korišćenje dela godišnjeg odmora za 2019.godinu u skladu sa Zakonom o radu, odnosno zaključno sa 30.06.2020.godine. Takođe, poslodavcima se preporučuje da prednost daju korišćenju godišnjeg odmora, pogotovo u situaciji kada se razmatra prekid rada, odnosno upućivanje zaposlenih na tzv „prinudno plaćeno odsustvo“ na osnovu člana 116 Zakona o radu.
U redovnim okolnostima, odredbe Zakona o radu o korišćenju godišnjeg odmora su imperativne prirode i poslodavac i zaposleni se ne mogu dogovoriti da zaposleni godišnji odmor iz prethodne godine iskoristi nakon 30. juna tekuće godine. Zaključkom Vlade se omogućava da se napravi izuzetak i da se zaposlenima koji „imaju obavezu redovnog obavljanja radnih zadataka“odobri korišćenje godišnjeg odmora i nakon obaveznog zakonskog roka.
Međutim, postavlja se pitanje da li je ovakva preporuka pravična i opravdana. Koji su razlozi koji su naveli da se pravi distinkcija između zaposlenih koji redovno obavljaju svoje radne zadatke od kuće i zaposlenih koji redovno obavljaju radne zadatke u prostorijama poslodavca? Jedan od razloga bi mogao biti taj da su zaposleni koji sve vreme obavljaju radne zadatke u prostorijama poslodavca u većem riziku od oboljevanja virusom COVID-19. Moguće da je na takav Zaključak uticala činjenica i da mnogo zaposlenih u javnom sektoru – kao što su zdravstvo, policija, vojska imaju utvrđenu radnu obavezu na osnovu Zakona o odbrani i Zakona o vojnoj, materijalnoj i radnoj obavezi. S obzirom na formulaciju iz Zaključka, može se zaključiti da se ovakva preporuka odnosi na sve koji obavljaju posao u prostorijama poslodavca, a ne samo na zaposlene kojima je utvrđena radna obaveza. Postoji inicijativa da se Zaključak izmeni tako da se ne pravi podela između zaposlenih već da se omogući da se preostali godišnji odmor iz 2019.godine iskoristi do kraja 2020.godine u zavisnosti od potrebe posla i organizacije rada kod poslodavca. Međutim, pitanje je da li će inicijativa biti prihvaćena s obzirom na već doneti Zaključak.
S tim u vezi, svi poslodavci bi trebalo da naprave plan korišćenja godišnjeg odmora uz konsultaciju sa zaposlenim i donesu odgovarajuća rešenja u proceduri koja je propisana Zakonom o radu (ukoliko zaposleni nije podneo zahtev za korišćenje godišnjeg odmora) kako bi zaposlenima omogućili korišćenje godišnjeg odmora, a u skladu sa potrebama procesa rada. Ako imate pitanja u vezi sa ovom temom, pratite naše objave i/ili kontaktirajte Anu Popović, partnera u advokatskoj kancelariji Živković Samardžić ili Vašu osobu za redovan kontakt u advokatskoj kancelariji Živković Samardžić.