Can an employee be fired for violating the rules of corporate ethics? Incorrect behavior. Code of Ethics and Service Conduct

AND OFFICIAL BEHAVIOR

EMPLOYEES OF THE PATHOANATOMIC BUREAU

Code professional ethics and official behavior employees of the OBUZ "Pathology Bureau" (hereinafter referred to as the Code) is a document that defines the set of ethical norms and principles of behavior of employees in the implementation of professional medical and other activities in the OBUZ "Pathology Bureau"

This Code defines the relationship between medical and other workers, society and the patient and is aimed at ensuring the rights, dignity, health of the individual and society as a whole, and also determines the high moral responsibility of the employee of the OBUZ "Pathology Bureau" to society for their activities.

The provisions of the Code apply to all employees of the Pathological Anatomical Bureau participating in the activities of the Institution, including medical registrars, junior and other staff, students medical schools, colleges undergoing practice in the OBUZ "Pathological and Anatomical Bureau".

SECTION I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 1. The concept of "medical worker".

In this Code, medical workers are understood as specialists with higher and (or) specialized secondary medical education, who are involved in the provision of medical care, the implementation of preventive measures aimed at preventing risk factors for the development of diseases and their early detection in the Pathological and Anatomy Bureau.

Article 2. Purpose of professional activity.

Purpose of professional activity medical worker- saving a person's life, taking measures to protect his health, providing high-quality diagnostic, preventive, rehabilitative and palliative medical care of all types, with a set of customer-oriented measures aimed at satisfying the population with the level of medical care.

Article 3. Principles of activity.

In his activities, a medical worker is guided by the legislation of the Russian Federation, in terms of the rights of citizens to health care and medical care, doctor's oath, principles of humanism and mercy.

A medical worker must direct all efforts, in accordance with his qualifications and competence, to the cause of protecting the health of citizens, ensuring the quality of care provided to them at the highest level.

A medical worker is obliged to provide medical care to any person, regardless of gender, age, race and nationality, place of residence, social status, religious and political beliefs, as well as other non-medical factors.

A medical worker must constantly improve his professional knowledge and skills, skills and erudition.

A medical worker is responsible, including moral, for providing high-quality and safe medical care in accordance with his qualifications, job descriptions and official duties within the limits of available resources.

A medical worker should participate in the formation of the principle of customer orientation in the implementation of activities medical organization.

Given the role of the health worker in society, the health worker personal example obliged to demonstrate healthy lifestyle life, giving up bad habits, including smoking on the territory of a medical organization, and encourage colleagues and patients to follow his example, support and take part in social events, especially those that promote a healthy lifestyle.

The behavior of a medical worker should not be an example of a negative attitude towards health.

The moral duty of a medical worker is to keep the ranks of the medical community clean, to impartially analyze both the mistakes of his colleagues and his own. Prevent the practice of dishonest and incompetent colleagues, as well as various kinds of non-professionals that are detrimental to the health of patients.

A medical worker must follow the algorithm of communication with patients, based on the principles of benevolence, respect and courtesy, mercy, a sense of compassion for the patient's condition during service.

The healthcare worker must appearance comply with the requirements of hygiene and the sanitary and epidemiological regime of a medical organization, while observing the principle of a medical dress code adopted by the staff of a medical organization, including the shape and color of clothing, hairstyle requirements, if there is no need to wear a medical cap, wearing low-heeled shoes (in in order to prevent annoying noise for patients in the course of their professional activities), wearing a sign (badge) indicating the surname, name, patronymic of the medical worker and the position held in the institution.

A medical worker must participate in creating an aesthetic image of a medical organization that complies with the rules of hygiene.

A medical worker should take care of medical records, draw up documentation in a timely manner in accordance with established requirements, using markings for ease of search and reduction of patient waiting time

The medical worker must comply with the work schedule of the medical organization, including the meal schedule established in the medical organization, with written information to patients on information stands installed in the lobby of the medical organization.

Article 4. Inadmissible actions of a medical worker.

The abuse of knowledge and position of a medical worker is incompatible with his professional activities.

The medical worker is not entitled to:

Use your knowledge and capabilities for inhumane purposes;

Apply or refuse medical measures without sufficient grounds;

Use methods of medical influence on the patient in order to punish him, as well as in the interests of third parties;

To impose on the patient their philosophical, religious and political views;

Inflict on the patient physical, mental or material damage neither intentionally nor negligently and indifferently treat the actions of third parties causing such damage.

