WHAT ARE THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF AN EMPLOYEE SUBJECTED TO MOBBING IN THE WORKPLACE IN TURKEY?

WHAT DOES MOBBING MEAN?

The word “mobbing” is derived from the English root “mob”. In its dictionary sense it means to gather, to come together and cause disturbance, to surround, to attack as a gang or to apply psychological pressure as a group.

In the literature of work psychology and sociology it was first used in the 1980s by the Swedish scientist Heinz Leymann to describe acts of “emotional/psychological violence and intimidation applied to individuals in working life”. Into Turkish it is mostly translated as “psychological harassment”, “intimidation in the workplace” or “emotional harassment”.

In legal terminology, mobbing is conduct carried out in the workplace by one or several people against a particular employee deliberately, systematically and over a certain period of time, which targets that employee’s personality rights, professional reputation and mental or physical health and which amounts to psychological violence that is unlawful under Turkish law.

WHICH LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS APPLY TO MOBBING DISPUTES IN TURKEY?

In the Turkish legal system, mobbing (psychological harassment) is protected against not by a stand-alone “Mobbing Act” but through the combined application of the relevant provisions of the Constitution, the Turkish Code of Obligations, the Labour Law, the Occupational Health and Safety Law and the Turkish Penal Code.

1. Constitutional Guarantees (Constitution Art. 17)

Under Article 17 of the Constitution, “Everyone has the right to life and the right to protect and develop his or her material and spiritual existence.” Since acts of mobbing directly interfere with the employee’s spiritual existence, personal dignity and mental integrity, they amount to a breach of a fundamental right at constitutional level in Turkey.

2. Provisions Under the Turkish Code of Obligations (TCO)

The main basis for compensation in tort and for the protection of personality rights is the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098:

• The Employer’s Duty to Protect the Employee’s Personality (TCO Art. 417): The employer is obliged to maintain order in the workplace in accordance with the principles of good faith and to take every measure necessary to ensure that workers are not subjected to psychological or sexual harassment and, if they have been, that they suffer no further harm.

• Harm to Physical Integrity (TCO Art. 56): Where acts of mobbing reach a level that damages the employee’s physical or mental health (for example depression, burnout syndrome or psychosomatic complaints), the judge may order that non-pecuniary damages in an appropriate amount be paid to the victim.

• Harm to Personality Rights (TCO Art. 58): This article is the main statutory basis under Turkish law for a claim for non-pecuniary damages in any act of mobbing that targets the employee’s dignity, standing, reputation and professional position.

3. Provisions of the Labour Law (Law No. 4857)

• Duty of Equal Treatment (Art. 5): This prohibits an employer in Turkey from discriminating between employees without justified grounds, treating them differently or excluding particular employees through mobbing.

• Right of Immediate Termination for Just Cause (Art. 24/II): A worker who is subjected to mobbing by the employer or by another employee becomes entitled to severance pay in Turkey by terminating the employment contract immediately and for just cause.

4. Occupational Health and Safety Law (Law No. 6331)

Law No. 6331 does not confine the employer’s duty of supervision to physical accidents at work. The employer is obliged to prevent psychosocial risks, to remove the mobbing atmosphere that threatens mental health in the workplace and to take the necessary administrative and organisational measures. Breach of this obligation by the employer is one of the main arguments giving rise to the employer’s fault-based liability in compensation lawsuits before the Turkish courts.

WHICH WORKPLACE BEHAVIOUR COUNTS AS MOBBING IN TURKEY AND WHICH DOES NOT?

Mobbing (psychological harassment) in Turkey is, at its plainest, where an employee is subjected systematically, continuously and deliberately to psychological pressure, exclusion and discrediting by the employer, by superiors, by colleagues at the same level or by subordinates.

• What Are the Basic Conditions for an Act to Count as Mobbing in Law?

For an act to be accepted as “mobbing” in the legal order, these four basic legal elements must be present together:

1. Continuity and Systematic Conduct: The behavior must extend beyond a single altercation or transient clash; it requires a recurring, structured pattern maintained over an extended duration.
2. Intent to Intimidate: The exerted psychological strain cannot be incidental—it must be intentionally designed to marginalize the worker, tarnish their professional standing, exhaust their resilience, or compel a forced departure.
3. Infringement of Personality Rights (Turkish Civil Code Art. 24 – TCO Art. 417): The conduct must impair the staff member’s dignity, standing, self-esteem, or overall physical and mental well-being, directly breaching the employer’s statutory duty of protection.
4. Targeted Execution: Rather than stemming from a general workplace culture or universal policy, the actions must specifically isolate a targeted worker or a discrete subgroup of personnel.

