La precaria regulación de la falta grave de impuntualidad reiterada en el ordenamiento jurídico peruano
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2023-03-30
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
La falta grave de impuntualidad reiterada, regulada en el inciso h) del artículo 25°
del Decreto Supremo N° 003-97-TR, se ha estructurado de tal manera que no
provee los elementos necesarios para identificar cuando es que se ha
configurado dicha causal. En efecto, la regulación cuenta con tratamiento muy
amplio y sin delimitación alguna, lo cual trae como consecuencia que se otorguen
facultades legislativas al empleador para decidir qué situaciones se encontrarían
dentro de dicha falta. Con el presente trabajo se pretende identificar las
principales fallas de la regulación actual de la falta grave de impuntualidad
reiterada en función a distintas de sentencias que han tratado el tema y proponer
una serie de factores (enunciativos, no limitativos) que ayudarán a delimitar
cuando es que se está ante dicha causal.
The serious misconduct of repeated delay, regulated in subsection h) of Article 25 of Supreme Decree No. 003-97-TR, has been structured in such a way that it does not provide the necessary elements to identify when such misconduct has occurred. In fact, the regulation has a very general treatment without any delimitation, which results in granting legislative powers to the employer to decide which situations would fall under such misconduct. The purpose of this paper is to identify the main flaws in the current regulation of the serious misconduct of repeated delay according to different rulings that have discussed the issue and to propose elements (enunciative, not limitative) that will help to establish when such a cause occurs.
The serious misconduct of repeated delay, regulated in subsection h) of Article 25 of Supreme Decree No. 003-97-TR, has been structured in such a way that it does not provide the necessary elements to identify when such misconduct has occurred. In fact, the regulation has a very general treatment without any delimitation, which results in granting legislative powers to the employer to decide which situations would fall under such misconduct. The purpose of this paper is to identify the main flaws in the current regulation of the serious misconduct of repeated delay according to different rulings that have discussed the issue and to propose elements (enunciative, not limitative) that will help to establish when such a cause occurs.
Description
Keywords
Despido de empleados--Legislación--Perú, Trabajadores--Derechos--Legislación--Perú, Jornada de trabajo--Legislación--Perú
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess