We would like to ensure that you are still receiving content that you find useful – please confirm that you would like to continue to receive ILO newsletters.
01 August 2018
The Industrial Disputes Tribunal recently issued a decision regarding a person working for the Cyprus Tourism Organisation (CTO) under a series of fixed-term contracts, some of which were referred to as contracts of employment and others as contracts for services.(1) The tribunal ruled that, even when working under an alleged contract for services, the applicant was a CTO employee working under a genuine contract of employment.
In December 2006 the applicant began working for the CTO under a fixed-term contract of service. After the contract expired, the applicant continued working for the CTO under a series of fixed-term contracts, some of which were referred to as contracts of employment and others as contracts for services.
In December 2010, when the last contract expired, the CTO refused to renew it, claiming that the applicant was on a fixed-term contract and that it was under no legal obligation to continue her employment. According to the CTO, the applicant worked under a contract of service for 829 days and under a contract for service for 82 days. Thus, the applicant was not employed for a continuous period longer than 30 months and therefore her contract was not transformed into a contract of indefinite duration under the Fixed-Term Work Employees (Prohibition of Discriminatory Treatment) Law (93(I)/2003).
The applicant brought a claim before the Industrial Disputes Tribunal, arguing that for the duration of her employment with the CTO she was working under a genuine contract of employment; therefore, her contract was automatically transformed into a contract of indefinite duration from the date on which she completed 30 months of employment. Consequently, the CTO's refusal to continue her employment constituted an illegal termination of her contract and she was entitled to:
After highlighting the basic principle governing the employer-employee relationship, according to which the relationship is determined by law, rather than by a label chosen by the parties (Cleanthis Christofides Ltd v The Fund for Redundant Employees and Yiannakis Florides ((1978) 1 Α.Α.Δ 208)), the tribunal examined the facts of the case and concluded that, for the duration of her employment with the CTO, the applicant was working under a genuine contract of employment. In reaching this conclusion, the tribunal considered, among other things, the following facts:
The tribunal concluded that the applicant had been a CTO employee for a period longer than 30 months (from December 2006 to December 2012) and, as a result, her fixed-term contract was automatically transformed into a contract of indefinite time. Therefore, the non-renewal of her contract constituted unlawful termination of her employment and she was entitled to receive relevant compensation.
However, the tribunal rejected all other claims made by the applicant, especially her claim for reinstatement. According to the tribunal, the Fixed-Term Work Employees (Prohibition of Discriminatory Treatment) Law does not provide employees with such a right. The only remedy provided by the law is the conversion of a fixed-term contract into a contract of indefinite duration. In addition, a reinstatement order could not be justified by the Termination of Employment Law (24/1967) because, under the law, such an order is justified only in exceptional cases when the termination of employment is proven to have occurred illegally and in bad faith.
The case is important for two reasons. First, it underlines the rule that, when determining a person's employment status, the courts will not simply accept the label given to the employment relationship by the parties, but will examine the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Second, it confirms that the Fixed-Term Work Employees (Prohibition of Discriminatory Treatment) Law does not allow the issuing of a reinstatement order, only the conversion of the fixed-term contract into a contract of indefinite duration. This means that employees with a fixed-term contract who ceased working due to the illegal non-renewal of their contract cannot hope to return to work, only to receive compensation for their unlawful dismissal.
For further information on this topic please contact Nicos Panayiotou at George Z Georgiou & Associates LLC by telephone (+357 22 763 340) or email (firstname.lastname@example.org). The George Z Georgiou & Associates LLC website can be accessed at www.gzg.com.cy.
The materials contained on this website are for general information purposes only and are subject to the disclaimer.
ILO is a premium online legal update service for major companies and law firms worldwide. In-house corporate counsel and other users of legal services, as well as law firm partners, qualify for a free subscription.