Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY REGARDING DOMESTIC WORKERS AND THEIR OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY IN TURKEY

Year 2018, Volume: 7 Issue: 4, 359 - 364, 30.12.2018
https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.996

Abstract

Purpose- The aim of this study is to examine the employer’s liability concerning domestic workers and their occupational health and safety in the Turkish legal system.
Methodology- The employer’s liability concerning domestic workers and their occupational health and safety will be discussed in light of the Turkish legislation and views of scholars.
Findings- It is stipulated under Turkish Code of Obligations that the employer is obliged to take any type of measures and to keep tools and vehicles available as required to ensure occupational health and safety in the workplace.
Conclusion- Domestic workers are real workers and bearing this in mind the domestic workers have distinctive structures. New laws are necessary to guarantee decent occupational health and safety conditions. However, the law is not always sufficient to improve occupational health and safety conditions for a domestic worker. The topic of domestic workers is not only a legalisation or an absense of perception issue but also a community education challenge.

References

  • Albin, E., Mantouvalou, V. (2011/1). The ILO convention on domestic workers: from the shadows to the light. UCL Labour Rights Institute On-Line Working Papers. 1-16.
  • Alfers, L. (2011). Occupational health and safety & domestic work. A Synthesis of Research Findings From Brazil and Tanzania. 1-26.
  • Baycık, G. (2013/3). Çalışanların iş sağlığı ve güvenliğine ilişkin haklarında yeni düzenlemeler. Ankara Barosu Dergisi. 106-167.
  • Blackett, A. (1998). Making Domestic work visible, the case for specific regulation, labour law and labour relations programme working paper No. 2, Geneva, ILO. 1-29
  • Caniklioğlu, N. (2012). 6331 sayılı iş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanununda öngörülen işveren yükümlülükleri. Türkiye Toprak, Seramik, Çimento ve Cam Sanayii İşverenleri Sendikası, Çalışma Mevzuatı Semineri, 26-30 Eylül 2012, Antalya, 27-84.
  • Centel, T. (2013). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanunu’nun uygulama alanı ve kapsamı. Prof. Dr. Nur Centel’e Armağan, MÜHF-HAD. Volume. 19. Number 2. 79-84.
  • Ekonomi, M. (1987). İş hukuku. Volume.I, Ferdi İş Hukuku,.3. edition, İstanbul.
  • Erdoğdu, S., Toksöz, G. (2013). The visible face of women’s invisible labour: domestic workers in Turkey. Conditions of Work and Employment Series No. 42. Geneva, ILO. 1-52
  • Ertürk, Ş. (2012). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanunu’nda işverene getirilen yükümlülükler. Sicil İş Hukuku Dergisi, Number. 27, September, 13-24.
  • Güzel, A. (2003). Dünyada ve ülkemizde işyeri hekimliğine yaklaşım, sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Uluslararası ve Ulusal Hukuk Sisteminde İşyeri Hekimliği Sempozyumu, TTB Ankara, 9-64.
  • Huws, U., Podro, S. (1995). Employment of homeworkers: examples of good practice. ILO, Geneva. 1-35.
  • Johnstone, L. (2013). Organising domestic workers: for decent work and the ILO Convention No. 189. Master Thesis, Oslo and Akerhus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences. 1-56.
  • ILO (2010). Decent work for domestic workers report IV(1). International Labour Conference, 99th Session, Geneva. ILO. 1-130.
  • ILO (2012). Effective protection for domestic workers: a guide to designing labour laws. Geneva, ILO. 1-118.
  • ILO (2016). Social protection policy papers, Paper 16, social protection for domestic workers. Key Policy Trends and Statistics, International Labour Office, Geneva. ILO. 1-69.
  • Mantouvalou, V. (2012). Human rights for precarious workers, the legislative precariousness of domestic labour. UCL Labour Rights Institute On-Line Working Papers. 1-24.
  • Ocak, S. (2012). 6331 sayılı iş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanununun taraflara getirdiği yükümlülükler, iş sağlığı ve iş güvenliğine hukuki bakış paneli. Öz-İplik İş Sendikası ve Yeni Yüzyıl Üniversitesi, İstanbul. 109-171.
  • Özdemir, E. (2014). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği hukuku. Vedat.
  • Santana, V. S., de Amorim, A. M., Oliviera, R., Xavier, S., Iriart, J., Belitardo, L. (2003). Housemaids and non-fatal occupational injuries. Rev Saude Publica, 37 (1): 65-74.
  • Sarıbay Öztürk, G. (2016). The precarious situation of domestic workers in the light of Turkish Labour Law and ILO Convention No. 189. Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe. 171-181.
  • Sarıbay Öztürk, G. (2017). Domestic workers’ working hours in Turkey. In Light of ILO Convention No.189. Hungarian Labour Law E- Journal, S.2. 30-47.
  • Sarıbay Öztürk, G. (2015). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği yükümlülüklerinin yerine getirilmemesinin hukuki, idari ve cezai sonuçları. Beta.
  • Soyer, P. (2003). 4857 sayılı yeni iş kanununun ücret, işin düzenlenmesi, iş sağlığı ve güvenliğine ilişkin bazı hükümleri üzerine düşünceler. 4857 Sayılı Yeni İş Kanunu Değerlendirme Konferans Notları, Türk-İş, 12-36.
  • Süzek, S. (1985). İş güvenliği hukuku. Ankara. Savaş.
  • Ünlütürk Ulutaş, Ç., Durusoy Öztepe, N. (2013). Ev hizmetlerinde mesleki sağlık ve güvenlik sorunu. Volume. 4, Number. 2, Çalışma İlişkileri Dergisi, 44-57.
  • www.hukukturk.com.tr
  • www.bianet.org
Year 2018, Volume: 7 Issue: 4, 359 - 364, 30.12.2018
https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.996

