Table of Contents

1. A familiar scenario: notification, silence, then “performance”
2. The employer’s real motive and the equation changing on May 1, 2026
3. Rules in effect: legislative map
4. Obligation of equal treatment and prohibition of pregnancy discrimination (Art. 5)
5. Pregnancy is a ground for invalid dismissal (Art. 18/3-d)
6. If it says “Your performance has dropped”: dismissal without taking defense is not allowed (Art. 19/2)
7. Maternity leave, nursing leave and updated periods in 2026 (Art. 74)
8. Severance and notice pay: even a force majeure defense will not save it
9. How does the burden of proof shift to the employer?
10. How are sham performance scenarios resolved in court?
11. Two paths: reinstatement or direct claim for receivables? (comparison table)
12. 1. Path: annulment of termination and reinstatement lawsuit
13. 2. Path: direct compensation and claim for receivables lawsuit
14. Concurrence of compensations: which cannot be claimed together with which?
15. Third channel outside of court: TİHEK application and administrative sanction
16. Deadlines and statute of limitations calendar
17. Most common procedural pitfalls in litigation
18. Evidence file: what to collect before and after termination
19. Frequently asked questions
20. Why is it important to properly manage the process in these cases?

1. A familiar scenario: notification, silence, then “performance”

Most cases begin in almost the same way. The employee informs human resources about her pregnancy. For a few weeks, nothing happens. Then, for the first time, a “performance review meeting” is held, followed by a record, a written warning, or a direct termination notice. The reason box does not state pregnancy: it states inadequacy, low productivity, changes in workplace organization, downsizing, and sometimes “mutual agreement.”

The termination of employment of a pregnant employee who has completed the minimum working period to be entitled to severance pay, either directly due to her pregnancy or for ostensible reasons with the real reason concealed, is a serious violation frequently encountered in Turkish labor law practice. The dispute here takes shape on three axes simultaneously: violation of the principle of equal treatment, prohibition of discrimination, and invalidity of termination.

In labor law, maternity and pregnancy are protected by constitutional and legal guarantees. The avenues an employee can pursue and the compensation she can claim in the face of direct or implicit terminations related to pregnancy, have been meticulously determined by the legislator and high court precedents, depending on whether the employee is covered by job security. This article maps out that entire landscape.

2. The Employer’s Real Motive and the Equation that Changed on May 1, 2026

The main motive behind these terminations is often the same: to prevent the continuation of an active employment relationship in the SGK (Social Security Institution) records during the employee’s maternity leave, and to avoid maternity rights and the associated burdens. The employer does not want to keep the position vacant during the leave, find temporary staff, grant nursing leave, and reopen the same position upon return.

This motive became even more apparent in 2026. Law No. 7578 on Amendments to Social Services Law and Certain Laws, published in the Official Gazette No. 33240 dated May 1, 2026, and entered into force on the same day, increased the post-natal leave in Article 74 of Law No. 4857 from 8 weeks to 16 weeks, and the total maternity leave from 16 weeks to 24 weeks. With parallel amendments made to Articles 15 and 18 of Law No. 5510, the period for which maternity temporary incapacity benefit would be paid was also increased to 24 weeks.

The outcome is twofold: employee protection has increased, but so has the motivation to avoid leave. In practice, it would not be surprising to observe a trend of “the shortening of the distance between pregnancy notification and termination” starting from the summer of 2026. Courts are precisely measuring this distance.

3. Rules in Effect: Legislative Map

The fundamental bases to be applied in the dispute are Articles 5, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, and 74 of Labor Law No. 4857 and Article 14 of Labor Law No. 1475, which is still in force. Two more layers from outside labor law are added to these.

Occupational health and safety layer: the part often overlooked in most files

The Regulation issued based on Law No. 6331 makes the notification of pregnancy a trigger for a series of employer obligations. According to Article 6 of the Regulation, the employee notifies the employer of her pregnancy; the employer is also obliged to assess the effects of chemical, physical, and biological agents and take necessary precautions. If a risk is detected according to Article 7, working conditions or hours are temporarily changed, and if this is not possible, the employee is transferred to another job. Article 8 stipulates that pregnant employees cannot be forced to work at night from the time of detection by a health report until childbirth, and an employee who has recently given birth cannot be employed at night for one year following childbirth; and Article 9 regulates that pregnant or breastfeeding employees cannot be employed for more than seven and a half hours a day.

