Full text of Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation with comments. New current edition with additions for 2019. Legal advice under article 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

When reducing the number or staff of employees, the preferential right to remain at work is granted to employees with higher labor productivity and qualifications.

With equal labor productivity and qualifications, preference is given to staying at work: family - in the presence of two or more dependents (disabled family members who are fully supported by the employee or receive assistance from him, which is for them a permanent and main source of livelihood); persons in whose family there are no other self-employed workers; employees who received an industrial injury or occupational disease during the period of work with this employer; disabled people of the Great Patriotic War and invalids of military operations for the defense of the Fatherland; employees who improve their skills in the direction of the employer on the job.
The collective agreement may provide for other categories of employees enjoying the preferential right to remain at work with equal labor productivity and qualifications.

Commentary on Article 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation

1. This article defines the procedure for dismissal of an employee due to a reduction in the number or staff of employees of both an organization and an individual entrepreneur.

When reducing the number (staff) of employees, the preferential right to remain at work is granted to employees with higher labor productivity and qualifications.
The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation noted that, when establishing the criteria for "higher labor productivity and qualifications", the legislator proceeded both from the need to provide additional measures protection of labor rights for employees with higher results of labor activity and better professional qualities, and from the employer's interest in continuing labor relations with the most qualified and efficient employees (see definition of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of December 21, 2006 N 581-O).

The possibility of exercising such a pre-emptive right depends on the specific composition of persons who are subject to reduction and occupy positions similar in terms of qualification requirements.

This provision is applied when reducing persons occupying positions similar in terms of qualification requirements, by comparing their business qualities. When deciding on the pre-emptive right in case of redundancy, the employer must compare the qualifications and productivity of labor, as well as other criteria in relation to all employees holding a particular position (as indicated, in particular, in the appeal ruling of the Yaroslavl Regional Court dated October 29, 2012 on case N 33-5903/2012).
It should be noted that if the position occupied by the employee and which was subject to reduction in the employer's staffing table is only one, the employee's preferential right to remain at work cannot be applied (this conclusion follows, in particular, from the appeal ruling of the Moscow City of November 22, 2012 in case No. 11-27863).

Quite often there are disputes about the legality of the use by the employer of the pre-emptive right to leave the employee at work.

Thus, the court concluded that the procedure for dismissal of an employee by the employer was not violated, since the qualifications of the lead engineer left at work and the amount of work performed by him were higher than that of the plaintiff - an engineer of the 1st category (in respect of which there was a reduction ). Also, unlike the plaintiff, who has a secondary education, the leading engineers had a higher education (see the appeal ruling of the Moscow Regional Court of August 14, 2012 in case N 33-13994 / 2012, see also the appeal ruling of the Omsk Regional Court of 7 November 2012 in case No. 33-6947/12).
It is important to remember that in all cases, at the request of the employee, the correctness of the employer's measures to reduce the number or staff of employees can be verified in court.

2. The commented article also establishes that in the case when an employer has identified equal labor productivity and qualifications of employees, but at the same time, reductions are planned for some of them, the following criteria must be taken into account.

Preference for staying at work should be given to:
- family persons - if they have two or more dependents. Dependents are understood as disabled family members who are fully supported by the employee or receive assistance from him, moreover, such assistance should be for them a permanent and main source of livelihood. For example, dependents are a non-working wife and children;
- persons in whose family there are no other workers with independent earnings. Based on this legislative wording, the fact that other family members of an employee receive social benefits: pensions, allowances, compensations, etc. - is not taken into account here;
- employees who received an industrial injury or occupational disease during the period of work with this employer. Definitions of these concepts are given in Art. 3 of the Federal Law "On Compulsory Social Insurance against Industrial Accidents and Occupational Diseases";
- invalids of the Great Patriotic War and invalids of military operations for the defense of the Fatherland. The list of persons belonging to this category is given in Art. 4 Federal Law "On Veterans";
- employees who improve their skills in the direction of the employer on the job.
Persons from these categories have the right to count on priority retention at work. At the same time, they must confirm their status documented.