Allow extraneous conversations that are not related to the provision of services to the patient, be distracted by extraneous actions in the process of providing the service.

In the performance of their professional duties, allow familiarity, non-official nature of relationships with colleagues and patients.

Be absent from the workplace, absent from the office for more than 5 minutes, without prior informing the patients and indicating specific time periods of absence.

The personal prejudices of a medical worker and other non-professional motives should not affect the diagnosis and treatment.

The refusal of the patient from the offered paid medical services cannot be the reason for the deterioration in the quality and availability, the reduction in the types and volumes of medical care provided to him free of charge within the framework of state guarantees established by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Gifts from patients to and from patients are highly discouraged as they may give the impression to patients who do not give or receive gifts that they are being less cared for. Gifts should not be given or accepted in exchange for services. Receiving gifts in the form of cash or gifts of value is prohibited.

A medical worker has no right, using his position, emotional state patient, conclude property transactions with him, use his labor for personal purposes, as well as engage in extortion and bribery.

When prescribing a course of treatment to a patient, a medical worker is not entitled to provide false, incomplete or distorted information about the medicines, medical devices used, including hiding from the patient information about the availability of medicines, medical devices that have more low price.

A medical worker should not accept incentives from manufacturers and distributors of medicines for prescribing the medicines they offer, use items on the territory of a medical organization that have a company logo or trade name medicinal product, medical product.

While doing official duties the medical worker must remain sober and not be under the influence of any drugs that cause persistent addiction to them.

A medical worker should not eat outside the household rooms and use household appliances in the workplace for the purpose of cooking

Article 5. Professional independence.

The right and duty of a medical worker is to preserve his professional independence. When providing medical care to the population, the medical worker assumes full responsibility for the professional decision, and therefore is obliged to reject any attempts of pressure from the administration, patients or other persons. The medical worker must refuse to cooperate with any individual or legal entity, if it requires his actions that are contrary to the legislation of the Russian Federation, ethical principles, professional duty.

Participating in councils, commissions, consultations, examinations, etc., a medical worker is obliged to clearly and openly state his position, defend his point of view, and in cases of pressure on him, resort to public and legal protection.

SECTION II. RELATIONSHIPS

HEALTHCARE WORKER AND PATIENT

Article 6. Respect for the honor and dignity of the patient.

A medical worker must respect the honor and dignity of the patient, show an attentive and patient attitude towards him and his relatives. Rude and inhuman treatment of a patient, humiliation of his human dignity, as well as any manifestations of superiority or expression of preference or dislike for any of the patients by a medical worker are unacceptable.

Article 7. Conditions for the provision of medical care.

A medical worker must provide medical care in the conditions of the least possible constraint on the freedom and dignity of the patient, with strict observance, rules of hygiene and sanitary-epidemiological regime, using modern means hygiene (disposable napkins, towels, liquid soap in dispensers, etc.)

The medical worker is obliged to accompany the patient during his stay in the medical organization from the moment of contacting the registry until the end of the appointment with a specialist, including routing the patient's medical record from the registry to the specialist doctor's office, delivering the results of tests and other studies to the doctor's office, without involving the patient

Article 8. Conflict of interest.

In the event of a conflict of interest, the patient-society, the patient-family, etc. the medical professional must give priority to the interests of the patient, unless their implementation causes direct harm to the patient or others.

A medical worker should use an algorithm of actions to provide medical care in emergency situations, with the obligatory informing the management of the institution about the obstacles to its activities, including the impossibility of servicing the patient in certain cases related to unforeseen emergencies, the patient's domestic problems and other emerging social problems.

Article 9. Medical secret.

The patient has the right to expect that the medical professional will keep confidential all medical and personal information entrusted to him. A medical worker is not entitled to disclose, without the permission of the patient or his legal representative, information obtained during the examination and treatment, including the very fact of seeking medical help. The medical worker must take measures to prevent the disclosure of medical secrets. The death of a patient does not release from the obligation to maintain medical confidentiality. Disclosure of medical secrets is allowed in cases stipulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Article 10. Moral support for a patient who is near death.

A medical worker is obliged to alleviate the suffering of a dying person by all available and legal means. A medical worker is obliged to guarantee the patient the right, at his request, to use the spiritual support of a minister of any religious denomination.

Article 11. Choice of medical worker.