Its value for litigation is as follows: if the employer says “productivity dropped”, it is debatable whether the drop stems from the employer’s failure to fulfill their adaptation obligation. An employer who fails to fulfill their obligation cannot be expected to draw conclusions in their own favor from the outcome.

4. Obligation of equal treatment and prohibition of pregnancy discrimination (Art. 5)

According to Article 5 of Law No. 4857, the employer is obliged to treat employees equally during the establishment, continuation, and termination of the employment relationship. Pregnancy is explicitly protected in the third paragraph of the article:

The sanction for infringement is in the sixth paragraph:

As emphasized in the Constitutional Court’s decision dated 01.02.2017 and numbered B. No: 2014/19081, if the employer violates the principle of equal treatment and the prohibition of pregnancy discrimination, the governing provisions of Article 5 of the Law come into play.

Violation of the article is also subject to administrative sanctions: In accordance with Article 99/1-a of Law No. 4857, an administrative fine is imposed on an employer who violates the principles and obligations of equal treatment for each employee in such a situation. The amount is updated annually with the revaluation rate; for the year 2026, it has been announced as 2,531 TL per employee. It is an item independent of the compensation claim and comes to the agenda with an inspection by a labor inspector upon a complaint to the Ministry of Labor and Social Security.

5. Pregnancy is a ground for invalid termination (Art. 18/3-d)

Pregnancy can under no circumstances be made a valid reason for termination for employees covered by job security. Subparagraph (d) of the third paragraph of Article 18 explicitly stipulates this:

The critical point here is this: the rule prohibits not only “writing pregnancy as a justification” but also pregnancy being the motive in the termination decision. Writing something else in the justification box does not circumvent the protection.

6. If they say “Your performance has decreased”: termination without taking a defense is not possible (Art. 19/2)

If the employer terminates the employment contract by citing the employee’s performance, efficiency, or behavior to conceal pregnancy, then taking a written defense before termination, as per the second paragraph of Article 19, is a mandatory procedural rule:

This rule is powerful enough to resolve the case on its own in practice. This is because, in performance-based terminations formulated in haste, the step of taking a defense is often either never taken or is backdated to after the termination.

So, the payment of your severance does not validate the termination. The employer often assumes the opposite.

7. Maternity leave, nursing leave and periods updated in 2026 (Art. 74)

Article 74 of Law No. 4857 grants female employees maternity leave before and after childbirth, paid leave for periodic check-ups, the right to work in lighter jobs with a doctor’s report, unpaid leave, and one and a half hours of daily nursing leave. According to the last paragraph of the article, these provisions apply to all types of employees working under an employment contract; an employee not covered by job security also benefits from these rights.

Provisional Article 1 of Law No. 7578 also introduced a transitional provision: as of April 1, 2026, an additional 8 weeks of maternity leave has been stipulated for employees who have not yet completed the 24-week period from their date of birth. After the maternity leave ends, the right to work half-time for 60 days for the first birth, 120 days for the second birth, and 180 days for subsequent births, the half-time work allowance under Additional Article 5 of Law No. 4447, and the right to request part-time work once until the child reaches primary school age are also in effect.

It is clearly unlawful for the employer to resort to termination to avoid maternity leave:

The second decision is particularly important: periods spent on legal leave and in reports cannot be cited as a reason for termination as “absenteeism” or “disrupting the workflow”. Employer defenses that accumulate pregnancy and birth reports and base their reasoning on the number of days will be countered by this case law.

8. Severance and Notice Pay: Even the defense of compelling reason does not exempt

Since the termination of the employment contract due to pregnancy is not based on a just cause, an employee with at least one year of seniority is paid severance pay amounting to 30 days of gross dressed wage for each full year of employment, in accordance with Article 14 of Law No. 1475. The dressed wage includes continuous payments such as transportation, food, bonuses, and regular premiums; therefore, calculations made over the naked wage are often incomplete. In accordance with Article 17 of Law No. 4857, if legal notice periods are not observed or the wages for these periods are not paid in advance, notice pay also arises.