In the event that several employees have such grounds at once, the one who has more of them gets the advantage to stay at work.

3. Other categories of citizens also enjoy the preferential right to be left at work in the event of liquidation, reduction in the number or staff.

So, paragraph 6 of Art. 10 federal law dated May 27, 1998 N 76-FZ "On the Status of Military Personnel" provides that the spouses of military personnel - citizens, other things being equal, have a preferential right to remain at work in state organizations, military units in case of a reduction in the number or staff of employees.

For citizens who have received or suffered radiation sickness and other diseases associated with radiation exposure due to the Chernobyl disaster or with work to eliminate the consequences of the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, disabled people due to the Chernobyl disaster, Part 7 of Art. 14 of the Law of the Russian Federation of May 15, 1991 N 1244-1 "On the social protection of citizens exposed to radiation as a result of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster" establishes the preferential right to remain at work in the event of a reduction in the number or staff, regardless of their work time at the enterprise, in the institution , organizations.

According to Art. 2 of the Federal Law of January 10, 2002 N 2-FZ "On social guarantees for citizens exposed to radiation as a result of nuclear tests at the Semipalatinsk test site" the preferential right to remain at work in case of a reduction in the number or staff, regardless of the time of work in the organization and priority employment in case of liquidation or reorganization of this organization are citizens who have received a total (cumulative) effective dose of radiation exceeding 25 cSv (rem).

In addition, the preferential right to remain at work with equal labor productivity and qualifications for certain categories of workers is provided for by a number of other regulatory legal acts, and can also be established by a collective agreement.

Here are examples from judicial practice, illustrating the definition by the employer of the pre-emptive right to leave the employee at work according to criteria different from those indicated in the commented article, with equal labor productivity and qualifications.

When determining an employee who has the preferential right to leave at work, the employer used such an indicator as "unproductive loss of working time", by which he meant, in particular, the employee's being on sick leave and time off, that is, in fact, absence from the workplace on a respectful basis. reason. Accordingly, the reduction was applied to the person whose indicator was higher. The court concluded that such an approach could not characterize the productivity of the dismissed worker. Since he had a higher qualification compared to the employee left at work, he had the priority right to remain at work (see the appeal ruling of the Yaroslavl Regional Court of October 29, 2012 in case N 33-5903 / 2012).

An employee who has relatively the same qualifications as other persons occupying a similar position, at the same time, was repeatedly brought to disciplinary responsibility. This circumstance, of course, could be taken into account when deciding on the priority right to leave at work and subsequent reduction (see the appeal ruling of the Moscow City Court of September 26, 2012 in case N 11-23422).

Consultations and comments of lawyers on Article 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation

If you still have questions about Article 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and you want to be sure that the information provided is up to date, you can consult the lawyers of our website.

You can ask a question by phone or on the website. Initial consultations are free of charge from 9:00 to 21:00 Moscow time daily. Questions received between 21:00 and 09:00 will be processed the next day.

Do you think you are Russian? Born in the USSR and think that you are Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian? No. This is wrong.

You are actually Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian. But you think you are a Jew.

Game? Wrong word. Right word"imprinting".

A newborn associates himself with those facial features that he observes immediately after birth. This natural mechanism is characteristic of most living beings with vision.

Newborns in the USSR for the first few days saw their mother have a minimum of feeding time, and most time we saw the faces of the staff of the maternity hospital. By a strange coincidence, they were (and still are) mostly Jewish. Reception is wild in its essence and effectiveness.

All your childhood you wondered why you live surrounded by non-native people. Rare Jews on your path could do anything with you, because you were drawn to them, while others were repelled. Yes, even now they can.

You cannot fix this - imprinting is one-time and for life. It is difficult to understand, the instinct took shape when you were still very far from being able to formulate. From that moment, no words or details have been preserved. Only facial features remained in the depths of memory. Those traits that you consider your family.

System and Observer

Let us define a system as an object whose existence is not in doubt.

An observer of a system is an object that is not a part of the system it observes, that is, it determines its existence, including through factors independent of the system.

