home Self-development Rules for the payment of bonuses for conscientious and efficient performance of official duties to military personnel serving under a contract - Rossiyskaya Gazeta. Award for Conscientious Performance of Duties Award for Conscientious Performance of Obligations

Rules for the payment of bonuses for conscientious and efficient performance of official duties to military personnel serving under a contract - Rossiyskaya Gazeta. Award for Conscientious Performance of Duties Award for Conscientious Performance of Obligations

In accordance with paragraph 21 of Art. 2 federal law November 7, 2011 N 306-FZ "On the monetary allowance of military personnel and the provision of individual payments to them"(hereinafter - the Law) the bonus is established in the amount of up to three salaries payroll(calculated per year). The rules for the payment of bonuses are determined by the Government Russian Federation.
Rules for payment to military personnel passing military service under the contract, bonuses for conscientious and efficient performance official duties(hereinafter - the Rules) were approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 5, 2011 N 993 "On the payment of bonuses to military personnel for conscientious and efficient performance of official duties and annual material assistance."

At present, the practice is quite often used in the field, when a serviceman who has received a disciplinary sanction, firstly, is not paid a bonus at all, and secondly, the bonus is not paid or its size is reduced repeatedly only on the basis of the presence of a previously received disciplinary sanction and in the absence of claims received in the month for which payment is made.

Let's consider this problem in more detail.
According to paragraph 210 of 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 of June 30, 2006 N 200, which has become invalid, commanders (chiefs) had the right to completely deprive military personnel of bonuses for omissions in service and violations of military discipline. It seems that some officials, in fact, continue to be guided by these long-lost norms, while the current Procedure does not contain similar norms.

The premium is not paid in the cases specified in clause 82 of the Procedure, which completely duplicates clause 6 of the Rules.

The list of cases specified in clause 82 of the Procedure is exhaustive and is not subject to broad interpretation. Neither omissions in service, nor disciplinary sanctions are indicated in this list. Accordingly, even in the presence of such, the premium should be paid. The only question is how much. The establishment of this amount in accordance with clause 80 of the Procedure is within the competence of the relevant commander (chief) issuing the order to pay the bonus. Nevertheless, in view of the foregoing, in the case under consideration, it cannot be equal to zero. In addition, size as a concept is a positive quantity.

Unfortunately, neither the minimum amount of the bonus, nor the actual clear legal criteria by which the quality of performance of official duties is assessed, are currently defined, which, of course, creates certain prerequisites for unreasonably wide discretion of officials when deciding on its payment. In fairness, it should be noted that the development of such criteria is not an easy task.

It does not contain the Procedure and any instructions regarding the minimum and maximum amount by which the premium reduction is allowed. Therefore, in principle, it would be legal to reduce the premium, for example, both by 5% and by 95%.

We also note that reducing the size of the bonus is the right, and not the obligation of the commander (chief). The receipt of a disciplinary sanction by a serviceman does not entail an automatic reduction in the bonus, much less, in view of the foregoing, its deprivation. The penalty is taken into account when determining the amount of the premium. How to take into account is the competence of the relevant official. Under certain conditions (for example, high performance in solving assigned tasks, high-quality and efficient performance of official duties, etc.), the commander (chief) may well come to the conclusion that there is no need to reduce the bonus to the serviceman, even taking into account the disciplinary sanction received by the awardee . And it will be absolutely legal.

However, the most interesting issue is the repeated reduction (and in practice more often complete deprivation) of the bonus for the same disciplinary sanction.

As already noted, the previous Procedure for providing monetary allowances to the military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, approved by Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of June 30, 2006 N 200, provided for the reduction or deprivation of bonuses on the basis of quarterly reports from immediate superiors, in which specific the reasons that served as the basis for such a decrease (deprivation). Referring to the disciplinary sanction received in the quarter for which the bonus was made, as the reason for reducing (depriving) the bonus to the serviceman, the immediate superiors, when submitting a report on bonuses for another quarter, did not repeatedly refer to the same reason as a matter of course. After all, the soldier, as they say, has already received his. It would seem that the continuity of this approach should have been preserved and reflected in the Order. However, the latter, as already noted, does not provide for the filing of such reports, and as a result of the incorrect, in the opinion of the author, interpretation by the relevant commanders (chiefs) of clause 80 of the Procedure, a practice has developed according to which all outstanding disciplinary sanctions are taken into account when determining the amount of the bonus.

