Can an employer fire you if you have a mortgage? When will the law on dismissal of mortgage holders be adopted? Do they have the right to dismiss from work if there is a mortgage?

Can an employee be fired if he has a mortgage? Many employees have obligations to banks. As for the mortgage, this is a long-term loan, which is issued only to those who have a stable and fairly high salary. Naturally, an employee will not voluntarily leave a job that makes it possible to repay the debt to the bank in a timely manner. What are the rights of an employer to terminate the employment relationship with an employee burdened with a mortgage?

Grounds for termination of employment relations

Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Continuation.

A bill prohibiting an employer from dismissing an employee who has debt obligations in the form of a mortgage has been considered by the State Duma for several years. However, to date it has not found sufficient support among deputies to put it into effect.

Many supporters of this bill are in defense of the employee who, when receiving a mortgage, was confident that he would always have income in the form of a stable salary. Opponents of the law say that a mortgage is a voluntary decision for everyone, and it would be wrong to put borrowers on the same level as people who really need social protection.

Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contains a list of grounds under which an employer can terminate an employment relationship with an employee:

1. Reduction of staff or liquidation of an organization
2. Gross violation of labor discipline by an employee.
3. Change of owner of the enterprise, giving the new owner the opportunity to terminate the employment contract with the manager and chief accountant.
4. Inconsistency with the position held due to the fact that the employee, according to the results of the certification commission, does not have sufficient qualifications or due to health reasons cannot continue to work.
5. Violation of labor safety standards, which led to serious consequences.
6. Systematic failure to fulfill one's duties.

As can be seen from the above list, the employer has many reasons for terminating the employment relationship on his own initiative. However, an employee who values ​​his job is unlikely to violate labor discipline, and one can prepare for a professional suitability assessment if it does not concern health status.

The easiest way to fire an employee is to reduce the number of employees. But there are exceptions due to which an employer cannot fire a person.

Article 261 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contains a list of such persons who cannot be reduced:

1. Pregnant women and those with a child under 3 years of age.
2. Single mothers raising children under 14 years of age or disabled minors.
3. Persons who single-handedly support a large family with children under 3 years of age or a minor child with a disability.

Guardians and trustees raising children without a mother are considered single mothers. This list can be supplemented by internal documents of the organization or, for example, a collective agreement.

If an organization has signed an agreement between the employer and the team, then often the terms of such an agreement contain a ban on dismissal due to staff reduction of persons of pre-retirement age, as well as persons who have mortgage loans.

What to do if you are fired from your job?

What should a mortgage holder who has been laid off do? When reducing staff numbers, the employer takes into account the professional qualities of the employee, as well as the level of labor productivity. Nevertheless, an important factor for the employer is the personality of the employee. By providing the employer with your arguments and documents about the existence of debt obligations, management can be convinced to meet halfway and keep the borrower at work.

For reference! Many banks provide a deferment of the next payment to borrowers who have lost their jobs due to layoffs.

Having received notice from the employer 2 months before dismissal, the person has time to find a new job in order to fulfill his obligations to the bank. In addition, after dismissal, the employee retains his average monthly earnings for 2 months if he has not yet found a job. Thus, a person who has been laid off has 4 months to find a job without falling behind on his mortgage payment.

Businesses are being asked to support workers with outstanding mortgage loans. It will be prohibited to lay them off or fire them due to low qualifications.

State Duma deputies Vitaly Pashin and Danil Shilkov introduced a bill to the State Duma. establishing an advantage for citizens who have taken out a mortgage over other employees. Forgetting about the interests of business, deputies propose to support Russians who need regular income to cover loans.

Mortgage holders will get an advantage at work

The proposed amendments provide for a new rule in Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. It prohibits the dismissal of an employee who has not paid off the mortgage loan for a first-time home purchase at the initiative of the employer. Namely, it will not be possible to fire a mortgage holder due to a reduction in the number or staff of employees, as well as due to the employee’s inadequacy for the position due to insufficient qualifications.