From the point of view of the system, the observer is a source of chaos - both control actions and the consequences of observational measurements that do not have a causal relationship with the system.

An internal observer is a potentially achievable object for the system in relation to which the inversion of the observation and control channels is possible.

An external observer is even an object potentially unattainable for the system, located beyond the event horizon of the system (spatial and temporal).

Hypothesis #1. All-seeing eye

Let's assume that our universe is a system and it has an external observer. Then observational measurements can take place, for example, with the help of "gravitational radiation" penetrating the universe from all sides from the outside. The capture cross section of "gravitational radiation" is proportional to the mass of the object, and the projection of the "shadow" from this capture onto another object is perceived as an attractive force. It will be proportional to the product of the masses of objects and inversely proportional to the distance between them, which determines the density of the "shadow".

The capture of "gravitational radiation" by an object increases its randomness and is perceived by us as a passage of time. An object that is opaque to "gravitational radiation", the capture cross section of which is larger than the geometric size, inside the universe looks like a black hole.

Hypothesis #2. Internal Observer

It is possible that our universe is watching itself. For example, using pairs of quantum entangled particles spaced apart in space as standards. Then the space between them is saturated with the probability of the existence of the process that generated these particles, which reaches its maximum density at the intersection of the trajectories of these particles. The existence of these particles also means the absence of a sufficiently large capture cross section on the trajectories of objects capable of absorbing these particles. The remaining assumptions remain the same as for the first hypothesis, except:

Time flow

Third-party observation of an object approaching the event horizon of a black hole, if the “outside observer” is the determining factor of time in the universe, will slow down exactly twice - the shadow from the black hole will block exactly half of the possible trajectories of “gravitational radiation”. If the determining factor is the "internal observer", then the shadow will block the entire trajectory of interaction and the flow of time for an object falling into a black hole will completely stop for a view from the outside.

Also, the possibility of combining these hypotheses in one proportion or another is not excluded.

When implementing measures to reduce the number of employees, the head of the organization must remember that highly qualified subordinates have a preferential right to remain in their positions at the enterprise. This rule is enshrined in Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. If at the enterprise all employees have the same qualifications, then jobs should be reserved for family citizens with several dependents, as well as for those who were injured during their professional activities in the organization, war invalids and persons undergoing training in the direction leader without interruption from service.

What is important to know

Many citizens who are subject to staff reduction are wondering if they will be able to stay at work in their position if they have high qualifications, certain knowledge, experience and positive characteristics. Here we can say for sure that the head of the organization cannot dismiss such subordinates. Because the norm of Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation indicates that highly qualified employees have a preferential right to stay at the enterprise at their workplace.

In the event that the manager cannot independently determine the categories of subordinates who should be dismissed due to the reduction, then he needs to consult with the organization's lawyer and take into account the opinion of the trade union.

It is also necessary to remember that in the absence of employees with the highest labor productivity at the enterprise, preference should be given to family citizens who have several dependents, as well as persons who were injured during the performance of official duties, disabled veterans of the Second World War. This rule is fixed in Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

With the same performance

Subject to the provisions of Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the reduction should bypass the following categories of employees:

• family people who are supported by two or more dependents (i.e., disabled citizens for whom the income of the breadwinner is considered the main income);
• subordinates who received serious injuries at work while performing their official duties at this company;
• family persons, if no one else in his family has a source of income (even able-bodied relatives of the latter);
• disabled veterans of the Great Patriotic War and participants in military operations to protect the state;
• persons who improve their qualifications in the direction of the chief on the job.

It is important.

How to determine

Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in the new edition indicates that employees with very high or even better labor productivity and qualifications have the preferential right to remain in their positions during staff reductions. But how can you identify the people you want to keep at work in the organization?

Here it is necessary to carefully review the personal file of an employee who presumably falls under the reduction. If he has work experience, a good education, quickly performs the duties assigned to him and does not violate labor discipline in the organization, then, accordingly, he will not be fired. Otherwise, the latter will be reinstated at work in a judicial proceeding.