This decision shows that the right to severance pay remains even in cases where working becomes risky due to pregnancy and the employer relies on a compelling reason (Art. 25/III). In practice, the employer’s defense of “became unable to work due to health condition” therefore does not exempt them from severance pay.

9. How Does the Burden of Proof Shift to the Employer?

Since employers are aware of the unlawfulness of termination based on pregnancy, they often resort to apparent pretexts such as poor performance, neglect of duty, or operational downsizing. The question that determines the fate of the case is: who will refute this?

Gradual Burden of Proof Rule (Art. 5/7)

Under normal circumstances, the burden of proof for a discrimination claim rests with the employee. However, the seventh paragraph of Article 5 introduces a phased approach:

The burden of proof for the validity of termination is already on the employer (Art. 20/2)

Before entering into the discussion of discrimination in a re-employment lawsuit, the burden of proving that the termination was based on a valid reason rests exclusively with the employer, in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 20.

Facts considered a “strong indication” in practice

• Short time interval between pregnancy notification and termination (temporal proximity)
• Consecutive reports/minutes issued after notification, while there were no warnings/minutes before notification
• Removal of multiple pregnant employees in the same period, while new personnel recruitment continues
• Assignment to a lower position, change of workplace, new job description entailing travel burden upon return from maternity leave
• Denial of lactation leave, refusal of periodic check-up leave
• Change of termination reason within the file (first downsizing, then performance cited)
• Signing of a “resignation” or “mutual termination” document in a process where the will to terminate comes from the employer

10. How are sham performance claims resolved in court?

Performance appraisal cannot disregard pregnancy conditions

This is one of the most functional precedents against performance defenses: if a comparison is to be made, it should be done with the pregnant employee’s own past data and the conditions of the period, not with the bare figures of other employees.

Satisfied yesterday, insufficient today: a sudden reversal is an indication of bad faith.

Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber, 22.01.2014, File No. 2013/36923, Decision No. 2014/707: “From the case file and witness statements, it is understood that the defendant employer was satisfied with the plaintiff’s work and productivity before the plaintiff gave birth, and that after the birth, the plaintiff was not granted maternity leave, and experienced unrest regarding this matter. Since the court’s decision that the termination made by the defendant was unfair and invalid, and that the plaintiff should be reinstated, is in accordance with the case file, the defendant’s appeals regarding this aspect were not found to be justified.”

The claim of downsizing and restructuring is also subject to scrutiny.

Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 22.02.2018, File No. 2018/1222, Decision No. 2018/3833: “where the company’s reason and content for restructuring based on downsizing could not be concretely presented, and it could not be proven that the need for the plaintiff’s job and service ceased or why the plaintiff was chosen as the personnel to be dismissed,” termination cannot be considered valid in such cases.

In the defense of operational decisions, the second question is crucial: even if downsizing is real, why was this employee chosen? If the selection criterion cannot be explained, the termination will not stand.

If a mutual termination agreement (rescission agreement) has been signed.

Even if a mutual termination agreement (ikale) is pursued, as indicated in the ruling numbered Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 17.09.2015, E. 2015/18686, K. 2015/26045, if the reasonable benefit of the pregnant employee is not met, the ikale is not considered valid and a re-employment decision is issued. A “mutual agreement” that deprives the employee of job security and maternity leave rights, and in return only pays legal compensation, does not constitute a reasonable benefit.

Exception: if there is genuinely a reason for termination independent of pregnancy

The honest side of the picture should also be stated. If it is proven with concrete evidence that the employer’s termination stemmed directly from the employee’s conduct non-compliant with truthfulness and loyalty under Article 25/II of the Law, independent of pregnancy, the dismissal of the case may come into question (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 19.09.2022, E. 2022/8179, K. 2022/9724). For this reason, cases should not be structured categorically, but at the level of evidence.