In the legal assessment the most critical threshold is drawing the line correctly between momentary tensions at work and constructed acts of mobbing spread over time. A single negative act, however uncomfortable, does not on its own constitute mobbing under Turkish law; the decisive element is that the behaviour is repeated within a certain period of time and follows a conscious pattern.

• What Are the Types of Mobbing?

In practice and in doctrine, mobbing is examined under two main headings according to the source of the act and the organisational position of the parties:

1. Vertical Mobbing (Top-Down / Bottom-Up): This is where the employer, a manager or superiors target an employee in a lower position by abusing their hierarchical power and authority. It is the type most often met with in practice in Turkey. Rarely, it is also possible for employees in lower positions to join forces and make a manager unable to do his or her job (bottom-up vertical mobbing).

2. Horizontal Mobbing (Harassment Between Equals): This is where colleagues at the same hierarchical level exclude an employee as a group, spread gossip about them or render them passive. Even where the act of workplace bullying is committed by colleagues at the same level (horizontal mobbing), under Article 417 of the Turkish Code of Obligations the employer, having been aware of the situation but having failed to take the necessary preventive measures and having breached its duty of supervision, bears direct civil and criminal liability.

• Which Behaviour Is Accepted as Mobbing in the Workplace?

In the Turkish legal system and in the practice of the Court of Cassation there is no fixed (standard) definition of mobbing and no closed list of acts. Whether an act constitutes mobbing is assessed on the facts of the individual case, taking into account the particular circumstances of each concrete event, the hierarchical position of the parties, the duration of the act and its psychological and physical effects on the member of staff.

As the Assembly of Civil Chambers of the Court of Cassation has also underlined, a single administrative act or piece of behaviour that appears unlawful or unfair does not constitute mobbing where it carries no systematic character and no intent to intimidate; whereas a series of acts that appear lawful and within the scope of authority, applied one after another for a hidden purpose (to render the employee passive or force a resignation), is accepted as mobbing before the Turkish courts.

The main examples frequently met with in practice that may constitute workplace bullying are summarised below:

WHICH LAWSUITS CAN BE FILED FOR MOBBING IN TURKEY?

A mobbing lawsuit is the general name for the legal actions brought by an employee subjected to systematic and deliberate psychological harassment in the workplace, in order to make good the personal, mental, professional or financial harm suffered and to have their rights restored. In the Turkish legal system there is no single type of action whose separate name is simply “Mobbing Lawsuit”. Depending on the employee’s claims, the features of the concrete case and whether or not the employment contract continues, the dispute is brought before the court under the following legal headings:

A. Lawsuit for Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Damages Arising from Mobbing (TCO Art. 417 – Art. 58)

This is the most basic form of the mobbing lawsuits brought in Turkey. It may be filed while the employment contract continues and it may equally be filed on its own after the contract has ended. Two main heads of compensation stand out in this lawsuit:

• Non-Pecuniary Damages (TCO Art. 58): These are claimed in order to make good the pain and distress suffered where mobbing has caused harm to the employee’s personality rights, reputation, mental integrity and quality of life.

• Pecuniary Damages (TCO Arts. 49 and 417): These cover the concrete and documentable financial losses arising as a result of acts of mobbing. The costs of psychological treatment, psychiatric medication and hospital expenses, and any loss of working capacity or income caused by mobbing, are recovered from the employer under this head.

B. Lawsuit for Severance Pay and Employee Receivables Following Termination for Just Cause (Labour Law Art. 24/II)

This is the lawsuit an employee in Turkey brings after unilaterally terminating the employment contract for just cause under Labour Law Art. 24/II because of the psychological harassment suffered. In this lawsuit the employee may claim severance pay without having to observe any notice period, together with all employee receivables such as unpaid overtime, annual leave and national and public holiday (UBGT) pay. Moreover, in this lawsuit based on termination for just cause, claims for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages arising from mobbing may also be accumulated in the same statement of claim.

C. Lawsuit for Breach of the Duty of Equal Treatment and Discrimination Compensation (Labour Law Art. 5)

If the act of mobbing applied in the workplace rests on a discriminatory ground such as language, race, sex, political opinion, philosophical belief, religion, sect, pregnancy or disability, the employer is deemed, under Turkish employment law, to have breached the duty of equal treatment laid down in Article 5 of the Labour Law. In that case the victim, alongside mobbing compensation and employee rights, becomes entitled to claim from the employer discrimination compensation of up to 4 months’ wages as well.

WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS FOR FILING A MOBBING LAWSUIT IN TURKEY?

For negative events or disagreements at a workplace to be accepted in law as “mobbing” and for the court to award compensation, certain conditions must be present together. Judicial practice and doctrine in Turkey require four basic elements to be present at the same time (together) before a mobbing claim is accepted.