Necessary actions

The administration of the organization, together with the trade union, needs to carefully review the personal files of all subordinates who are supposed to be laid off. Moreover, if all employees have the same level of education and the same professional experience, then preference should be given to families with children, war invalids and those who were injured in the line of duty in this enterprise, because this rule spelled out in part 2 of Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

Other categories

The collective agreement of the organization may also include other citizens who have priority rights to remain in the organization. These include:

• people of pre-retirement age, when there is very little time left before going on a well-deserved rest;
• minor citizens;
• subordinates who have been performing official activities at the enterprise for many years (15 or more);
• specialists who are just starting their career (in the first three years of work);
• employees raising a child under 16 years of age without the participation of the second parent.

A comment

Those employees who have very good labor productivity and high qualifications have the advantage in case of reduction. This is stated in Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. It is impossible not to agree with her comments. Because it is these two criteria that allow the employer to decide on the choice of those employees who will not be dismissed on this basis.

If several subordinates fall under the reduction, one of whom has extensive work experience and a high level of qualification, then preference for remaining in office will be given to him, and not to other citizens.

In the event that all employees have the same knowledge and equal productivity, the company needs to save places for family people, war invalids, as well as those people who received injuries during the performance of their duties.

Typical mistakes of a leader

Most employers for some reason believe that with the help of layoffs, you can get rid of objectionable subordinates. Although this is not true at all. The latter can be reinstated in their positions in a judicial proceeding.

In addition, employees with good labor productivity and a sufficiently high level of education have an advantage over other subordinates who are laid off. This rule is fixed in Part 1 of Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. And even if these citizens do not evoke sympathy from the boss, they still cannot be reduced without a proper assessment of their professional qualities. Moreover, they must be under the protection of the trade union committee.

Carrying out the procedure

The employee must be warned about the upcoming reduction in advance. The law provides for a certain period of time for this, which cannot be less than two months. A person receives a corresponding notice in his hands, the second copy of which remains in his personal file at the enterprise. In addition, the head of the organization must remember that highly qualified employees have an advantage over other subordinates, and all those who are laid off must be offered free vacancies that exist in the campaign. These rules are enshrined in Art. 179, 180 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

When a subordinate refuses the proposed vacancy and wants to leave the reduced position ahead of time, the manager is obliged to pay him all due cash on the last day of service.

Additional warranties

In the event that all subordinates at the enterprise have the same productivity and level of education, then preference is given to staying at the workplace during staff reductions: family citizens with two or more dependents, war invalids, persons injured in the performance of official duties in this organization - this is written in Art. 179. Art. 261 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation supplements the category of people who cannot be fired in connection with the implementation of these events. Thus, the reduction should not affect the following citizens:

• representatives of the fair sex who have babies under the age of three;
• single mothers raising disabled children under 18 years of age or minors (if not 14 years old);
• a person who is considered the sole breadwinner if he has more than three children in his family, one of whom is under three years old, and the wife is not employed and has no source of livelihood;
• a person who himself supports a disabled child (until the latter comes of age).

Practice

The citizen was warned about the upcoming reduction two months before the implementation of these measures. At the same time, the head of the organization did not offer him the available vacancies. After the period of time specified in the notice expired, the employee was terminated from the organization with payment of benefits.

The citizen considered that the contract with him was unfairly terminated, because he has a very good education, work experience and copes with his duties much faster than other subordinates who remained at their jobs. The man went to court.

When all the circumstances were clarified at the meeting, it was established that the dismissed employee not only had a good education and productivity, but he had never been held accountable for violating discipline at the enterprise. While other subordinates who remain in the organization are constantly late and do not complete the work plan. In this regard, the court concluded that the person was dismissed unlawfully. Therefore, the man was reinstated in his position.

Judicial practice under Art. 179 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation most often shows that the heads of enterprises, when dismissing employees for redundancy, do not evaluate their professional skills, knowledge and abilities, and this is a significant violation of the law. Therefore, the majority of citizens with high qualifications are again restored to work.