This approach seems unreasonable for the following reasons:

Firstly, a disciplinary offense from the moment of its discovery and suppression, as a rule, cannot affect the quality and efficiency of the performance of official duties by the person who committed it in the future.

Secondly, despite the fact that the deprivation of a bonus, strictly speaking, is not a measure of disciplinary action, its repeated reduction (deprivation) on the sole basis that a serviceman has an unremoved disciplinary sanction is, in fact, nothing more than repeated punishment (punishment in rubles) for one and the same offense.

Third, since, according to clause 80 of the Procedure, the specific amount of the bonus depends on the quality and efficiency of the performance of military duties in the month for which the bonus is paid (i.e., the bonus, in fact, is paid based on the results of work for the month), then, accordingly, the presence an unremoved disciplinary sanction for an offense committed outside the bonus period, in itself does not affect the quality and efficiency of the performance of official duties during this period and cannot serve as a basis for reducing (depriving) the bonus. Therefore, the provision of paragraph 80 of the Procedure "taking into account having disciplinary actions for committed disciplinary offenses", according to the author, should be understood only as "taking into account the existing disciplinary sanctions for disciplinary offenses committed in the month for which the bonus is paid".

Fourth, according to Art. 2 Law premium is integral part military salaries. Therefore, reducing its size to a serviceman who conscientiously performed his duties in the month for which the bonus is paid, only on the grounds that earlier (outside the bonus period) he received a disciplinary sanction, is nothing more than wage discrimination, prohibited Art. 37 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
For comparison, we also note that at present, military personnel and civilian personnel receive additional material incentives in in the form of additional payments (bonuses) based on the results of service (work). This Procedure was approved by Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of July 26, 2010 N 1010 "On additional measures to improve the efficiency of the use of monetary allowance funds for military personnel and remuneration of civilian personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation."

According to clause 7 of the said Procedure, the specific amounts of additional financial incentives are determined within the volume of budgetary funds allocated for the specified purposes, based on the results of the performance by military personnel and civilian personnel of official duties during the period for which additional material incentives are provided. At the same time, the issuance of orders for the payment of additional material incentives to military personnel and civilian personnel is carried out on the basis of reports submitted by direct commanders (chiefs, leaders).

It has already been said above that there are no clear regulatory criteria for assessing the quality and effectiveness of the performance of official duties used in deciding on bonuses, just as there were and are no regulatory criteria for assessing the results of their performance, taken into account when paying for material stimulation. The discretion of officials when deciding on the amount of additional financial incentives was (and in principle remains) so wide that it generated (and generates) numerous complaints from both military personnel and civilian personnel, which readers are well aware of.

In accordance with clause 11 of the Procedure approved by Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of July 26, 2010 N 1010, the following are not presented for additional financial incentives:
- servicemen receiving additional monetary incentives in accordance with the federal law on the federal budget for the corresponding year;
- 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;
- persons of civilian personnel who have a disciplinary sanction for failure to perform or improper performance due to their fault of the labor duties assigned to them;
- military personnel and civilian personnel who have committed violations in the financial, economic and economic activity that caused damage to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and are reflected in the acts of audits (inspections of certain issues) of financial, economic and economic activities, as well as commanders (chiefs, leaders) who did not take a decision on the violations registered in the accounting in these activities and measures to compensate for damage in accordance with the mandate.

As we can see, "persons" known to us also appear here: disciplinary sanctions, the results of inspections on professional and official (commander's) and physical training. True, we are already talking about unsatisfactory results. And they do not affect the amount of financial incentives, but are grounds for refusing to pay it. In addition, the results of the latest inspections are taken into account, regardless of when they were carried out - during the bonus period or beyond.

As for disciplinary sanctions, as we see, penalties are subject to accounting only for gross disciplinary offenses committed by military personnel only during the bonus period.

Case No. 35 Copy

SOLUTION

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 open court 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:

Kosov is doing military service under a contract in the military unit No. in position<данные изъяты>

By order of the commander of the military unit No. 1078 of 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 conscientious and efficient performance of 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 submitting a letter of resignation, he was suspended from performing basic official duties, the place of performance of his duties of military service was not determined for him, and since on December 2, 2011 he was at home, on the territory of the residential zone 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 report on gross disciplinary offense states that he did not arrive for military service on December 2, 2011 and withdrew from his official duties, and in the order of the commander of the military unit No. 1078 dated December 5, 2011, he was severely reprimanded for his absence 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 recognize the applicant's claim 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 liability, in the opinion of the representative, the commander’s order gave a clearer wording, corresponding to the wording set out in the Disciplinary Charter of the RF Armed Forces, 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, was 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. Moreover,<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 a statement challenging the 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 the basis for refusing to satisfy the application, and these reasons are clarified by the court, regardless of whether there are statements about 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 said 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 conclusions 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 Military Personnel”, for misconduct related to violation of military discipline or public order, military personnel bear disciplinary responsibility on the grounds and in the manner determined by general military regulations.