Abstract

References

  • Albin, E., Mantouvalou, V. (2011/1). The ILO convention on domestic workers: from the shadows to the light. UCL Labour Rights Institute On-Line Working Papers. 1-16.
  • Alfers, L. (2011). Occupational health and safety & domestic work. A Synthesis of Research Findings From Brazil and Tanzania. 1-26.
  • Baycık, G. (2013/3). Çalışanların iş sağlığı ve güvenliğine ilişkin haklarında yeni düzenlemeler. Ankara Barosu Dergisi. 106-167.
  • Blackett, A. (1998). Making Domestic work visible, the case for specific regulation, labour law and labour relations programme working paper No. 2, Geneva, ILO. 1-29
  • Caniklioğlu, N. (2012). 6331 sayılı iş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanununda öngörülen işveren yükümlülükleri. Türkiye Toprak, Seramik, Çimento ve Cam Sanayii İşverenleri Sendikası, Çalışma Mevzuatı Semineri, 26-30 Eylül 2012, Antalya, 27-84.
  • Centel, T. (2013). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanunu’nun uygulama alanı ve kapsamı. Prof. Dr. Nur Centel’e Armağan, MÜHF-HAD. Volume. 19. Number 2. 79-84.
  • Ekonomi, M. (1987). İş hukuku. Volume.I, Ferdi İş Hukuku,.3. edition, İstanbul.
  • Erdoğdu, S., Toksöz, G. (2013). The visible face of women’s invisible labour: domestic workers in Turkey. Conditions of Work and Employment Series No. 42. Geneva, ILO. 1-52
  • Ertürk, Ş. (2012). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanunu’nda işverene getirilen yükümlülükler. Sicil İş Hukuku Dergisi, Number. 27, September, 13-24.
  • Güzel, A. (2003). Dünyada ve ülkemizde işyeri hekimliğine yaklaşım, sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Uluslararası ve Ulusal Hukuk Sisteminde İşyeri Hekimliği Sempozyumu, TTB Ankara, 9-64.
  • Huws, U., Podro, S. (1995). Employment of homeworkers: examples of good practice. ILO, Geneva. 1-35.
  • Johnstone, L. (2013). Organising domestic workers: for decent work and the ILO Convention No. 189. Master Thesis, Oslo and Akerhus University College of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences. 1-56.
  • ILO (2010). Decent work for domestic workers report IV(1). International Labour Conference, 99th Session, Geneva. ILO. 1-130.
  • ILO (2012). Effective protection for domestic workers: a guide to designing labour laws. Geneva, ILO. 1-118.
  • ILO (2016). Social protection policy papers, Paper 16, social protection for domestic workers. Key Policy Trends and Statistics, International Labour Office, Geneva. ILO. 1-69.
  • Mantouvalou, V. (2012). Human rights for precarious workers, the legislative precariousness of domestic labour. UCL Labour Rights Institute On-Line Working Papers. 1-24.
  • Ocak, S. (2012). 6331 sayılı iş sağlığı ve güvenliği kanununun taraflara getirdiği yükümlülükler, iş sağlığı ve iş güvenliğine hukuki bakış paneli. Öz-İplik İş Sendikası ve Yeni Yüzyıl Üniversitesi, İstanbul. 109-171.
  • Özdemir, E. (2014). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği hukuku. Vedat.
  • Santana, V. S., de Amorim, A. M., Oliviera, R., Xavier, S., Iriart, J., Belitardo, L. (2003). Housemaids and non-fatal occupational injuries. Rev Saude Publica, 37 (1): 65-74.
