Question

Помогите пожалуйста по ПОПД решить задачку На завод Воронежгидропривод» с агитационными целями прибыл помощник кандидата в губернаторы для ознакомления с предвыборной программой и сбора подписей в поддержку кандидата. В обеденный перерыв (13-14 час. ) по распоряжению директора завода всех работников отправили на встрече с агитатором. Слесарь Васнецов заявил, что выборы подождут, поскольку он проголодался и вообще политикой он не интересуется, после чего отправился обедать в столовую завода. Его примеру последовало ещё несколько рабочих. Приказом директора Васнецову был объявлен выговор за нарушение трудовой дисциплины, кроме того, Васнецову было отказано в предоставлении отпуска в летнее время года. Основываясь на действующем законодательстве дайте оценку действиям Васнецова и директора завода?

Answer 1

Он не прав каждый должен учавствовать в выборах

Answer 2

Background Information

The scenario provided involves a factory called "Voronezhgidroprivod" and its employees. The assistant of a gubernatorial candidate arrived at the factory to familiarize themselves with the candidate's pre-election program and collect signatures in support of the candidate. During the lunch break (from 13:00 to 14:00), the director of the factory ordered all the workers to attend a meeting with the campaigner. However, a worker named Vasnetsov expressed disinterest in politics, claimed to be hungry, and went to have lunch at the factory canteen. Several other workers followed his example. As a result, Vasnetsov received a reprimand from the director for violating labor discipline, and his request for a summer vacation was denied.

Evaluation of Vasnetsov's Actions

Based on the information provided, Vasnetsov expressed disinterest in politics and claimed to be hungry, which led him to go to the factory canteen for lunch instead of attending the meeting with the campaigner. It is important to note that employees have the right to take a lunch break during their working hours. However, it is also essential to consider the context and the specific instructions given by the director.

According to the labor legislation, employees are expected to follow the instructions of their employer, as long as those instructions are lawful and reasonable. In this case, the director ordered all workers to attend the meeting with the campaigner during the lunch break. By choosing not to attend the meeting and instead going to have lunch, Vasnetsov violated the director's instructions and potentially disrupted the planned activities.

Therefore, Vasnetsov's actions can be considered a violation of labor discipline, as he did not comply with the director's order. The director's decision to issue a reprimand to Vasnetsov for this violation is within their authority as the employer.

Evaluation of the Director's Actions

The director of the factory ordered all workers to attend the meeting with the campaigner during the lunch break. While it is understandable that the director wanted to ensure the workers' participation in the campaign activities, it is important to consider the rights and needs of the employees.

According to labor legislation, employees have the right to take a lunch break during their working hours. However, this right can be limited or modified by the employer if there are reasonable grounds for doing so. In this case, the director's decision to interrupt the lunch break and require all workers to attend the meeting can be seen as a modification of the usual lunch break arrangements.

The director's decision to issue a reprimand to Vasnetsov for not attending the meeting and going to have lunch instead can be seen as an attempt to enforce labor discipline and ensure compliance with their instructions. However, it is important for the director to consider the specific circumstances and the reasonableness of their instructions.

Regarding the denial of Vasnetsov's request for a summer vacation, it is not explicitly mentioned in the scenario why the director made this decision. Without further information, it is difficult to evaluate the director's actions in this regard.

In summary, while the director has the authority to issue instructions and enforce labor discipline, it is important for them to consider the rights and needs of the employees and ensure that their instructions are reasonable and lawful.

Conclusion

Based on the information provided, Vasnetsov's actions can be considered a violation of labor discipline, as he did not comply with the director's order to attend the meeting with the campaigner during the lunch break. The director's decision to issue a reprimand to Vasnetsov for this violation is within their authority as the employer. However, it is important for the director to consider the rights and needs of the employees and ensure that their instructions are reasonable and lawful. Without further information, it is difficult to evaluate the director's decision to deny Vasnetsov's request for a summer vacation.