Zdravo,

naj v podkrepitev trditve kolega Kolariča, da je po določbi 95. člena ZSDU za sprejem “letnega delovnega koledarja” potrebno predhodno soglasje sveta delavcev, povzamem odgovor na tovrstno vprašanje, ki je objavljen na tej spletni strani v rubriki Koristne informacije/Zbirka vpršanj in odgovorov iz prakse za prakso/Letni delovni koledar in svet delavcev (https://www.delavska-participacija.com/koristne-informacije/vprasanja/letni-delovni-koledar-in-svet-delavcev/), in v katerem je to stališče ZSDS tudi podrobneje pravno argumentirano. Ker iz prakse večkrat dobivam signale, da je ta določba s strani delodajalcev pogosto kršena, bi tudi mene zelo zanimale izkušnje čim večjega števila članov ZSDS v zvezi s tem.

* * *

Vprašanje:

Odgovor:

Ključnega pomena je predvsem vprašanje, kaj razumeti pod pojmom »letni delovni koledar«, ki ga sicer zakonodaja v takšni obliki neposredno ne uporablja. Vsebina tega pojma je smiselno zajeta v institutu »letnega razporeda delovnega časa«, urejenega v določbi 2. odstavka 148. člena ZDR-1, ki se glasi: »(2) Pred začetkom koledarskega oziroma poslovnega leta delodajalec določi letni razpored delovnega časa in o tem pisno obvesti delavce na pri delodajalcu običajen način (npr. na določenem oglasnem mestu v poslovnih prostorih delodajalca ali z uporabo informacijske tehnologije) in sindikate pri delodajalcu.«

Drugo pomembno pravno vprašanje pa je, kaj razumeti pod pojmom »osnove za odločanje o izrabi letnega dopusta in odločanje o drugih odsotnostih z dela«, k predlogu katerih mora delodajalec po določbi 95. člena ZSDU pridobiti predhodno soglasje sveta delavcev. Zakon o delovnih razmerjih namreč tudi tega pojma ne pozna. Bolj ali manj jasno je, kaj so osnove in merila za določanje (daljšega) »trajanja« letnega dopusta s kolektivno pogodbo v smislu 160. člena ZDR-1, ni pa izrecno zapisano kaj naj bi bile osnove za odločanje o »izrabi« letnega dopusta. Ker pa »zakon ničesar ne določa brez razloga oziroma tja v en dan« (lex nihil fustra facit) in ker »zakon vedno določa tisto, kar ustreza razumnemu preudarku« (lex semper intendit, quod convenit rationi), se je v stroki s pomočjo uporabe ustrezne pravnointerpretacijske metode izoblikovalo stališče, da je pod to formulacijo mogoče razumeti edinole letni delovni koledar oziroma letno razporeditev delovnega časa v smislu zgoraj omenjene določbe ZDR. Samo ta je namreč po logiki stvari lahko podlaga za planiranje oziroma odločanje o izrabi letnih dopustov. Brez letnega delovnega koledarja namreč ni mogoče takšno planiranje (čeprav ga ZDR-1 v 2. odstavku 162. člena in 1. do 3. odstavku 163. člena izrecno predvideva oziroma vsaj predpostavlja), kajti
• dopust se izrablja na »delovne dneve« ( 5. odstavek 160 člena ZDR-1),
• bistvo t.i. letnega razporeda delovnega časa (delovnega koledarja) pa je ravno v tem, da določa, kateri dnevi so pri posameznem delodajalcu »delovni dnevi«.
Poleg tega se z letnim delovnim koledarjem med drugim določajo tudi dnevi t.i. kolektivnih dopustov, kar pomeni direktno »odločanje o izrabi letnega dopusta«. Zato je resnično težko razumeti trditev nekaterih, da letni delovni koledar ne sodi pod pojem »osnove za izrabo letnega dopusta delavcev«.

Na osnovi zgoraj povedanega torej po kakršnikoli uporabljeni logiki nujno pridemo do zaključka, da skladno z določbo 95. člena ZSDU delodajalec lahko letni razpored delovnega časa (delovni koledar) sprejme le s predhodnim soglasjem sveta delavcev. Če delodajalec
• predloga te odločitve ne predloži v soglasje svetu delavcev, ali
• sprejme odločitev kljub temu, da je svet delavcev v osmih dneh zavrnil soglasje (97. člen),
je po določbah 17. in 18. točke 107. člena ZSDU storil prekršek, za katerega se pravna oseba kaznuje z globo od 4000 do 20.000 evrov, odgovorna oseba pravne osebe pa z globo od 1000 do 2000 evrov.

