The obligation to employ former convicts is not merely an employment policy to be considered within the scope of social responsibility; it is also an obligation that gives rise to direct legal and financial consequences for employers. Although this obligation may appear to be a simple matter of “filling a quota,” in practice it involves multiple technical elements, including determining the number of employees, employing personnel with the correct legal status, and managing notification procedures. In particular, where employers fulfill this obligation incompletely or incorrectly, they may face administrative fines, making it necessary to address the issue not only from a theoretical perspective but also as a matter of direct risk management.
At this point, many employers tend to focus only on the question of “how many people must be employed,” while overlooking critical details such as how the obligation arises, which employees are included in the calculation, and which mistakes may lead to sanctions in practice. However, since this obligation lies at the intersection of employment law and administrative sanctions, the process must be structured correctly from the outset. This article systematically addresses the legal basis of the obligation to employ former convicts, the applicable conditions for employers, the quota calculation method, administrative sanctions, and the most common practical risks.
Legal Basis of the Obligation to Employ Former Convicts
The obligation to employ former convicts is not merely an administrative practice; it is an employer obligation arising directly from law. The primary legal basis of this obligation is Labor Law No. 4857, which imposes employment obligations on employers above a certain size for social policy purposes. The legislature does not merely aim to regulate the labor market, but also to support the reintegration of disadvantaged groups into society. For this reason, the regulation has the character of a public policy measure that goes beyond the conventional employee-employer relationship.
At this point, the obligation to employ former convicts is often assessed together with the obligation to employ disabled employees in Turkey. Since these two obligations are regulated within the same legal framework in practice, employers often need to evaluate them together. However, the scope, ratio, and method of implementation of each obligation differ. Therefore, it is not sufficient to look only at the total quota; it must also be separately analyzed how many employees must be employed under each specific status. Failure to make this distinction correctly may result in the employer facing administrative sanctions despite believing that it has fulfilled its obligation.
The point at which the obligation to employ former convicts arises, and the exact numerical obligation it creates, are determined under Article 30 of Labor Law No. 4857. Accordingly, the obligation arises where the same employer employs a total of 50 or more employees in one or more workplaces. For private sector employers, employing former convicts is not mandatory under this framework, while they are required to employ disabled employees at a rate of 3%. In public workplaces, however, the applicable ratios are different, and the obligations relating to the employment of disabled persons and former convicts are regulated at a higher level. The critical point is that these ratios are not applied simply to the apparent total number of employees, but to the legally relevant number of employees determined in accordance with the calculation method prescribed by the legislation. Therefore, instead of a superficial headcount, a legally accurate calculation is required.
In addition, the purpose of the regulation is not merely to impose an obligation, but also to guide employers toward a specific employment model. For this reason, the legislation includes both obligation and incentive mechanisms. However, in practice, most employers focus only on the obligation and penalty aspects, while failing to adequately assess incentives and support mechanisms. This may cause employers to miss cost advantages and mismanage the obligation. Accordingly, properly understanding the legal basis is decisive not only for identifying the obligation, but also for developing a strategic employment plan.
Conditions Applicable to Employers
The obligation to employ former convicts does not apply to every employer; it arises only when certain conditions are met. The most decisive criterion is the number of employees in the workplace. Under Labor Law No. 4857, this obligation arises for public employers whose number of employees exceeds 50, and correctly determining this threshold is critically important. In practice, many employers make assessments based only on approximate employee numbers, but this approach often leads to incorrect results.
First, when determining whether the obligation has arisen, it must be considered whether the workplace should be assessed individually or together with multiple workplaces. Where the same employer has multiple workplaces, the number of employees working in these workplaces may, in certain cases, be assessed together. This is particularly important for group companies or businesses operating in different locations. Incorrect assessments may cause the employer to fail to realize that it falls within the scope of the obligation and later face collective penalties.
That said, not all employees are included in this calculation. The law excludes certain groups of employees from the scope, while treating others differently. Technical details such as converting part-time employees into full-time equivalents, the position of subcontractor employees, and the exclusion of personnel with certain statuses directly affect the scope of the obligation. Therefore, a superficial calculation based solely on the total number of employees will often not produce a legally valid result.
