Financial incentives for work. Order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs "On approval of the Procedure for the payment of bonuses for the conscientious performance of official duties to employees of the internal affairs bodies of Russia" - Rossiyskaya Gazeta

Types of employee bonusesdetermined by the employer, or the provisions of local acts, collective agreements, agreements. In the article, we will analyze the issues of bonuses to employees, highlight the main types of bonuses, and talk about the procedure for securing incentive payments.

What are the bonuses for employees - the main classifications of types of bonuses and their differences

The current legislation does not establish the types of bonuses. In Art. 191 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation states that bonuses are incentive payments for conscientious performance of duties. In practice, organizations pay various types of bonuses, which can be classified:

By the number of employees awarded:

1. Individual awards. Paid to a specific employee.
2. collective awards. Paid to a group of employees. They may work in the same department or division. As a rule, bonuses are made upon achievement of joint results in labor activity for example, the achievement of certain indicators.

In order to determine the amount of payments:

1. in a fixed amount of money.
2. As a percentage of salary.
3. Shares of salary.
4. As a percentage or fraction of the total wages(for example, from salary + allowances for length of service, etc.).

According to the frequency of calculation.

1. One-time.
2. Systematic. They can be paid once a month, once a quarter, half a year or a year.

Based on charge.

1. Behind Good work.
2. For the implementation of the plan.
3. For any other achievements of employees.

According to the method of fixing in the organization:

1. fixed in employment contracts.
2. collective agreements.
3. local acts.
4. Agreements.
5. Not fixed in internal documents, paid at the initiative of the head (these bonuses are not provided for by the remuneration system).

Bonuses based on the results of work for the month, quarter, year, as the main types of bonuses for employees

In each organization, bonuses can be differentiated according to the frequency of their payments. Bonuses for the month, quarter and year are characterized by the fact that they, as a rule, are of a regular nature, although the possibility of a one-time, one-time accrual is not excluded.

All types of bonuses under consideration can be established by internal acts of the organization, or paid at the will of the employer. The payment of such bonuses on the basis of provisions employment contract with a specific employee. The payment is made on the basis of the order of the employer.

Bonuses can be paid both if there are grounds for this, and without them.

Award for a particularly important task and its implementation

The procedure for bonuses for the performance of particularly important tasks can be fixed at the organization level, for example, in the Regulations on Bonuses. It prescribes the criteria for the payment of bonuses, their size, frequency of accrual, etc.

The criteria for payments can be as follows:

1. The employee has achieved a positive result in the fulfillment of the task assigned to him, or a responsible assignment.
2. The employee qualitatively and timely performed the duties assigned to him by the job description.
3. The worker has achieved significant performance indicators in labor activity, used new methods of work, etc.

The payment is made on the basis of the order of the employer or other person whom the head authorized to perform such actions. The amount of payments can be determined both by the employer and by the provisions of the internal acts of the organization.

Most often, the type of bonus in question is made on the basis of a memo from the immediate supervisor of the distinguished employee.

Achievement Award

If an employee is assigned to perform additional work in his profession or in another profession of the same kind (Article 60.2 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation), a bonus may be provided for this. This makes sense as the volume of work increases substantially.

Bonuses for the increase in the volume of work can be paid on the basis of:

1. Provisions of internal documents adopted by the organization.
2. Service note of the immediate supervisor of the employee.
3. Employee statements.
4. at the discretion of the employer.

Engaging an employee additional work made solely with his consent. It is illegal to force an employee to work for an absent employee.

Distinguished Service Award

This type of bonus is paid to military personnel and is enshrined in the Rules approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation “On the payment of bonuses to military personnel ...” dated December 5, 2011 No. 993.

The maximum amount is 3 salaries per year. It is permissible to pay bonuses both monthly and quarterly, along with monetary allowance. The size of the bonus is determined depending on the salary of the military. The amount of bonuses and the procedure for accrual depend on the troops in which the soldier serves.

Award for conscientious work

This type of bonus is fixed in the internal acts of organizations, or is paid at the will of the management. The conscientiousness of labor implies both a temporary criterion (an employee’s work in an organization for a long time) and a qualitative one (performing work in accordance with the requirements of the company, the absence of disciplinary sanctions).

