Flexible working hours were recently extended by a presidential decision. The related regulation included a requirement that employment contracts for workers under 25 and over 50 be fixed-term. Turkish trade unions TÜRK-İŞ, HAK-İŞ and DİSK opposed this provision.
Unions Object
Flexible working hours and a recently approved measure—interpreted by many as causing serious disadvantage—requiring fixed-term contracts for employees under 25 and over 50, drew strong objections from the unions. In their joint statement, the three unions argued that employing those under 25 and over 50 exclusively on fixed-term contracts, without any conditions, would create major inequalities regarding severance and notice pay. They warned this practice would unfairly erode workers’ long-established compensation rights.
The unions also said that the omnibus bill contains elements harmful to labor relations and called for it to be withdrawn from the Grand National Assembly. They argued the spread of fixed-term contracts serves employers’ interests, not workers’, and that employees working under such arrangements would suffer significant losses in severance and notice compensation. The statement emphasized that making fixed-term contracts mandatory for those under 25 and over 50 would effectively eliminate their entitlement to these compensations, which the unions described as unjust. They added that such discriminatory treatment would benefit neither younger nor older workers, and that employers would likely prefer fixed-term contracts when given the option.
Demand for Rules on Flexible Hours
The unions also called for clearer regulation of flexible working hours. They stated that the current system has left many workers disadvantaged, with employers exercising arbitrary discretion in setting hours. This has resulted in income losses for employees and restricted access to social security benefits. The unions noted that whether through fixed-term contracts or flexible hours, gaps in social security coverage leave workers vulnerable in cases of unemployment, disability, old age, death, work accidents or occupational illnesses. These shortcomings, they said, can cause serious problems. The unions urged that the proposal be rejected and warned against enacting laws that would work to the detriment of workers.
What Awaits Workers Under 25 and Over 50?
If the proposal that prompted the unions’ objection becomes law, it would create important problems for employees under 25 and over 50. Under the government’s proposal, anyone in those age groups hired at any workplace would be placed on a fixed-term contract. Typically, workers begin employment under indefinite-term contracts, which protect severance and notice pay rights. Under the proposed change, employees in the affected age groups would have fixed-term contracts and therefore could lose the right to claim severance and notice compensation, since such entitlements are generally not recognized for fixed-term contracts. As a result, employers could dismiss workers at the end of contracts without paying compensation.
Another issue is that insurance exits recorded at the end of fixed-term contracts—even if there is only a one-day gap—break continuity of employment and can prevent access to various social rights. Such interruptions also negatively affect pension service periods, since even a single day can change the calculation of required premium contribution periods. Accepting this change would therefore cause substantial losses for workers.