As the authors of the initiative explain, citizens who today take out loans to buy their own homes are young families with young children. The state must additionally protect this category of workers, which will ultimately have a positive impact on the birth rate, the banking sector, and the construction sector, deputies assure.

However, from a business point of view, the situation is strange. An employer, private or public company, will be required to employ an underqualified employee simply because he has an outstanding mortgage. And in the next five to ten years, such an employee will have to regularly pay wages, pay vacations and sick leave. Although there is little benefit from it.

Who can no longer be laid off?

The current labor legislation already limits employers by establishing criteria for selecting workers to be laid off. In particular, the organization does not have the right to fire:

• employees who are on sick leave or on vacation, including at their own expense and on study leave;
• pregnant women;
• women raising children under three years of age;
• a single parent raising a child under 14 years of age or a disabled child under 18 years of age;
• union members and employee representatives who conduct collective bargaining.

In addition, Article 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation lists categories of employees “with privileges” - those who have a preferential right to maintain a job in the event of a reduction in numbers or staff. These include disabled veterans of military operations in defense of the Fatherland, parents in large families, the only breadwinners in their families, and persons who previously received an injury or occupational disease from their employer.

However, many events must take place before the bill becomes law. In particular, the document must be approved by the government, parliament and presidency. It is still unknown whether the authorities will agree to new restrictions on business.

Dear readers, if you see an error or typo, help us fix it! To do this, highlight the error and press the “Ctrl” and “Enter” keys simultaneously. We will learn about the inaccuracy and correct it.

Can I get laid off if I take out a mortgage?

By virtue of Part 1 of Art. 180 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, upon dismissal due to a reduction in the number or staff of employees, the employer is obliged to offer the employee another available job (vacant position) in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 81 Labor Code of the Russian Federation. If the employee is not satisfied with the other work, then he is fired under Article 77 (clause 4) of the Labor Code. The employer is obliged to notify employees personally and against signature of the upcoming dismissal due to a reduction in the number or staff of the organization’s employees at least two months before the dismissal (Part.

They won't drive us away

179 TK). In reality, of course, this does not always happen. But at least this requirement, enshrined in the Labor Code, can serve as a basis for an employee to defend his rights in court. If, of course, he can prove that he works better and with greater productivity than those who remained on staff.

If you have to choose between employees who have approximately the same professional qualities, the employer is obliged to give preference to:

How does the reduction happen?

The employee is notified of dismissal two months in advance, against signature.

Mortgage at the expense of the company: what can an employee claim after dismissal?

The highest court in specific cases came to the conclusion that labor relations had arisen to which the norms of civil law did not apply. In this connection, the prosecutor’s demands in the interests of the dismissed workers remained unsatisfied.

According to the logic of the court, termination of employment relations frees the employer from fulfilling contractual obligations, since labor law, as an independent branch, does not provide for the payment of targeted financial assistance to repay a loan issued for the purchase of residential premises.

Let’s try to understand the situation that has arisen from the point of view of established legal positions of dividing law into branches.

Do they have the right to dismiss from work if there is a mortgage?

2 tbsp. 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation) is not allowed. In accordance with Art. 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, it is not allowed to dismiss an employee at the initiative of the employer (except in the case of liquidation of an organization or termination of activities by an individual entrepreneur) during the period of his temporary disability and while on vacation. It is also prohibited to terminate an employment contract with pregnant women at the initiative of the employer (Art.

Dismissal due to health reasons

Vilyuchinsk, Kamchatka region

Read also: Retrospective official sick leave

According to the provisions of sub. "b" clause 3 of Art. 51 of the Federal Law “On Military Duty and Military Service”, a soldier performing military service under a contract has the right to early dismissal from military service for health reasons in connection with recognition by a military medical commission as limitedly fit for military service.

Do they have the right to dismiss from work if there is a mortgage?

Consequently, refusal to travel or work overtime will not be a disciplinary offense in this case.