Criteria can be clearly spelled out in the Regulations on bonuses. For example, it may be fixed that on this basis employees are rewarded, since the conclusion of an employment contract with which at least 3 years have passed, and who do not have disciplinary and other penalties. The bonus is paid on the basis of the order of the head of the organization or a person authorized by him.

Bonus to an employee for good work (bonus payment for excellent work)

Good (excellent) work - too vague criterion for accrual bonus employee. For this reason, organizations local acts or collective bargaining agreements, in which the term "good" or "excellent" work is specified, clarifying conditions are prescribed, under which bonuses are accrued to employees.

Good work can be characterized by criteria such as:

1. Quantity and quality of products produced or services rendered.
2. Employee Compliance job description and provisions of the employment contract.
3. Fulfillment by the employee of the rules of internal work schedule and lack of disciplinary action.
4. Any other indicators that can be attributed to labor function worker.

Thus, the types of bonuses for employees can be different, depending on the place of service and the criteria for calculating bonuses. The possibility of paying several bonuses for various reasons is not ruled out.

Read even more useful information in the heading: "".

In accordance with part 12 of article 2 federal law dated July 19, 2011 N 247-FZ "On social guarantees for employees of internal affairs bodies Russian Federation and amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation" 1 - I order:

1. Approve the attached Procedure for the payment of bonuses for conscientious performance official duties employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation.

2. Recognize as invalid paragraphs 33 - 42 of the Regulations on the monetary allowance of employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation, approved by order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia dated December 14, 2009 N 960 2.

4. To impose control over the implementation of this order on the Deputy Ministers, who are responsible for the relevant areas of activity.

Minister General of the Army R. Nurgaliyev

_________________

1 Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2011, N 30 (Part I), art. 4595; No. 46, art. 6407; Russian newspaper, 2011, December 7th.

2 Registered with the Ministry of Justice of Russia

February 12, 2010, registration N 16404, subject to changes made by orders of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia dated January 12, 2011 N 8 (registered with the Ministry of Justice of Russia

February 8, 2011, registration N 19738) and dated August 1, 2011 N 898 (registered with the Ministry of Justice of Russia on October 28, 2011, registration N 22165).

Appendix

The procedure for paying bonuses for conscientious performance of official duties to employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation

1. Employees of the internal affairs bodies of the Russian Federation 1 are paid bonuses for conscientious performance of official duties 2 at the rate of three salaries payroll in year.

2. The bonus is paid monthly at the rate of twenty-five percent of the salary of the monetary allowance established by the employee on the 1st day of the month in which the payment is made.

3. The bonus is calculated in proportion to the time the employee performed his official duties in the corresponding calendar month. The calculation period for the payment of the bonus includes the time of training, being on vacation with the preservation of monetary allowance, the release of the employee from the performance of official duties due to temporary disability.

4. The amount of the bonus for each calendar day of service is calculated by dividing the total amount of the bonus for the month, determined in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Procedure, by the number of calendar days in this month.

5. Employees enlisted at the disposal of the federal executive body in the field of internal affairs, its territorial body or division, bonuses may be paid on the basis of the order of the head of the said body, division, taking into account the actual volume of official duties performed by them within twenty-five percent of the salary .

6. When an employee is transferred to the service within a month, the bonus is paid to him at a new place of service in the amount determined in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Procedure.

7. The bonus is not paid to employees:

a) who are on parental leave until they reach the age of 3 years;

b) temporarily suspended from the performance of official duties on one of the grounds provided for by the Federal Law of November 30, 2011 N 342-FZ "On Service in the Internal Affairs Bodies of the Russian Federation and Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation" 3 .

