Overview of current court practice and positions of Rostrud of Russia for the third quarter of 2025

Overview of current court practice and positions of Rostrud RF for Q3 2025 regarding the application of labor law provisions in the areas of dismissal, occupational safety, remote work, replacement of temporarily absent employees, etc.

1. In the area of dismissal:
   • An employee may change their mind about resigning voluntarily until the specialist invited to replace them has resigned.

The Russian Court of Cassation reminded that a resignation letter cannot be withdrawn only if the company already has an obligation to hire another specialist. This did not happen, since the current employee changed his mind about leaving before the invited employee was dismissed from his previous job as part of a transfer.

The agreement between the companies’ managers on the transfer of the specialist is irrelevant in this case. The employer could not refuse to allow the employee to exercise his right to withdraw his resignation.

It should be noted that a similar conclusion was reached by the 8th KSOYU.

Document:

Ruling of the 2nd KSOYU dated 04.09.2025 in case No. 88–20320/2025

• The courts did not uphold the dismissal of an employee who was asked to explain his absences in a messenger app.

An employee did not go to work for several days. Attempts were made to find out the reasons for his absence via messenger. The employee was dismissed for absenteeism.

Three courts agreed that the employer had violated the procedure for imposing disciplinary action. The employer did not confirm that it had properly requested an explanation from the employee. The courts rejected the argument that they had been requested via messenger. In this case, correspondence on a phone is not considered evidence.

Document:

Ruling of the 6th Civil Court of Appeal dated 11.09.2025 No. 88–15429/2025

• Remote worker refused to go on a business trip – courts agreed with dismissal for absenteeism

The appellate and cassation courts agreed with the lawful dismissal for absenteeism when a remote worker refused to travel to another city on a business trip to meet with the manager.

Remote workers can also be sent on business trips. The specialist did not belong to the category of employees who can refuse to travel (disabled persons, women with children under 3 years of age, etc.). Interaction with management and participation in strategic meetings were part of his duties. There were no valid reasons for not going on a business trip. The employee did not perform any other work during this period.

It should be noted that remote work does not give grounds for refusing a business trip, as indicated by the 2nd KSOYU.

• Fixed-term contracts were repeatedly concluded with the manager – the courts did not recognize the relationship as permanent.

Essence: The director of an organization worked under fixed-term employment contracts for 10 years. The last contract was concluded for one year, and later extended for another four years by agreement. When the contract expired, the director was dismissed. He appealed to the court.

Three courts confirmed the fixed-term nature of the relationship. It is not possible to unconditionally recognize them as permanent simply because the manager had repeatedly signed fixed-term contracts. The company has the right to hire someone for this position for a specific period. When signing the contract, the employee agreed to its terms.

It should be noted that other courts, such as the 9th Civil Court of Appeal, came to a similar conclusion.

2. Occupational safety answers from online inspections for August–September 2025

2.1. Do employees working in hazardous conditions retain their benefits if the special assessment has expired?

Yes, the employer is obliged to pay compensation and provide benefits until a new SOUT is conducted.

It should be noted that Rostrud RF has previously held this position.

• Is it necessary to conduct an unscheduled special assessment of working conditions if office workers have moved to a new address?

Yes, because an unscheduled special assessment should be carried out when newly organized workplaces are put into operation.

2.3.Is it possible to familiarize staff with the results of the special assessment of working conditions in electronic form?

Yes, if the organization has introduced electronic document management. Employees can also use a simple electronic signature.

3. It is sometimes possible to temporarily assign another person’s duties to an employee without their consent.

Additional work is usually assigned to an employee only with their consent and for additional pay. However, a substitute for an absent employee may perform the latter’s duties in accordance with their job description or employment contract. The agency explained that in such cases, separate consent is not required.

Document:

Information from Rostrud dated October 15, 2025

4. The courts noted that different salaries may be paid for positions with the same title.

An employee considered it discrimination that he was paid less than other employees in the same position. He took the case to court. Three courts ruled in favor of the employer. The employer has the right to determine the amount of remuneration individually. Working in the same position does not mean that the scope, complexity, and quantity of work are the same. Other employees had more responsibilities.

It should be noted that a similar conclusion was also reached in the practice of other courts, for example, the 3rd KSOY. Rostrud believes that for positions with the same title but different responsibilities, salaries may differ due to allowances and bonuses.

Document:

Ruling of the 1st KSOYU dated July 29, 2025 No. 88–17352/2025

Our specialists will help you develop the necessary documents or conduct an appropriate review in order to minimize the risks of appeals in courts and other government agencies.