Gulers Partners
Contact
Employment Law

EVALUATION OF THE WAGE ENTITLEMENT OF EMPLOYEES WORKING ON MAY 1 WITHIN THE SCOPE OF NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AND GENERAL PUBLIC HOLIDAYS

May 1, Labor and Solidarity Day, is regulated as a general public holiday under Law No. 2429 on National Holidays and General Public Holidays. The historical development of workers’ rights was shaped by harsh working conditions, low wages, and the absence of occupational safety measures that emerged following the Enlightenment Era and the Industrial Revolution in Europe. Although industrialization progressed more slowly in the Ottoman Empire, labor-related issues became increasingly visible during the post-Tanzimat modernization period. Influenced by global labor movements, regulations aimed at protecting workers’ rights gradually developed in Türkiye as well. As a result of this historical process, May 1 gained official holiday status, and today workers’ rights are largely protected by law. This study evaluates the wage entitlements of employees working on May 1 within the framework of national holiday and general public holiday regulations.

Stj. Av. Gözde BİLGİN
May 13, 2026

A. INTRODUCTION

  1. National holidays and general public holidays in Türkiye are regulated under Law No. 2429 on National Holidays and General Public Holidays (“Law No. 2429”). May 1, Labor and Solidarity Day (“May 1”), is also included within the scope of Law No. 2429 and is regulated as a general public holiday. It is evident that the foundations of modern labor law and the developments achieved in terms of workers’ rights today were laid long ago. Following the Age of Enlightenment that began in Europe during the 17th century, the development of scientific and rational thought, together with the Industrial Revolution that emerged in the late 18th and 19th centuries, accelerated industrialization and gave rise to numerous problems affecting the increasingly expanding working class. Although this period initially began with the invention of the steam engine by the Scottish inventor James Watt, its impact profoundly affected the entire world and, as reflected in its very name, created a revolutionary transformation.
  2. Although industrialization movements in the Ottoman Empire did not progress rapidly due to political circumstances of the era, labor-related issues became more visible particularly during the modernization efforts that began after the Tanzimat period. Worldwide developments, coupled with workers being employed for long hours under low wages, the absence of occupational safety mechanisms, and the widespread use of child labor, led to the strengthening of labor movements. In present-day Türkiye, the historical development of May 1 has likewise been at the center of various political and social debates throughout different periods.
  3. Alongside this historical development process, regulations aimed at protecting workers’ rights increasingly found their place within legal systems. The recognition of May 1 as an official holiday under the title “Labor and Solidarity Day” constitutes a result of this historical struggle. Accordingly, workers’ rights are today largely protected by law, and this article evaluates the wage entitlement of employees who work on May 1, which is one of the national holidays and general public holidays.

B. THE EMPLOYEE’S RIGHT TO WAGES ON NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AND GENERAL PUBLIC HOLIDAYS

  1. Various provisions regarding national holidays and general public holidays regulated under Law No. 2429 are set forth in the Labor Law No. 4857 (“Law No. 4857”). Pursuant to Article 44 of Law No. 4857, whether an employee may be required to work on national holidays and general public holidays shall be determined by collective bargaining agreements or employment contracts. Accordingly, as a rule, the employment of workers on official holidays is subject to the agreement of the parties.
  2. The second paragraph of the same article provides that wages relating to national holidays and general public holidays shall be paid in accordance with Article 47. Pursuant to Article 47, if the employee does not work on such days, they shall nevertheless be paid their full daily wage without any requirement to perform work.
  3. If the employee works on national holidays or general public holidays, the article further provides that an additional daily wage shall be paid for the day worked. In other words, the employee becomes entitled to two days’ wages. Although the wording of the law appears clear at first glance, a dispute arises as to whether the number of hours worked on such holidays should be taken into consideration when determining the employee’s daily wage entitlement. This issue has been interpreted differently in legal doctrine and in the decisions of the Court of Cassation, thereby creating a controversial situation.

C. EXAMINATION OF THE LAW AND CASE LAW REGARDING THE EFFECT OF WORKING HOURS ON WAGES DURING NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AND GENERAL PUBLIC HOLIDAYS

  1. When Article 47 of Law No. 4857 is examined literally, it is understood that the decisive criterion is whether the employee worked on the national holiday or general public holiday. Therefore, even if the employee works for only one hour on a general holiday, they become entitled to a full daily wage. The provision contains no regulation regarding the number of hours the employee must work. The legislator did not establish any distinction such as “full-day work,” “work for a certain duration,” or “hourly-based remuneration.” Consequently, since the article does not include any regulation based on hourly work, it is clear that no such interpretation may be made and that even one hour of work entitles the employee to a full daily wage.
  2. Considering the legislative purpose behind the provision, it is apparent that the legislator aimed to protect the employee’s right to rest during national holidays and general public holidays. Therefore, even if the employee is required to work for a short period on an official holiday, it must be accepted that the employee’s right to rest has been restricted. Accordingly, irrespective of the number of hours worked, the employee is entitled to a full additional daily wage.
  3. In this regard, the 22nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in its decision dated 15.05.2017 numbered E. 2017/6369 and K. 2017/10999, and the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in its decision dated 03.06.2020 numbered E. 2016/15760 and K. 2020/4806, ruled that even where only one hour of work is performed on national holidays and general public holidays, the employee is entitled to a full daily wage, explicitly establishing that the calculation must be made on a daily basis.

D. THE INDIVISIBILITY OF GENERAL PUBLIC HOLIDAY WAGES AND PARTIAL WORK

  1. One of the fundamental principles of labor law is the indivisibility of holiday wages, which means that if an employee works even for one hour on a holiday, they are entitled to a full daily wage. This principle was firmly established by the decision of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated 12.06.2023, numbered E. 2023/6930 and K. 2023/8976. In the relevant judgment, the defense arguing that “if only one hour is worked on a weekly rest day or general holiday, payment should only be made for that duration” was rejected, and the lower court’s calculation based on a full daily wage was upheld by the Court of Cassation. This precedent clearly demonstrates that partial work performed on holidays should not be evaluated as hourly overtime work, but rather as a full daily national holiday and general public holiday wage.

E. PROOF OF WORK PERFORMED ON NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AND GENERAL PUBLIC HOLIDAYS

  1. Payroll records, entry-exit records, and witness statements constitute the principal means of proof regarding work performed on general public holidays. In its decision dated 17.06.2014, numbered E. 2012/16872 and K. 2014/19734, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation held that where ID (Log Management System) records and signed attendance sheets exist, such documents must be examined meticulously, and failure to do so constitutes grounds for reversal.
  2. The significance of payroll records was also emphasized in the decision of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated 27.11.2019, numbered E. 2017/13589 and K. 2019/21156. The High Court ruled that it must be examined whether the payments shown in payrolls represent “one daily wage that must legally be paid even without work” or “an additional daily wage paid in return for work performed.” In cases where written evidence is unavailable, witness statements may be relied upon; however, the Court of Cassation has further stated in its precedents that in such cases an equitable reduction (discretionary deduction) must also be applied.

CONCLUSION

In light of the case law, it is beyond dispute that where employees work on May 1 and other general public holidays, entitlement to wages is not assessed on an hourly basis, but rather on a daily basis, such that even one hour of work entitles the employee to a full daily wage. The consistent precedents of the Court of Cassation have reinforced the principle of daily wage calculation and the indivisibility of holiday wages, thereby bringing an end to doctrinal debates regarding hourly calculation methods. Furthermore, in proving work performed on national holidays and general public holidays, due consideration must also be given to the nature of payroll accruals and to the application of equitable deductions in calculations based on witness testimony.

Next