A medical worker has no right to interfere with a patient who decides to entrust his further treatment to another specialist. A medical worker may refuse to work with a patient by referring him to another specialist in the following cases:

If he feels insufficiently competent, does not have the necessary technical capabilities to provide the proper type of assistance;

This type medical care is contrary to the moral principles of a specialist;

If there are contradictions with the patient or his relatives in terms of treatment and examination

SECTION III. RELATIONSHIPS

MEDICAL WORKERS

Article 12. Relationships between colleagues.

Relationships between medical workers should be built on mutual respect, trust and be distinguished by impeccability and respect for the interests of the patient.

In relations with colleagues, a medical worker must be honest, fair, friendly, decent, respectful of their knowledge and experience, and also be ready to disinterestedly transfer their experience and knowledge to them.

The moral right to lead other health professionals requires high level professional competence and high morality.

Criticism of a colleague should be reasoned and not offensive. Professional actions are subject to criticism, but not the personality of colleagues. Attempts to strengthen one's own authority by discrediting colleagues are unacceptable. A medical worker has no right to allow negative statements about his colleagues and their work in the presence of patients and their relatives.

SECTION IV. LIMITS OF THE CODE OF ETHICS, RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS VIOLATION, PROCEDURE FOR ITS REVIEW

Article 13 Action ethical code.

This Code is binding on all healthcare professionals

OBUZ "Pathological Anatomical Bureau".

Article 14. Responsibility of a medical worker

The degree of responsibility for violation of professional ethics is determined by the ethics commission.

If a violation of ethical standards simultaneously affects legal norms, the medical worker is liable in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.

the federal law dated December 29, 2012 No. 273-FZ “On Education in the Russian Federation” (hereinafter referred to as the Federal Law “On Education in the Russian Federation”) includes the observance of legal, moral, ethical standards, as well as adherence to the requirements of professional ethics (art. 48).

If the situation is clear with legal norms (legislation provides for bringing to legal responsibility for their violation), then the situation is different with ethical and moral norms, since they are not spelled out in the legislation. However, any organization that has the status legal entity, is entitled to accept local regulations, which become legally binding for her employees.

Thus, if a moral or ethical requirement is specifically formulated and spelled out in a local normative act, then de jure it becomes a norm, the violation of which may result in legal liability.

Due to the specifics pedagogical activity The Labor Code of the Russian Federation directly provides the grounds for the dismissal of a teacher for committing an immoral offense incompatible with the continuation of this work (clause 8, part 1, article 81). At the same time, in judicial practice, incompatibility with the continuation of work is the subject of proof, which is not always decided in favor of the administration. educational institution. The best option- adoption of ethical norms, rules, code of professional ethics as a local normative document ensuring the responsibility of the teacher in case of violation of the established requirements.

In addition, paragraph 2 of Art. 336 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation provides for the dismissal of a teacher for the use, including a single use, of methods of education associated with physical and (or) mental violence against the student's personality. As judicial practice shows, to prove mental violence against a person in conditions pedagogical process very difficult, because this process involves a certain mental impact on the child. The difficulty lies in distinguishing between the permissible impact of pedagogical ethics (for example, the constant presentation of certain requirements) and the unacceptable. The latter may include an insult to the dignity of the student, humiliating ridicule in front of the class, group, etc. At the same time, the admissibility or inadmissibility of mental influence largely depends on the characteristics of the child's personality.

The Federal Law "On Education in the Russian Federation" (clause 3, part 1, article 48) establishes the duty of teachers to respect the honor and dignity of students and other participants in educational relations. Except as described, violation of this duty will result in disciplinary action, provided that the duty is spelled out in the articles of association or local regulations.

Often, participants in educational relations who have suffered as a result of the humiliation of their honor and dignity go to court with an application for compensation for moral harm. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides in such a case for the recovery monetary compensation for harm caused by a teacher to honor, dignity, business reputation. Civil legislation establishes similar liability for causing harm to the business reputation of an organization engaged in educational activities.

We also note that pedagogical workers are criminally liable in accordance with the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of June 13, 1996 No. 63-FZ for involving minors in criminal activities (Article 150), failure to perform or improper performance of duties for the upbringing of a minor, if this is associated with cruel treatment of a minor (art. 156).

In addition, according to the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses dated December 30, 2001 No. 195-FZ, pedagogical workers bear an increased administrative responsibility compared to other citizens in the form of an administrative fine in the amount of 1.5 thousand to 2 thousand rubles. for involving a minor in the use of beer and drinks made on its basis, alcoholic drinks or intoxicating substances (Article 6.10).

Moskaleva's article in the magazine " labor law» No. 8/2014 describes the analysis of disputes in employee and company courts.