11. Two paths: re-employment or a direct claim for receivables?

The rights an employee can benefit from are examined in two categories, according to their seniority at the date of termination and the total number of employees at the workplace.

Criterion	Path 1: Reinstatement under job security (Art. 18–21)	Path 2: Direct claim for receivables and compensation lawsuit
Scope conditions	Minimum 6 months seniority + 30 or more employees in workplaces of the same business line of the employer	Less than 6 months seniority or less than 30 employees; or pursuit of rights directly linked to termination without filing a reinstatement lawsuit
Mandatory procedure and period	Mediation is mandatory within 1 month from the notification of termination. If an agreement is not reached, a lawsuit must be filed within 2 weeks from the last record	Mediation and litigation within general statute of limitations periods
Basic rights that can be claimed	Invalidity of termination and reinstatement; compensation for non-reinstatement equal to at least 4, up to 8 months’ wages; wages for the idle period up to 4 months and other rights	Severance pay (if minimum 1 year seniority); notice pay; discrimination compensation up to 4 months (Art. 5/6) or 3 times the notice period in bad faith compensation (Art. 17/6); other unpaid labor receivables
Status of discrimination / bad faith compensation	Since the fact of discrimination is taken into account in determining non-reinstatement compensation, separate discrimination compensation is not awarded. Bad faith compensation, on the other hand, cannot be claimed (Art. 17/6)	According to Art. 5, discrimination compensation can be claimed independently. Bad faith and discrimination compensation cannot be collected concurrently for the same act

12. Path 1: Lawsuit for invalidity of termination and reinstatement (Art. 20, 21)

An employee subject to job security (at least 6 months’ seniority and 30+ employees) must apply to a mediator within one month from the notification of termination. If an agreement cannot be reached through mediation, a re-employment lawsuit is filed in the labor court within two weeks. When the court rules on the invalidity of the termination and re-employment, two claims arise (Supreme Court 7th Civil Chamber, 27.02.2015, E. 2014/17377, K. 2015/2732; Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 17.09.2015, E. 2015/18686, K. 2015/26045):

Compensation for failure to re-employ

If the employer fails to re-employ the employee within one month despite the employee’s timely application, compensation amounting to at least 4, and at most 8 months’ wages, is paid in accordance with Article 21. As stated in the decision of Supreme Court 7th Civil Chamber, 21.12.2016, E. 2016/31743, K. 2016/21732, “this compensation, which is in the nature of job security, should be determined by taking into account factors such as the employee’s seniority and the reason for termination”. In terminations that violate the prohibition of discrimination, such as pregnancy, courts may award compensation close to the upper limits; for example, in the ruling numbered Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber, 22.01.2014, E. 2013/36923, K. 2014/707, the compensation for failure to re-employ was determined as five months’ wages.

Wages for the period of unemployment

Wages and other rights accrued for a maximum of four months for the period during which the employee was not employed until the finalization of the decision are awarded. This period is also evaluated in terms of insurance; it holds great practical importance for records related to maternity leave and maternity benefits.

13. 2nd Way: direct compensation and claim lawsuit

If the worker is outside the scope of job security (for example, if fewer than 30 workers are employed at the workplace) or if the termination becomes final by not filing a re-employment lawsuit despite being within the scope, a direct lawsuit for receivables is filed:

• Severance and notice pay: A worker with at least 1 year of seniority is paid severance pay in accordance with Article 14 of Law No. 1475; if no notice period was granted, notice pay is paid in accordance with Article 17 of Law No. 4857.
• Discrimination compensation (Art. 5/6): A worker subjected to pregnancy discrimination in the employment relationship or upon termination may claim compensation up to four months’ wages. Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 09.09.2025, E. 2025/5550, K. 2025/6083: “Discrimination compensation is not technically a form of compensation. It is sufficient for the worker to be subjected to an act or behavior that constitutes discrimination to claim discrimination compensation, and there is no need for further damage to arise.”
• Malice compensation (Art. 17/6): For workers outside the scope of job security, in case of abuse of the right to terminate, entitlement to malice compensation equivalent to three times the notice period arises.
• Other labor receivables: Unpaid wages, overtime, National Holiday and General Holiday pay, weekly rest pay, annual leave pay, and compensation for unused nursing leave (in accordance with Article 74/7, according to overtime provisions) may be claimed.