Where the court finds any one of these elements missing in the concrete case, it does not classify the behaviour as mobbing in law and dismisses the case.

1. The Acts Must Be Continuous and Systematic

Under Turkish law the mobbing behaviour must be spread over a certain period of time and be repeated within a certain plan. Random, momentary, unconnected or isolated incidents do not satisfy this element.

Although the case law of the Court of Cassation as a rule requires the acts to continue without interruption and systematically for at least 6 months for mobbing to exist, this period is assessed in the light of the features of the concrete case, having regard to the gravity of the event, the intensity of the acts and the damage caused to the victim.

2. Deliberate Intimidation and the Aim of Driving the Employee Out

The perpetrator (the employer, a manager or a colleague) must carry out the acts in question knowingly and deliberately, with the aim of wearing the employee down, rendering them passive, damaging their reputation or forcing them to leave the job (to resign).

Under Turkish law, decisions the employer takes within the scope of its managerial prerogative in good faith and on the basis of the operational needs of the workplace and of concrete, objective grounds (for example performance appraisals or unit changes) are not regarded as breaching this element.

3. Harm to the Employee’s Personality Rights and Health

For a mobbing claim to found an award of compensation in Turkey, the acts must result in harm to the victim’s personality rights, reputation or physical and mental integrity.

• Non-Pecuniary Harm: Mental damage appearing as sleep disorder, anxiety, depressive episodes, burnout syndrome or loss of self-confidence.
• Pecuniary Harm: Psychological and physical treatment costs, medication expenses or loss of income through loss of work, borne as a result of mobbing.

4. The Acts Must Target the Employee Directly (Personalisation)

Mobbing is not a general understanding of discipline at the workplace, a harsh management style or the application of a general rule to all employees. The acts must be directed directly and specifically at a particular employee or group of employees. General working rules that the employer applies equally and impartially to everyone do not carry the element of mobbing under Turkish law.

THE PROCESS OF PROOF IN MOBBING LAWSUITS IN TURKEY AND THE IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL EVIDENCE

The most critical and most technical stage of a mobbing case is the process of proof. Because acts of psychological harassment are generally carried out behind closed doors, in settings without witnesses, or orally so as to leave no written trace, obtaining full and conclusive evidence is very difficult. The Turkish legal system, having regard to this difficulty faced by the victim, has developed special mechanisms that make proof easier.

1. The Rule of “Approximate Proof” in Mobbing

According to the settled case law of the Court of Cassation, the principle of “approximate proof” applies in mobbing lawsuits in Turkey. Under this rule, the claimant employee is not expected to prove the acts of mobbing with 100% certainty and beyond any doubt.

Once the worker puts before the court strong facts and indications (presumptions) capable of raising a reasonable suspicion that they were subjected to workplace bullying, the burden of proof is treated as discharged. From that point on the burden of proof shifts to the defendant employer. The employer is then required to prove that no mobbing was applied at the workplace and that the decisions taken rested on objective and justified grounds.

Leading Decisions of the Court of Cassation:

• Court of Cassation, Assembly of Civil Chambers (dated 16.01.2020, Case No. 2019/9-571, Decision No. 2020/23): In a lawsuit for non-pecuniary damages brought for mobbing, it set aside the local court’s decision dismissing the case on the basis of strict proof and underlined that the standard of proof must be relaxed in favour of the claimant employee and that approximate proof must be regarded as sufficient.

• Court of Cassation, 22th Civil Chamber (dated 27.12.2013, Case No: 2013/293, Decision No: 2013/30811): It has been stated that in claims of workplace bullying (mobbing), definitive evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is not required; it is sufficient for the plaintiff employee to put forward facts that raise reasonable suspicion, and the burden of proof falls upon the defendant to demonstrate that mobbing did not occur in the workplace.

2. The Main Evidence Accepted by the Courts in Mobbing Lawsuits in Turkey

In practice, the main legal evidence that supports a mobbing claim and is accepted by the Turkish courts is as follows:

• Written Communication Records: E-mail correspondence, WhatsApp messages, SMS messages and all records containing pressure, threats or humiliation in internal messaging systems (Slack, Teams and the like) should be kept.
• Witness Statements (Eyewitnesses): Statements given before the court by colleagues who directly witnessed the events, the arguments in meetings or the exclusionary conduct are among the strongest evidence.
• Health and Psychiatric Reports: Reports from specialist doctors and psychologists, medication prescriptions and treatment records relating to the mental and physical complaints that arise as a result of mobbing (anxiety, depression, burnout syndrome, sleep disorder, blood pressure and the like) give concrete form to the element of harm before the Turkish courts.
• Performance Appraisal and Assignment Records: Where a worker who was successful until shortly before suddenly receives negative performance scores without grounds, is subjected to unfair disciplinary penalties or is put into lower duties that do not match their competence, this is proof of systematic pressure.
• Dated Diaries and Incident Notes: Where the employee notes down every act suffered day by day, with the date, time, place and any witness details, this allows a consistent chain of events (a chronology) to be presented to the court.

