materials / 25.12.2021

Only a responsible worker but also. Ten essential qualities of an effective employee. Employee misbehavior

Only a responsible worker but also. Ten essential qualities of an effective employee. Employee misbehavior

Every leader in an organization wants employees to work responsibly. It is possible to make an employee liable simply by law. financially responsible. Chapter 39 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation is devoted to this.


There are several types of legal liability, and one of them is the material liability of the employee to the employer - this is the obligation of the employee to compensate the employer for the direct actual damage caused through the fault of the employee (part 1 of article 238 of the Labor Code).


Existence of direct actual damage

As already mentioned, the organization must suffer direct actual damage (part 2 of article 238 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). This is a real decrease or deterioration in the condition of the employer's cash assets. It is also the need for him to incur expenses or excessive payments for “correction of the situation” - for the acquisition, restoration of property or for compensation for damage caused to third parties (in relation to property that belongs to third parties, but is with the employer, and he is responsible for it contract or law).

Employee misbehavior

The behavior of the worker, as a result of which the damage was caused, was unlawful. That is, the employee violated the job description, labor regulations and internal regulations, did not comply with safety precautions and other rules established by law or internal documents of the organization.

The damage was caused by the unlawful act of the employee

A prerequisite for bringing an employee to liability is the existence of a causal relationship between the actions of the employee and the infliction of direct actual damage. In this case, two necessary conditions must be observed:

  • the illegal action of the employee precedes the moment of harm;
  • harm to the employer is caused precisely by the unlawful actions of a particular employee.

Employee fault

The material liability of the employee arises only if the employee is at fault (part 1 of article 233 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). The concept of guilt is divided into intent and negligence. In case of intentional damage to the property of the employer or third parties, the employee is aware of what his actions will lead to, and in case of negligence - no, although he should.

EXAMPLE: the chief accountant who transferred part of the firm's revenue to his own account knows that he is hurting the firm he works for. And the cleaner who, while wiping the table, broke the monitor, did not know that this would happen, although she should have been careful.

There are circumstances that exclude the fault of the employee and release him from liability.

First, it is an act of force majeure.

EXAMPLE: The driver was hit by hail, which shattered the windshield of the car. Of course, acts of force majeure include earthquakes, wars, uprisings, hurricanes, and all other natural and social phenomena that the worker can neither influence nor prevent them.

Secondly, the employer's failure to fulfill the obligation to ensure the conditions for the storage of property entrusted to the employee.

EXAMPLE: not only the employee who, under the contract, is responsible for its contents has the keys to the safe.

Thirdly, the normal economic risk, namely:

  • there is no other way to achieve the desired result;
  • all reasonable steps have been taken to prevent harm;
  • the object of risk is property, not human life and health.

Liability: partial and full

The liability of the employee to the employer may be partial or full. The employee is liable for the full actual damage caused by him within the limits of his average monthly earnings, unless otherwise provided by the Labor Code or other federal law (Article 241 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). This is a partial responsibility.

The full liability of the employee consists in his obligation to compensate the direct actual damage caused to the employer in full (Article 242 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), and this can be a very impressive amount. Therefore, in addition to the conditions set out above, for full liability, special conditions must be “fulfilled” (Article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

  • full financial responsibility is assigned to the employee by the Labor Code or other federal law;
  • a special written contract was concluded with the employee;
  • the employee was entrusted with the relevant material values;
  • the employee made a shortage of these material assets;
  • the damage is intentional. It should be noted that in order to bring an employee to full liability for harm caused to the employer intentionally, it is not necessary to open a criminal case or an administrative offense case;
  • the damage was caused in a state of alcoholic, narcotic or toxic intoxication. The form of guilt in this case does not matter. An employee who caused harm to an employer in a state of alcoholic, narcotic or toxic intoxication will bear full financial responsibility, regardless of whether he wanted to cause this harm or did not even suspect what his actions would lead to;
  • if the damage was caused by the employee's criminal actions, as evidenced by a court verdict (not a decision to initiate a criminal case), which indicates that it was his unlawful actions of the employee that led to the damage;
  • if the damage was caused as a result of an administrative offense established by the relevant state body;
  • if the damage was caused as a result of disclosure of information constituting a legally protected secret (official, commercial or otherwise). In this case, the employer must prove that the information disclosed by the employee constituted a legally protected secret. For example, he can present the Confidentiality Agreement concluded with the counterparty, or the Regulation on commercial and official secrets adopted by the organization;
  • if the damage was caused by the employee not in the performance of the employee's labor duties (regardless of when it happened - during working or personal time).

Responsibility for the list

In order to bring an employee to full liability for the lack of valuables entrusted to him, it is necessary that, under an employment contract, he fill a position that allows him to be held fully liable for the full actual damage caused. This list of positions and professions was approved by the Decree of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated December 31, 2002 No. 85 (hereinafter referred to as the List).

An employee may also bear full financial responsibility on the basis of a one-time document, for example, an invoice. It must be said that, according to one-time documents, those employees whose position or work performed are not included in the List usually bear full financial responsibility.

Individual and collective responsibility

The financial responsibility of employees can be individual and collective.

Individual responsibility

Full individual liability applies to a specific worker who:

  • material values ​​​​are transferred, and it is he who is entrusted with the function of ensuring their safety;
  • instructed to store (process, sell, etc.) the transferred valuables, and for this he is provided with a separate isolated room and a place for storing valuables (for example, a safe);
  • must independently report to the accounting department for the values ​​\u200b\u200baccepted by him under the report.

Collective responsibility

Article 245 of the Labor Code is "responsible" for collective (team) responsibility. It can be introduced in an organization if employees jointly perform certain types of work related to the storage, processing, sale, transportation and other use of the values ​​transferred to them. In order to introduce collective (team) responsibility in organizations, it is necessary to issue an order from the head of the organization and bring it to the attention of the team (team). Then the brigade should sign an agreement on full liability. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that this should be an agreement, one for all - at the end of the agreement there must be signatures of all employees of the team.