Article 178. Severance pay

Upon termination of an employment contract in connection with the liquidation of an organization (clause 1 of part one of Article 81 of this Code) or a reduction in the number or staff of employees of an organization (clause 2 of part one of Article 81 of this Code), the dismissed employee is paid a severance pay in the amount of the average monthly earnings, as well as for he retains the average monthly salary for the period of employment, but not more than two months from the date of dismissal (including severance pay).

In exceptional cases, the average monthly salary is retained by the dismissed employee for the third month from the date of dismissal by decision of the public employment service agency, provided that the employee applied to this agency within two weeks after dismissal and was not employed by him.

Severance pay in the amount of two weeks of average earnings is paid to the employee upon termination of the employment contract due to:

refusal of the employee to transfer to another job, necessary for him in accordance with a medical certificate issued in the manner prescribed by federal laws and other regulatory legal acts Russian Federation, or the lack of an appropriate job for the employer (paragraph 8 of the first part of Article 77 of this Code);

conscription of an employee for military service or sending him to an alternative civilian service that replaces it (clause 1 of part one of Article 83 of this Code);

reinstatement at work of an employee who previously performed this work (paragraph 2 of part one of Article 83 of this Code);

the refusal of the employee to transfer to work in another locality together with the employer (paragraph 9 of the first part of Article 77 of this Code);

recognition of an employee as completely incapable of work in accordance with a medical certificate issued in accordance with the procedure established by federal laws and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation (clause 5 of part one of Article 83 of this Code);

refusal of the employee to continue work in connection with a change in the terms of the employment contract determined by the parties (paragraph 7 of the first part of Article 77 of this Code).

An employment contract or a collective agreement may provide for other cases of payment of severance benefits, as well as establish increased amounts of severance benefits, with the exception of cases provided for by this Code.

Article 179

When reducing the number or staff of employees, the preferential right to remain at work is granted to employees with higher labor productivity and qualifications.

With equal labor productivity and qualifications, preference is given to staying at work: family - in the presence of two or more dependents (disabled family members who are fully supported by the employee or receive assistance from him, which is for them a permanent and main source of livelihood); persons in whose family there are no other self-employed workers; employees who received an industrial injury or occupational disease during the period of work with this employer; invalids of the Great Patriotic War and invalids of military operations for the defense of the Fatherland; employees who improve their skills in the direction of the employer on the job.

The collective agreement may provide for other categories of employees enjoying the preferential right to remain at work with equal labor productivity and qualifications.

Article 180

When carrying out measures to reduce the number or staff of the organization's employees, the employer is obliged to offer the employee another available job (vacant position) in accordance with part three of Article 81 of this Code.

About the upcoming dismissal in connection with the liquidation of the organization, the reduction in the number or staff of the organization's employees, employees are warned by the employer personally and against signature at least two months before the dismissal.

The employer, with the written consent of the employee, has the right to terminate the employment contract with him before the expiration of the period specified in part two of this article, paying him additional compensation in the amount of the employee's average earnings, calculated in proportion to the time remaining before the expiration of the notice of dismissal.

In the event of a threat of mass layoffs, the employer, taking into account the opinion of the elected body of the primary trade union organization, takes the necessary measures provided for by this Code, other federal laws, a collective agreement, an agreement.

Article 181

In case of termination of the employment contract with the head of the organization, his deputies and the chief accountant in connection with the change of ownership of the organization's property, the new owner is obliged to pay compensation to the specified employees in the amount of not less than three times the average monthly earnings of the employee, except for the cases provided for by this Code.

Article 181.1. Severance pay, compensation and other payments to employees in certain cases of termination of employment contracts

Collective agreement, agreements, local regulations, employment contracts or decisions of the employer, authorized bodies legal entity, as well as the owner of the property of the organization or persons (bodies) authorized by the owners, the payment of severance benefits, compensations and (or) the assignment of any other payments to them in any form cannot be provided for in cases of dismissal of employees on grounds that relate to disciplinary sanctions ( part three of Article 192 of this Code), or termination of employment contracts with employees on the grounds established by this Code, other federal laws, if this is connected with the commission of guilty actions (inaction) by employees.

When reducing the number or staff of employees, the preferential right to remain at work is granted to employees with higher labor productivity and qualifications.

