The investigation conducted about certain undertakings to determine whether they violated article 4 of the Act no 4054 by means of gentlemen’s agreements for not hiring each other’s employees has been concluded.

The investigation examined whether parties to the investigation made no poaching agreements to prevent hiring each other’s employees or limit the mobility of employees. Such agreements are based on employers’ mutual withdrawal to compete for labor, which is one of the most important inputs.

No poaching agreements may limit the mobility of labor factor among undertakings. Also, they may artificially cause that wages, the return to labor, cannot receive their real value. As a result, there are inefficiencies in the distribution of employees and the competitive structure of labor markets may be distorted.

Within the framework of the abovementioned points, the investigation has been terminated with settlement in terms of 11 undertakings, and it has been decided that the following parties to the investigation

1. Arvato Lojistik Dış Ticaret ve E-Ticaret Hizmetleri AŞ,
2. Bilge Adam Yazılım ve Teknoloji Anonim Şirketi,
3. Binovist Bilişim Danışmanlık AŞ,
4. Çiçeksepeti İnternet Hizmetleri AŞ,
5. D-Market Elektronik Hizmetler ve Ticaret AŞ,
6. Flo Mağazacılık ve Pazarlama AŞ,
7. Koçsistem Bilgi ve İletişim Hizmetleri AŞ,
8. LC Waikiki Mağazacılık Hizmetleri Ticaret AŞ,
9. Sosyo Plus Bilgi Bilişim Teknolojileri Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Ticaret AŞ,
10. TAB Gıda Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ,
11. Türk Telekomünikasyon AŞ,
12. Veripark Yazılım AŞ,
13. Vivense Teknoloji Hizmetleri ve Ticaret AŞ,
14. Vodafone Telekomünikasyon AŞ,
15. Zeplin Yazılım Sistemleri ve Bilgi Teknolojileri AŞ,
16. Zomato İnternet Hizmetleri Ticaret AŞ

violated article 4 of the Act no 4054 by means of participating in anticompetitive no poaching agreements; therefore, they shall be imposed administrative fines;

1. 41 29 Medya İnternet Eğitimi ve Danışmanlık Reklam Sanayi Dış Ticaret AŞ
2. Anadolu Restoran İşletmeleri Ltd. Şti.
3. Doğuş Planet Elektronik Ticaret ve Bilişim Hizmetleri AŞ
4. Etiya Bilgi Teknolojileri Yazılım Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ
5. Google Reklamcılık ve Pazarlama Ltd. Şti.
6. Grupanya İnternet Hizmetleri İletişim Organizasyon Tanıtım ve Pazarlama AŞ
7. Havas Worldwide İstanbul İletişim Hizmetleri AŞ
8. İş Gıda AŞ
9. Logo Yazılım Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ
10. Meal Box Yemek ve Teknoloji AŞ
11. Migros Ticaret AŞ
12. Mobven Teknoloji AŞ
13. Mynet Medya Yayıncılık Uluslararası Elektronik Bilgilendirme ve Haberleşme Hizmetleri AŞ
14. Net Danışmanlık Eğitim ve Ticaret Ltd. Şti.
15. Noktacom Medya İnternet Hizmetleri San. ve Tic. AŞ
16. NTV Radyo ve Televizyon Yayıncılığı AŞ
17. Peak Oyun Yazılım ve Pazarlama AŞ
18. Pizza Restaurantları AŞ
19. Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Pazarlama ve Ticaret AŞ
20. Valensas Teknoloji Hizmetleri AŞ
21. Yeşil Vadi Tarım Gıda AŞ

 could not be found to have violated article 4 of the act no 4054 within the framework of the claims in the file; therefore, it is not necessary to impose administrative fines to those undertakings,

with the decision subject to review before Ankara Administrative Courts within 60 days as of the notification of the reasoned decision.

Click here for the text of the pronouncement of the decision dated 26.07.2023 and numbered 23-34/649-218, the reason for which will be notified later, being subject to appeal before Ankara Administrative Courts.