8. Employees dismissed from service in the internal affairs bodies are not paid a bonus in the month of dismissal if the dismissal is made on the following grounds:

a) gross violation service discipline;

b) repeated violation of official discipline if the employee has disciplinary action, superimposed in writing by order of the head of the federal executive body in the field of internal affairs or an authorized head;

c) refusal of an employee to transfer to a lower position in the internal affairs bodies in the execution of a disciplinary sanction;

d) violation of the terms of the contract by the employee;

e) non-compliance by an employee with restrictions and prohibitions established by federal laws;

e) loss of trust;

g) submission by an employee of false documents or knowingly false information when entering the service in the internal affairs bodies, as well as the submission by an employee during the period of service in the internal affairs bodies of forged documents or knowingly false information confirming his compliance with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation in terms of conditions replacement of the relevant position in the internal affairs bodies, if this does not entail criminal liability;

h) conviction of an employee for a crime, as well as termination of criminal prosecution against an employee due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, in connection with the reconciliation of the parties, as a result of an amnesty act, in connection with active repentance;

i) committing an offense discrediting the honor of an employee of the internal affairs bodies;

j) violation by an employee of mandatory rules when concluding a contract.

9. Within the limits of the funds for the payment of monetary allowances, employees who successfully perform particularly complex and important tasks may be additionally paid one-time bonuses.

10. The decision to pay a one-time bonus specified in paragraph 9 of this Procedure is issued by order of the head of the internal affairs body, organization or unit created to perform the tasks and exercise the powers assigned to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia.

11. With regard to the heads of internal affairs bodies, organizations or units created to perform the tasks and exercise the powers vested in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, and their deputies, the decision to pay a one-time bonus is made by a higher head.

Case No. 35 Copy

DECISION

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Bryansk garrison military court consisting of:

presiding - Judge Zaytseva N.Yu., with the secretary Astakhova I.A., with the participation of the applicant<данные изъяты>Kosov E.A., representative of the commander of the military unit<данные изъяты>Stulovoy M.N., having examined in an open court session in the premises of the military court a civil case at the request of a serviceman of the military unit<данные изъяты>Kosova E.A. on challenging the actions and decisions of the commander of the military unit<данные изъяты>related to bringing him to disciplinary liability and deprivation of monetary payments, -

installed:

Kosovo passes military service under contract in the military unit No. in position<данные изъяты>

By order of the commander of the military unit No. 1078 dated December 5, 2011, he was brought to disciplinary responsibility and a disciplinary sanction of “severe reprimand” was imposed on him.

By orders of the said commander dated December 20, 2011 No. 1134, dated December 23, 2011 No. 1150 and No. 1158, dated January 24, 2012 No. 45, Kosov was deprived of the following payments for being absent from duty without good reason for more than four hours:

Prizes for exemplary performance of military duty for the 4th quarter of 2011;

One-time monetary reward based on the results of 2011;

Additional material incentives provided for by Order No. 1010 of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the 4th quarter of 2011;

Awards for conscientiousness and effective execution official duties for January 2012.

By orders of the same commander dated December 23, 2011 No. 1157 and dated February 24, 2012 No. 170, the applicant was deprived of additional financial incentives for the 3rd quarter of 2011 by 50%, bonuses for conscientious and efficient performance of official duties for February 2012, respectively.

Considering his rights violated, Kosov asked the court:

Recognize as illegal the actions and decisions of the commander of military unit No. related to the issuance of order No. 1078 dated December 5, 2011 on imposing a disciplinary sanction on him, and oblige the specified official to cancel it;

To oblige the commander of military unit No. to pay him additional financial incentives, provided for by order No. 1010 of the RF Ministry of Defense dated July 26, 2010, for the 3rd and 4th quarters of 2011 in the amount of 100%;

The award for exemplary performance of military duty for the 4th quarter of 2011, the award for the performance of military duty for January and February 2012, as well as a one-time cash reward based on the results of 2011 - in full:

To collect compensation in the amount of 1 million rubles from the said commander in compensation for the moral damage caused to him.

In addition, Kosov asks the court to punish the perpetrators who prevented him from going to court.

The applicant Kosov supported his claims at the court session and clarified that he was indeed at home on 2 December 2011 and did not go to work during the whole day, as he felt unwell. The next day, during the proceedings, he explained to the command that he had not arrived at the service due to his unwillingness to go through it in<данные изъяты>, which he also indicated in his dismissal report dated September 11, 2011, in which he also asked to be sent to the VVK.