The characteristic of “no damage requirement” for discrimination compensation is strategically important: the compensation is linked to the discriminatory act itself, independently of any material loss incurred.

14. Competition of Compensations: Which cannot be claimed concurrently?

The most common mistake in practice is requesting mutually exclusive items together in the same petition. The high court has clarified three rules.

a) Reinstatement and discrimination compensation are not awarded together

Since the claim of discrimination in a reinstatement lawsuit is already evaluated in terms of the invalidity of the termination and the amount of compensation for not reinstating the employee, discrimination compensation under Article 5 cannot be additionally awarded.

Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 25.05.2015, E. 2015\/11182, K. 2015\/18740: “It is erroneous to rule on the claim, without considering that the defendant’s conduct violating the prohibition of discrimination was discussed both at the point of invalidity of termination and when determining the amount of compensation for not reinstating the employee, and therefore, discrimination compensation cannot be awarded concurrently.” To the same effect: Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 17.09.2015, E. 2015\/18686, K. 2015\/26045.

Conversely, when a direct claim for receivables is filed, discrimination compensation is awarded as an independent right (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 05.11.2014, E. 2012\/39721, K. 2014\/32640).

b) An employee covered by job security cannot claim malicious termination compensation

Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 05.11.2014, E. 2012\/39721, K. 2014\/32640: “Pursuant to the clear provision of the sixth paragraph of Article 17 of the Law, it is not possible for employees covered by job security to be entitled to malicious termination compensation.” Additionally: “The acceptance of the claim for malicious termination compensation is incorrect, as it overlooks that a second compensation cannot be awarded for the same legal reason and due to the non-fulfillment of the conditions for malicious termination compensation, thus the judgment had to be reversed for the reasons explained.”

c) Discrimination and bad faith compensation cannot be claimed together

Court of Cassation 22nd Civil Chamber, 27.03.2018, E. 2015/28332, K. 2018/7866: “According to our Chamber’s practice, it is not possible to pay these two compensations simultaneously.”

For employees outside the scope of job security, the correct approach is to initially determine which item is higher and more easily provable in the specific case and to formulate the claim accordingly. For employees with a short notice period, discrimination compensation (up to 4 months’ wages) is generally higher than bad faith compensation.

15. Third extra-judicial channel: TIHEK application and administrative sanction

Pregnancy discrimination is not solely a matter for the labor court. Article 3 of the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey Law No. 6701 prohibits gender-based discrimination; and Article 6 stipulates that the employer cannot discriminate “in any of the processes related to employment, including information, application, selection criteria, recruitment conditions, and processes for commencement and termination of employment.” The third paragraph of the article explicitly prohibits the rejection of an employment application on grounds of pregnancy, maternity, and childcare; according to the fifth paragraph, service contracts not covered by Law No. 4857 are also within the scope of this article.

Pursuant to Article 25 of the Law, in case of a violation of the prohibition of discrimination, an administrative fine is imposed, taking into account the severity of the violation’s effects and consequences, the economic situation of the perpetrator, and the aggravating effect of multiple discrimination. The Institution determined that there was gender-based discrimination against the applicant whose recruitment process was negatively concluded after she notified her pregnancy (TIHEK Board Decision No. 2020/176).

This channel has two practical values. Firstly, because, according to the prevalent view in doctrine regarding discrimination compensation in Article 5/6 of the Labor Law, it does not cover the recruitment stage, the main recourse in cases of non-recruitment is Law No. 6701. Secondly, the Institution’s decision can be presented as evidence in the labor court file. Applications can also be made through governorships in provinces and district governorships in districts; the application procedures and conditions are regulated in Article 17 of Law No. 6701.

Furthermore, Law No. 6701 defines deliberate actions carried out with the aim of discouraging, excluding, and wearying a person from their job, based on grounds of discrimination, as “workplace mobbing”, and negative treatment directed towards an individual who initiates an administrative or judicial process against discrimination, as “victimization”. These concepts can be directly applied to employees who are isolated, stripped of their duties after reporting their pregnancy, or pressured for filing a lawsuit.

