With the degree of a coronavirus pandemic, the border is reopened. Traveling abroad on holiday is her mon. It doesn’t have to be risk-free. Getting back to work will complicate me with quarantine and covid-19 disease. A number of employers are logically concerned that the allowed employees may be a great complication for the company, so they try to find out exactly where their employees want to go on vacation.
The employer asks my employee if he will go to Mchovo Lake, the Adriatic or you to Egypt? And what happens when an employee is lht? Lawyer Tom Prochzka from the law firm Eversheds Sutherland answered these questions in connection with the holidays.
Are there concerns about the employer in the city, when they are trying to find out exactly where their employees want to go on holiday?
Such fears logically arise. If the employee goes on holiday to Mchova Lake, there is no high risk of infection. The flight to the exotic destination can end after the return, if not by order, then a two-day quarantine, which can be problematic for employers. I have experience and experience that holiday destinations are among themselves at work and colleagues who are afraid that they will work to drill someone from the city, which is marked as a risk.
M employer first to find out where employees suddenly on vacation?
The first right of the employer does not support this precaution, and in this direction I can easily meet the limits of protection of private employees. In general, however, the employer’s question is asked whether the employee did not take a holiday in one of the risky destinations, especially in the areas marked in orange and June at the Covid traffic light or even outside the European Union.
What a threat when an employee hurts?
If the employee lies, he is exposed to Czech penalties, the risk of liability for the code caused and, if necessary, the risk of penalties.
If I understand that, an employer cannot categorically require employees to tell them where to go on holiday at once, and the employee does not have to answer such a question at all?
That’s right. At the same time, the first right significantly complicates the ability of employers to effectively combat the risk of introduction and coronavirus in the workplace. On the other hand, in the opposite case, it could become a rule that the employer would not approve leave outside the approved safe area and thus would actually limit the employee’s ability to choose how and where free time will last. However, the choice between these variants is a difficult political one.
When does an employee decide to travel to the risk area during the holidays and the well is infected, how will this affect him?
If the employees are assigned a sunny regional hygiene station or a quarantine, or it is a matter of work. In such a case, the employees will pay the wages as well as in the case of incapacity for work. This means that the employee is entitled to the payment of wages in the amount of 60% of the average debt for the first 14 days of quarantine. And from the 15th day it will draw sickness benefits from the sickness insurance system.
The employee is obliged to inform the employer about the quarantine order without undue delay and to provide proof of receipt with a confirmation of the quarantine order.
How does the employer now take such a risk? How is your experience?
Many of them are asking them to supplement the lightness of some of their employees and go pay them for deciding to travel to the risks of the area. The employer is thus complaining that due to their ease and the threat of quarantine, they will have a shortage of employees to keep the traffic going. There are also situations of companies that, out of fear of the order, require at-risk employees to return to the home office or even a full payroll.
How about the ease of employees who decide to be allowed to travel to high-risk areas?
I think that providing employees in such a situation with sickness or payment of wages is not the right one, and it is up to the employer or the state, therefore, to all of us. If the employee freely decides to travel to the risks of the area and thus create a quarantine, he should have the consequences of such a decision. Unfortunately, the first rights at the same time with such a possibility of literal need. However, I would see a court or first decision in this area, where it would be clear whether the employee must behave responsibly in private travel, or whether he has the first for two weeks to pay a quarantine just because he went to the outbreak for the weekend.