The Supreme Court has determined when a remote worker cannot be dismissed for absenteeism.

The application of disciplinary liability to employees who perform work remotely requires the employer to take a particularly careful approach to determining the nature of the violation. The Supreme Court, as a panel of judges of the First Judicial Chamber of the Civil Court of Cassation, considered case No. 538/1991/23 (decision of 08.07.2026) regarding the dismissal for absenteeism of the CEO who worked remotely. The key issue was whether the absence of an employee on the territory of the enterprise could be considered absenteeism if the order to establish remote work remained in force, but the employee did not provide the results of the work performed.

The previous approach of the courts was based on the fact that the absence of confirmation of the actual performance of the employee’s duties remotely may indicate absenteeism in the event of his absence from the workplace.

The Supreme Court found this approach unfounded, as it effectively replaces the ground for dismissal for absenteeism with another ground — improper performance of labor duties. The court noted that if there is a valid order on remote work, the employee’s stay outside the company’s territory is lawful, and failure to submit reports or work results in itself cannot confirm the fact of absenteeism. This conclusion clarifies the approach to proving disciplinary offenses of employees who work remotely.