There are also differences in implementation between private sector and public employers. Although the basic logic of the obligation is similar, different rules may apply in terms of ratios and method of implementation. Overlooking this distinction may create risk, especially for businesses operating in connection with the public sector or within a hybrid structure. Therefore, clarifying the employer’s legal status is a critical step that must be taken at the beginning of the process.
In conclusion, the conditions for employing former convicts are not merely a matter of numerical threshold. They require a combined assessment of how the number of employees is calculated, which workplaces are assessed together, and which employees fall within the scope. Misinterpreting these conditions may result in an employer being considered subject to the obligation even though it believed otherwise. This significantly increases the risk of retroactive administrative sanctions during inspections.
Quota Calculation and Determination of Employee Count
The most critical stage of the obligation to employ former convicts is calculating the quota correctly. This is because not only the existence of the obligation, but also the exact numerical scope of that obligation, directly determines the risk of administrative sanctions. One of the most common issues in practice is that employers try to reach a conclusion by applying a percentage calculation only to the total employee count.
First, full-time employees are directly included in the calculation. By contrast, part-time employees are calculated by converting their working time into full-time equivalents. For example, two employees working half of the weekly working time are treated as one full-time employee. This point is frequently overlooked in practice, and employers often make undercalculations. By contrast, interns and students receiving vocational training are generally not included in the employee count. Similarly, individuals who do not work under an employment contract and do not have employee status are not taken into account in this calculation. This distinction may significantly affect the total number, especially in large enterprises.
In addition, where an employer has multiple workplaces, whether those workplaces should be assessed together may change the quota calculation. This issue becomes even more complex in large-scale enterprises or companies with group structures. Where the employer has multiple workplaces, the general principle is that the total number of employees working in workplaces belonging to the same employer is assessed together. In other words, operating in different cities or branches does not change the result; what matters is total employment on the basis of the legal entity. By contrast, the employee numbers of companies with separate legal personality, such as group companies, are generally not combined. Assuming that each workplace must be evaluated separately may often lead to undercalculation. In some cases, the obligation is determined based on the total number of employees, which may create a higher quota than expected.
Administrative Fines for Failure to Employ Former Convicts in 2026
Violation of the obligation to employ former convicts gives rise to direct administrative fines for the employer, and this sanction often creates more serious consequences than expected. This obligation is considered breached not only where no former convict is employed at all, but also where the quota is filled incompletely. Therefore, even partial failure to meet the quota may result in separate fines for each missing person. This may create significant financial burdens, especially for workplaces with high employee numbers.
The main factors in determining the administrative fine are the number of persons missing from the required employment quota and the duration of the violation. The fine is calculated monthly and applied separately for each month in which the obligation is not fulfilled. Therefore, the violation is not limited to a single period; unless detected, it accumulates and becomes an increasing financial burden. In practice, employers often become aware of the violation only during inspections, at which point they may face retroactive collective fines.
Administrative fines applicable in case of breach of the obligation to employ former convicts are determined under Article 101 of Labor Law No. 4857. As of 2026, an administrative fine of TRY 37,748 is imposed monthly for each missing employee. This fine applies not only where no employment is made, but also where the quota is filled incompletely, and it is calculated separately for each missing person and for each month. For example, if an employer remains two persons short of the required quota for six months, the fine will increase cumulatively and create a serious financial burden. Moreover, this sanction is not a one-time fine; it is imposed again for each month during which the obligation remains unfulfilled. Therefore, where the violation goes unnoticed, it is common for employers to face high retroactive total fines. Within this framework, correctly identifying and regularly monitoring the obligation is critically important not only for legal compliance but also for direct financial risk management.
At this point, the inspection process is of particular importance. Relevant authorities determine whether the employer has fulfilled the obligation by comparing employer notifications, Social Security Institution records, and data relating to employee numbers. In particular, incomplete or inaccurate records may prevent the employer from proving compliance, even if the obligation has actually been fulfilled. Therefore, preventing penalty risk requires not only actual employment but also accurate and complete record-keeping. The riskiest situation in practice is where the employer does not realize that it falls within the scope of the obligation to employ former convicts. Incorrect employee count calculations or erroneous assumptions that workplaces should be assessed separately may cause the employer to believe that it is outside the scope of the obligation. In such cases, the violation may continue for a long period, making substantial retroactive administrative fines almost unavoidable after inspection. Moreover, these fines may not always be limited to breach of the primary obligation; additional administrative sanctions and delay-related consequences may also become part of the process.