In order not to load you with legal terms, we invite you to read the opinions of leading experts...

So, do not rush to punish for violating the rules of conduct in the company ...

Anna Filina, Senior Legal Counsel, GS EL - LAW LLC:

Breaking the rules corporate ethics often becomes a reason to attract an employee to disciplinary responsibility. More often, penalties are imposed on employees in the form of comments or reprimands, but there are cases when a violation of the rules of corporate ethics becomes the basis for dismissal under clause 5 of part 1 of Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation - repeated non-fulfillment by an employee without good reasons job duties if he has a disciplinary sanction.

When considering dismissal disputes on the specified grounds, the employer needs to prove exactly what actions that violate the rules of corporate ethics and at what time the employee committed, how these rules are fixed, whether the employee is familiar with it.

To do this, the employer can provide memos, written customer complaints, local regulations, testimonies, and the like as evidence.

An example of how the employer could not provide evidence satisfying the court can be the Decision of the Isilkul city court of the Omsk region dated February 16, 2012 in the case
№ 2-116/2012. State-financed organization health care of the Omsk region "Isilkulskaya CRH" dismissed the senior nurse M.L.N. under clause 5 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The employer blamed the employee systematic failure of his official duties, among which he singled out a violation of the rules of ethics of a medical worker, expressed in a discussion in a public place of working moments, which, according to the employer, led to disorganization and nervousness of the clinic staff.

As evidence, the employer presented a memorandum of nurses about the incorrect behavior of M.L.N., as well as a number of testimonies.
In particular, the main nurse the hospital testified that she “in April 2011 from the doctor FULL NAME1 received an oral statement that M.L.N. raised her voice to the doctor in the presence of a nurse, about which she personally made a remark to M.L.N. There were also complaints from the nurses of the polyclinic that the head nurse M.L.N. behaves incorrectly. She received information that the senior nurse of the polyclinic M.L.N. in public transport discusses those issues that are discussed at planning meetings in the clinic, which violated the rules of ethics of a medical worker.

However, the court in its decision indicated that those interrogated in court session these witnesses could not explain why the memorandum was set out in general terms, to whom exactly from the staff M.L.N. was rude, when and where it happened.

The court considered that the court did not provide evidence of exactly what “actions the plaintiff committed that violate the rules of ethics of a medical worker and what moments, and in what public place she discussed working moments that lead to disorganization and nervousness of the polyclinic staff”. The court ruled in favor of the employee, satisfying her claim in full, recognizing the dismissal as illegal and reinstating her in her position.

However, in judicial practice there are court decisions that are positive for the employer. K.D. filed a lawsuit against CJSC "Bank Intesa" to declare illegal and cancel disciplinary action, compensation for non-pecuniary damage.

By order of the bank, the plaintiff was brought to disciplinary liability in the form of a reprimand for violating a number of points job description, as well as violation of article 4 of the Code of Corporate Conduct and the section "Principles of Conduct in Relations with Employees" of the Code of Corporate Ethics, expressed in the manifestation of rudeness towards bank employees.

The employer managed to confirm the fact of unethical behavior of K.D. with bank employees during the period of requesting explanations from him regarding the violations of information processing.

At the same time, the employer submitted local regulations to the court: the Code of Corporate Ethics of Banca Intesa CJSC, according to which the employee must respect the personality and human dignity of each employee, and the Bank’s Corporate Conduct Code, which establishes that representatives and employees should avoid behavior in a workplace that is not characterized by honesty and the utmost respect for the dignity and morals of every employee.

The court took into account the provisions of these acts when making its decision. It is also necessary to pay attention to the fact that the employer fully complied with the procedure for bringing the employee to disciplinary responsibility.

Therefore, the Basmanny District Court of Moscow refused K.D. in satisfaction of his claim, and the Moscow City Court left this decision unchanged, the appeal of K.D. without satisfaction

(Appeal ruling of the Moscow City Court dated May 22, 2013 in case No. 11-11717).

Artem Denisov, Managing Partner of Genesis Law Firm, Ph.D. in Law:":

In general, the informative article of a colleague is aimed more at a formal approach to the study of such a phenomenon as corporate ethics and generalization judicial practice on a formal basis. The statement that the rules of corporate ethics, unspoken or approved by a local normative act, are in fact the rules of conduct and are advisory in nature. Violation of the rules of corporate ethics is not grounds for dismissal of an employee.