If the organization has collective responsibility, the employer should consider the following:

  • the foreman is appointed by order of the director of the organization, but taking into account the opinion of the team. Consent must be obtained in writing. The majority of the workers of the brigade must vote "for";
  • it is possible to accept a new employee into an already created team only with the consent of the team (in the manner similar to that described above);
  • if the head (foreman) changes in the team or most of the employees leave (leave), the contract on full liability must be renegotiated by conducting an inventory;
  • a member of the team may be released from full liability, but subject to evidence of the absence of guilt (for example, was on vacation at the time of the incident)
  • if a team of workers compensates the employer for damage voluntarily, then the degree of guilt of each is determined by an agreement between the team (team) and the employer, and if compensation for damage goes through the court, then the degree of guilt will be determined by the judge.

A separate contract is required

Despite the fact that the concept of material liability is considered within the framework of labor law, agreements on the full material liability of employees must be concluded with them separately from employment contracts. If the employer simply includes the obligation to bear full financial responsibility in the text of the employee's employment contract, then this provision will not apply. After all, the presence of an appropriate written contract is one of the main conditions for the imposition of liability. At the same time, the employee must be at least 18 years old and serve or use directly monetary, commodity values ​​or other property (Article 245 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

But the employment contract must contain a clause stating that the employee performs work in accordance with the List and bears full financial responsibility, about which an appropriate contract must be concluded.

It is especially important to conduct an inventory before concluding an agreement on full liability in order to find out what values ​​the employee or team will be responsible for. An inventory should also be carried out in connection with holidays of financially responsible employees, sick leave and dismissal.

The financially responsible employee must know ...

Material liability is assigned to employees only for the property that he received according to the primary accounting document.

In addition to contracts, such an employee must have a clear job description.

Steps to collect

In order to start recovering damages from an employee or a group of employees, the employer must follow a certain sequence of his actions.

Step 1

Conduct an inventory of property in the organization, identify lost or damaged property

Step 2

Schedule an internal investigation

Establish a Commission of Inquiry

Establish causes of loss or damage to property

Step 3

Request written explanations of the causes of damage from the financially responsible person

If the material person refuses to give written explanations, draw up an act about this (Article 247 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation)

Step 4

Determine the amount of damage (based on actual losses at market prices on the day the damage occurred, but not lower than the value of the property according to accounting data (including depreciation) (Article 246 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation)

Step 5

If the damage was caused by several employees, determine the degree of fault, the type of liability limit for each of them individually

During the audit, as well as after its completion, the employee or his representative should be allowed to familiarize himself with its materials. If they deem it appropriate, then, according to the rules of Articles 386,391 of the Labor Code, they can appeal against both the findings of the audit and its materials.

How to claim damages

Damage can be recovered from the employee both without going to court and in court.

If the damage does not exceed the average monthly earnings of the employee, it can be recovered from him without going to court. To do this, the head must issue an appropriate order (in any form).

It happens that the employee agrees to compensate for the damage voluntarily. In this case, the organization can provide him with installments. But the employee must write a written obligation to compensate for the damage and indicate the period in which he plans to do this.

If a month has elapsed since the damage was caused or the amount of damage exceeds the average monthly salary of the employee, and it was not possible to “agree amicably”, the employer may file a claim for bringing the employee to liability in court. As mentioned above, in this case, a reduced limitation period is applied - one year (Article 392 of the Labor Code).

If the employee quit without reimbursing the damage, the employer can also go to court (Article 248 of the Labor Code).

My new show on PodFM is out, in which I explain why some people get paid twice as much for the same job.

Quite often, I see two employees sitting next to each other who do almost the same work. Let's call them, say, Petya and Masha.

Their positions are slightly different. Masha is an operator. And Petya is a senior operator. And their salary, respectively, differs twice: Masha has 25 thousand, and Petya has 50 thousand.

The question is - why is that? Why pay Petya so much? Why is he paid as much as 25 thousand extra for various petty nonsense, which takes Petya no more than an hour a week?

I answer. Pete is paid for responsibility.

Many people misunderstand responsibility. Many people think that responsibility is when a person plays a "gag": he personally takes on any business that concerns him at least indirectly. Let's say the toilet ran out of toilet paper - he will go and put a fresh press there so that the asses of other employees can somehow turn over before the cleaner arrives with a new roll.

So. Actually, it's not a responsibility. It would be more correct to call such a character trait pedantry or tediousness. Responsibility is when an employee takes responsibility for a certain scope of work.

Immediately an example from life. It is necessary to draw up an important document and fax it to another company.

An irresponsible employee will prepare a document, fax it to another company, and on this consider his task completed.

The responsible employee will additionally call in another hour and ask whether the document has reached and whether it is drawn up correctly.

It would seem trifles - a two-minute conversation on the phone. However, if this call is not made, there is a chance that the fax will fall into the hands of the wrong person and will simply be thrown away. An important document will not be submitted on time, and in a month, when this becomes clear, the deadline for submitting the document will have already been missed. As a result - sometimes big losses and unnecessary hemorrhoids.

It is for this trifle - the ability to do the work to the end and check the results - that responsible employees are valued.

You can tell the responsible employee "do this" and forget. He will, and if he can't, he'll call you and explain why.

If we give an order to an irresponsible employee, then we will have to spend a lot of extra time on controlling him. As a rule, managers do not have this scarce time.

Another example from life. The company goes to the barbecue. One of the participants is asked to buy skewers.

A responsible person will drop by the store and buy them. If there are no skewers, he will go to the next store or call the others and say that there are no skewers.

An irresponsible person will look into the store, see that there are no skewers there, and ... on this he will consider his job done. And when they ask him in three days "where is the skewers" he will spread his arms.

Please note: a responsible person is not a hero who achieves the goal at all costs. This is not a masochist who voluntarily takes on other people's duties.

This is just a person who does not hang problems in the air. He always brings the issue to its logical end: either solves the problem, or, having stumbled upon an obstacle, shifts the responsibility back to the management.

Another example. An important device broke down, an employee is instructed to fix it. Repairmen say that it is necessary to wait two months for details.