3. The Personal Data Protection Law (KVKK) and the Limit of Lawfulness in Gathering Evidence

The point requiring most care in the evidence-gathering process in Turkey is that the proof must be obtained by lawful means. Where the employer keeps employee communications under surveillance, it must be examined whether that monitoring is carried out in accordance with the Personal Data Protection Law (KVKK) and the criteria of the Constitutional Court.

Although secret audio or video recordings are in principle unlawful evidence, the Court of Cassation may accept as evidence recordings made in sudden and unavoidable situations where the person has no other means of proving an offence committed against them or a violation of their personality rights (mobbing, insult, blackmail), treating them within the scope of self-defence.

WHY THE LINE BETWEEN MOBBING, WORK STRESS AND MANAGERIAL PREROGATIVE MUST BE DRAWN CORRECTLY IN TURKEY

When assessing a mobbing claim, the courts distinguish mobbing from the burnout or stress caused by ordinary workload. An intense working pace does not on its own indicate mobbing; the decisive element is that the employer or the perpetrator displays a deliberate and repeated attitude targeting the employee. When drawing this distinction, the panel of court-appointed experts also brings the general working conditions at the workplace into the file.

One of the matters on which the Turkish courts and panels of court-appointed experts dwell most carefully in mobbing lawsuits is establishing whether what the employee has been subjected to is systematic psychological harassment (mobbing) or ordinary work stress arising from the nature of the sector and from an intense working pace. Not every negative working condition, periodic business pressure or harsh communication style on the part of a manager can be classified as mobbing in law.

The panel of experts appointed by the court during the proceedings, made up of psychologists, employment law specialists and human resources specialists;

1. the general stress level of the sector and of the work performed,
2. whether other employees at the same workplace are exposed to similar conditions,
3. whether the treatment applied to the claimant rests on an objective and reasonable ground

examines as a whole, and so draws the line between work stress and mobbing with legal clarity.

The panel of experts (an employment law specialist, a psychologist or psychiatrist and a human resources specialist) goes beyond abstract allegations and establishes the position in Turkey on the basis of the following concrete data:

1. The Macro Conditions of the Workplace: The general working standards of the sector, the average working hours in the department and whether other employees went through similar processes are examined. Whether the pressure was reflected on the whole team or narrowed down to a single member of staff is compared against the indications in the file.
2. Proportionality of the Managerial Prerogative: Whether the employer used its power of instruction, supervision and performance monitoring in accordance with the rule of good faith (Turkish Civil Code Art. 2), and whether there was a concrete operational need behind the decisions, is reviewed.

If, at the end of this examination, the court establishes that the act has separated itself from the natural stress of the working environment and turned into a conscious policy of intimidation, it accepts that mobbing exists under Turkish law.

WHICH TYPES OF COMPENSATION CAN BE OBTAINED FOR MOBBING IN TURKEY?

An employee subjected to psychological harassment (mobbing) in the workplace may, according to how the concrete case developed, to whether the contract has been terminated and to the nature of the harm suffered, claim more than one type of compensation in the same lawsuit on the basis of different provisions of the legislation, including compensation for dismissal in Turkey.

Main Heads of Compensation in a Mobbing Lawsuit
├── 1. Non-Pecuniary Damages (TCO Art. 56 / Art. 58)
├── 2. Pecuniary Damages (TCO Art. 49 / Art. 417)
├── 3. Severance Pay (Labour Law Art. 24/II)
└── 4. Discrimination Compensation (Labour Law Art. 5)

1. Non-Pecuniary Damages for Mobbing (TCO Arts. 56 and 58)

Where acts of mobbing harm the employee’s personality rights, professional reputation and mental integrity, non-pecuniary damages are claimed in the lawsuit to be brought. The law lays down no fixed (set) amount for non-pecuniary damages. Under Turkish Civil Code Art. 4 the judge uses his or her discretion and awards an amount that is equitable in the circumstances of the concrete case.

In determining the amount of non-pecuniary damages for mobbing, the Turkish courts assess the following criteria as a whole:

• Duration and Intensity: How long the acts of mobbing continued (months or years) and the dose of pressure applied.
• Gravity of the Harm: The extent of the deterioration in the victim’s mental and physical health (psychiatric reports, hospitalisation records and the like).
• The Perpetrator’s Intent: Whether the acts involved a planned, constructed and conscious policy of intimidation.
• Social and Economic Position: The economic strength of the parties (of the worker and of the employer). (Compensation must not be a means of enrichment, but it must carry a deterrent quality).

