No wonder teachers – Newspaper Kommersant No. 53 (7498) dated 03/29/2023

Former lecturers at the Higher School of Economics Elena Lukyanova and Ilya Guryanov complained to the Constitutional Court about the provisions of the Labor Code, because of which teachers are in a worse position than ordinary employees, and standard guarantees of labor rights do not apply to them. Both teachers, as well as a number of their colleagues, were fired from the HSE in 2020.

Former professors of the Higher School of Economics (NRU HSE) Elena Lukyanova and Ilya Guryanov are asking the Constitutional Court (CC) to check the norms of the Labor Code (LC) governing relations between an educational organization and teachers. Complaints of both are registered in the electronic database of the Constitutional Court. The reason for the appeal was the university’s unexpected termination of cooperation with teachers: in the summer of 2020, several HSE employees discovered at once that the university did not renew the contract with them – they explained this decision by the reorganization of faculties as part of the new HSE development program, but the teachers themselves were sure that the reason was their active social activities.

As Ilya Guryanov told Kommersant, he disputes the provisions of Art. 332 of the Labor Code, which gives the administration of the university the right to conclude a fixed-term employment contract with teachers who have passed the competitive selection. In practice, this works in such a way that the contract is replaced by a unilateral decision of the university, and no negotiations or procedures for reconciling the interests of the parties are carried out. This practice puts university teachers in a position dependent on the administration, which leads to a violation of their academic freedoms, Mr. Guryanov believes. After all, if the administration can unilaterally determine the term of labor relations with a teacher, then the latter cannot confidently plan his professional obligations to students and colleagues, the applicant explains.

According to Ilya Guryanov, in 2020 he once again successfully passed the competition for the post of teacher at the Higher School of Economics. However, a new employment contract was not concluded with him, and the old one was not extended. At the same time, he continued to teach (which, as a general rule, implies: the condition of the urgent nature of the employment contract becomes invalid, and it becomes indefinite), and subsequently, by order of the rector, he was transferred to another position and soon dismissed due to the expiration of the employment contract. The transfer order was based on a new additional agreement, which was signed only by the university – Mr. Guryanov himself got acquainted with it after his dismissal. He challenged this decision in court, but he sided with the university, where they argued that the order sent to the employee is equated to a bilateral agreement between him and the employer.

Now the applicant asks the Constitutional Court to clarify whether the administration of the university has the right to replace the employment contract with its unilateral decision, as well as to arbitrarily determine its term and conditions. “A big victory for the entire academic community would be an unequivocal decision of the Constitutional Court that we have the right to demand that we conclude an open-ended labor contract with us after passing the competition, and the university administration cannot refuse us this,” concludes Ilya Guryanov.

Elena Lukyanova confirmed to Kommersant that her complaint to the Constitutional Court is based on a similar legal position. According to her, she and her colleagues have been preparing for this appeal since 2020.

The HSE did not respond to Kommersant’s request for comment.

Lawyer of the Institute of Law and Public Policy (the NPO is included in the register of foreign agents) Ivan Brikulsky recalls that last year the Constitutional Court already checked the provisions of Art. 332 of the Labor Code and even recognized them as inconsistent with the Basic Law – in the part in which they allow arbitrary determination by the employer of the term of the employment contract. But at the same time, the key issue was not resolved: are general labor guarantees applied to teachers, the expert explains. Because the competition of the general and special norms leads to the fact that teachers are generally denied general labor guarantees – for example, in an indefinite employment contract. “The reverse side of this practice is the complete insecurity of the academic freedoms of teachers and their complete powerlessness in front of the university administration,” notes Mr. Brikulsky. “Unfortunately, university autonomy is interpreted as the absolute power of the administration over teachers and scientists. And this absolute power completely eliminates the constitutional guarantees of freedom of scientific creativity and freedom of teaching.”

Anastasia Kornya