With equal labor productivity and qualifications, preference in leaving at work is given to: family - in the presence of two or more dependents (disabled family members who are fully supported by the employee or receive assistance from him, which is for them a permanent and main source of livelihood); persons in whose family there are no other self-employed workers; employees who received an industrial injury or occupational disease during the period of work with this employer; invalids of the Great Patriotic War and invalids of military operations for the defense of the Fatherland; employees who improve their skills in the direction of the employer on the job.

The collective agreement may provide for other categories of employees enjoying the preferential right to remain at work with equal labor productivity and qualifications.

Commentary on Art. 179 Labor Code of the Russian Federation

1. Only in the event of equality among employees of professional qualities, the provisions provided for in this article on the pre-emptive right of certain employees to remain at work upon dismissal on the specified basis will apply.

2. In addition to the employees listed in paragraph 2 of this article, the advantage in leaving at work is provided in accordance with the law to a number of other categories of employees.

3. Among such employees it is possible to name, in particular:

- spouses of military personnel in state organizations, military units (see Article 10 of the Federal Law of May 27, 1998 N 76-FZ "On the status of military personnel" // SZ RF. 1998. N 22. Art. 2331);

- officials and citizens admitted to state secrets on an ongoing basis (see Article 21 of the Law of the Russian Federation of July 21, 1993 N 5485-1 "On State Secrets" // SZ RF. 1997. N 41. Art. 8220 - 8235);

- citizens awarded the titles of Hero of the Soviet Union, Hero of the Russian Federation or who are full holders of the Order of Glory (see Article 8 of the Law of the Russian Federation of January 15, 1993 N 4301-1 "On the status of Heroes of the Soviet Union, Heroes of the Russian Federation and full holders of the Order of Glory "// Air Force of the Russian Federation. 1993. N 7. Art. 247), etc.

4. Other categories of workers who, with equal labor productivity and qualifications, enjoy a preferential right in comparison with other workers to remain at work, may be provided for by a collective or labor contract.

Second commentary on Article 179 of the Labor Code

1. This article has not undergone significant changes. In the content of the priority right to leave at work in case of a reduction in the number or staff of the organization's employees, the Code highlights the advantages of two levels. The first level includes benefits that are absolute. Those employees who have higher labor productivity and qualifications have these advantages. Any specific list of documents evidencing more than high performance labor, the legislation does not fix. Therefore, this legal fact is established on the basis of the cumulative assessment of the evidence. These may include data indicating the high quality of the work performed, the performance by the employee of important responsible tasks or a greater amount of work compared to employees occupying similar positions or performing work in the same profession and the same degree of complexity. In the absence of direct evidence of a higher productivity of a particular employee compared to another employee, indirect evidence of this legal fact may also be taken into account. These may include data on rewarding an employee for high performance in labor.

Qualification is proved by documents on education, advanced training, professional retraining.

Evaluation of the higher labor productivity and qualifications of the employee and the decision on the preferential right to remain at work in case of a reduction in the number or staff of the organization's employees is made by the employer. In the event that the dismissed employee does not agree with such a decision and considers the termination of the employment contract illegal, he has the right to file a labor dispute directly with the court. When considering a dispute, the court also evaluates the professional qualities of the employee left and compares them with the professional qualities of the dismissed employee.

2. The benefits of the second level are determined only with equal labor productivity and qualifications. These benefits are enjoyed by: family - in the presence of two or more dependents; persons in whose family there are no other self-employed workers; employees who have received a work injury or occupational disease in this organization; invalids of the Great Patriotic War and invalids of military operations for the defense of the Fatherland; employees who improve their qualifications in the direction of the employer on the job.

The employee's dependents include any members of his family who are fully supported by him or receive assistance from him, which is for them a permanent and main source of livelihood. This can be not only children, but also parents of spouses who receive a pension, as well as other family members who have an income, if the help of an employee is a permanent and main source of livelihood for them.

The absence of other self-employed workers in the family means that the receipt of various kinds of social payments (pensions, allowances, compensations, various subsidies) by the family members of the worker should not be taken into account.