After filing a report on dismissal, he was suspended from performing his main official duties, the place of his military service duties was not determined for him, and since on December 2, 2011 he was at home, on the territory of the residential area of ​​the military camp, and did not leave the territory of the military unit, therefore, he did not commit a disciplinary offense;

On December 3, 2011, when familiarizing himself with the draft order to impose a disciplinary sanction on him, he expressed his disagreement with it, however, the officials did not have a conversation with him in this regard, and an officer meeting and meeting were not held on this fact either. attestation commission;

A copy of the protocol on gross disciplinary offense states that he did not arrive for military service on December 2, 2011 and withdrew from the performance of official duties, and in the order of the commander of the military unit No. valid reasons for more than 4 hours, that is - for another offense.

The applicant also pointed out that on March 11, 2012, the officials of the military unit illegally prohibited him from leaving the military camp in Bryansk to file an application with the Bryansk garrison military court.

At the hearing, the representative of the commander of the military unit No. Stulov did not acknowledge the applicant's claims and testified that the disciplinary sanction was imposed on the applicant lawfully, since on 2 December 2011 Kosov was absent from the service and did not arrive at the construction of the military unit, which are provided for by the official time regulations, with the place of their holding on the parade ground in front of the administrative and amenity building, that is, he committed a gross disciplinary offense. In this connection, the next day, a trial was held on this fact, as a result of which Kosov explained that he had not arrived at the service because of his unwillingness to continue it in the future. On December 3, 2011, the Applicant was familiarized with the draft of the contested order, about which he put his signature on the approval sheet.

As for the difference in the wording of the grounds for bringing Kosovo to disciplinary responsibility, in the representative’s opinion, the commander’s order gave a clearer wording, corresponding to the wording set out in the Disciplinary Regulations of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, which does not indicate that Kosov committed any other disciplinary offense.

Stulova also explained that Kosov was not removed from shift management and performance of official duties, however, due to the fact that military personnel must undergo medical checkup to obtain permission to<данные изъяты>, the head of the department decided to terminate such access to him, since in the report on dismissal Kosov expressed a request to pass the IHC. At the same time, according to the established regulations, Kosov had to comply with the daily work schedule that is valid for all military personnel.

With regard to bringing Kosovo to chores, then the representative of the commander of the military unit explained that, according to the plan for conducting educational and methodological classes, Kosov, like other military personnel of military unit No., was involved in such work as<данные изъяты>in the performance of his general duties of military service.

In connection with the existing disciplinary sanction, Kosov, in the opinion of the representative of the commander of the military unit, is rightfully deprived of all the incentive payments indicated by him.

The representative further explained that on 11 March 2012 Kosovo's exit had been prohibited in connection with the educational and methodological sessions conducted in the unit, in which the complainant was involved. Furthermore,<данные изъяты>petitioned the commander of the unit for permission to leave Kosovo for the city of Bryansk to file an application with the court on March 12, 2012.

In addition, Stulova pointed out that Kosov missed the deadline for filing an application with the court, in connection with which, she asks to apply Art. 256 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, since the applicant became aware of the violation of his rights in connection with the issuance of the contested order no later than December 5, 2011.

After hearing the explanations of the parties, examining the evidence presented, the military court comes to the following conclusions.

In accordance with Art. 256 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, a serviceman has the right to apply to a military court with an application to challenge decisions, actions (inaction) of a military command body or commander (chief) of a military unit within three months from the day he became aware of the violation of his rights and freedoms. The reasons for missing this deadline may be grounds for refusing to satisfy the application, and these reasons are clarified by the court, regardless of whether there are statements about missing the deadline from the persons participating in the case or not, since the case arose from public legal relations.

As the applicant explained at the court session, on December 3, 2011, he was acquainted with the draft of the contested order, no one acquainted him with the content of the order itself, and he learned about the commander’s final decision only on the 20th of December 2011 from a conversation with his colleague after as did not receive stimulus payments.

Since no evidence showing that the applicant became aware of the order to impose a disciplinary sanction on him no later than 5 December 2011 was presented to the court and this is not seen from the case file, the court comes to the conclusion that the applicant did not miss the deadline for filing an application to challenge the legality of this order, since his application was registered in the court's incoming correspondence book on March 13, 2012.

