Current problems unreported and unpaid overtime

The current legal framework for the establishment of labor and / or retirement by court order contained in the Act establishing employment and retirement before the courts (ZUTOSSR) - Prom. SG. 26 of March 29, 2011 This Act repealed the current half-century decree establishing service by court order of 1961 (see. § 1 of ZUTOSSR TFP). Historically, adopted in 2011 ZUTOSSR is the sixth in a row and the fourth an Ordinance, which governs this particular legal matter.
The law establishing employment and retirement by court order settles two separate and distinct declaratory action - action for failure of service and action for failure to retirement. This legal conclusion follows from a literal, logical and systematic interpretation of the three paragraphs of Art. 3 of the law. The subject of this research is the legal nature of the dispute in ZUTOSSR. It is made demarcation of this dispute by other disputes under the Labour Code (LC) and the Social Security Code (SSC).
1. The Labour Code Art. 357, para. 1, in fine clearly defined dispute for establishing service as a labor dispute. The legal dispute which is given to the provision of CT on the same subject as that of art. 1, para. 1, p. 1 and p. 3, Cion. First ZUTOSSR and dealt with under the ZUTOSSR. Therefore legal branch belonging to this type of dispute is defined by legislation. But before the Appendix of this text in legal provision in the literature character of the dispute is always described as labor. In fact arisen in the legal labor dispute for recognition and neudostoverya-
tion of the service, the only way an employee can receive legal protection by bringing the action under ZUTOSSR.
2. In respect of the dispute for recognition and neudostoveryavane of retirement there are some features that are a consequence of pozitivnop-flat system.
2. 1.. 117, para. 1, p. 1 CSR to the Head of NSSI's the person (insured person or pensioner) may appeal against the refusal to issue a certificate of retirement and income. The law has specified the subject of one of the many osiguritelnopravni disputes. In its legal nature refusal of a certificate of retirement and income is an administrative act (art. 21, para. 3, in fine APC) because the relevant body of the Institute that makes denial is an administrative body within the meaning of § 1, ie. 1 AP of APC. In terms of the procedural order to address this dispute it is
administrative law dispute - an administrative appeal under the special rules of CSR (Art. 117-117a CSR in relation to Art. 148 APC) and judicial review (CSR chl.118-120 and APC). In the judicial phase of the appeal cases are administrative.
This dispute is different from the dispute, as set out in ZUTOSSR.Razlikata is not the subject of dispute - in either case have refused to recognize and accordingly certify certain period of time as pensionable service nor in his country - they are same - insured person (pensioner) and Social Security
authority. These two disputes differ in procedural order for their consideration - administrative law and civil law. But the essential and practical important difference is related to the subject and personal scope of the ZUTOSSR. Administrative law to resolve the dispute refusal of evidence of
ficate retirement is applicable only possible for those persons who are excluded from the scope of ZUTOSSR, i. e. can not establish retirement CSR in court on ZUTOSSR. These are self employed (Art. 4, para. 3 pt. 1, 2 and 4 CSR); Seafarers (Art. 4a para. 1 CSR);
persons working without employment (art. 4, para. 1, p. 5 Cion.
second and par. 3 pt. 5 and 6 CSR) [10]. In terms of insured persons under Art. 2 para. 2 ZUTOSSR can
to establish their insurance practice CSR under judicial proceedings ZUTOSSR things are more osobeno.Pri provided that such insured person has a claim to the insurance authority with a request to grant a certificate of pensionable service and followed refusal of certificate, the person under general has the right to appeal. This is his subjective procedural right to appeal derives from the explicit provi-ba Art. 117, para. 1, p. 1 CSR. Judicial consideration of osiguritelnopravniya dispute, the court has the force of res judicata will decide whether the period of time should be counted or not a pension, and therefore the issue or not the requested certificate. It is possible, however, and will most often happens in practice, the insured person to submit an application to the insurance authority to grant some insurance collateral (compensation for short-term social security or pension under long-term social security), i. E. The insured makes voleizlenie asking to exercise their subjective Employment law. When occurrence of insurance subjective right is conditioned by the presence of a particular size pensionable service will occur dispute if the insurance or-
Gan unrecognized specific period of time pension. In practice, insurance body nepriznava that there is one of the constituent elements, which triggers subjective insurance law the relevant insurance collateral. Insurance body for that reason refused to re-
release the requested insurance collateral. Such a subject osiguritelnopravni disputes are settled explicitly in art. 117, para. 1 pt. 2, letter "a", "b" and "f" CSR. In this situation, the insured person (pensioner) there are two ways of redress that are alternative and whose basis is pozitivnopravno regulated.
l. 117, para. 2 CSR complaint to the Head NSSI.