Is it possible to fire a pregnant woman?

A pregnant woman cannot be fired at the initiative of her employer. The only exception is the complete liquidation of the company.

It is permissible to terminate an employment contract with a pregnant woman if she worked under a temporary contract during the absence of another employee.

Military personnel will have their mortgage paid upon early dismissal

During this time, the Ministry of Defense makes annual transfers and pays off interest on bank mortgages. If dismissal occurs early, regardless of how many years the military man has served, the accrued funds are not given to him. If a serviceman managed to buy an apartment, he has to return all the transferred funds and pay off the mortgage with the bank.

According to the explanatory note to the draft federal law, new paragraph 1.1.

From July 1, debtors will not be able to get a job!

Considering that the law on bankruptcy of individuals has not yet been adopted, let’s be honest, debtors have practically no way out of the difficult situation.

Director of the Department of Retail Business and Regional Network Management of Rosgosstrakh Bank Vilen Li called the changes ambiguous, since, in principle, employers have no real need to know their credit history.

“Let's start with the fact that a person's credit history can be damaged for various reasons.

Mayhem! People are being kicked out of work!

81, 180 Labor Code of the Russian Federation). Even if only a single janitor position is open, the first applicant for it is you.

If you are dismissed due to reduction, you are entitled to a severance pay in the amount of one average monthly salary (the average salary for the last 12 months). If you were unable to find a job within a month, the payment of severance pay may be extended for another month. And if, after your dismissal, you registered with the employment center and were unable to find a job within two months, you will also receive benefits for the third month of inactivity (Art.

Providing leave with subsequent dismissal

No. 5227-6-1 clearly states that during illness during vacation followed by dismissal, the employer is obliged to pay the employee temporary disability benefits. However, the vacation is not extended by the number of sick days.

Termination of an employment contract is carried out on the basis of paragraph 3 of Article 77 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The question arises: when should a work book be issued to an employee? Previously, experts argued that it is necessary to make an entry in the work book and then hand over this document to the employee on the last day of work, i.e.

Add a comment Cancel reply

We understand the issue of dismissal if an employee has an outstanding mortgage

Many citizens are interested in whether they can be fired if they have a mortgage. There is a certain list of labor guarantees that apply in this situation.

Legislative initiatives

In November 2016, a bill was introduced to the State Duma banning the dismissal of workers with a mortgage. At the moment, this is just a draft document, on which serious work is underway. It is planned to adopt the regulatory act by the end of 2017.

The law banning the dismissal of employees with a mortgage still contains too many controversial issues and nuances that need serious improvement. The main task in this case is to protect employers and employees from dishonest behavior of the other party. There are fears that employers will try to circumvent the new ban on dismissal of workers with a mortgage, and some workers, on the contrary, may abuse their rights. That is why it is important to resolve all these issues, preventing unpleasant examples of legal practice. The main objective of the document is to protect the rights of young families and provide serious guarantees to young employees.

It is planned that the employer will not be able to fire an employee who has a mortgage loan for the entire duration of the loan. In the event of layoffs, such employees will have priority to remain. It is also planned to introduce a ban on the dismissal of such categories of the population for not too serious disciplinary violations. If the law on this issue is violated, each party will be able to resolve the dispute in court.

Labor legislation currently in force does not provide for a direct ban on the dismissal of employees with a mortgage, but enterprises have the right to include such a rule in the collective agreement.

Current regulations

At the moment, disputes between an employee who has a mortgage and an employer are regulated by the Labor Code. If an employee does not belong to any preferential category of employees, then he may be dismissed on a general basis.

Currently, standard legal provisions apply to employees with a mortgage loan, namely:

• Labor Code;
• specialized by-laws regulating labor relations in a specific area;
• collective agreement. Here the employer can introduce a clause that it is impossible to fire an employee with a mortgage or any other social guarantees for employees, but at the moment this is a right, not an obligation.