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 conducted 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 RF Armed Forces, 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 military service duties, 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 in 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 about 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 protocol on gross disciplinary misconduct, do not change the essence and the circumstances of its commission established by the proceedings.

The applicant's subjective opinion that, after submitting his dismissal report, he was suspended from his official duties, was not confirmed at the court session. The fact that the applicant's admission to the premises of the 1st group of danger class was terminated 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 duties of military service, the same military personnel, following the results of the calendar year, by decision of the commander of the military unit, may be paid a one-time monetary reward 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: for military personnel undergoing military service under a contract ... - three salaries of monetary 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 the bonus, deprivation or reduction of its size are made by the respective commanders (chiefs) on the basis of the reports of direct commanders (chiefs) submitted by command at the end of the first, second and third quarters and at the end of November 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 amount of the bonus to the 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 paragraph 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 one-time 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 conscientious and efficient 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 by military personnel. 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 material incentives are determined within the volume of budgetary 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 paragraph 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 an additional payment is made, as well as those who have unsatisfactory results in professional official (commander) and physical training, are not presented for additional material incentives.

Thus, the specified payment, as well as the payment for 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 a report by the applicant's immediate superior dated 21 December 2011 to Kosov, by order of the commander of the military unit No. 1157 dated 23 December 2011, the payment of additional material incentives for the 3rd quarter the 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 local government, officials, state and municipal employees "in the case when the adoption or non-adoption of a decision, the performance or non-performance of 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 being disputed, the court is not entitled to assess the expediency 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 the decisions of the official, whose actions are being challenged, were recognized by the court as lawful, and Kosovo's statement was unfounded, the claims for compensation for non-pecuniary damage related to the contested decisions 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, -

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

An appeal may be filed against the decision to the Moscow District Military Court through the Bryansk Garrison Military Court within one 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

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 05.12.2011 N 993 "On the payment of bonuses to military personnel for the conscientious and effective performance of official duties and annual material assistance (together with the Rules for the contract, bonuses for the conscientious and effective performance of official duties, the Rules for payment to military personnel undergoing military service under the contract , annual financial assistance)"

GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

RESOLUTION

ON THE PAYMENT OF THE PRIZE TO THE MILITARY

FOR HONEST AND EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIALS

RESPONSIBILITIES AND ANNUAL MATERIAL ASSISTANCE

In accordance with the Federal Law "On the monetary allowance of military personnel and the provision of certain payments to them," the Government of the Russian Federation decides:

1. Approve:

Rules for the payment of bonuses for conscientious and efficient performance of official duties to military personnel serving under a contract;

Rules for the payment of annual material assistance to military personnel serving under a contract.

2. Payments stipulated by the rules approved by this Decree shall be made within the limits of the budgetary appropriations provided for the monetary allowance of military personnel as part of the federal budget expenditures for the maintenance of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations and bodies.

3. This Decree shall enter into force on January 1, 2012, and in relation to the persons specified in Part 2 of Article 7 of the Federal Law "On the monetary allowance of military personnel and the provision of certain payments to them", - from January 1, 2013.

Prime Minister

Russian Federation

Approved

Government Decree

Russian Federation

PAYMENTS TO MILITARY SERVICE PERSONNEL IN MILITARY SERVICE

UNDER THE CONTRACT, PRIZES FOR HONEST AND EFFECTIVE

PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES

1. The bonus for the conscientious and efficient performance of official duties (hereinafter referred to as the premium) is paid to military personnel serving under a contract (hereinafter referred to as military personnel) in the amount of up to 3 salaries of the monthly monetary allowance of a serviceman (hereinafter referred to as monetary salary) per year.

2. The premium is paid monthly or quarterly. The payment of the bonus is made simultaneously with the payment of monetary allowance in the month following the month (quarter) for which the bonus is paid, and in December - for December (IV quarter).