The court established that Kosov is serving in military unit No. in position<данные изъяты> <данные изъяты>On September 11, 2011, he filed a report on his dismissal from military service for own will with a request to send the VVK for examination, which is confirmed by a copy of the indicated report of the applicant.

Evidence evidencing Kosovo's exemption from official or general duties of military service established order, was not presented to the court.

On December 2, 2011, Kosov was absent from duty due to his unwillingness to do military service in<данные изъяты>, did not arrive at the construction of the military unit during the specified day, violating the regulations of official time. After the conduct of the proceedings on a gross disciplinary offense, by order of the commander of the military unit No. 1078 dated December 5, 2011, the applicant was severely reprimanded “for being absent from duty for more than 4 hours without good reason”.

These circumstances are not refuted by the applicant himself, and are also confirmed by:

Service record and a copy of the applicant's service card;

The materials of the official proceedings with the explanations, reports and the conclusion of the head of the department<данные изъяты>Timofeev, as well as a protocol on gross disciplinary misconduct;

Extract from the order of the commander of the military unit No. dated DD.MM.YYYY No.;

Annex No. to the order of the commander of the military unit No. dated DD.MM.YYYY No. “Regulations on the service time of military personnel undergoing military service under a contract for winter period 2011-2012 academic year”.

At the same time, the applicant did not provide evidence of the validity of the reasons for absenteeism; on the contrary, as can be seen from the materials of the proceedings, Kosov did not arrive at the service due to his unwillingness to take it.

According to Article 28 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the Status of Servicemen”, for misconduct related to the violation of military discipline or public order, servicemen bear disciplinary responsibility on the grounds and in the manner determined by general military charters.

Articles 80 and 81 of the Disciplinary Regulations of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation establish that only those disciplinary sanctions that are determined by the Disciplinary Regulations, correspond to the military rank of the military personnel and the disciplinary authority of the commander (chief) who decides to bring the violator to disciplinary responsibility can be applied to a serviceman who has committed a disciplinary offense .

The decision by the commander (chief) to apply a disciplinary sanction to a subordinate soldier is preceded by a trial.

Proceedings are conducted in order to identify the perpetrators, to identify the causes and conditions that contributed to the commission of a disciplinary offense.

Proceedings, as a rule, are held by the direct commander (chief) of the serviceman who committed the disciplinary offense, or by another person appointed by one of the direct commanders (chiefs).

Based on Article 28.5 of the Federal Law of May 27, 1998 No. 76-FZ “On the Status of Servicemen” and Appendix No. 7 to the Disciplinary Charter of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of November 10, 2007 No. 1495, a gross disciplinary offense includes the absence of a serviceman, performing military service under a contract, in a military unit or a place of military service established outside the military unit without good reason for more than four hours in a row during the established daily service time.

According to Article 37 of the Federal Law of March 28, 1998 No. 53-FZ (as amended on December 8, 2011) "On military service and military service" a serviceman is considered to be performing the duties of military service, among other things, including in cases of performance of official duties, as well as being on the territory of a military unit during the working hours established by the daily routine or at other times, if this is caused by official necessity.

As can be seen from the meaning of the above norms of the law, the absence of a military serviceman who is doing military service under a contract in a military unit or a place of military service established outside the military unit without good reason is understood as not being at the place of performance of military service duties. Since military service is a professional service activity and the exercise of the constitutional right to work for military personnel undergoing military service under a contract, the legislator has determined their absence from the place of performance of military service duties without good reason for more than four hours in a row during the established daily service time as a gross disciplinary offense .

The daily routine and duty time regulations are established by the commander of a military unit or formation, taking into account the type of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the type of troops, the tasks facing the military unit.

With such information, the court comes to the conclusion on the legitimacy of Order No. 1087 of December 5, 2011, issued by the commander of the military unit, since the fact of the applicant’s absence from service and his failure to perform official and general duties of military personnel without good reason has been fully proven.

The applicant's arguments justifying the unlawfulness of imposing a disciplinary sanction on him do not affect the above conclusion of the court, due to their inconsistency and groundlessness.