2. Pecuniary Damages for Mobbing (TCO Arts. 49 and 417)

Where mobbing has caused a concrete reduction in the employee’s assets, those losses are claimed in Turkey as pecuniary damages. The amount of pecuniary damages is calculated by expert witnesses appointed by the court:

1. The psychological and physical treatment costs and medication expenses borne because of mobbing,
2. The loss of earnings and income during the periods of sick leave the employee took because of the complaint caused by mobbing,
3. Where mobbing has given rise to incapacity for work or loss of earning capacity in the profession, the amounts of compensation to be calculated in that respect.

3. Severance Pay and Other Employee Receivables

A worker subjected to mobbing is entitled to terminate the employment contract immediately for just cause under Art. 24/II of Labour Law No. 4857.

• Severance Pay: An employee who terminates for just cause becomes fully entitled to severance pay under Turkish employment law if they have at least 1 year of service.
• The Position on Notice Pay: Because the party carrying out the termination for just cause is the employee, the employee cannot claim notice pay. Notice pay is an institution that protects the other party in unjust terminations carried out without observing the notice periods. In the same way, the employer cannot claim notice pay from an employee who terminates the contract for just cause.
• Other Receivables: Together with the termination, the employee may add unpaid overtime, annual leave, weekly rest day and UBGT receivables to the compensation lawsuit.

4. Discrimination Compensation (Labour Law Art. 5)

If the systematic act of mobbing at the same time involves discrimination based on grounds such as language, race, sex, political opinion, philosophical belief, religion or pregnancy, the employee may also claim discrimination compensation of up to 4 months’ wages under Art. 5 of the Labour Law.

THE COURT PROCESS IN MOBBING LAWSUITS IN TURKEY

The steps an employee subjected to mobbing in the workplace in Turkey must follow when seeking their rights before the courts are subject to procedural rules laid down by law. For the litigation process in Turkey to be conducted soundly and to avoid any loss of rights, the stages of the process must be planned correctly.

1. Mediation as a Mandatory Condition of the Lawsuit

Under Labour Courts Law No. 7036, mediation is a condition of the lawsuit in claims for compensation based on mobbing (pecuniary and non-pecuniary) and for employee receivables (severance pay and the like). Under Turkish law the worker cannot bring a lawsuit directly before the court; they must first apply to the mediation office.

• Time Limit: As a rule the mediator concludes the process within 3 weeks of the date of application (extended by a maximum of +1 week where this is unavoidable, making 4 weeks in total).
• Final Minutes: Where the parties fail to agree, the mediator draws up “Final Minutes of Non-Agreement”. These minutes are attached to the statement of claim and the court process is started.

2. The Court with Subject-Matter Jurisdiction and the Court with Venue

• Court with Subject-Matter Jurisdiction: In all claims for receivables and compensation based on mobbing, the courts with subject-matter jurisdiction are the Labour Courts. (In places where there is no labour court, the case is heard by the Civil Court of First Instance sitting as a labour court).
• Court with Venue: The worker may bring the lawsuit in Turkey, as alternatives, before the courts of the following places:

1. the court of the place where the defendant employer (company or institution) is domiciled or has its head office,
2. the court of the place to which the workplace where the acts of mobbing occurred and the work was performed is attached.

3. Limitation Periods

Keeping track of the limitation periods is of vital importance in mobbing lawsuits in Turkey. Where the period is missed, the employer’s “plea of limitation” leads to the case being dismissed without any examination of the merits.

• Claims Based on the Employment Contract and on Termination for Just Cause (Severance Pay and the like): These are subject to a 5-year limitation period under Turkish Labour Law. That period starts to run from the date on which the employment contract came to an end.
• Claims for Damages Based on Tort (TCO Art. 72): In lawsuits for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages brought for mobbing, the limitation period is 2 years from the date on which the victim learned of the damage and of the person liable to compensate it, and in any event 10 years from the date on which the act occurred. Because the acts continue in a chain and systematically, the limitation period is started from the date on which the last act of mobbing occurred.

4. Litigation Costs and Attorney’s Fees in Turkey

In practice, compensation lawsuits brought for mobbing in Turkey are mostly filed as an “Action for an Indeterminate Receivable” or by stating a value as the basis for the court fee.

