Eldar Tajibaev noted that most cases reviewed by the inspection end in favor of employees, and in courts, the effectiveness of decisions in favor of employees reaches 70%. He also pointed out that even termination "at the employee's request" does not always protect the employer, as employees often contest such decisions, and some cases end in their favor.
In this context, Tajibaev highlighted termination by mutual agreement as the most "non-conflict" and manageable method for employers when further cooperation is impossible. He recommended not to force employees to write resignation letters at their own request, but to use Article 41. "This is a compromise approach. In our practice over the past few months, we have supported about 10 such terminations, and none of them have gone to court, at least from the cases we are aware of," the expert added.
Kanybek Cherikov emphasized that in small and medium-sized businesses, cases of "same-day" terminations are often encountered, especially in trade and the service sector, where employees are asked to write a resignation letter "at their own request" for subjective reasons. Experts noted that such an approach creates additional legal risks.
Tajibaev also explained the difference between termination at the employee's request and termination by mutual agreement. According to the new Labor Code, the notice period is one month, and during this time, the employee can withdraw their application, making termination impossible. In turn, Article 41 allows the parties to agree in advance on the terms of termination of the employment contract, including possible compensation.
Furthermore, the expert noted that Article 41 is not "negative" for the employee and can serve as a neutral option for ending employment relations without conflict and additional disputes.