16. Periods and statute of limitations calendar

Procedure	Duration	Commencement
Mediation application for reinstatement	1 month (preclusive period)	Service of termination notice
Reinstatement lawsuit	2 weeks	Drawing up of the final mediation report
Application to start work after reinstatement decision	10 business days	Service of the decision
Severance pay, notice pay, compensation for malicious termination, and compensation for termination violating the principle of equal treatment	5 years (Law No. 4857, Additional Art. 3)	Termination date
Wages and wage supplements	5 years (Law No. 4857, Art. 32)	Accrual

Additional Article 3, added to Law No. 4857 by Article 15 of Law No. 7036 on Labor Courts, has set the statute of limitations at five years for annual leave pay, severance pay, compensation arising from termination without observing the notice period, compensation for malicious termination, and compensation arising from the termination of the employment contract without observing the principle of equal treatment. Since the wording of the provision is “arising from its termination,” the ten-year period under Article 146 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) for claims arising from discrimination experienced during the continuation of the employment relationship continues to be debated. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 3, paragraph 17 of Law No. 7036, the statute of limitations is suspended and preclusive periods do not run from the date of application to the mediation office until the date the final report is drawn up.

17. Most Common Procedural Pitfalls in Litigation

• Missing the preclusive deadline: In a re-employment claim, the one-month mediation application period specified in Article 20 is preclusive; if missed, the case is dismissed on procedural grounds.
• Ex officio investigation of the thirty-employee condition: Job security provisions are mandatory. Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 18.12.2017, E. 2016/32626, K. 2017/21574: “Since the job security provisions (Articles 18-21) of the Labor Law No. 4857 are mandatory provisions, it must be investigated ex officio whether the employee is covered by job security.”
• Investigation of organic link: If there are seemingly fewer than 30 employees at the time of termination, claims regarding group companies, organic links, and employees being formally registered in different companies must be meticulously examined (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 05.11.2018, E. 2018/9291, K. 2018/19546).
• Determination of the claim’s outcome and fee payment: In claims for discrimination or bad faith compensation, the petition must specify an amount and the fee must be paid. Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 22.02.2018, E. 2018/1222, K. 2018/3833: “First of all, no amount was specified in the lawsuit petition for the plaintiff’s claim for bad faith compensation, and this claim was not subject to a fee. No judgment can be rendered regarding a right to claim for which no amount is specified and no fee is paid.”
• Obligation of concrete examination: In claims of discrimination based on pregnancy, the local court’s rejection of the claim with abstract justifications is a ground for reversal; all allegations, defenses, and evidence of the parties must be examined individually (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber, 04.10.2018, E. 2018/8282, K. 2018/17510).

18. Evidence file: documents to be collected before and after termination

If you are still employed

• Notify the pregnancy in writing (email or KEP). Oral notification makes proof difficult.
• Keep hospital reports, periodic check-up documents, and their dates.
• Collect job changes, target changes, warnings, and minutes that come after the notification, along with their dates.
• Do not sign any document you are asked to sign without reading it; especially texts titled “resignation”, “mutual agreement to terminate”, “mutual termination”.
• Get copies of your previous performance evaluations, bonus, and promotion letters.

If Termination Occurred

• Document the notification date of the termination notice; the one-month period starts from this date.
• Is the reason stated in the notice, has your defense been taken, and if so, on what date — note these.
• Check the termination code in the SGK departure statement from e-Devlet; a discrepancy between the code and the reason for termination is a common issue.
• If there are other pregnant employees terminated in the same period at the workplace, identify their names and dates; the witness list is established from here.
• Check if the same position has been re-advertised on job sites, take a screenshot.
• Even if your compensation has been paid, your right to seek legal recourse is not closed; payment does not validate the termination.

Setting up your case on the right track makes all the difference

Reinstatement to work or a direct claim for receivables? The wrong choice leads to loss of rights. We handle labor law cases in Istanbul and surrounding provinces.