Common Mistakes and Risk Areas in Practice
The greatest risk regarding the obligation to employ former convicts is that employers may not realize they have misunderstood the obligation. In practice, mistakes usually do not appear as obvious violations; rather, they arise from the employer’s belief that the obligation has been properly fulfilled. In particular, incorrect calculation of the number of employees may cause the employer to misjudge whether it falls within the scope of the obligation. This may result in unnoticed violations accumulating over time and serious financial consequences emerging during inspections.
One of the most common mistakes is the incorrect assessment of part-time employees and personnel with specific statuses. Employers often rely only on the total number appearing on payroll records, without applying the technical calculation method required by the legislation. However, this detail directly affects whether the obligation arises. Therefore, instead of making a simple headcount, employees must be classified according to their legal status. Otherwise, an employer may believe it is not subject to the obligation while in fact being in breach.
Another significant risk area is the erroneous assumption that workplaces should be assessed separately. In businesses with multiple workplaces, it is common to think that each workplace should be considered independently. However, in certain cases, the total number of employees is taken as the basis, which may result in a higher quota than the employer expects. This incorrect approach is frequently seen in group company structures or businesses operating in different cities.
Notification and record-keeping procedures are another important risk area. It is not sufficient for the employer to fulfill the obligation in practice; this must also be properly reported to the relevant authorities and documented. Incomplete or incorrect notifications may result in administrative sanctions even where the employer has actually fulfilled the obligation. In inspection processes, document deficiencies may be interpreted against the employer.
Although it may be assumed that the obligation to employ former convicts ends when the number of employees falls below 50, the legal consequences are not always that simple. Changes in employee numbers may trigger not only administrative obligations but also employment law risks related to termination of employment relationships. Incorrect terminations during such transition periods may later become the subject of employee claims in Turkey; misinterpreted processes may be confused with termination during the probationary period; or the grounds relied upon by the employer may not qualify as just cause for termination. Therefore, the termination of the obligation, just like its emergence, must be carefully managed. Otherwise, the employer may avoid an administrative sanction but face employment law disputes.
Finally, treating the obligation as a static matter is another important mistake. Employee numbers and workplace structures may change over time, and these changes directly affect the obligation. Therefore, a one-time assessment is not sufficient; the process must be reviewed regularly. Otherwise, even initially correct planning may lose its validity over time, and the employer may fall into non-compliance without realizing it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Conclusion and Assessment
At first glance, the obligation to employ former convicts may appear to be merely a technical obligation to employ a certain number of personnel. In practice, however, it creates a much broader legal and financial risk area for employers. In particular, failure to calculate employee numbers correctly, determining the quota incompletely, or conducting notification procedures improperly may result in unnoticed violations of the obligation. These violations often do not become visible for a long time; however, during inspections, employers may face substantial retroactive administrative fines. Therefore, the process should not be viewed merely as a theoretical obligation, but as a risk area with direct financial consequences.
At this point, the process should not be handled only by asking how many people must be employed. It should be addressed together with an employment law attorney through a comprehensive compliance approach. Correctly determining the number of employees, regularly updating the quota, conducting recruitment processes in accordance with the legislation, and maintaining complete records are the fundamental elements of properly managing this obligation. Especially in growing businesses or structures with multiple workplaces, this process must be monitored dynamically rather than statically. On the other hand, evaluating the obligation only from the perspective of penalty risk would be incomplete; when properly managed, it may also allow employers to benefit from incentives and establish a more balanced workforce planning structure. However, these advantages can only be achieved if the technical details of the legislation are correctly understood and the process is structured soundly from a legal perspective from the outset with the help of an employment lawyer in Turkey.
For your inquiries or legal assistance regarding this matter you may contact us at info@paldimoglu.av.tr.