• Cost of Filing the Lawsuit: At the start of the case the worker pays a relatively low court fee and an advance on expenses. When the amount awarded becomes clear at the end of the proceedings, the proportional fee is completed.
• Costs Charged to the Defendant: Where the case is concluded in favour of the victim employee, all the court fees, expert witness and service costs and the attorney’s fee assessed by the court that have been paid are charged to the defendant employer. This arrangement is intended to protect the freedom to seek justice of workers in financial difficulty.

IS MOBBING AN OFFENCE UNDER THE TURKISH PENAL CODE?

There is no separate type of offence in the Turkish Penal Code (TPC) regulated directly under the name of a “Mobbing Offence”. But this does not mean that those who apply mobbing go unpunished. Where the concrete acts, words and attitudes making up the mobbing process carry the elements of the general types of offence defined in the TPC, personal criminal liability arises for the perpetrators.

Depending on the nature of the psychological harassment applied in the workplace, the main offences that come into play under the TPC in Turkish law are as follows:

• The Offence of Torment (TPC Art. 96): Carrying out against a person acts that are incompatible with human dignity and that lead to physical or mental suffering and humiliation, systematically and spread over a certain process, constitutes the offence of torment. The Court of Cassation may assess serious cases of mobbing that show continuity directly within the scope of this article.
• The Offence of Insult (TPC Art. 125): Where words, tone and acts capable of injuring the employee’s honour, dignity and standing are used in meetings, in the working environment or in written communication channels, the offence of insult is committed.
• Intentional Injury / Harming Physical and Mental Health (TPC Arts. 86-87): This comes into play where acts of mobbing lead to chronic depression, anxiety or psychosomatic complaints in the employee and this is documented by medical and psychiatric reports.
• Threat and Blackmail (TPC Arts. 106 and 107): These arise where the employee is threatened, or forced into a decision they do not want, by being told that they will be dismissed, that their promotion will be blocked or that their professional future will be ruined.
• Violation of Privacy and Breaches of the Personal Data Protection Law (TPC Art. 134): This finds application where, without the employee’s consent, their private life is placed under surveillance, or their personal data is examined irregularly or disseminated.

An employee who is a victim of mobbing has, independently of one another, both the right to file a criminal complaint with the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office and the right to bring a compensation lawsuit before the Labour Court in respect of what they have been through. Although the civil judge is not bound by an acquittal of the criminal court, a conviction handed down by the criminal court, or a finding that the act has been established (a factual determination that the event occurred), does bind the civil court. A criminal conviction of the perpetrator therefore constitutes the strongest legal evidence under Turkish law for winning the mobbing compensation lawsuit.

HOW ARE PUBLIC PERSONNEL (CIVIL SERVANTS) PROTECTED AGAINST MOBBING IN TURKEY?

For public officials, mobbing (psychological harassment) mostly takes the form of the abuse of hierarchical power, unjustified changes of place of duty (exile), unfair disciplinary investigations, being rendered passive or having authority restricted — that is, of administrative acts and actions.

Because the legal status of public personnel is subject to the Constitution and to Civil Servants Law No. 657, their legal protection and the procedure for bringing a case differ significantly in Turkey from those of private sector employees.

1. Action for Annulment of the Administrative Act in Turkey

A public superior mostly carries out the act of psychological harassment under the appearance of an official administrative act (for example, transfer to another post, temporary assignment, lowering the performance score, a change of room or desk, or an unfair disciplinary penalty).

• Request for Annulment: The public official may bring an Action for Annulment before the Administrative Court in Turkey, stating that the administrative act which they claim was established for the purpose of mobbing and intimidation is unlawful in terms of competence, form, grounds, subject matter and purpose.
• Effect on the Compensation Lawsuit: Because a judgment of annulment given by the court will establish that the administrative act in question was carried out unlawfully in terms of mobbing and purpose, it constitutes the strongest legal evidence in a compensation lawsuit to be brought later.

2. Full Remedy (Compensation) Action Against the Administration in Turkey

Under Article 129/5 of the Constitution: “Actions for damages arising from faults committed by civil servants and other public officials in the exercise of their powers may, subject to recourse against them and in accordance with the form and conditions prescribed by law, be brought only against the administration.”

Public personnel in Turkey who suffer mental, physical or professional harm because of mobbing may bring a Full Remedy Action for compensation of the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage they have suffered. Under this mandatory rule, the public official must bring the mobbing lawsuit not directly against the person of the superior or individual applying the mobbing, but against the public institution (the administration) to which they are attached.

As a result of the full remedy action, the public institution has recourse under the legislation against the superior or public official who is personally at fault and acted with intent in the act of mobbing for the amount of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages it paid to the personnel who suffered the mobbing (it collects the compensation paid from the superior).