An irresponsible person will order the parts and wait. The person in charge will call their manager and tell them about the problem. Then the manager will not suddenly find out in a week that the device is still broken and will be repaired no one knows when.

It should be noted that additional phone calls do not take any time. On the contrary, responsibility saves a lot of time, which otherwise would have to be spent on correcting one's own mistakes.

At the same time, responsible people are usually paid one and a half to two times more in the same position than irresponsible ones. The conclusions are perhaps obvious. Being responsible is both easier and more profitable in terms of money.

Magazine: Directory of personnel officer
Year: 2011
Author: Orlova Elena Vasilievna
Topic: Documents of the personnel service, Full liability, Mandatory and additional conditions
Category: HR practice

    Document Templates
      Agreement on full individual liability Supplementary agreement on the performance of duties of a temporarily absent employee Order on the performance of additional work Order on inventory

    Regulations

      Labor Code of the Russian Federation (extract) Federal Law No. 126-FZ of July 7, 2003 “On Communications” (extract) Federal Law No. 161-FZ of November 14, 2002 “On State and Municipal Unitary Enterprises” (extract) Federal Law of November 21. 1996 No. 129-FZ “On Accounting” (extract) Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated July 29, 1998 No. 34n Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 16, 2006 No. 52 “On the application by courts of legislation governing the liability of employees for damage caused to the employer” (extract) Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 2 dated March 17, 2004 “On the application by the courts of the Russian Federation of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation” (extract)

There is such a special category of workers - matresponsible. And despite the fact that you will not find a special chapter in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation that establishes the specifics of regulating their labor, there are plenty of peculiarities in the relationship between such workers and the employer. In what cases is it legal to increase the liability of an employee, what should be remembered when concluding an agreement on full liability and what to do when the responsible employee needs to be urgently replaced?

The full liability of the employee consists in his obligation to compensate the direct actual damage caused to the employer in full. Recall that the full liability for damage caused to the employer in the performance of labor duties is assigned to the employee, in particular, by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation or other federal laws (Article 242, clause 1, part 1, article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

For example, according to part 5 of Art. 68 of the Federal Law of 07.07.2003 No. 126-FZ “On Communications”, employees of telecom operators are liable to their employers for the loss or delay in the delivery of all types of postal and telegraph items, damage to mailing attachments that occurred through their fault in the performance of their official duties , in the amount of responsibility that the telecom operator bears to the user of communication services, unless another measure of responsibility is provided for by the relevant federal laws.

The list of cases of full material liability of employees is established by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and cannot be supplemented either by a local act of the employer or by an individual agreement with the employee, with the exception of labor contracts concluded with the deputy head and the chief accountant (part 2 of article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Article 244 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation allows the conclusion of written agreements on full liability for the shortage of entrusted property with employees who have reached the age of 18 and directly serve or use monetary, commodity values ​​or other property.

So, we can distinguish three categories of materially responsible employees due to the peculiarities of the concluded labor contracts and contracts on full liability.

EMPLOYEES DIRECTLY WORKING WITH MATERIAL VALUES

Advice It is impossible to conclude an agreement on full liability with a minor. Therefore, it is better not to hire him for work related to the direct maintenance of monetary and material values.

Full material liability may be assigned to persons who, on the basis of a special written agreement ( Attachment 1) or funds, documents (securities, forms of strict reporting, etc.) or other property belonging to the employer were transferred under a one-time document (clause 2, part 1, article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

With regard to employees directly working with monetary or material values, the above general rules for concluding an agreement on full individual liability, established by Art. 244 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation ( tab. one).

Table 1

Conditions for concluding an agreement on full liability

The list of positions and works replaced or performed by employees with whom agreements on full individual liability for the shortage of entrusted property (hereinafter referred to as the List), as well as the standard form of such an agreement, were approved by the Decree of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated December 31, 2002 No. 85.

So, according to the List, agreements on full individual liability, in particular, can be concluded with employees replacing the positions of cashiers, controllers, sellers, managers, other warehouse managers and others, as well as those employed in receiving and paying all types of payments, according to settlements when selling (realizing) goods, products and services (including not through a cash desk, through a cash desk, without a cash desk through a seller, through a waiter or other person responsible for making payments), etc.

Written agreements on full liability can be concluded only with those employees and for the performance of those types of work that are provided for by the specified List. The list is exhaustive and is not subject to broad interpretation (Rostrud letter dated October 19, 2006 No. 1746-6-1).

Our cashier went on maternity leave, and one of the employees was offered to temporarily take her place. Simultaneously with the conclusion of an additional agreement to the employment contract on transfer, it is necessary to conclude an agreement on full individual liability. Usually, we draw up all liability documents strictly according to the approved standard form. But this time there was a need to make certain clarifications in the contract. Are we allowed to do this?

The standard form of an agreement on full individual liability was approved by the Decree of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated December 31, 2002 No. 85. But this is just a standard form - it is advisory in nature. Moreover, the obligation of this form is not directly provided for by law.

Thus, you have the right to change or supplement the standard form of an agreement on full individual liability, and you can also develop your own form of such an agreement. The main thing is to make sure that certain conditions of your liability agreement do not worsen the position of the employee in comparison with the established current labor legislation, collective agreement, agreements. Otherwise, such conditions may not apply.

Please note: if the position (work) substituted (performed) by an employee is included in the List, but an agreement on full liability has not been concluded with him, then the employee will not be fully liable for the reason in question (clause 2, part 1, art. 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). If at the same time the employer establishes:

    the fault of such an employee in causing damage (in the absence of intent); illegal actions (inaction); causal relationship between them, material liability can be imposed only within the limits of his average monthly earnings.

In our organization, employees are given expensive overalls. Do we have the right to oblige employees to sign agreements on full liability in case they suddenly lose or spoil their overalls?

In this case, the employee cannot be held fully liable for the overalls issued to him for work by concluding an appropriate contract with him. Such contracts are concluded only with those employees whose work is related to the direct service or use of monetary, commodity values ​​or other property (Article 244 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). Moreover, the positions of such employees should be mentioned in the List.