It is conditionally possible to divide the manifestation of the phenomenon of corporate ethics in two frameworks of relations. First, it can be viewed as conditions on the behavior of employees within the corporate structure, where it is expressed by issuing a local labor act.

Second: mandatory conditions compliance of an employee within professional communities, for example, lawyer education, audit organizations, and so on, where it is compliance with corporate ethics and rules that is a condition and guarantee of the proper performance of labor duties and is the basis for dismissal. They are established both within the framework of industry laws and within the framework of local acts.

In the first case, we can consider the rule when, as an additional reason for terminating the employment contract with the head of the organization on the basis of paragraph 13 of part 1 of Article 81 and Article 278 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the contract indicates a violation of the requirements of corporate ethics (ethical code of the organization).

The review of judicial practice in these legal relations is quite extensive, and it is the application of these articles of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, in conjunction with the norms of corporate ethics, that ensures the proper procedure for dismissal in case of violation of the norms of corporate behavior by the dismissed person.

If we consider the second case and use Federal Law No. 63-FZ of May 31, 2002 “On Advocacy and the Bar in the Russian Federation” as an example, then the grounds for terminating an employment contract with an assistant lawyer are not only the grounds listed in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Also, as the grounds for which the employment contract with a lawyer's assistant is terminated, and the assistant is expelled from the composition of the lawyer's assistants, there is a case of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment by the lawyer's assistant of his professional duties or non-fulfillment of decisions of corporate standards governing the activities of the bar.

In general, the concept of corporate ethics in Russian legislation is new, but despite this, this phenomenon is a fairly powerful regulator of employee behavior, which can be subject to various sanctions, up to and including dismissal.

Tatyana Bekreneva, lawyer:

moral requirements service relations or otherwise - corporate ethics, some features are inherent. And although the Labor Code of the Russian Federation does not have a clear definition of the concept of corporate ethics, nevertheless, certain requirements for the behavior of an employee can be attributed to the rules of corporate ethics, namely, requirements, non-compliance with which is a disciplinary offense.

It is difficult to agree with the author that these requirements are advisory in nature. Giving an example of a lawsuit on dismissal for disclosure of trade secrets, that is, essentially agreeing that the rule on non-disclosure of trade secrets is a rule of corporate ethics, the author at the same time points out in his conclusions that one cannot be fired for violating the rules of corporate ethics, which is a clear contradiction. Especially when you consider that violation of the above rule is grounds for dismissal in accordance with Labor Code(paragraph "c" of paragraph 5 of Article 81).

A clear understanding of the moral requirements, that is, the moral guidelines for the organization's activities, is necessary for the coordinated work of all departments. It seems that the legislator should determine the criteria for the compliance of these moral rules with the requirements of the law, as well as the requirements of reasonableness and justice. It is important that, like any rule, the rule of corporate ethics must be reliably protected by law, local regulations, the conditions established in the employment contract, and also backed up by the employer's real actions to enforce its compliance - punishments, since the establishment of rules requires not only a clear fixation, but also sanctions for their violation. In the charters, rules, codes of corporate ethics or other local regulations, which the employee gets acquainted with when hiring under his personal signature, the employer must prescribe a clear reasonable rule of conduct that the employee must comply with, indicating that failure to comply with this rule is equated to a violation labor discipline. At the same time, it is important that the norms contained in them do not worsen the rights of workers in comparison with the current labor legislation.

The law establishes that employees in terms of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of their labor duties, which include the obligation to comply with corporate acts, bear disciplinary responsibility. Of course, it is impossible, for example, to dismiss a person with the wording in the order: "For violation of corporate ethics." In the work book you can not write: "Fired for violation of corporate ethics." Dismissal for violation of the rules that relate to the rules of corporate ethics implies compliance with the dismissal procedure established by the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, indicating in the order and work book the legal basis for dismissal (paragraph 14 of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated April 16, 2003 No. 225 "On work books"). But in the event that a violation of these rules really occurs, the employer, in accordance with Articles 192-193 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, is obliged to request from the employee explanatory note, if it is not provided, an appropriate act is drawn up, after which the employee can be fired.

One cannot but agree that if you correctly fix the relevant requirements, correctly arrange all Required documents to bring an employee to disciplinary liability, no court recognizes the employer's demands as far-fetched and discriminatory.