0505 390 25 48 — Call Now

Message on WhatsApp

19. Frequently asked questions

I was dismissed a week after I said I was pregnant. Is this sufficient on its own?

It does not provide a definitive result on its own, but it is a very strong indicator. Proximity in terms of time can be considered a “situation strongly indicating the possibility of a violation” within the meaning of the seventh paragraph of Article 5, and it shifts the burden of proof to the employer. Thereafter, the employer is obliged to explain the termination with concrete facts independent of the pregnancy.

The employer paid my severance and notice pay. Can I still file a lawsuit?

Yes. As explicitly stated in the decision dated 13.02.2017 of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, termination without taking a defense is invalid even if compensation has been paid, and reinstatement should be ordered. Payment does not render the termination lawful.

There are not 30 employees at the workplace. Do I have no rights?

No. Even if reinstatement is not possible, you can demand discrimination compensation up to the amount of 4 months’ wages in addition to severance and notice pay, or, if the conditions are met, bad faith compensation three times the notice period. Furthermore, the 30-employee condition is investigated ex officio by the court, and claims of organic ties with group companies are examined; the apparent number of employees does not always reflect the reality.

They said, “Let’s separate by mutual agreement,” and I signed. Is there a way back?

The validity of a mutual termination agreement is evaluated by the criterion of “reasonable benefit” provided to the employee. Paying only the legal entitlements to a pregnant employee in exchange for them waiving their job security and maternity leave rights is generally not considered a reasonable benefit; the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court’s decision dated 17.09.2015 is in this direction. As deadlines continue to run, get an assessment without delay.

How many weeks did maternity leave increase to in 2026?

With Law No. 7578, a total of 24 weeks, consisting of 8 weeks before birth and 16 weeks after birth; in multiple pregnancies, two weeks are added to the prenatal period, making it 26 weeks. The period for which SGK will provide maternity temporary incapacity benefit has also been increased to 24 weeks. The change came into effect on May 1, 2026.

They called me back to work before my maternity leave ended, and then dismissed me. What happens?

In the decision of the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court dated 11.04.2019, this scenario was directly addressed, and reinstatement was ruled on the grounds that the termination was not based on a just cause. Furthermore, the same decision stated that absence records prepared by the employer for dates after declaring their intention to terminate cannot be given value.

Can I claim both discrimination and bad faith compensation?

Both cannot be ruled concurrently based on the same act of termination (Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber, 27.03.2018). If you are covered by job security, bad faith compensation cannot be claimed anyway. The correct approach is to choose the item that is higher and easier to prove in the specific case and structure the claim accordingly.

If I win a reinstatement lawsuit, do I really have to return to work?

No, but you must apply to start work within the given period. If no application is made, the right to compensation for not being rehired and wages for the idle period does not arise. If the employer does not reinstate you within one month, compensation equivalent to 4–8 months’ wages becomes payable.

They are not allowing me to use my nursing leave. Is this a separate right?

Yes. Article 74 provides for a total of one and a half hours of nursing leave per day to breastfeed a child under one year old, and any unused duration is compensated according to the overtime provisions of Article 41 of the Labor Law. Failure to grant nursing leave is also considered in discrimination assessments; the decision dated 22.01.2014 of the Supreme Court’s 22nd Civil Chamber is an example of this.

They withdrew the job offer when they learned I was pregnant during the job interview. What can I do?

According to the prevailing view in doctrine, the discrimination compensation under Article 5/6 of the Labor Law does not cover the recruitment phase. In this case, the main recourse is Article 6/3 of Law No. 6701: an employer cannot reject an employment application on grounds of pregnancy, maternity, and childcare. The application is made to the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey and may result in an administrative fine.

Within what period should I file a lawsuit?

For reinstatement, mediation within one month, and if no agreement is reached, a lawsuit within two weeks. For compensation arising from termination contrary to the principles of seniority, notice, bad faith, and equal treatment, a five-year statute of limitations applies from the date of termination (4857 Add. Art. 3).