The Labor Code in Article 81 provides grounds for dismissal. The most common reasons:

• violations of labor discipline (systematic tardiness, absenteeism);
• inconsistency with the position (based on certification;
• theft;
• staff reduction, liquidation.

There are various additional grounds that are also provided for, but are used very rarely: disclosure of trade secrets, loss of management’s trust, refusal to move to the location where the enterprise is being relocated.

Read also: Amendments to the employment contract

Staff reduction: can you be fired if you have a mortgage in 2017?

Downsizing is a common reason for leaving. The dismissal procedure provides many features and guarantees for various categories of employees. The law on the reduction of employees with a mortgage will have to include these employees in the list of preferential categories of the population.

In some situations, despite the rights of employees and legislation, the enterprise, for objective reasons, will not be able to continue cooperation (complete liquidation of the enterprise). But the company is still obliged to comply with the law regarding the procedure for dismissing employees.

A common reason for dismissal these days is staff reduction. This is allowed by Art. 81 of the Labor Code, but there are important nuances of the procedure for dismissing employees:

• The employee must be warned in writing about the upcoming layoff 2 months in advance. At this moment, as well as immediately before dismissal, alternative vacancies should be offered, if they are available at the enterprise;
• when dismissing workers, trade unions and the Employment Service must be notified in advance;
• the employee is paid a benefit in the amount of average monthly earnings. After this, the employee can receive an average salary for 3 months at the Employment Service.

The collective agreement may also provide for additional payments for such employees;

— the law does not prohibit terminating the contract by agreement of the parties. In this situation, the conditions of dismissal and monetary payments are negotiated individually;

— the employee has the right to underwork for 2 months (the period during which he was notified of the upcoming layoff). At the same time, he has the right to receive monetary compensation in the amount of average earnings for this period;

— when compiling a list of candidates for dismissal, the employer must take into account the fact that the law provides for preferential categories of the population who are insured against dismissal at the enterprise. If this rule is violated, the employee will have every right to be reinstated and receive monetary compensation during the legal proceedings.

Labor guarantees

Article 179 of the Labor Code provides for a list of categories of workers who, when staffing is reduced, have a priority right to remain working. There are also categories of the population that cannot be dismissed in the usual manner.

There are certain categories of workers to whom the state provides a certain list of social guarantees. In particular, they are insured against layoffs and staff reductions. These categories include:

• pregnant women and mothers of children under 3 years of age;
• single mothers with a child under 14 years of age;
• mothers of disabled children under 18 years of age;
• disabled people.

The rule about disabled children applies to fathers raising children on their own or the sole breadwinners with a child under 14 years of age.

Among other workers, it is also necessary to choose taking into account priority rights. If an employee does not belong to a preferential category of the population, then when choosing between two employees he may have certain advantages. To such criteria in Art. 179 the legislator refers:

• having a long period of experience at this enterprise;
• higher indicators of labor quality;
• highest qualification;
• training at a specialized institution in the specialty;
• status of combatant;
• having more than 2 dependents.

The contract may also provide for additional conditions that are a priority for maintaining the position for the employee. The provisions of an employment contract cannot contradict current legislation.

Prospects

Now the rule is that it is impossible to fire a person with a mortgage only in the state plans. At the moment, no additional preferential conditions of labor legislation are applied to such employees.

So, at the moment, a mortgage and leaving a job are in no way connected. For employees with a mortgage loan, only valid labor and social guarantees are provided. If the Law on non-dismissal of employees with a mortgage is indeed adopted, then, most likely, such employees will not only enjoy the priority right to remain working, but will be completely socially protected from such actions of the employer. Even if there is a discrepancy with the position held, the employer will only be able to send the employee to advanced training courses. Thus, young families will be more socially protected.

You may also be interested in:

Can you be fired from your job if you have a mortgage?

When applying for a mortgage loan, citizens must be aware that there are certain risks associated with potential job loss and, as a result, difficulty in making regular loan payments. In general, any deterioration in the borrower’s financial situation will invariably complicate the repayment of the mortgage, but dismissal, for obvious reasons, is the most critical case.