So, the fact that the applicant did not have a conversation before the announcement of the penalty, the officers' meeting and the meeting of the attestation commission on this issue cannot serve as evidence of a violation of the procedure for applying a disciplinary sanction to him as not based on law.

The fact that on December 2, 2011 the applicant was at home and did not leave the territory of the residential area of ​​the military camp, as well as the presence in the disputed order of the wording of the committed disciplinary offense other than in the report on gross disciplinary offense do not change the essence and the circumstances of its commission established by the proceedings.

The applicant's subjective opinion that, after filing his dismissal report, he was removed from his official duties, was not confirmed at the court session. The fact that the applicant was denied admission to the premises of the 1st group of hazard class cannot testify to his removal from official duties, as well as from the performance of general duties of military service.

As can be seen from the materials of the case, Kosov, as a serviceman who has a disciplinary sanction for committing a gross disciplinary offense, is deprived of the bonus for exemplary performance of military duty for the 4th quarter of 2011 and a one-time monetary reward based on the results of 2011,

These circumstances are confirmed by extracts from the orders of the commander of the military unit No. 1134 dated December 20, 2011 and No. 1150 dated December 23, 2011.

According to Article 13 of the Federal Law “On the Status of Military Personnel”, which was in force at the time of the disputed legal relations, military personnel serving under a contract, conscientiously performing the duties of military service, are paid a bonus for the exemplary performance of military duty in the manner determined by the Government of the Russian Federation, as well as for conscientious performance of the duties of military service by the same servicemen at the end of the calendar year, by decision of the commander of the military unit, a one-time monetary reward may be paid in the manner determined by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

The procedure for providing monetary allowances to military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, approved by order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation dated June 30, 2006 No. 200, determines that the bonus is paid on the basis of the order of the commander of a military unit in the following amounts: military personnel undergoing military service under a contract ... - three salaries of cash content per year ... (p. 204). The payment of a bonus in the amount of one fourth of the established annual norms is made quarterly, simultaneously with the payment of monetary allowance for the month following the expired quarter (paragraph 205). Decisions on the payment of bonuses, deprivation or reduction of its size are made by the respective commanders (chiefs) on the basis of reports submitted by command at the end of the first, second and third quarters and at the end of November from direct commanders (chiefs) with petitions for payment of bonuses to subordinate military personnel. In reports with petitions to reduce or deprive military personnel of the bonus, they indicate the specific reasons that served as the basis for such a petition (paragraph 209). Commanders (chiefs) have the right to reduce the size of the bonus to servicemen under their command, or to deprive them of the bonus in full for omissions in service and violations of military discipline. At the same time, the order of the corresponding commander (chief) indicates the specific reasons for the reduction (deprivation) of the bonus (paragraph 210).

As follows from Article 5 of the Instruction on Separate Payments to Military Personnel and Members of Their Families (Appendix to Order No. 450 of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation dated August 27, 2000), decisions on the payment of a bonus, deprivation or reduction of its amount are made by the relevant commanders (chiefs), and according to clause 6 Rules for the payment of bonuses to military personnel serving under a contract for exemplary performance of military duty, set out in the annex to Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 14, 2000 No. 524, commanders (chiefs) have the right to deprive military personnel under their command of bonuses in full for omissions in the service and violations of military discipline, about which an order is issued.

In accordance with the clarifications of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 14, 2000 No. 9 (clause 16), the payment of a lump-sum monetary reward is made by decision of the commander (chief) only to servicemen who are doing military service under a contract and conscientiously performing the duties of military service.

Taking into account that the applicant committed a gross disciplinary offense on December 2, 2011, expressed in absence from service without good reason and self-withdrawal from the performance of any (official, functional) duties of military service due to unwillingness to perform it, the court comes to the conclusion on the validity of the deprivation and non-payment to the applicant of a one-time monetary reward based on the results of 2011 and a quarterly bonus for the 4th quarter of 2011.