First, all rules must be fixed in a local act. Otherwise, there is no reason for the employer to demand something from employees, and then punish them for non-performance. We cannot agree with the author of the article that the presence of unspoken rules of conduct can influence the issues of holding employees accountable - labor legislation does not provide for such a thing as unspoken rules. Therefore, in the event of a dispute, the employer will have to prove that he has familiarized the employee with the rules of corporate ethics (the obligation not to disclose trade secrets, the obligation to comply with the dress code, for example, by employees of railway or air transport). Secondly, when the employer sets requirements corporate culture moderation and reasonableness are important, real requirements should be fixed. Thirdly, when punishing non-compliance with the rules, the provisions of articles 192-193 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation should be strictly observed. Otherwise, the risk of recognizing the order as illegal as well as the local act increases, since if employers violate the norms of Article 372 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation on the procedure for agreeing local acts, this gives the employee the opportunity to challenge them, or challenge the actions of the employer based on the illegal norms of the local act. But basically, disputes related to violation of corporate ethics encountered in judicial practice can be divided into two types:

• contesting a disciplinary sanction;
• reinstatement at work in the event of dismissal for a systematic violation of official duties (clause 5 of part 1 of article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

Thus, taking into account the above, it is hardly possible to agree with the author of the article that a violation of the rules of corporate ethics cannot be a basis for dismissal of an employee. But it is clear that the issues of corporate ethics require special legal elaboration, since corporate ethics is increasingly becoming part of the general policy of the employer.

Vladimir Alistarkhov, legal expert:

An employee cannot be fired for violating the norms of corporate ethics, but the author of the article proposes to figure out “what should be the violation of corporate ethics in order for dismissal to become possible from the point of view of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation?”

The very formulation of this question already contradicts the norms of the current labor legislation. Labor legislation, and in particular Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, directly provides for the grounds on which an employee may be dismissed at the initiative of the employer.

The grounds for dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer have an exhaustive list, and, accordingly, this ground must be clearly stated in the order for dismissal, indicating the article of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the employee is dismissed.

Consideration of the issues of dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer through the prism of the code of corporate ethics is a kind of "tautology" of the procedure for considering the dismissal of an employee on the grounds provided for by law.

For example, for the disclosure of a secret, access to which is limited by law and liability is provided for -
why, then, consider a violation of the norms of the code of corporate ethics when deciding on the dismissal of an employee?

Currently, there is no judicial practice in which the court would use the fact of violation of corporate ethics as necessary evidence in the case of dismissal of an employee.

The necessary list of evidence in cases of dismissal of employees has long been formed, and if it is available, the employer does not need to be additionally guided in court by a violation of corporate ethics on the part of the employee.

The jurisprudence cited by the author of the article shows that for the dismissal of an employee at the initiative of the employer, various evidence is presented, but not once any information about the violation of corporate ethics is used as evidence, since this is not necessary.

At the same time, the absence of this moment jurisprudence, in which a violation of corporate ethics is considered by the court as necessary evidence, does not mean that in the future courts will not be able to take into account this kind of evidence in support of the dismissal of an employee by an employer, but changes in labor legislation will probably be required for this purpose.

The conclusion of the author of the article is correct in that the rules of corporate ethics are advisory in nature and cannot be the basis for the dismissal of an employee, but the question remains whether violations of the rules of corporate ethics can become the basis for the application of other disciplinary measures (in addition to dismissal), which seems more realistic .

A person spends at least 20% of his life at work. When we come to work, we want to feel comfortable. Unfortunately, not a single day goes by without stress. Overshadow workdays and conflicts between employees. The employer finds himself in a difficult situation when it is necessary not only to resolve the conflict, but also to punish the instigator.

Today, many employers include in the local regulatory legal acts of the organization provisions that affect the ethical aspect, for example, the need to be friendly with customers, respectful of colleagues, etc. And if the first is included in the duties of employees and is not subject to discussion, then the second remains on their conscience and is their personal matter.

The competence of the employer does not include regulation of relations between employees. Does this mean that it is impossible to punish an employee, for example, for his criticism of a colleague? Consider an example from judicial practice.

Situation

K. worked as a deputy director for educational work in an educational institution. During the next meeting, she criticized the work of one of her colleagues, V., and after the meeting she expressed her negative attitude towards her during a personal conversation. V., believing that she had been insulted, wrote a memorandum addressed to the director with a request to bring K. to disciplinary responsibility. The employer issued an order to impose a disciplinary sanction on the deputy director K. in the form of a remark for violating the internal labor regulations (in working time distracts employees with extraneous conversations, discusses and criticizes the work of colleagues, makes comments regarding personal and professional qualities workers). This was not the first order to impose a disciplinary sanction; earlier K. had also been brought to disciplinary responsibility.