At the same time, in any case, the employee is obliged to take care of the property of the employer, including work clothes (Article 21 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). If the overalls are lost or damaged due to the fault of the employee, he must legally compensate the organization for the damage (Article 238 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, as a general rule, liability is limited to his average earnings (Article 241 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). That is, regardless of the cost of damaged overalls, only an amount not exceeding his average earnings can be recovered from an employee.

True, in some cases, the employee will still be obliged to compensate the organization for all the losses that have occurred through his fault. For example, if he deliberately spoils the uniform or overalls issued to him (paragraph 3 of part 1 of article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). In this case, the obligation to compensate for the damage in full will come by force of law. And the fact that an agreement on full individual liability has not been concluded with the employee will not matter in this case.

Advice When hiring a financially responsible person, specify the specifics of his work related to the maintenance of material assets in the employment contract and do not delay concluding an agreement with him on full liability

The ideal case is when an agreement on full liability is concluded simultaneously with the signing of an employment contract. At the same time, it is advisable to stipulate in the text of the employment contract both the working conditions and the fact that it will be associated with the maintenance of property on the terms of full liability.

Please note: if the fulfillment of duties for the maintenance of material assets is the main labor function of the employee, which is agreed upon when hiring, and by virtue of the current legislation, an agreement on full liability can be concluded with him, which the employee knew about, the refusal to conclude such an agreement should be considered as a failure to fulfill labor duties with all the ensuing consequences. This is indicated, in particular, in par. 2 paragraph 36 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 17, 2004 No. 2 “On the application by the courts of the Russian Federation of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation” (hereinafter - Resolution No. 2). It is in order for the employer to confirm that when hiring, the need to conclude an agreement on full individual liability was stipulated, and this condition should be reflected in the employment contract with the employee.

The employee was transferred to a position related to financial responsibility. In the additional agreement on the transfer, we prescribed the possibility of concluding an agreement on full individual liability, and the employee agreed to this condition. Now we offer to sign the contract, but he refuses. What should we do?

You have the right to require the employee to conclude an agreement on full individual liability, subject to the conditions that we mentioned above. In addition, when signing an employment contract, and in this situation, a transfer agreement, an employee must be aware that an agreement on full liability can be concluded with him.

The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in Resolution No. 2 equates an employee's refusal to conclude an agreement on material liability to a disciplinary offense with "all the ensuing consequences." And this means that in case of refusal to conclude an agreement on full material liability, a disciplinary sanction may be applied to the employee in the prescribed manner. For example, you can act according to the following scheme: refused once - you can make a remark, continues to refuse - reprimand, did not draw conclusions, and did not sign an agreement on full liability - you can dismiss the employee on the basis provided for in paragraph 5 of part 1 of article . 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, - for repeated failure to fulfill labor duties in the presence of a disciplinary sanction.

HEAD OF THE ORGANIZATION

The full liability of the head of the organization for the damage caused to the organization comes by force of law (Article 277 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), and regardless of whether the employment contract with him contains a condition on full liability or not (clause 9 of the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 16, 2006 No. 52 "On the application by the courts of legislation governing the liability of employees for damage caused to the employer"; hereinafter - Resolution No. 52). At the same time, as indicated in the same paragraph of the resolution, the issue of the amount of compensation for damage (direct actual damage, losses) is resolved on the basis of the federal law, in accordance with which the head is liable.

For example, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 25 of the Federal Law of November 14, 2002 No. 161-FZ “On State and Municipal Unitary Enterprises”, the head of a unitary enterprise shall be liable in accordance with the procedure established by law for losses caused to the unitary enterprise by its guilty actions (inaction), including in case of loss of property unitary enterprise.

Thus, the employer may provide for a condition on the liability of the head of the organization in the employment contract (additional agreement to it), however, the absence of such a condition does not deprive the employer of the opportunity to recover damages in full from the head of the organization.

DEPUTY HEAD OF THE ORGANIZATION AND CHIEF ACCOUNTANT

Full financial responsibility can be assigned to the deputy head of the organization or the chief accountant, provided that this is established by the employment contract (part 2 of article 243 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation) ( tab. 2).

table 2

Conditions for bringing individual employees to full liability

Keep in mind that it is impossible to provide for a condition on full liability in an employment contract, for example, with a chief engineer. The inclusion in an employment contract with a simple accountant of a condition on full liability is also illegal. By virtue of h. 2 Article. 9 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, such a condition, which worsens the position of the employee in comparison with the established labor legislation, cannot be applied.

In the employment contract with the chief accountant, we prescribed a condition on full liability for damage caused through his fault. And how they looked into the water: as a result, he caused damage, and very tangible. Can we recover from him the damage in full, as provided for by the employment contract, despite the fact that at the time of its infliction, the chief accountant had not yet passed the test established when hiring?

Labor legislation applies in full to those employees who are hired with a probationary condition (Article 70 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). In this regard, the establishment of a test is not a circumstance that excludes liability, including full liability, in cases provided for by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation or other federal laws, and in particular - in the situation under consideration, when the condition for the full individual liability of the chief accountant is prescribed in his employment contract.

If the employment contract with the deputy head of the organization or the chief accountant does not contain the terms of full liability, then these employees will bear limited liability for the damage caused, that is, within their average monthly earnings (clause 10 of Resolution No. 52). They can be brought to full liability only on a general basis, like any other employee (for example, in case of intentional damage).

Is it possible to bring the chief accountant to full liability for the lack of material assets?

It is impossible to bring the chief accountant to full liability for the lack of any valuables, for example, money in the cash register. As already noted, only employees directly servicing monetary or material values ​​(for example, cashiers) bear full liability for the shortage. Their positions should be included in the List, and agreements on full liability for the shortage of property entrusted to them are concluded with such employees. The chief accountant is not engaged in direct servicing of monetary and material values. Except, of course, in exceptional cases: when he combines his position with the position named in the List, for example, the position of a cashier (or performs such additional work on a part-time basis), and an agreement was concluded with him on full liability for the lack of monetary values ​​precisely as with cashier.