In accordance with Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 5, 2011 No. 993 "On the payment of bonuses to military personnel for the conscientious and effective performance of official duties and annual material assistance," the size of the bonus depends on the quality and efficiency of the performance of military duties. The procedure for its payment is established by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, namely: by order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of June 30, 2006 No. 200, which determines that commanders (chiefs) have the right to reduce the amount of bonuses to servicemen under their command, or to deprive them of bonuses completely for omissions in service and violations of military discipline.

Additional material incentives are paid on the basis of the Procedure for determining and spending the amount of budget funds allocated for additional payments to military personnel serving under a contract, and bonuses to civilian personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, approved by order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation dated July 26, 2010 No. 1010 (hereinafter - Order).

According to paragraph 7 of the Procedure, the specific amounts of additional financial incentives are determined within the limits of the budget funds allocated for these purposes, based on the results of the performance by military personnel and civilian personnel of their official duties during the period for which additional material incentives are provided.

On the basis of clause 6 of the Procedure, orders for the payment of additional material incentives to military personnel and civilian personnel are issued on the basis of reports submitted by direct commanders (chiefs, leaders).

According to paragraph 11 of the Procedure, military personnel who have a disciplinary sanction for gross disciplinary offenses committed during the period for which additional payment, as well as having unsatisfactory results in professional position (commander) and physical training.

Thus, the specified payment, as well as the payment for the conscientious and efficient performance of official duties, which is not part of the monetary allowance of military personnel, is of an incentive nature, is paid from the availability of limits Money and is established by the commander (chief) based on the results of the performance of military duties by military personnel.

As can be seen from the case file, on the basis of the report of the applicant's immediate superior of 21 December 2011 to Kosov, by order of the commander of the military unit No. commander of the military unit No. 1158 dated December 23, 2011 in the 4th quarter of Kosov was deprived of this payment as a military man who has a disciplinary sanction for committing a gross disciplinary offense.

By extracts from the orders of the commander of the military unit No. 45 dated January 24, 2012 and No. 170 dated February 24, 2012, the applicant was deprived of the bonus for conscientious and efficient performance of official duties for January and February 2012, respectively.

According to the explanations contained in paragraph 25 of the Resolution of the Plenum Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 10, 2009 No. 2 “On the practice of consideration by courts of cases on challenging decisions, actions (inaction) of bodies state power, bodies of local self-government, officials, state and municipal employees" in the case when the adoption or non-adoption of a decision, the commission or failure to perform an action by virtue of a law or other regulatory legal act is at the discretion of the body or person whose decision, action (inaction) is disputed, the court is not entitled to assess the appropriateness of such a decision, action (inaction).

The combination of the above circumstances allows the court to conclude that, since the fact that Kosov committed a gross disciplinary offense has been fully proven, and the official acted within his powers determined by the current legislation, there is no violation of the applicant's rights, and therefore, recognizes his statement in part of the deprivation of these payments is also unreasonable.

With regard to Kosovo's claim to punish the perpetrators who prevented him from going to court, this claim is not subject to civil proceedings. Moreover, this fact was not confirmed at the court session, which is confirmed by a copy of the applicant's report with the resolutions of the superiors superimposed on it.

Considering the applicant's claims for the recovery of compensation for non-pecuniary damage, the court finds them unsatisfactory.

According to Article 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen has been inflicted moral harm (physical or moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights, or encroach on other non-material benefits belonging to the citizen, as well as in other cases provided for by law, the court may impose on the violator the duty of monetary compensation for said damage.

The applicant connects such a penalty with the imposition of a disciplinary sanction on him and the deprivation of additional payments in connection with this.

Since decisions official whose actions are disputed, are recognized by the court as lawful, and Kosovo's statement is unfounded, then claims related to the contested decisions for compensation for non-pecuniary damage are also not subject to satisfaction.

No other evidence confirming the infliction of moral or physical suffering on the applicant by the named circumstances was presented to the court.

Based on the above, guided by art. Art. 194-199, 258 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, court, -

I decided:

In satisfaction of the statement of Kosova E.A. on challenging the actions and decisions of the commander of military unit No. related to bringing him to disciplinary responsibility and depriving him of monetary payments, - refuse

The decision may be appealed to the Moscow District Military Court through the Bryansk Garrison Military Court within a month from the date of the final decision by the court.

presiding in the case N.Yew. Zaitseva

Secretary of the court session AND.A. Astakhov

28. Employees are paid bonuses for conscientious performance of official duties at the rate of three monthly salaries per year * (31).