The concept of labor injury is given in the Regulations on the procedure for providing state social insurance benefits, approved by the Decree of the Presidium of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions of November 12, 1984. Work injury is understood as damage to the health of an employee as a result of an accident that occurred under the circumstances specified in this regulatory act. These circumstances include the following: in the performance of labor duties, as well as in the performance of any actions in the interests of the organization, even without instructions from the administration; on the way to or from work; on the territory of the organization or in another place of work during working hours (including established breaks), during the time necessary to put in order the tools of production, clothing, etc. before or after work; near the organization or other place of work during working hours, including the established breaks, if being there did not contradict the internal labor regulations. Labor injury also recognizes damage to health as a result of an accident that occurred during the passage of industrial training (practice) or the conduct of educational experiments (experiments) during study; in the performance of public duties, as well as assignments public organizations whose activities do not contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation; in the performance of civic duty to save human life, protect property and law and order.

The concept of industrial injury is much broader than such a concept as an accident at work, when insurance payments are made to an employee in connection with damage to health in the form of compulsory social insurance. The concept of an industrial accident is given in the Federal Law of July 24, 1998 "On Compulsory Social Insurance against Industrial Accidents and Occupational Diseases" (SZ RF. 1998. N 31. Art. 3803).

Accident at work - an event as a result of which the insured received an injury or other damage to health in the performance of his duties under an employment contract and in other cases established by this law, both on the territory of the insured and outside it, or during the journey to the place of work or return from the place of work on the transport provided by the insured, and which led to the need to transfer the insured to another job, temporary or permanent loss of his professional ability to work. Since the term “labor injury” is not used in this Law, it is obvious that when determining the benefits of the second level, the concept of industrial injury considered above should be taken as a basis.

The provision on the priority right of disabled veterans of the Great Patriotic War is not of great importance, since there are practically no workers who have reached such an advanced age. At the same time, when defining this category, one should be guided by Art. 4 of the Federal Law "On Veterans".

The circle of employees who improve their qualifications on the job and enjoy the preferential right to stay at work in the event of a reduction in the number or staff of employees has narrowed. Now they include only those employees who improve their skills in the direction of the employer on the job. At the same time, the form of education and the type of vocational education institution do not matter (see comments on Chapters 31 and 32 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

3. When determining the benefits of the second level, a situation may arise when all employees belong to one or another category from those specified in Art. 179. Since their advantages are equal, then, apparently, preference should be given to those of them who simultaneously belong to several of the named categories. If there is no such criterion, then the employer has the right to give preference to any of these employees, and the labor dispute body obviously cannot review the decision of the employer.

4. Art. 179 does not indicate many categories of workers from those that were provided for in Art. 34 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, for example, wives (husbands) of military personnel; citizens discharged from military service; persons injured in connection with the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, liquidators of the accident and some others.

The exclusion from the Code of the spouses of servicemen and citizens dismissed from military service does not deprive them of the pre-emptive right to remain at work in the event of a reduction in the number or staff of employees, since this right is provided for by Art. 10, 23 of the Federal Law of May 27, 1998 "On the status of military personnel" (SZ RF. 1998. N 22. Art. 2331). This Law also provides for this right for single mothers of conscripted military personnel (Article 23).

Citizens who have received or suffered radiation sickness and other diseases associated with radiation exposure as a result of the Chernobyl disaster or with work to eliminate the consequences of the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, as well as disabled people as a result of the Chernobyl disaster, have a preferential right to remain at work in case of a reduction in the number or staff on the basis of Art. . 14 (p. 13) of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the social protection of citizens exposed to radiation as a result of the Chernobyl disaster", as amended on June 18, 1992 (Vedomosti RF. 1991. N 21. Art. 699; 1992. N 32. Art. 1861).

Important is the provision enshrined in Part 3 of Art. 179, that the collective agreement may provide for other categories of workers who enjoy the preferential right to remain at work with equal labor productivity and qualifications. Obviously, the employer can give preference to other categories of employees specified in the collective agreement in leaving at work only if there are no employees enjoying this right by virtue of the Code or other laws.