  • Sarıbay Öztürk, G. (2016). The precarious situation of domestic workers in the light of Turkish Labour Law and ILO Convention No. 189. Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe. 171-181.
  • Sarıbay Öztürk, G. (2017). Domestic workers’ working hours in Turkey. In Light of ILO Convention No.189. Hungarian Labour Law E- Journal, S.2. 30-47.
  • Sarıbay Öztürk, G. (2015). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği yükümlülüklerinin yerine getirilmemesinin hukuki, idari ve cezai sonuçları. Beta.
  • Soyer, P. (2003). 4857 sayılı yeni iş kanununun ücret, işin düzenlenmesi, iş sağlığı ve güvenliğine ilişkin bazı hükümleri üzerine düşünceler. 4857 Sayılı Yeni İş Kanunu Değerlendirme Konferans Notları, Türk-İş, 12-36.
  • Süzek, S. (1985). İş güvenliği hukuku. Ankara. Savaş.
  • Ünlütürk Ulutaş, Ç., Durusoy Öztepe, N. (2013). Ev hizmetlerinde mesleki sağlık ve güvenlik sorunu. Volume. 4, Number. 2, Çalışma İlişkileri Dergisi, 44-57.
  • www.hukukturk.com.tr
  • www.bianet.org
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Gizem Saribay Ozturk This is me 0000-0001-8038-6713

Publication Date December 30, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 7 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Ozturk, G. S. (2018). EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY REGARDING DOMESTIC WORKERS AND THEIR OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY IN TURKEY. Journal of Business Economics and Finance, 7(4), 359-364. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2018.996

Journal of Business, Economics and Finance (JBEF) is a scientific, academic, double blind peer-reviewed, quarterly and open-access journal. The publication language is English. The journal publishes four issues a year. The issuing months are March, June, September and December. The journal aims to provide a research source for all practitioners, policy makers and researchers working in the areas of business, economics and finance. The Editor of JBEF invites all manuscripts that that cover theoretical and/or applied researches on topics related to the interest areas of the Journal. JBEF charges no submission or publication fee.



Ethics Policy - JBEF applies the standards of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). JBEF is committed to the academic community ensuring ethics and quality of manuscripts in publications. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden and the manuscripts found to be plagiarized will not be accepted or if published will be removed from the publication. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work. Plagiarism, duplicate, data fabrication and redundant publications are forbidden. The manuscripts are subject to plagiarism check by iThenticate or similar. All manuscript submissions must provide a similarity report (up to 15% excluding quotes, bibliography, abstract, method).


Open Access - All research articles published in PressAcademia Journals are fully open access; immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Open access is a property of individual works, not necessarily journals or publishers. Community standards, rather than copyright law, will continue to provide the mechanism for enforcement of proper attribution and responsible use of the published work, as they do now.