REPLACEMENT OF A TEMPORARILY ABSENT FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE EMPLOYEE

In practice, situations are not uncommon when a financially responsible person (storekeeper, cashier, freight forwarder, etc.), with whom an agreement on full individual liability has been concluded and who owns certain property, is temporarily absent (for example, is on annual or educational leave or leave without pay, sick, sent on a business trip, absent due to unexplained circumstances). At the same time, the acceptance and issuance of monetary and material values, of course, does not stop. And there is a need to arrange for the replacement of a financially responsible person during his absence. In practice, various methods are used to replace a temporarily absent employee ( tab. 3).

Table 3

Substitution registration methods

Are there any peculiarities in paperwork when replacing materially responsible employees that should be taken into account?

According to paragraph 2 of Art. 12 of the Federal Law of November 21, 1996 No. 129-FZ “On Accounting”, clause 27 of the Regulation on Accounting and Accounting in the Russian Federation, approved. by order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated July 29, 1998 No. 34n, when changing financially responsible persons, the organization is obliged to conduct an inventory.

The inventory procedure is established by the Guidelines for the inventory of property and financial obligations, approved. order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 13.06.1995 No. 49. The form of the order to conduct an inventory is given in Appendix No. 1 to these Guidelines ( annex 4). It must be registered in the book for monitoring the implementation of orders to conduct an inventory in the form given in Appendix No. 2 to the Guidelines.

After summing up the results of the inventory, it is necessary to draw up an act of transferring monetary, inventory items, and other property to a substitute employee (in any form).

You should know

    An employment contract on full liability can be concluded with an employee only if there are three conditions: Condition 1. The employee has reached the age of 18 years. Condition 2. Direct service to him or the use of monetary, commodity values ​​or other property in the performance of a labor function. Condition 3. The presence of a position occupied by an employee in the List, approved. Decree of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated December 31, 2002 No. 85.

Attachment 1

An example of drawing up an agreement on full individual liability

Annex 2

An example of drawing up an additional agreement on the performance of duties of a temporarily absent employee with the imposition of full liability

1 -1

Source: Electronic catalog of the branch department in the direction of "Jurisprudence"
(Libraries of the Faculty of Law) of the Scientific Library. M. Gorky St. Petersburg State University


Starodubskaya, E. N.
The concept of a responsible worker in the Soviet
labor law /E. N. Starodubskaya.
//Jurisprudence. -1980. - No. 3. - S. 49 - 54
  • The article is in the publication “Jurisprudence. »
    • Material(s):
    • The concept of a responsible worker in Soviet labor law.
      Starodubskaya, E. N.

      E. N. STARODUBSKAYA,

      PhD in Law

      THE CONCEPT OF THE RESPONSIBLE WORKER IN THE SOVIET

      LABOR LAW

      The current labor legislation operates with the concept of "responsible employee" in two cases - when it comes to establishing a one-month probationary period when hiring and when imposing disciplinary liability in the order of subordination. In the first case, this term is used in the Labor Code of the RSFSR (Article 22), in the second - in the Regulation on disciplinary responsibility in the order of subordination, approved by the decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR of March 29, 1932. However, neither one nor the other act explain this concept, do not give a list of persons who should be considered responsible employees, do not formulate the criteria from which one must proceed when delimiting this category of employees. The concept of a responsible worker was formed historically. It received regulatory approval in the 1920s. Thus, in the resolution of the People's Commissariat of Labor of the USSR dated March 31, 1925, it was noted that wages at the rate of responsible employees should be paid to those political workers who take a responsible part in the cause of party, trade union, Soviet, economic and cooperative construction and are responsible not only for the technical fulfillment of the duties entrusted to them, but are also responsible for the political and ideological implementation of the duties entrusted to them. 1 The number of responsible, political workers included: chairmen of executive committees (district, city, district), heads of departments of executive committees, judges, prosecutors, heads of enterprises, institutions, organizations. executive editors of all-union, republican (union and autonomous republics), regional newspapers, etc. 2 It should be noted that even then the category of responsible employees covered a limited circle of people: for this purpose, a list of positions assigned to this category was established.

      Initially, special legal regulation of the labor of responsible employees concerned only the issues of their wages. In general, the status of this category of employees was regulated by social norms contained in party, trade union charters and other documents. Over time, the scope of legal regulation were; questions related to other aspects of the labor activity of responsible employees are also included. For example, for this category, an administrative procedure for the consideration of labor conflicts was established. In a private explanation of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR dated February 7, 1927 on the judicial procedure for the reinstatement of persons incorrectly dismissed from service, it was noted: “taking into account the special nature of the work of employees of state institutions and state enterprises, whose work requires not only proper qualifications, but also special confidence in this person, as well as persons receiving positions of responsible political workers, to recognize that the complaints of these persons about improper dismissal should be considered only in an administrative manner. 3 The circle of persons subject to this clarification corresponded to the list of positions provided for by the already mentioned decree of March 31, 1925 on the payment of responsible political workers (and later additions to it). The administrative procedure for considering complaints on the listed issues also extended to persons of senior administrative and technical personnel of state institutions and enterprises enjoying the right to hire and dismiss. four

      Along with the introduction of an administrative (higher in the order of subordination bodies and persons) procedure for the consideration of labor disputes, the list of responsible employees was specified. This category included: a) heads of enterprises, institutions, organizations and their deputies; b) heads of structural subdivisions of these bodies (heads of workshops, foremen, etc.); c) elected employees holding paid positions in the organization that elected them; d) other persons (for example, executive editors of periodicals, fire chiefs in enterprises, chiefs of fire departments and teams, etc.). 5 The dominant category in this list was executives, which is also typical for subsequent lists. Thus, the resolution of the People's Commissariat of Labor of the USSR on the procedure for dismissal and reinstatement of responsible employees, adopted on October 18, 1929, whose cases on dismissal and reinstatement were not subject to consideration in the RSC and labor sessions, provided for the introduction of an administrative procedure for the consideration of labor disputes for persons enjoying the right to hire and dismiss in all enterprises, institutions and organizations, as well as for other categories of responsible employees of state, cooperative and public enterprises, institutions, organizations holding positions listed in the three lists. 6

      List No. 1 (categories of responsible employees) was general, as it applied to all state, cooperative and public enterprises, institutions, organizations, except for transport and communications. Compared to the above list, it was expanded and consisted of 18 items. 7 In particular, it included such categories of responsible employees as chief and senior accountants of all institutions, enterprises and organizations, heading financial accounting and accounting departments and units; contractors with independent departments or offices; other executives classified as responsible by law.