There is an opinion among some people that when dismissing an employer, they must take into account the employee’s mortgage and provide him with a preferential right to continue working. This is wrong.

The legal portal bukva-zakona.com draws your attention to the fact that the presence of a mortgage loan (like any other bank loan) does not serve as a basis for providing benefits upon dismissal and the possibility of terminating an employment contract with such a person is exactly the same as with any other .

The current legislation specifies the categories of workers who have priority to retain their jobs upon dismissal.

• persons who alone provide for the existence of their families, that is, they are the sole breadwinners;
• persons who provide for more than 2 dependents; minor children, disabled people, elderly parents can act as dependents;
• persons undergoing training at the direction of the employer;
• persons who, in the course of performing their duties, acquired an occupational disease or injury.

When dismissing, when there is a question of choosing between several employees, the employer will definitely take into account the level of skill of each of them and the fulfillment of production standards. Preference will be given to the one who is a great professional and provides higher labor productivity.

Every year in Russia, mortgage lending is becoming an increasingly popular way of purchasing your own square meters. Almost a quarter of our country's population has loans received to purchase their home. In the last decade, for many citizens of our country, the question has become very relevant and no less painful: can an employer fire an employee who has a mortgage?

Based on the norms of the current legislation regulating legal relations in the sphere of labor, all working employees have guarantees defined by law that ensure the protection of their rights and interests in the workplace.

Regulator of labor relations in Russia

In Russia, the Labor Code has become the fundamental legal document regulating the relationship between employee and employer.

Speaking about the rights and social guarantees of workers, to begin with, it is necessary to refer to Article 180 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, which contains the requirements that at the beginning of the procedure for reducing the number of employees of an enterprise, the head of this enterprise must comply with certain rules for such a reduction.

Thus, the manager of an enterprise (organization) is obliged to offer the dismissed employee on his staff to perform another available job or another vacant position at his enterprise.

Moreover, that the employee will be fired, he must be notified by his employer personally, with a signature on the notice, and no later than two months before the dismissal.

Reasons why an employee may be fired

Let's take a closer look at the conditions that may serve as a reason for dismissing an employee.

For example, Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contains a list of circumstances under which an employment contract with an employee is terminated.

The contract will be terminated in the event of:

This article contains mandatory conditions according to which the head of the organization will not be able to dismiss an employee for the above reasons during the period when the person is temporarily disabled or is on primary or additional leave.

Further, Article 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation tells us that those employees of the organization who have greater labor productivity and higher qualifications have a preferential right over other employees to remain working.

If the employer has to choose between two employees with approximately the same productivity and qualifications, then the employee who will remain working is:

• a family person (if the family has two or more dependents);
• an employee who received an occupational disease or injury at work;
• disabled during the Second World War or disabled during combat operations;
• an employee who improves his qualifications in his area of ​​work;
• the only able-bodied person in the family.

Who else is covered by the guarantee not to be fired?

Articles 256 and 261 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation establish a requirement, observing which the head of an organization does not have legal grounds to dismiss due to a reduction in the number of people working for him in the following categories:

Having analyzed all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the current legislation does not define privileges for employees paying mortgages. Such employees can be dismissed on a general basis, since they do not enjoy any preferential right to remain employed.

In November 2016, deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation from the LDPR faction made a proposal to legalize additional guarantees for employees with mortgage loans (bill No. 27293-7).

According to this bill, it was proposed to amend Article 81 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, according to which an employer could not fire an employee who has an outstanding mortgage.

In the explanations to the bill, deputies explained the need to adopt such amendments by the fact that the majority of Russian families cannot purchase their own housing without borrowed funds. In most cases, mortgage loans are taken out by young families.

In the event of dismissal, such families are left without a source of livelihood, with a large credit debt, and most often, without their own apartment. To effectively protect this category of citizens at the legislative level, this bill has been prepared, the authors of the initiative report.

