{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","provider_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","author_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","author_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","title":"TT 2019:5 - Irtisanomisj\u00e4rjestys","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"hULOqGvpkc\"><a href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/tt-20195-irtisanomisjarjestys\/\">TT 2019:5 &#8211; Irtisanomisj\u00e4rjestys<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/tt-20195-irtisanomisjarjestys\/embed\/#?secret=hULOqGvpkc\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u300a TT 2019:5 &#8211; Irtisanomisj\u00e4rjestys \u300b\u2014Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" data-secret=\"hULOqGvpkc\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"Asiassa oli kysymys siit\u00e4, oliko ty\u00f6nantaja irtisanonut ty\u00f6ntekij\u00e4n ty\u00f6suhteen ty\u00f6ehtosopimuksen osana noudatettavan irtisanomissuojasopimuksen ty\u00f6voiman v\u00e4hent\u00e4misj\u00e4rjestyst\u00e4 koskevan m\u00e4\u00e4r\u00e4yksen vastaisesti. Ty\u00f6tuomioistuin katsoi, ett\u00e4 ty\u00f6nantaja oli voinut tuomiossa selostetuilla perusteilla p\u00e4\u00e4ty\u00e4 siihen, ett\u00e4 ty\u00f6ntekij\u00e4 oli yhti\u00f6n toiminnalle verrokkihenkil\u00f6ihin n\u00e4hden v\u00e4hiten t\u00e4rke\u00e4 ammattity\u00f6ntekij\u00e4. Kun vertailu oli ratkennut ty\u00f6ntekij\u00e4n vahingoksi yhti\u00f6n toiminnalle t\u00e4rkeiden ammattity\u00f6ntekij\u00f6iden vertailemisella, ty\u00f6ntekij\u00e4n ty\u00f6suhteen kestolle ja huoltovelvollisuuden..."}