The supreme court decided to settle the costs of the spectacles to the magistrates. The decision, taken after the spokeswoman of the CSM sued the court and won

The High Court of Cassation and Justice will reimburse employees for glasses, based on a December 2022 ruling by the EU Court of Justice requiring employers to provide glasses to employees who work in front of a monitor. The supreme court brings, among its arguments, the prevention of “a litigious phenomenon and the extinguishment of the disputes pending before the courts with this object”. This, after, recently, the spokeswoman of the Superior Council of the Magistracy, Daniela Stăncioi, sued the state to settle the bribes and won the case.

The president of the ICCJ, Corina Corbu, decided, through an order, that the employees of the supreme court should be settled for the value of the glasses.

How much will the magistrates be billed for the eyeglasses

What the order provides:

• “The staff of the High Court of Cassation and Justice whose activity involves the use of equipment with a monitor benefit, on the recommendation of the ophthalmologist and on the basis of the prescription issued by him, of devices necessary for visual correction.
• The settlement in the case of changing the lenses required for visual correction is made when the initial diagnosis is changed.
• If the diagnosis remains unchanged, the settlement of the change of eyeglasses is made once every 2 years, and of the contact lenses expressly recommended by the ophthalmologist through the prescription issued, in full or successively, for the 2-year interval.
• The maximum amount that is borne from the budget of the High Court of Cassation and Justice for the devices required for visual correction includes the value added tax and is calculated as follows:
• a) maximum ceiling of 2,500 lei, for lenses related to devices required for visual correction;
• b) maximum ceiling of 500 lei, for eyeglass frames;
• c) labor cost;
• d) the cost of the medical examination, as the case may be.
• In the situation where the invoice value is lower than the stipulated ceiling, the invoice value is settled, and in the situation where the invoice value is higher than the stipulated ceiling, its value is settled.
• In all cases, the settlement of the devices necessary for visual correction refers to the specifications and characteristics of the product, as it is described in the prescription issued by the ophthalmologist.
• The department of prevention and protection in the field of safety and health at work keeps records of employees who benefit from the settlement of special correction devices in order to comply with the conditions and deadlines for their replacement.
• This order is communicated to the Prevention and Protection Department in the field of safety and health at work and the Economic-Financial and Administrative Department and is brought to the attention of the staff of the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
• It is recommended that the secondary credit orderers draw up operational procedures for the settlement of the counter value of the special correction devices that are also applicable to the thesis credit orderers.
• The settlement of the expenses determined by the purchase of special correction devices is done within the prescribed ceilings.
• The economic-financial and administrative department of the High Court of Cassation and Justice will draw up and communicate to the secondary credit orderers a procedure for allocating the amounts intended for the settlement of special correction devices”.

The supreme court shows that, among other things, it took this decision “in order to prevent a litigious phenomenon related to the settlement of special correction devices, as well as to extinguish the disputes pending before the courts with this object”.

The CSM spokeswoman sued the state to settle her glasses and won. What a fortune he has

Official sources say that there have been discussions in this regard with the presidents of the appeal courts, as several magistrates have sued the courts, demanding the settlement of the spectacles.

The spokeswoman of the CSM, Daniela Stăncioi, is one of the magistrates who sued the court and won, based on the CJEU decision by which employers are obliged to provide eye glasses to employees who work in front of a monitor. The judge, seconded from the Bucharest Court of Appeal to the CSM, asked the court to settle the costs for the eyeglasses, and in March she won the case, the decision being handed down by the Argeș Court. The decision by which the judge obtained the settlement of the amount of 2,331 lei for the eyeglasses is not final, but it is enforceable.

In fiscal year 2022, the spokeswoman of the CSM obtained a salary income of about 224,000 lei, a little under 19,000 lei per month on average, defapt.ro wrote. According to the wealth declaration, he is paid per diem and transport: over 36,000 lei per year, in 2022.

The judge mentioned 11,000 euros worth of jewelry and over 315,000 lei in accounts in the asset declaration. Since 2019, she drives an Audi A5.

What the Court of Justice of the European Union decided

In December 2022, a lawyer from Cluj managed to obtain a favorable decision at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), by which employers are obliged to provide eye glasses to employees who work in front of a monitor.

The CJEU ruled that the glasses for those who work at a monitor must be provided by the employer or he reimburses the related expenses, the payment of a general salary increase to the employee is not sufficient.

The announcement regarding this decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was then made by the association VeDem Just, which stated that Article 9 of Directive 90/270/EEC aims to protect the eyes and vision of workers, in particular the right them to receive special correction devices, specific to the work in question, if the result of the test provided for in paragraph (1) of this article 9 or that of the examination provided for in paragraph (2) of said article 9 make the respective devices necessary. As a result, the Court decided:

• “Corrective devices” means not only glasses, but also other types of devices capable of correcting or preventing visual difficulties;
• The visual difficulties leading to an employee’s right to a special corrective device need not necessarily have been caused by working at the monitor;
• Glasses must not be used exclusively at work or in the exercise of professional tasks;
• National law may provide that the worker may choose either to obtain a special corrective device directly from his employer or to bear the cost and then obtain reimbursement from the employer;
• A general increase in wages, paid permanently for hard working conditions, does not cover the expenses incurred by the worker concerned for such a purchase”.

In Romania, occupational health and safety regulations are provided for in Law no. 319/2006 and HG no. 1028/2006, reminds VeDem Just. According to art. 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, directives are binding on each recipient Member State with regard to the result to be achieved, leaving competence as to form and means to national authorities.

The CJEU decision regarding the settlement of the cost of the glasses, obtained by a lawyer from Cluj

The decision was obtained by the lawyer Julia Kis from Cluj, after a former policeman from Cluj who worked at the General Inspectorate of Immigration sued the institution for allegedly refusing to pay him the sum of 2,629 lei, the value of the eyeglasses . The ex-policeman says that his eyesight has been seriously affected during the ten years of working in front of the computer.

A Government Decision from 2006, which transposed after 16 years a European Directive on the health of employers, shows that employees must benefit from an eye exam if they are sitting at the monitor, and, if necessary, “workers must special correction devices shall be provided’.

The policeman says that in his case the employer refused to enforce the law on the grounds that those special corrective devices would not include eyeglasses. His lawyer referred the Court of Justice of the European Union for clarification, according to Euronews.ro.

“Practically, this interpretation decision brings a first aspect as a novelty: it clarified what special vision correction devices mean, that is, including eyeglasses. We asked about eyeglasses, if they fall into this category, but I don’t see why contact lenses wouldn’t also fall into it,” says the lawyer, quoted by Euronews.

In other words, the CJEU established that employers have the obligation to provide eyeglasses to employees who prove that they need these devices, and also that the glasses paid for by the company can be used outside the professional framework. The judges of the European Court also clarify the way in which employers can provide employees with eyeglasses, if they need them: either they provide them directly, or they offer them the value of the devices, in no case by paying a salary increase.

Based on this decision, employers who do not provide eyeglasses can be sued.