3. Administrative Application Routes in Turkey

Before bringing a full remedy action before the Turkish courts, a public official may follow the administrative application routes below under Law No. 2577 on Administrative Judicial Procedure (IYUK):

• Internal Complaint and Objection: By using the right of complaint under Law No. 657, the ending of the mobbing and the taking of administrative measures may be requested.
• Application to the Ombudsman Institution (KDK) and TIHEK: A finding of mobbing may be obtained by applying to the Ombudsman Institution (KDK) or the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey (TIHEK). Violation decisions of TIHEK are an important presumption in administrative compensation lawsuits.
• Application to the Administration Under Art. 13 of IYUK: Before the lawsuit is brought, compensation for the damage suffered is requested from the administration in writing. Upon the implied or express rejection of that request by the administration, a full remedy action is brought before the Administrative Court within 60 days.

CAN AN EMPLOYEE TERMINATE THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT FOR MOBBING AND CLAIM COMPENSATION IN TURKEY?

For an employee subjected to systematic and deliberate psychological harassment (mobbing) in the workplace in Turkey, keeping the employment relationship going can become unbearable. In labour law in Turkey, mobbing is one of the most basic grounds giving the employee the power to terminate the employment contract immediately and for just cause.

1. Which Types of Compensation Can an Employee Receive in a Case of Mobbing in Turkey?

Paragraph (II) of Article 24 of Labour Law No. 4857 regulates the employee’s options for termination for just cause under the heading “Cases that do not comply with the rules of morality and good faith, and similar cases”. Because acts of mobbing plainly breach the employer’s duty to protect the employee and its duty of equal treatment, they are assessed within the scope of this article. An employee who terminates the employment contract on a just ground may claim the compensation and receivables set out below from the employer.

• Right to Severance Pay: An employee who terminates the employment contract for just cause because of mobbing becomes fully entitled to severance pay, provided they have at least 1 year of service.
• Other Employee Receivables: Under Turkish law, alongside severance pay, the worker who carries out the termination may claim all accrued employee rights such as unpaid overtime pay, national and public holiday (UBGT) receivables, weekly rest day pay and unused annual leave pay.

• The Position on Notice Pay: Because the party terminating the contract is the employee, notice pay cannot be claimed. In the same way, since the employee relied on a just ground, the employer cannot claim notice pay from the employee either.

2. Can a Reinstatement Lawsuit Be Filed in a Case of Mobbing in Turkey?

Mobbing processes do not always end with the employee being unable to bear the pressure and terminating the employment contract for just cause. In practice, employers also dismiss outright, on unfair and invalid grounds, the employee they have worn down with systematic pressure and intimidation policies, or have them sign a letter of resignation. Mobbing may therefore form the basis not only of lawsuits for severance pay and non-pecuniary damages but also of a reinstatement lawsuit in Turkey under the job security provisions (Labour Law Arts. 18-21).

In practice the process mostly develops in two different ways, each of which may form the basis of a reinstatement lawsuit:

A. The Employee Being Forced to Resign Under Pressure (Invalidity of the Resignation)

The main aim of the employer or of the managers is most often to dismiss the employee without paying severance pay. Even if the worker, under heavy mobbing pressure, has signed a standard “letter of resignation”, and even if the SGK employment termination code has been recorded by the employer as a resignation, they may still ask the Turkish courts to declare the termination invalid and to apply the provisions on termination for just cause, by proving that the resignation was given not of free will but under the pressure (duress) of mobbing.

B. Termination of the Employment Contract by the Employer on Invalid Grounds

Where the employee does not resign despite the workplace bullying, the employer may this time terminate the contract unilaterally, using the worker’s performance or conduct as a pretext, and at that point the rights of a dismissed employee in Turkey come into play. In that case the employee;

1. may, if the conditions Turkish law requires for reinstatement are met, apply to mediation within 1 month and bring a Reinstatement Lawsuit from the service of the notice of termination,
2. may take to court, claiming that the termination was carried out to conceal the mobbing (that it was in bad faith), the job security compensation together with claims for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages arising from mobbing.

CAN FOREIGN NATIONAL EMPLOYEES FILE A MOBBING LAWSUIT IN TURKEY?

In the globalising world of business, the number of foreign national employees employed in companies established in Turkey or in institutions with foreign capital is rising by the day. One of the matters foreign employees hesitate over most is whether they can benefit from legal protection when they are subjected to psychological harassment in Turkey.

1. The Principle of Territoriality (Locality) in Turkish Employment Law

The principle of territoriality (locality) applies under Turkish labour law. Accordingly, where the work is performed within the borders of Turkey, as a rule the provisions of Turkish labour law apply regardless of the employee’s nationality (citizenship).