K. realized that the administration was preparing documents for her dismissal under paragraph 4 of Art. 42 of the Labor Code of the Republic of Belarus (hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code) (for the systematic failure of an employee to fulfill duties without good reason), and applied to the court with a request to remove the last disciplinary sanction from her. The court of first instance considered the actions of the employer unlawful and recognized that K. had not violated labor discipline. The employer's disciplinary order was cancelled. The tenant did not agree with the decision of the court and appealed it.

The regional court upheld the decision of the district court, considering that, even if criticism of a colleague violates ethical standards, it is not a misdemeanor for which you can bring the employee to disciplinary responsibility.

Parties' arguments

AT statement of claim K. asked the court to recognize the order to declare her remark unlawful, since she did not commit a disciplinary offense. K. explained to the court that the order to impose a penalty on her was issued due to the fact that she allegedly humiliated the honor and dignity of an employee of the educational institution, first at a meeting, and then during communication with her. The deputy director claimed that she did not want to offend the honor and dignity of her colleague in any way, but only wanted to find out what complaints she had about her work, and therefore, she considered the imposition of a disciplinary sanction on the grounds specified in the order unlawful.

At the court session, representatives of the educational institution disagreed with the plaintiff's claims and asked the court to refuse to satisfy them. At the same time, they explained to the court that during the production meeting K. criticized V., which affected her honor and dignity. Then, in a personal conversation with V., the deputy director allowed herself to express a negative attitude towards her, which was the reason for V. writing a memorandum addressed to the director of the educational institution about taking measures against K., which was done.

The director of the educational institution was sure that K. misbehavior violated the internal labor regulations of the educational institution. The rules stated that it was forbidden to distract employees from the performance of their labor duties by talking on extraneous topics not related to work, insulting colleagues, discussing and criticizing their work, accusing them of ignorance and misunderstanding of the functions assigned to them, job duties. D. was called as a witness and confirmed that relations between K. and V. were tense.

Reference: the employer needs to present evidence to the court, indicating not only that the employee committed disciplinary offense, but also that when imposing a penalty, the gravity of this misconduct and the circumstances under which it was committed were taken into account.

The medical worker is individual who has a medical or other education, leads labor activity in a medical organization whose duties include the implementation of medical activities, or an individual who is individual entrepreneur and operates in the field of medicine. The main task is to improve human health and preserve human life. This ensures that every patient is treated with respect. Medical workers, performing a labor function, in accordance with the Labor Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), have certain duties of an employee and are liable for violation of labor discipline, internal labor regulations.

In the performance of their duties, “guardians of health” must comply with the rules of medical ethics. However, there are problems associated with the professional ethics of a medical worker, both at the international and national levels. It is believed that the basic principles of medical ethics were formulated by Hippocrates. These principles are as follows1: 1. The principle of non-harm, concern for the benefit of the patient, the dominant interests of the patient. 2. The principle of careful informing the patient, allowing him to be misinformed. 3. The principle of respect for life, a negative attitude towards euthanasia, complicity in suicide, and abortion. 4. Commitment to renounce intimate relationships with patients. 5. The principle of medical secrecy and confidentiality. 6. Obligations to teachers. 7. Commitment to transfer knowledge to students and to consult with colleagues. 8. Obligations of professional and moral self-improvement and decent behavior. It is obvious that the principles indicated by Hippocrates put the rights and interests of citizens at the head. Exploring the legal doctrine, a certain picture of the professional ethics of medical workers is formed. I.V. Prikhoda, A.A. Rybalchenko in his work "Fundamentals of Medical Ethics and Deontology" notes that the following conditions are necessary for the optimal implementation of the principles of medical deontology: vocation, tact, intelligence, citizenship. A medical worker must always remember the patient, have the ability to conquer and subjugate the soul of the patient2. In addition, researcher T.A. Kornaukhova is in solidarity with the principles of Hippocrates and believes that the main principle of the Hippocratic model of medical ethics is the maxim “do no harm”. This principle acts as a regulator of the civil component of the doctor's professional ethics3. This problem was also studied

V. N. Saperov in his work “Bioethics or medical ethics? Basic principles of medical ethics”, where he points out that the principles of professional ethics of medical workers contain the following principles: “The main thing is do no harm”, “Do good”, the principle of respect for the autonomy of the patient and the principle of justice1.