29. The bonus is paid monthly at the rate of 25 percent of the salary of the monetary content established by the employee on the first day of the month for which the payment is made.

30. The bonus is paid in proportion to the time the employee performs official duties in the corresponding calendar month.

31. The calculation period for the payment of the bonus includes the time of training, vacations with the preservation of monetary allowance, release from official duties due to temporary disability.

32. The amount of the bonus for each calendar day of service is determined by dividing the total amount of the bonus for the month, determined in accordance with paragraph 29 of this Procedure, by the number of calendar days in this month.

33. Employees enlisted at the disposal, bonuses can be paid on the basis of the order of the head, taking into account the actual volume of their official duties within 25 percent of the salary.

34. Based on the order of the head, the bonus is not paid in the following cases:

1) temporary suspension of an employee from the performance of official duties;

2) removal of an employee from performing duties related to possible application physical force, special means and firearms.

35. Based on the order of the head, employees who have a disciplinary sanction "severe reprimand", "warning of incomplete service compliance", "transfer to a lower position", the bonus is not paid within one month from the date of their disciplinary action.

36. Based on the order of the head, the bonus in the month of dismissal is not paid upon dismissal of an employee for the following reasons:

1) gross violation of official discipline by an employee;

2) repeated violation of official discipline by an employee if he has a disciplinary sanction imposed in writing by order of the director or manager;

3) the employee's refusal to be transferred to a lower position in the execution of a disciplinary sanction;

4) violation of the terms of the contract by the employee;

5) non-observance by the employee of restrictions and prohibitions established by federal laws * (32);

6) loss of trust;

7) the submission by an employee of false documents or knowingly false information when entering the service in the National Guard troops, as well as the submission by an employee during the period of service in the National Guard troops of forged documents or knowingly false information confirming his compliance with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation in terms of conditions replacement of the corresponding position in the troops of the National Guard, if this does not entail criminal liability;

8) conviction of an employee for a crime, termination of criminal prosecution against him due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, in connection with the reconciliation of the parties (except for criminal cases of private prosecution), as a result of an amnesty act, in connection with active repentance, unless at the time of termination contract and dismissal from service in the troops of the National Guard, the criminality of the act previously committed by him is eliminated by the criminal law * (33);

9) committing an offense discrediting the honor of an employee;

10) violation by an employee of mandatory rules when concluding a contract.

v. District coefficients, coefficients for service in high-mountain regions, in desert and waterless areas, percentage bonuses for service in regions of the Far North, equivalent areas and other areas with adverse climatic or environmental conditions, including remote

37. To the monetary allowance of employees serving in the regions of the Far North, areas equated to them and other areas with adverse climatic or environmental conditions, including remote ones, coefficients are established (district, for service in high mountain regions, for service in desert and waterless localities) and percentage bonuses to monetary allowance for service in the regions of the Far North, equivalent localities and other localities with unfavorable climatic or environmental conditions, including remote ones, in high-mountainous regions, desert and waterless areas, provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation * (34 ).

38. For the application of coefficients and percentage surcharges, the following are taken into account in the composition of the monetary allowance:

1) official salary;

2) salary for a special rank;

3) a monthly allowance to the salary of monetary maintenance for the length of service (length of service);

4) monthly bonus to the official salary for the qualification title;

5) monthly bonus to the official salary for special conditions of service;

6) a monthly bonus to the official salary for working with information constituting a state secret * (35).

39. The size of the coefficients and percentage markups, as well as the rules for their application are determined by the Government of the Russian Federation * (36).

• Business
• Self-development
• Ideas
• Calculators
• Success stories

avtovsamare.ru - My business - Franchises. Ratings. Success stories. Ideas. Work and education

Mass media registration certificate EL No. FS 77 - 57771 dated April 18, 2014.
Copyright © 2006-2017. All materials are protected by copyright
Mass media "BusinessGarant" is registered by the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technologies and Mass Communications