      Lists No. 2 and No. 3 concerned responsible employees of transport and communications enterprises.

      In the 1930s, the legal regulation of the work of responsible employees was further developed in the legislation on disciplinary responsibility. For responsible workers, disciplinary liability was established in the order of subordination, which was regulated by the decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR of March 20, 1932. .9 and consisted of 25 items.

      The main group among the categories of responsible employees in this list were also executives of enterprises, institutions and organizations. In addition to them, it included executive editors of periodicals and non-periodicals, their full-time deputies and assistants, executive secretaries of newspaper, magazine, book publishing houses and executive secretaries of editorial offices, technical and sanitary inspectors of departments, tax inspectors, inspectors of organizational departments of the CEC of autonomous republics, regional and regional executive committees and other responsible employees.

      The list of responsible employees who bear disciplinary responsibility in the order of subordination has undergone certain changes in connection with the adoption of the Regulations on the procedure for considering labor disputes of January 31, 1957. This Regulation introduced a unified list of categories of employees whose labor disputes concerned both issues of dismissal, transfer and reinstatement in position and disciplinary action. However, unlike the previous ones, this list did not contain a direct indication that the employees included in it were responsible. The regulation on disciplinary liability in the order of subordination, as before, considered employees falling under this list as responsible.

      The legislator, establishing the list of employees whose labor disputes were considered in the order of subordination, proceeded from different criteria. In some cases, such a criterion was the nature of the functions performed (leading, elected, prosecutorial and investigative workers), and in others - a special way of filling positions (professional and teaching staff, employees of research institutions, artists and other creative workers whose positions replaced by competition). If the former, by the nature of the functions performed, could be recognized as responsible workers, then this in no way applied to the latter. With subsequent additions, categories of employees were included in the list mainly by the nature of the functions performed.

      The regulation on the procedure for considering labor disputes of May 20, 1974 made significant changes to the list of categories of workers whose labor disputes are considered by higher authorities in the order of subordination. The Appendix to the new Regulation contains two lists (instead of the previously existing single list). The basis for the inclusion of certain categories of employees in List No. 2 is a specific way of filling positions (their election to a position by competition) or a specific condition for maintaining a position (positive certification). After all, only in cases where the employees included in List No. 2 are dismissed from work due to the recognition of their inadequacy for their position (as a result of certification or in another established manner) or due to not being elected for a new term through competition, they can file a complaint in order of subordination to higher authorities. If labor disputes of employees included in the list No. 2 are caused by their dismissal for some other reason or are not related to dismissal at all (for example, the imposition of a disciplinary sanction is appealed), they, in accordance with Regulation 1974, cannot be considered in the order of subordination .

      Although the criterion for the inclusion of certain categories of employees in List No. 1 is the nature of the functions performed (this includes, in particular, executive, elected employees holding paid positions in the organization that elected them; prosecutors and investigators; some employees of editorial and publishing houses, TASS, radio and television, bodies of the USSR Gosgortekhnadzor system, fish protection, bodies of the system of the main department for foreign tourism; employees of the Main Customs Department, diplomatic workers), these functions are very different in their content. Some relate to the management of an enterprise, institution, organization or their structural subdivisions (executives), others are associated with the administration of justice, investigation of crimes and oversight of the rule of law (judges and prosecutorial and investigative workers), others with the management of the activities of the media (employees of TASS, radio , television, newspaper editors), or with the relations of the Soviet state with foreign states (diplomatic officials) and citizens (employees of the Main Directorate for Foreign Tourism and employees of the Main Customs Directorate); this also includes control functions (employees of the Gosgortekhnadzor system and fish protection workers), etc.

      However, the positions included in List No. 1 have a common feature on the basis of which they can be classified as responsible employees - they all involve the performance of functions that the state recognizes as particularly important. The concept of a responsible worker in the form in which it was historically formed in our country does not mean this or that content of labor functions, but precisely their importance. The same meaning is given to the word "responsible" in a purely semantic sense. ten

      Therefore, recognizing the importance of the functions performed as a decisive criterion in the concept of a responsible employee and taking into account that responsibility in the order of subordination is characteristic first of all and mainly of the category of responsible employees, we must come to the conclusion that the normative basis for classifying certain employees as list No. 1 of Appendix No. 1 to the Regulations on the procedure for considering labor disputes of May 20, 1974 should serve as a number of responsible employees, although the term “responsible employees” itself is not directly used in it. In this regard, a one-month probationary period for employment should be applied only to those employees who are indicated in this list. It is hardly correct to take a different approach to the concept of a responsible employee when resolving issues of disciplinary responsibility in the order of subordination and the duration of a test when hiring.

      In Soviet literature, other points of view have been expressed regarding the concept of a responsible worker.

      According to one of them, “when deciding whether an employee is a responsible employee, one should be guided by the Unified nomenclature of positions of employees, approved by the Decree of the State Labor Committee of September 9, 1967.” 11 At the same time, employees classified by the Unified Nomenclature as managers or specialists are recognized as responsible employees. 12 Although this point of view has received some recognition, it was formulated in the form of a postulate and has not received any serious substantiation.