Under the “Principle of Equal Treatment” laid down in Article 5 of Labour Law No. 4857, in the employment relationship discrimination on grounds of language, race, colour, sex, disability, political opinion, philosophical belief, religion and sect, and on similar grounds, is prohibited. Accordingly, foreign national workers employed in Turkey with a valid work and residence permit hold exactly the same statutory rights as Turkish workers and are entitled to bring a lawsuit before the Turkish courts when they are subjected to mobbing.

2. The Employer’s Status Under Turkish Company Law

In lawsuits to be brought for mobbing (pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages and termination of the employment contract for just cause), the employer’s status under Turkish company law matters:

• Companies Established in Turkey and Companies with Foreign Capital: Foreign national personnel working in all joint stock, limited or other companies established in Turkey within the scope of commercial law are subject to Turkish employment jurisdiction.

• Turkish Branches and Liaison Offices of Foreign Companies: Foreign workers who actually work in the branch in Turkey of a company based abroad or in its liaison office and perform their work obligation in Turkey may likewise bring mobbing lawsuits before the Labour Courts in Turkey.

3. A Critical Exception: Employees Attached to a Head Office Abroad (The PILA Dimension)

The most delicate legal distinction here arises at the point of whether the employee’s employment contract and payroll are directly attached to the parent company abroad:

• Employees Paid from Abroad and on Temporary Assignment: Where the foreign employee is directly within the body of the foreign company abroad, receives their salary from the head office abroad and has come to Turkey only on a temporary assignment, then, unless there is a jurisdiction agreement or a choice of law to the contrary in the employment contract concluded, the provisions of the PILA (the Law on Private International Law and Procedural Law) come into play.

• The Court with Jurisdiction: In such situations the Turkish courts may treat the law and the courts of the country of the employer’s origin (head office) as having jurisdiction. The foreign employee may need to bring the mobbing case before the judicial authorities of the country in which the employer is established.

WHY IT MATTERS THAT EMPLOYEES FACING MOBBING TAKE LEGAL SUPPORT IN TURKEY

Mobbing lawsuits in Turkey are, both because of the “approximate proof” mechanism under which the burden of proof is relaxed and because they sit at the intersection of the Labour Law, the Turkish Code of Obligations and the Penal Code, one of the most technical and complex areas of dispute in employment law in Turkey.

Taking legal advice from a lawyer specialising in employment law in Turkey from the very beginning of the process removes critical risks in terms of preventing the loss of rights and of the course the case takes.

1. Building the Evidence Lawfully, in Time and Correctly

Because those who apply psychological harassment generally carry out their acts behind closed doors and without leaving a written trace, the process of proof is the most delicate link in a case before the Turkish courts.

• A Chronological Web of Proof: Support from a lawyer ensures that the events are set into a chronology with the date, time, place and witness details, and that e-mail and WhatsApp records, performance appraisals and medical reports are brought into the state of lawful evidence that the court will accept.
• The Risks of Haphazard Evidence Gathering: Evidence gathered by unlawful means (for example data obtained irregularly, in a way that would breach the Personal Data Protection Law) is prevented from putting the course of the case at risk.

2. Strategic Management of the Mediation and Court Process

Mandatory mediation and the court process must be designed as a whole in which each completes the other:

• Mediation Strategy: The offers to be made in the mediation meetings, the reservations to be entered in the standard minutes and the negotiation strategy are managed so as not to damage rights at a possible litigation stage before the Turkish courts.
• Tactical Notice of Termination: The timing of the termination for just cause to be made because of psychological harassment and the content of the warning notice should be prepared under the guidance of a lawyer so that the justification is placed on record.

3. Claiming All Heads of Compensation in Full and in Time

The compensation rights arising as a result of mobbing (Non-Pecuniary, Pecuniary, Severance and Discrimination Compensation and the like) must be made the subject of the lawsuit on the correct legal bases and in full.

• Preventing the Risk of Incomplete Claims: A head of compensation overlooked at the pleadings stage may later give rise to the need to bring a supplementary lawsuit, causing a loss of time, effort and rights.
• Following the Limitation and Preclusive Periods: By carefully following the limitation periods under the Labour Law (5 years) and the Turkish Code of Obligations (2 and 10 years), the risk of the case being dismissed on procedural grounds is removed.

The basic factor that directly determines the success of a mobbing lawsuit in Turkey is that an employee who is a victim of mobbing conducts their legal fight with a holistic strategy shaped according to the evidential position in the concrete case, the intensity of the period involved and the heads of compensation that can be claimed. For this reason, obtaining support from an English-speaking lawyer in Turkey is important both for understanding Turkish law and for effectively protecting the legal rights of an employee facing mobbing in Turkey.