3. The bonus is calculated on the basis of the monthly salary of a serviceman in accordance with the assigned military rank and the monthly salary in accordance with the military position held (in the case of temporary fulfillment of duties by him in a vacant military position, the monthly salary in accordance with this military position), set at 1- e day of the month in which the premium is paid, and in December - on December 1 of the current year.

4. The size of the bonus, depending on the quality and efficiency of the performance of official duties by military personnel and the procedure for its payment, are established by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, the heads of federal executive bodies in which military service is provided for by federal law - respectively, in relation to military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops , military formations and bodies, the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation - in relation to the military personnel of the military prosecutor's office, the Chairman of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation - in relation to the military personnel of the military investigative bodies of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation.

5. For servicemen who have served in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations and bodies for an incomplete month (quarter), the bonus is paid for the time of actual performance of duties in a military position based on the salaries of the monetary content on the day the decision to pay the bonus is made.

6. The bonus is not paid to military personnel:

passing military service in military units (organizations), where, in accordance with federal laws and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, a system of bonuses is established for them for the fulfillment and overfulfillment of production targets and other indicators;

sent outside the territory of the Russian Federation to provide technical assistance and perform other duties;

during the period of being at the disposal of commanders (chiefs), with the exception of periods of temporary performance of duties by them in vacant military positions;

7. In the event of the death of a serviceman, the bonus accrued for the time of his actual performance of duties in a military position in the corresponding month (quarter) is paid to his wife (spouse), in her (his) absence - to adult children living with him, legal representatives (guardians, trustees) or adoptive parents of minor children (disabled from childhood - regardless of age) and dependents of a serviceman, in equal shares or parents in equal shares, if the serviceman was not married and had no children.

Approved

Government Decree

Russian Federation

PAYMENTS TO MILITARY SERVICE PERSONNEL IN MILITARY SERVICE

UNDER THE CONTRACT, ANNUAL MATERIAL ASSISTANCE

1. Annual material assistance is paid to military personnel serving under a contract (hereinafter referred to as military personnel) in the amount of at least one monthly salary of the military serviceman.

2. The procedure for applying for material assistance, as well as its amount for the corresponding year, based on the budget allocations provided for the monetary allowance of military personnel as part of the federal budget expenditures for the maintenance of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations and bodies, are established by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation , heads of federal executive bodies in which military service is provided for by federal law - respectively, in relation to military personnel of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations and bodies, the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation - in relation to military personnel of the military prosecutor's office, Chairman of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation - in relation to military personnel of the military investigative bodies of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation.

3. Servicemen who have the right to receive financial assistance, but did not apply for it in the current year, are paid financial assistance simultaneously with the payment of their monetary allowance for December of the current year.

4. Material assistance is calculated on the basis of the monthly salary of a serviceman in accordance with the assigned military rank and the monthly salary in accordance with the military position held (in the case of temporary fulfillment of duties by him in a vacant military position - the monthly salary in accordance with this military position), established on the date making a decision on the payment of material assistance, and in the case of payment of material assistance in December - as of December 1 of the current year.

5. Servicemen transferred for further military service from one federal executive body, in which military service is provided by federal law, to another (Armed Forces of the Russian Federation) or from the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation to a federal executive body, in which federal law provides military service, financial assistance is paid once a year in full upon departure from the federal executive body in which the federal law provides for military service (Armed Forces of the Russian Federation), if it has not been paid earlier.

6. Material assistance is not paid to military personnel:

dismissed from military service on the grounds specified in paragraphs 1 - 5, 7 - 11 of part 4 of Article 3 of the Federal Law "On the monetary allowance of military personnel and the provision of individual payments to them." If the specified military personnel were paid financial assistance earlier, upon their dismissal from military service, the amount paid is not subject to withholding;

during the period of being at the disposal of commanders (chiefs);

dismissed from military service at the end of the current year with the provision of leave upon dismissal ending in the next year - for the year in which the leave ends.

7. In the event of the death of a serviceman, material assistance for the current year (if it was not paid to the serviceman before his death) is paid to his wife (spouse), in her (his) absence - to adult children living with him, legal representatives (guardians, trustees) or to adoptive parents of minor children (disabled from childhood - regardless of age) and to persons who are dependent on a serviceman, in equal shares or parents in equal shares, if the serviceman was not married and had no children.

Legal advice:

1. Deprived of the award for conscientious performance official duties. Lost for exercise therapy. is this legal?

1.1. Dmitry, the problem is that issuing a bonus is the right of the employer, and not his obligation. He wants - he will give out, he does not want - he will not give out.