      Why, then, when referring this or that employee to the category of responsible employees, one should be guided precisely by the Unified nomenclature of positions of employees? None of the scientists who share this point of view answers this question. There is no answer in the explanation of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the USSR. Supporters of the considered point of view raise another question - which of the three categories of employees provided for by the Unified nomenclature of positions of employees can be classified as responsible employees. Since it is clear that technical performers do not fall under this concept, it is concluded that the other two categories form it. But after all, the list of specialists in the Unified Nomenclature of Servants' Positions is extremely wide, it covers not only employees whose functions are undoubtedly essential for the state (for example, people's judge, prosecutor, investigator, envoy, embassy adviser, diplomatic courier, etc.), but and a number of workers who cannot be called responsible workers in this sense (for example, a librarian, bibliographer, merchandiser, economist, accountant, etc.).

      The unified nomenclature divides employees into three categories not according to the degree of importance of the functions they perform, but according to the nature of their work, and, perhaps, this is precisely why they do not use the concept of "responsible worker".

      Attention is also drawn to the fact that in the judicial practice in criminal cases, when defining the concept of “official in a responsible position”, the Unified nomenclature of positions of employees is not addressed. The decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR of July 31, 1962 stated that “the question of the responsible position of an official accused of taking a bribe is decided by the court depending on the specific circumstances of the case, taking into account the nature of the position held and the importance of the functions performed by him (representatives of the authorities, executives of enterprises, institutions and departments, operatives of controlling and auditing bodies, etc.). 13 Of course, the criminal law concept of an official occupying a responsible position is not identical to the concept of “responsible employee” used in labor law, but when deciding on the responsible position of an employee (after all, a responsible employee is nothing more than an employee occupying a responsible position!) in labor law, the same criterion should be applied as in criminal law.

      A different point of view was expressed by V. I. Turanov, who identifies the concept of responsible employees with the commanding staff of the structural divisions of enterprises and institutions (heads of services and departments of plant management, heads of workshops, foremen, senior foremen, etc.), excluding the category "leading workers" from it (he refers to the latter only those officials whose activities are carried out on the scale of the USSR, union or autonomous republic, territory, region, national district, city, district, enterprise, institution, organization). In his opinion, responsible employees, unlike executives, “do not directly possess the administrative powers of the governing bodies or exercise them, but in a specific area and in other forms. The official powers of these officials are determined by the tasks of this governing body, the volume and nature of the work performed. Therefore, such persons have much less official rights and obligations than those of senior employees. 14 Undoubtedly, in terms of their competence and legal status, the heads of structural divisions of enterprises (institutions, organizations) differ from the heads of these enterprises, but both categories of officials perform managerial functions (albeit in different volumes and in different forms) and are included in the Unified nomenclature of positions of employees in the category of "managers", as well as in List No. 1 of the Appendix to the Regulations on the Procedure for Considering Labor Disputes of 1974.

      Of course, from the point of view of bringing the two specified categories of workers to responsibility by the people's control bodies, there are important differences, but they do not directly relate to the concept of responsible workers. To assert that the highest group of managers are not responsible workers means to contradict both the logical meaning of the term "responsible worker" and the development of this concept in the history of Soviet legislation.

      1 See: News of the NKT USSR, 1925, No. 17-18.

      2 See: Regulations on the Remuneration of Remuneration of Responsible Political Workers of November 25, 1929 (Izvestia of the NKT USSR, 1929, No. 48-49); Circular of the NCT of the USSR of December 10, 1929 No. 374 On the procedure for implementing the Regulations of November 251, 1929 (Appendix to No. 48-49 of the News of the NCT of the USSR for 1929).

      3 See: News of the NKT USSR, 1927, No. 24.

      4 See: Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR of May 16, 1927 “On the reinstatement of persons incorrectly dismissed from service by judicial procedure” (Izvestiya NKT USSR, 1927, No. 29).

      5 Decree of the NCT of the USSR of March 16, 1929 “On the procedure for dismissal and reinstatement of responsible employees whose cases on dismissal and reinstatement are not subject to consideration in the RCC and labor sessions” (see: Izvestiya NKT USSR, 1929, No. 15 -16).

      6 See: News of the NKT USSR, 1930, No. 1-2.

      7 See: Appendix No. 1 to Art. 1 Decree of the CNT of October 18, 1929 (Izvestiya of the NCT of the USSR, 1930, No. 1-2)

      8 See: SU RSFSR, 1932, No. 32, art. 152.

      9 See: News of the NKT RSFSR, 1932, No. 24

      10 Explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language explain the word “responsible” as “associated with responsibility, very serious, important” (Dictionary of the modern Russian literary language. M., 1959, v. 8, p. 1273-1274), “essentially important, very serious ”(Ozhegov S, I. Dictionary of the Russian language. M., 1973, p. 427).

      11 Korshunov Yu. N., Lifshits R. 3., Rumyantseva M. S. Soviet labor legislation. M., 1976, p. 27.

      12 See ibid. The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the USSR gave the same answer to requests from courts and organizations regarding the application of the provisions of labor legislation regarding the probationary period (see: Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the USSR, 1977, No. 4, p. 41).

      13 Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the USSR, 1962, No. 5, p. 11. The same provision was reproduced in 1976 in the decision of the Presidium of the Moscow City Court (see: Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR, 1976, No. 12, p. 9).

      14 See: Turanov V. I. Bringing to responsibility by the bodies of people's control. M., 1972, p. 12-14

    Information updated:25.11.2003

    Related materials:
    | Books, articles, documents

    Actually, any employee of a company/firm can be a financially responsible person, that is, deal with items (it can be money, documents, office equipment, goods, and much more) that are of some value to the enterprise for the benefit of which he works.

    The main difference from other employees is that such a person bears full or partial responsibility for the values ​​that he has been entrusted with or that he has to use to carry out his activities.

    Most often, this category of workers includes:


    A detailed list of areas of activity where it can be introduced, as well as the positions of employees who can be materially responsible employees, are enshrined at the legislative level in the Labor Code and the Decree of the Ministry of Labor of the Russian Federation (No. 85 of 12/31/2002).

    Obligations of the financially responsible person

    It should be noted that the person responsible for valuables can be both a senior employee and an ordinary (performer).