According to the new bill, the law will prohibit an employer from dismissing employees who have mortgage loans until the bank has paid it in full. In the event of a reduction in the number of staff in the organization, such employees will have a legislative priority right not to be fired.

According to the legislative initiative, an employer will not be able to lay off employees paying a mortgage in the following situations:

1. if the employee does not correspond to the position he holds or the work performed;
2. if there is a reduction in the number of staff of the organization.

However, among the expert community of economists, political scientists, and lawyers, opinions on the legislative amendments proposed by deputies were divided.

One group of experts considers the adoption of such amendments to labor legislation a good thing, since it will not allow a person paying a mortgage to be left without a single source of income.

Others, on the contrary, consider such a legislative initiative to be incorrect, since, in their opinion, such conditions will create additional difficulties for the employer. He will be forced to keep an inefficient employee on staff, firing an effective one, for no other reason than that the ineffective employee has a mortgage.

There are opinions that argue that with the adoption of the new law, the requirements for the selection of new employees for any positions will be seriously tightened.

With such measures, the employer will be able to protect itself from careless employees with a mortgage. After all, the price of a mistake is quite high.

Currently, if an irresponsible, professionally unsuitable employee is hired, the employer may lose an average of 100-200 thousand rubles over several years in the form of direct losses or lost profits.

If the corresponding amendments to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation are adopted, the same employer, having hired such an employee, will hang a “financial yoke” for himself for many years - i.e. until the end of the employee's mortgage payment period.

Summarizing the material collected in the article, we conclude that today, according to Russian legislation, a laid-off employee of an organization will not be able to demand reinstatement from a dismissed position only because he has mortgage obligations.

Time will tell whether appropriate amendments to labor legislation will be adopted to establish additional social guarantees for workers with mortgage loans.

Many employees are wondering if there is an unpaid mortgage, can they be fired? It is worth noting that some employees think that their employer must take into account the fact that they are paying off a large loan, and this can be a good reason for not firing a person from a permanent job. Actually this is not true. When you take out a loan from a bank, you yourself must be responsible for it. If your employer has good reasons to fire you, then, according to Russian law, he will do so without any hindrance, even if you still have 10 years left to pay your mortgage. You should know about this in advance so that you do not have serious problems in the future.

When you decide to take out a loan from a bank, you must be aware that you will have to repay it for several years in a row. Moreover, this must be done every month and without any delays. That is why you must be 100% sure that during this time your income will not decrease, you will not be fired, and no other changes will occur. It's best to think about the following points in advance:

1. You should only take out a loan if you have been working in your position for several years and are confident in your company.
2. You are sure that you will not have any unnecessary unexpected expenses. For example, if you have a child, will you be able to continue paying your mortgage?
3. If you share mortgage costs with your spouse, you might want to think about their job, too.

But even if you have thought through all the important points in advance, you may still encounter some problems. Weigh the pros and cons several times, only then take out a mortgage.

Is it possible to fire an employee whose mortgage loan from the bank has not yet been repaid? A mortgage is not a reason not to fire a person. This also applies to laid-off workers; a mortgage will not save them from this. However, indeed, there are certain categories of citizens who have some advantages:

• If a citizen provides for his family alone. For example, in a family only the father works, while the mother is on maternity leave with two children.
• A person with a mortgage provides for more than two dependents. Dependents include minor children, disabled people, and incapacitated parents.
• Citizens who are undergoing training at any institution on the direction of their superiors.
• People who acquired some kind of injury while working for the company.

It is important to note here that this does not mean at all that these categories of citizens can work poorly, but they still will not be fired. If a person is absent or does not perform his duties properly, then the employer has every right to fire him, and it does not matter whether the employee has any privileges or not.

The fact is that these categories of citizens cannot, for example, be laid off. If there is a choice between several employees, the manager will leave the workplace to an employee from the list presented above.