Svet delavcev torej lahko v teh primerih poda prijavo za prekršek inšpekciji dela, ne glede na to pa v vsakem primeru in kadarkoli zahteva ugotovitev »ničnosti« konkretne odločitve pred arbitražo po ZSDU.

Mato Gostiša

The Morrisons are my oldest clients. Sweet couple, been in that house fifty years. That oak was their family tree—kids’ swings, grandkids’ photos, the whole story. When the arborist gave his verdict—a rare blight, treatable but expensive, very expensive—I saw their hearts break. The quote was more than they could possibly afford on their pensions. “We’ll just have to enjoy it while it lasts, Tom,” Mr. Morrison said, his voice thin. I offered a payment plan for the treatment, but they refused charity. It ate at me. I looked at my own savings, but a new truck was desperately needed, and my own kid’s tuition was looming. I felt stuck between a rock and a dying tree.

My escape was usually a beer on the porch, watching the birds. But one evening, rain keeping me inside, I was scrolling on my phone. An ad popped up. Not flashy, just text about vavada casino bonuses. The word “bonuses” caught my eye. In my world, a bonus is an extra ten bucks from a grateful client, or finding a forgotten twenty in your work pants. The idea of a digital bonus, something extra just for showing up, felt like a small promise of something good. I was in a mood to chase even a tiny promise.

I registered. It was straightforward. And sure enough, for signing up and making a first deposit, I was greeted with a stack of vavada casino bonuses: free spins, match bonuses, the works. It felt like opening a toolbox full of new, shiny, unfamiliar tools. I wasn’t a gambler. I approached it like a job. I read the terms for each bonus like I was reading a fertilizer label. Wagering requirements? That’s like knowing how many square feet a bag of seed will cover. I started with the free spins on a slot game called “Forest Fortunes.” Ironic, given my predicament. It was a beautiful game, all shimmering leaves, glowing mushrooms, and woodland creatures. I spun. I lost a few, won a few small ones. It was a pretty distraction.

I moved to the match bonus, using it on blackjack. I like blackjack. It’s a game of simple decisions, like choosing the right blade for a job. Stand, hit, double. I played carefully, methodically, stretching the bonus money as far as I could. I wasn’t thinking about a jackpot. I was thinking, “If I can turn this $50 bonus into $200, that’s four bags of blight treatment.” It gave me a goal. A weird, digital side-quest to help a real-world tree.

For two weeks, after my muscles ached from laying sod or pruning hedges, I’d shower, eat, and then sit down with my “bonus project.” I became disciplined. I’d cash out small wins immediately to protect them. I used different vavada casino bonuses as they became available, always reading the fine print. It was a strange, focused kind of stress relief. Instead of worrying helplessly, I was doing something, even if it was just clicking cards on a screen.

The breakthrough came on a Sunday night. I’d built my “tree fund” up to a few hundred dollars through sheer, cautious grind. I was tired. I decided to use one last free spin bonus on the “Forest Fortunes” game, for sentiment’s sake. One spin left on the bonus. I hit it.

The reels spun. They settled on three glittering stag symbols. The screen didn’t flash; it bloomed. A cascade of animations unfolded: trees grew, rivers flowed, and a “Sacred Grove” bonus round began. It was a picking game. Choose between ancient tree stumps to reveal multipliers and free spins. My landscaper’s intuition kicked in. “Not that one, looks rotten. That one… strong rings.” I clicked. A 10x multiplier. Clicked another. 15 free spins with a wild vine symbol that expanded.

My heart, usually steady from physical labor, was hammering. The free spins played out. The vine wilds slithered across the reels, locking in wins. The multipliers stacked. The number in the corner, my careful, scraped-together tree fund, began to swell. It doubled. Then tripled. It didn’t stop until it was a number that didn’t just cover the blight treatment. It covered the treatment, the arborist’s follow-up visits for a year, and a beautiful new bench for the Morrisons to sit under their saved tree.

I didn’t yell. I put the phone down and stared at my calloused hands. Hands that could nurture living things, that had just, in the most bizarre way, secured the life of a grand old oak. The relief was a physical wave, washing away months of helpless frustration.

The next day, I went to the Morrisons. “I had a crazy good week on a few extra jobs,” I said, which wasn’t entirely a lie. “I want to prepay the arborist. For the oak.” The look on their faces—the shock, the welling tears, the sheer, unadulterated joy—was worth more than any bonus. The tree got its treatment. It’s budding again this spring.

I still check out the vavada casino bonuses sometimes. I might use a free spin offer, think of the forest, and smile. It taught me that sometimes, help can come from the most unexpected places. Even from a digital forest, when you’re just a landscaper trying to do right by an old tree and the people who love it. It wasn’t luck; it was a bonus turned into a purpose, and that made all the difference.