    According to the Labor Code, an employee who caused direct actual damage by his actions or inaction compensates him in full. He is exempt from compensation for lost profits of the employer. Hence, the mat.responsible employee is obliged:

    • Carefully and accurately treat the values ​​transferred to him (or by means of which the employee’s activities are carried out) and do everything in his power to preserve them and prevent possible damage;
    • If safety mat. values ​​are threatened by any threat, the employee is obliged to immediately inform his immediate superior or the head of the organization;
    • Monitor the status and number of entrusted MCs by keeping records, timely and unscheduled inspections, inventory and audits, be present and take part in the process of accepting values ​​into work.

    Details and details depend on the field of activity of the company and the position of the employee responsible for the MC. They are spelled out in the employment contract, or in the contract of liability.

    Rights

    PTOs have rights that not only protect them, but also allow them to carry out their direct work. Namely, employees have the right to:

    • Participate in the discussion and resolution of issues on the implementation of the contract of liability;
    • Require the employer or immediate supervisor to create conditions for the fulfillment of duties to ensure the safety of entrusted valuables, to ask for unscheduled inspections, audits, inventories;
    • To get acquainted and make agreed adjustments to reports on the balances, the movement of the MC and the results of checks;
    • Be directly involved in the acceptance and processing of items for which they need to be responsible;
    • Require the employer or immediate supervisor to remove from work employees who impede the fulfillment of the liability agreement.

    A detailed list of rights is reflected in contracts and job descriptions and should not contradict the law.

    Documents of responsible persons in the organization

    There are a number of mandatory documents on the basis of which a MOT can be appointed at an enterprise.

    Chief among them - order of appointment mat.responsible employee, which includes a link to a legislative act regulating the possibility of appointing such an employee and directly the full name of the employee himself.

    It is drawn up in duplicate and signed by the parties to the agreement. This document can be issued both when hiring, and after, when the employee starts working with material assets due to a change in position, duties, or if necessary.

    Contracts and orders related to material liability are mandatory recorded in the ledger, which reflects the dates of compilation, registration numbers, degree of responsibility (full, partial, individual, collective), full name of the responsible employee (in the case of collective responsibility - foreman), his signature and changes .

    Also, some organizations have job description, which is drawn up and signed also in two copies. This document is not mandatory, but its presence does not contradict legislative acts.

    The document that confirms the fact of the transfer of valuables to the person who is responsible for them is the act of acceptance and transfer. The form of the document is unified and contains information: about the employee transferring and accepting responsibility for the safety of material assets; date, time, number and place of filling; operating or storage conditions; name, quantity and characteristics of values.

    The document must also have 2 copies, drawn up and signed directly at the time of transfer of values.

    Features of drafting a job description

    Due to the variety of positions that can be held liable, the job description is compiled individually for each employee and reflects the full specifics of the work. It indicates specific actions, special duties, the boundaries of responsibility of each of these employees.

    In this way, The job description of a person contains:

    • Qualification requirements - age, length of service, education, experience, availability of any special training;
    • Enumeration of laws, orders, orders of the head of organization. Forms and methods of accounting (not only specific - for a particular position, but also, for example, accounting). Their employee must know to carry out their activities.
    • Rules for the operation of equipment, units, etc.;
    • Safety regulations;
    • Action plan in case of a threat of loss, damage to valuable property;
    • A list of specific employee actions when working with values.

    General concepts and abbreviations should not be introduced into the text of the document.

    I would also like to say that job description mat. responsible employee- the document of which, in principle, does not exist, because should the instruction refers to a specific position, and all clauses in the contract will be different. An example of one of them (not the most standard one) is below:

    briefing

    Along with the job description, the instruction of employees occupies an important place.

    It can be carried out at a certain frequency set by the employer, and is required for the rational distribution of employees' time and the development and improvement of skills.

    It can be done both in writing and orally. During the briefing, innovations and changes related to the activities of employees are reported.

    But at the same time, the briefing procedure is not mandatory, since it performs functions similar to the job description.

    Reporting

    In order to control the activities of a responsible employee, various forms of reporting are mandatory at the enterprise.

    The reporting period and deadlines for the submission of documents are set by the head of the enterprise and depend on the need to update information on material values ​​and volumes and the type of activity of the organization. The responsible person can inform his management about the movements of the things entrusted to him daily, once a week / month / quarter, etc.

    All changes and movements of material assets are recorded in writing and executed in the form of a document. It contains:

    • general information- details of the organization, reporting period, report number, etc.;
    • Information about entrusted material assets at the beginning of the period - amounts, prices, accompanying documents, etc.
    • Information about the entrusted material assets at the end of the period.
    • The result is the balance (of goods, things, documents, banknotes and other valuables) and documents confirming the movement of these valuables (incoming and outgoing cash orders, commodity and consignment notes, etc.).

    The report is drawn up in 2 copies and signed mat. responsible person.

    The data entered in writing are compared with the attached documents.

    Accounting for fixed assets for which a person is responsible is carried out using:

    • Inventory list of fixed assets;
    • accounting journal;
    • Book of accounting of material assets;
    • Accounting cards for material assets;
    • Other documents depending on the specifics of the position held.

    Forms of this documentation can be found in the Labor Code and Decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation.

    When checking and identifying a lack of fixed assets or their damage, a person who has signed an agreement on full liability can not only receive a reprimand with entry in a personal file, but also be suspended or dismissed. In this case, the damage to the employee will be fully compensated. The degree of punishment depends on the degree of guilt of the employee.

    Another very important document is receipt of a financially responsible employee, which is compiled according to the approved form (P - 52).

    It is filled in and signed by the employee personally before the start of the inspection, audit, inventory and is proof that there are no unaccounted for money, documents and valuables, and all the rest are included in the report.

    Conclusion

    The employees responsible for things play a very important role in the activities of the organization, since the coherence, accountability and quality of work depend on them. Therefore, it is important to follow all the rules and recommendations for the appointment, execution and organization of the activities of responsible persons.



    Bookmark and Share



    Previous post
    The most powerful laptops in the world
    Next post
    How to calculate the power of a computer power supply?