Important! Deputies are thinking about prohibiting managers from firing employees who have a mortgage. However, such a law has not yet been issued, so you should not count on it.

Thus, it turns out that firing an employee who pays a mortgage is no different from any other dismissal. At the same time, the employee cannot go to court, claiming that the manager violated the law, since the presence of a loan is not a valid reason. You can only go to court if your superiors really did something wrong. For example, you cannot fire an employee just like that if there are no layoffs and he fully fulfills his duties. There are many rules on this matter:

• A person cannot be fired if he is on vacation. In this case, the employee himself can apply for dismissal at any time. He is not required to give reasons.
• You cannot fire an employee who is on maternity leave. Such actions are illegal. If the employer does this, then the woman has every right to sue him. In 100% of cases, the court sides with the employee. The woman herself can quit at any time, and the manager cannot refuse her this.
• You cannot fire employees who are on sick leave.
• Even if an employee has some privileges, he can be fired. This can happen if he regularly does not fulfill his official duties.
• There must be serious reasons for the dismissal of any employee.

Results

If you still have an unpaid mortgage, then you cannot count on the fact that you will not be fired or laid off. The employer is not required to determine whether its employees have loans or not. Only the employee himself is responsible for such actions , and he must decide for himself whether he should take out a mortgage or not.

Mortgage lending for our citizens is the only widespread way to purchase their own housing if income or savings do not allow this to be done in another way - about 690 thousand mortgage loans were issued in Russia last year alone. However, given the conditions under which housing loans are provided, for the majority it turns into a real “bondage”, which has been “sucking” the last of the family budget for decades. Thus, according to the Central Bank of Russia, As of October 2016, the total debt of Russians on the mortgage exceeded 4.3 trillion rubles. But when there are constant sources of income, this is not so bad; the situation changes dramatically when these same sources of income disappear.

To reduce the pressure on “mortgage holders,” some State Duma deputies took legislative initiative and submitted to parliament a bill providing for amendments to legislation that will restrict the recruiter in his right to terminate the relationship with the mortgage borrower. And, it seems, such proposals are relevant for the existing economic realities in the Russian Federation, but some experts call this approach unfair. Careerist.ru decided to understand the specifics of the initiative.

Ban on dismissal

This draft document was submitted to parliament on November 15 by liberal democrats Daniil Shilkov and Vitaly Pashin. As the parliamentarians themselves note, a mortgage today is the only opportunity to get an apartment for many citizens. However, the economic realities of modern Russia are such that employers often have to carry out wholesale layoffs, as a result of which young mortgage holders may be left without a livelihood, along with debts on a million-dollar loan. This leads to the destruction of families, an increase in the number of crimes and an increase in the crime situation in general. Taking this into account, the deputies consider it expedient to increase the protection of the labor rights of these persons by limiting the grounds for severing labor relations with them.

As an additional labor guarantee, parliamentarians propose to provide borrowers with partial immunity, prohibiting recruiters from terminating employment contracts with them if real estate is purchased for the first time. However, the proposed ban is not unconditional - it will only apply to mass layoffs(“mortgage holders” should receive priority in case of layoffs), as well as in the event that an employee does not comply with the functions performed or the position held due to insufficient qualifications (apparently, the employer will be obliged to provide the employee with advanced training or pay for training), which should be revealed by the results of certification. To this end, parliamentarians propose to make appropriate changes to Articles 81 and 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

According to deputies, such an initiative should have a positive impact on the Russian economy as a whole, the development and real estate market.

The innovation should add confidence to “mortgage holders” in the future, which will allow them to increase the number of mortgages taken out - already today, according to NBKI, the number of mortgages has increased by 55% compared to last year, and this norm will improve these results.

Indeed, this kind of proposal, at first glance, may seem useful, especially for mortgage borrowers. However, according to the Analytical Center experts, this measure is largely discriminatory in nature, because loan payers until today were not considered a preferential category, and the initiative considered proposes putting them on a par with the sole breadwinners in the family who suffered from work-related injuries or, for example , disabled combatants (other categories with immunity from reductions, according to paragraph 2 of Article 179 of the Labor Code). Other experts agree with this.