20. Why is it important to properly manage the process in these cases?

Pregnancy discrimination cases are one of the areas of labor law that are subject to both the strictest deadlines and the most case law. Two different choices made in the same event produce entirely different outcomes. The main points requiring the correct establishment of the process are as follows:

On the employee’s side

• The one-month mediation period is a preclusive term and cannot be recovered; it is mandatory to calculate the period correctly from the date of notification.
• The choice between reinstatement and a direct claim for receivables directly determines whether discrimination compensation can be claimed.
• Since discrimination and bad faith compensation cannot be claimed together, the claim must be established on the correct item from the outset.
• No judgment can be rendered regarding an item for which the requested amount is not specified and no fee has been paid.
• Severance pay is calculated based on the gross fully-loaded salary; a significant loss occurs if travel, meal allowances, and regular bonuses are not included.
• “Strong indicator” evidence that shifts the burden of proof to the employer must be presented systematically in the lawsuit petition.

On the employer’s side

• Failure to obtain a written defense in terminations based on conduct or performance alone invalidates the termination.
• In the defense of an operational decision, not only the downsizing but also why the employee was chosen must be demonstrated.
• Performance evaluations must be based on objective criteria and should not disregard pregnancy and childbirth conditions.
• If a reasonable balance of benefits is not established in mutual termination agreements, the agreement is deemed invalid.
• Failure to document OHS (Occupational Health and Safety) obligations regarding pregnant and nursing employees entirely weakens the defense.

Regions in Istanbul where these disputes are concentrated

Pregnancy discrimination cases are concentrated in specific employment clusters in Istanbul. On the European side, employment in production, textile, logistics, and call centers is prominent in the Başakşehir (İkitelli OIZ), Esenyurt, Beylikdüzü, Bağcılar, Küçükçekmece, Avcılar, Bahçelievler, and Zeytinburnu line; while white-collar, finance, technology, and service sector employment stands out in the Şişli, Sarıyer (Maslak), Beşiktaş (Levent), and Beyoğlu line. On the Anatolian side, the areas around Ataşehir, Ümraniye, Kadıköy, Sancaktepe, Çekmeköy, Sultanbeyli, and Tuzla Organized Industrial Zone; additionally, industrial and logistics businesses in Kocaeli’s Gebze, Çayırova, Darıca, and Dilovası districts form a significant portion of these cases.

The nature of employment also alters the structure of the case. In organized industrial zones, discussions regarding shift patterns, the prohibition of night work, and the division of employee numbers through group companies come to the forefront; whereas in corporate office employment, performance system documents, target cards, email correspondence, and discussions about changes in duties upon return from maternity leave become crucial. In both types, the decisive factor is the proper collection of evidence before termination.

2M Law Office

Founder: Atty. Meryem Günay. Our office operates in the fields of labor law, condominium law and urban transformation, maritime commerce law, foreigners’ law, and administrative jurisdiction. We handle cases in the labor courts on both the Anatolian and European sides of Istanbul, as well as cases around Kocaeli.

Address: Postane Mahallesi, Seher Sokak No: 18/2, Tuzla / Istanbul
Phone: 0505 390 25 48  |  E-mail: info@2mhukuk.com

About the office  |  All articles

Resources and legislation

• Labor Law No. 4857 — mevzuat.gov.tr
• Labor Law No. 1475, Art. 14 (current provision)
• Law No. 7578 Amending the Social Services Law and Certain Laws — OG May 1, 2026, No. 33240
• Law No. 5510, Art. 15 and 18 (maternity temporary incapacity benefit)
• Labor Courts Law No. 7036, Art. 3 and Art. 15 (4857 Add. Art. 3)
• Law No. 6701 on the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey — mevzuat.gov.tr
• Regulation on the Working Conditions of Pregnant or Breastfeeding Women, Breastfeeding Rooms, and Childcare Nurseries — OG 16.08.2013, No. 28737
• Constitutional Court, 01.02.2017, App. No: 2014/19081

This article has been prepared for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal opinion or advice. Each case should be evaluated within its own evidentiary context. For the current texts of the judicial decisions mentioned in the article, it is recommended to obtain confirmation from UYAP and official decision databases.