In addition to the above researchers, the problem of medical ethics was studied by such scientists as Yaroslavtseva A.V., Ganshin I.B., Shergeng N.A. and others. considerable attention. Thus, in Article 3 of the Global Code of the World Health Organization (hereinafter referred to as WHO) on the practice of international recruitment of health personnel, it is stipulated that the health of all people is essential condition achieving peace and security 2. In addition, WHO in the international code of medical ethics emphasizes that3: THE PHYSICIAN MUST always maintain the highest professional standards. A PHYSICIAN MUST not allow considerations of self-interest to interfere with the freedom and independence of professional decision, which should be made solely in the interests of the patient. A PHYSICIAN MUST place compassion and respect for the human dignity of the patient at the forefront and be fully responsible for all aspects of medical care, regardless of their own professional specialty. A PHYSICIAN MUST be honest in dealing with patients and colleagues and fight those of his colleagues who show incompetence or are seen as deceitful.

These duties meet the principles of ethics established at the time by Hippocrates, where the interests of a person are the highest value. With regard to the regulation of the issue of professional ethics at the national level, it should be noted that Russian Federation also pays great attention to it. In accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a person, his rights and freedoms are the highest value, and everyone has the right to health protection and medical care4. These human and citizen rights are exercised through the activities of medical organizations and medical workers who must comply with the rules of professional ethics.

Thus, the Code of Professional Ethics of a Doctor of the Russian Federation establishes that a doctor is obliged to provide high-quality, effective and safe medical care. He must take into account the advantages, disadvantages and consequences of various diagnostic and therapeutic methods. In the absence of a medical organization necessary conditions and resources, the doctor is obliged to refer the patient to the appropriate medical facility1. In our opinion, each medical worker must perform his duties efficiently and effectively, taking into account the peculiarities of each specific situation. In addition, considerable attention is paid to medical confidentiality.

Article 8 of the Code of Professional Ethics of a Doctor of the Russian Federation contains the rule that medical secrecy refers to everything that became known to the doctor in the course of his professional duty. It is not allowed to disclose information constituting a medical secret without the permission of the patient or his legal representative, including after the death of a person, except as otherwise provided by Russian law. In this act, as in others regulating the professional ethics of medical workers at various levels, the highest value is the honor and dignity of the patient, and it is indicated that the treatment should take into account all the features of his personality and respect his personal life and the right to confidentiality2. In addition, it should be noted that a draft Code of Professional Ethics for a medical worker has been developed, which establishes the duty of conscientious performance of their labor functions3.

There is also the Federal Law “On the Fundamentals of Protecting the Health of Citizens”, which, in turn, establishes the rules of professional ethics for a medical worker. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the failure to fulfill any duty by an employee working on employment contract, or improper performance labor function in accordance with the Labor Code of the Russian Federation entails disciplinary liability in accordance with Article 192 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation4. Similarly, non-compliance by a medical worker with the norms of professional ethics provides for disciplinary liability for evasion or poor performance of their duties5. But in the latter case, a medical worker can be brought, in addition to disciplinary responsibility, to administrative and criminal liability, since human life and health is serious. The Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes in Article 13.11 “Violation of the procedure established by law for the collection, storage, use or dissemination of information about citizens (personal data)”6 administrative liability, and Article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for liability for “Violation of privacy”7, where privacy is understood as the disclosure of information constituting a medical secret by a person to whom this information became known in connection with the performance of his official or professional duties. However, despite the responsibility, medical workers do not comply with the established norms, which is a huge problem. On this issue, there is a wide one. Thus, the Khabarovsk Regional Court issued an appeal ruling No. 33-5145 / 2016 dated August 12, 2016 in case No. 33-5145 / 2016 in the case of recognition of an order to bring to disciplinary responsibility for non-compliance with continuity in treatment, violation of ethical and deontological norms of behavior doctor illegal. By the decision of the Industrial District Court of Khabarovsk dated April 26, 2016, the claims were denied.

The Judicial Collegium of the Khabarovsk Regional Court determined that the decision of the Industrial District Court of Khabarovsk dated April 26, 2016 on civil case on the claim for the recognition of the order to bring to disciplinary liability illegal, the recovery of compensation for non-pecuniary damage is left unchanged, and the appeal is not satisfied1. So, the professional ethics of medical workers is an important component of the legal norms governing their activities, since citizens engaged in labor activities in the field of protecting human health and life must strictly observe established rules for quality and professional help. To ensure compliance with the rules of professional ethics of medical workers, we believe that it is necessary to tighten the rules that establish liability for their violation.

F.F. KARIMOV