Two different planes

If we consider this issue not from a social point of view, but objectively, then the benefits that mortgage borrowers can potentially receive cannot even be compared with the losses that other participants in the relationship may receive. It is obvious that the protection of citizens with a mortgage should be ensured by the state as a strategic task, however, issues of protecting borrowers and issues of layoffs at an enterprise or the personnel policy of an organization as a whole lie in different planes, both legislation and logic.

As a rule, layoffs are a forced measure to optimize production resources, and if an employer has to lay off a more productive employee instead of a “mortgagee,” it turns out that problems the borrower is transferred to his employer. If we talk about the formal reasons for the cuts to which mortgage payers are subjected, then it would be much more logical to improve labor legislation regarding these very reductions in general(for example, by revising the procedure itself or tightening control over it), rather than adding unnecessary preferential categories. According to Doctor of Economic Sciences Elena Ivankina from RANEPA, whose words are quoted by FBA Economics Today, the thinking of the initiators of the bill is correct, but they should be tied to macroeconomics, when there are a sufficient number of open vacancies in the country that redundant workers with a mortgage can get a job. . They are just missing.

Economist Tatyana Kulikova is also skeptical about the proposals - in her opinion, the bill cannot be adopted, since its initiators are engaged in populism. The fairness of the norms laid down in the bill, especially in relation to other employees, raises doubts among the expert. In particular, because they can force an employer to fire valuable employees in a “difficult moment”, regardless of the quality of their work. In the end, this will obviously create problems for the employer himself, since the law will oblige him to maintain even an ineffective employee just because he pays the loan.

This also looks unfair in relation to other preferential categories that no less than “mortgage holders” need protection, for example, single mothers or the disabled. It is, of course, much more difficult to fire them than an ordinary employee, so employers simply do not hire them - the opposite effect of the “preferential” effect. The same can happen to borrowers.

No need to wait for growth

If the law is adopted, the popularity of housing lending will not increase, says Valery Senkov from the State University of Management.

As he told the MIR24 portal, The main obstacle to obtaining a mortgage is the reduction in income of Russians, therefore, the provision of additional labor guarantees is unable to in any way affect the growth of the mortgage market, which is what the authors of the amendments to the Labor Code are aiming at. The expert notes that banks are already extremely scrupulous in checking the financial capabilities of potential borrowers, and the confidence that he will not lose his job in the future is unlikely to be a decisive factor when issuing a loan in any case.

As for the labor guarantees themselves, their completeness also raises doubts. According to Senkov, it is obvious that the presence of a benefit in the form of “immunity from dismissal” worsens the applicant’s chances of finding a job. The more difficult the dismissal process, the less willing the employer is to hire the applicant. But at the same time, labor legislation provides for at least 17 reasons for terminating an employment relationship. Immunity is unlikely to stop an employer who wants to get rid of an employee. Of course, according to statistics, in labor disputes the courts more often take the position of the employee, however, even if he decides to defend the illegitimacy of his dismissal in court, he will have to prove the fact that the reason for terminating the contract is not related to the real state of affairs or it falls into one of two bases that give him immunity.

At the same time, this may become an indicator of the imperfection of domestic labor legislation, which provides advantages to mortgage providers over other employees. The decision to transfer his own property “on bail” was made by the citizen personally, so it is not entirely logical to give him a benefit based on his own decision. After all, there is not a single country in the world in which mortgage borrowers are more protected by law than other workers, Senkov notes.

And it’s really impossible to argue with all this - the social effect for “mortgage holders” will indeed be positive, borrowers can feel more confident in the future. But the price that others will have to pay for this “borrower confidence” is disproportionate and unfair. Considering this, as well as the shortcomings of the bill itself, the Analytical Center experts have the subjective impression that the authors of the amendments do not initially expect the document to be adopted.