25.10.2026 20:53
A noteworthy decision has come from the Court of Cassation regarding the compensation claims of stop attendants who make a living from tips they receive from drivers at minibus stops. In a lawsuit filed by a stop attendant who had worked at a stop for 15 years, the Labor Court ruled for compensation, but the appellate court overturned the decision, stating that the remuneration was paid not by the stop official but by the minibus operators. The Court of Cassation upheld this decision and ruled that the stop attendant cannot claim compensation from the person against whom he filed the lawsuit.
Bad news came from the Court of Cassation for the minibus stop attendants (değnekçi), who are considered indispensable to public transport, especially in metropolitan cities, and who arrange departure times, passenger queues, and vehicle order at minibus stops or on busy routes. The 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation overturned the Labor Court decision ruling that an attendant who makes a living from minibus drivers' tips could receive severance and notice pay.
HE RESIGNED WHEN HE COULD NOT GET PAID AND ENDED UP AT THE COURTHOUSE Although they do not have an official status, an important judicial decision has been issued regarding the working conditions of attendants who play an important role in the daily operation of minibus lines. T.K., who worked as an attendant at an urban minibus stop for exactly 15 years, resigned on the grounds that he was not paid his wages. Unable to obtain a result from his meeting with the stop official, the attendant went to the Labor Court. Claiming that although he worked overtime he was not paid for it, that the annual leave he had earned was not granted, and that his wages were not paid, he requested a decision ordering the defendant to pay him severance pay, overtime pay, national holiday and public holiday pay, minimum living allowance receivable, wage difference receivable, and annual paid leave receivables. The defendant, on the other hand, argued that the plaintiff was an employee of the stop tradesmen and made his living from the daily payments given by the stop tradesmen, that the plaintiff was not employed, that the plaintiff was chosen by the tradesmen operating the minibus line, and that the lawsuit could not be directed at him, and requested that the case be dismissed.
LABOR COURT RULED FOR COMPENSATION The Labor Court ruled that the plaintiff terminated his employment contract because the wages he had earned in return for his work were not paid, and in this situation he was entitled to severance and notice pay. It decided on the partial acceptance of the case on the grounds that there were unpaid national holiday and public holiday pay, minimum living allowance receivable, balance wage, annual paid leave, and overtime pay receivables.
THE COURT OF CASSATION PUT AN END TO THE MATTER When the defendant's lawyer filed an appeal, the Regional Court of Justice, which stepped in, drew attention to the fact that the statements of the plaintiff's witnesses heard clearly stated that the plaintiff, who was an attendant, had his money paid to him separately by each driver. It was recalled that no employment contract had been established between the plaintiff and the defendant, that the plaintiff worked as an attendant at the minibus stop, and that his wages were paid by the vehicle owners operating at the stop. It was emphasized that, given both the place of work and the nature of the work performed, the status of employer belonged to the minibus operators at the stop where the work was alleged to have been performed. Due to the defendant's lack of party status (lack of passive legal standing), it was decided to dismiss the case on procedural grounds due to the absence of a condition for filing suit. When the Regional Court of Justice decision was appealed, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, which stepped in, found the decision lawful and upheld it. With this precedent decision, attendants who work for tips will no longer be able to receive severance pay.