The implementation of a collective termination of employment for the employees of a call center company

CLE is initiating legal action in court in the case of the dismissal of 12 employees from a call center company, without respecting the deadlines and procedures defined in the law.

On December 3^rd, 2021, a call center company based in Tirana placed its former employees in a challenging position due to its failure to adhere to the legally mandated deadlines outlined in the collective dismissal law. Furthermore, the company neglected to follow the requisite procedures. Advisory session were conducted in the absence of the National Union of Telephone Operators, and they were prematurely concluded without addressing the issues and concerns raised by the employees.

Familiar with the case referenced by SKOT, the Center for Legal Empowerment (CLE) took action at the request of 12 former employees who had been dismissed. CLE initiated legal proceedings by filing 12 lawsuits against the call center company.

Represented by CLE, the plaintiffs submitted the following demands to the Tirana Judicial District Court:

1. The defendant is required to compensate the plaintiffs with 12 months’ salary for the immediate termination of their employment contracts without adherence to the notice period for collective layoffs.
2. In the event that the notice period was not respected, the defendant must compensate the plaintiffs with 3 months’ salary.
3. Compensation of 6 months’ salary is demanded from the defendant due to the breach of the collective dismissal procedure.

The plaintiffs assert that they are entitled to a total compensation of 20,186,040 ALL for the damages incurred from the collective dismissal. Their claims are based on several irregularities committed by the call center company, including failure to comply with procedural deadlines stipulated by the law. The disregard for legal deadlines has left the plaintiffs uncertain about securing new income following the termination of their employment contracts. Additionally, the closure of sessions without addressing raised concerns or providing responses has exacerbated this uncertainty. Furthermore, the absence of SKOT, which advocates for employees’ interests and facilitates necessary explanations and responses, during these sessions was noted.

The lawsuit has been submitted to the court, and an announcement regarding the progression of the court case is anticipated.