Fines for tardiness and social media during working hours: how legal is it in Kazakhstan

Tengrinews.kz — Fines for tardiness, phone use during work hours, or inventory shortages—these are situations some employees in Kazakhstan are facing. Tengrinews consulted the State Labor Inspection Committee to find out when an employer can legally withhold money from a salary and when such penalties are unlawful.
"Tardiness, Phones, and Shortages": Why Kazakhstanis Are Being Fined
Social media users have shared stories of employers fining them for being late, using phones, their physical appearance, mistakes, and shortages. Some also complained about unauthorized salary deductions.
For instance, one user reported that within the first few hours of her internship, she learned about numerous fines established at her new workplace.

"I lasted only three hours before leaving. The conditions were very strange: a fine for tardiness, a three-month internship, a fine if you don't smile at customers, stand incorrectly, or are dressed wrong—even if you look at your phone for a second or fail to offer customers coffee and ice cream," she noted.

Another user mentioned that her office introduced fines for using social media during work hours. According to her, the employer hired a dedicated staff member to monitor this.

"Since May, our office introduced fines for browsing social media during work hours. At first, we thought it was a joke—how would they track it? But when payday came today, 35,000 tenge was withheld from my salary alone. It turns out the boss hired a remote worker to monitor our social media, WhatsApp, and Telegram, recording whenever we were online. Now I don't know what to do: quit or endure it and never log in," the poster shared.

Several other users reported salary deductions due to inventory shortages in the food service industry.
Screenshots: Threads
Clarification from the Labor Committee
We reached out to the State Labor Inspection Committee for clarification. The department emphasized that a monetary fine cannot be applied to an employee as a disciplinary measure.

"An employer is not entitled to establish such fines for tardiness, violation of internal rules, work errors, or other disciplinary offenses as a measure of disciplinary responsibility," the committee noted.

Labor legislation provides for specific types of disciplinary actions:

a remark;
a reprimand;
a severe reprimand;
termination of the employment contract at the employer's initiative in cases provided for by law.

As the committee pointed out, terms in employment contracts and employer regulations that worsen an employee's position compared to labor laws are considered invalid and cannot be applied.

"Thus, the inclusion of provisions in employer regulations (e.g., job descriptions, internal labor rules, etc.) regarding the imposition of monetary fines on employees for disciplinary offenses is unlawful," the committee stressed.

When Money Can Legally Be Withheld from a Salary
However, salary withholding and a fine are not the same thing. In certain cases, an employer can indeed withhold part of a salary, but only if there are grounds provided for by law.
According to Article 115 of the Labor Code, deductions are possible:

to return unspent travel expenses;
to reimburse training costs if a corresponding agreement exists;
to return an unearned advance payment;
when an employee is transferred or recalled from paid leave in cases provided for by law;
in other cases—with the written consent of the employee.

"At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between a monetary fine and the material liability of an employee for damage caused to the employer. These are different legal mechanisms," the committee clarified.
As an example, we asked the labor inspectorate about situations where customers refuse their orders and waiters are required to cover the costs.
The inspectorate responded that, by law, an employee must only compensate for proven direct damage.

"The mere fact of an incorrectly placed order or a customer's refusal of a dish is not an unconditional basis for the automatic recovery of its cost from the employee. According to Articles 120 and 123 of the Code, the material liability of an employee arises only in the presence of their guilty unlawful behavior and a causal link between their actions and the damage caused to the employer," the committee stated.

However, if an employee is forced to pay for shortages in the kitchen or bar, the cause of the loss must be taken into account. If the shortage is attributed to normal operational risks, liability cannot be automatically assigned to the employee.

"An employee is required to compensate for direct actual damage caused to the employer. At the same time, an employee cannot be held liable for damage resulting from normal production and business risks," the committee noted.

The committee emphasized that in each case, it is necessary to determine whether damage was actually caused, what actions or omissions by the employee led to it, whether there was fault, and if a causal link exists.

"Employers are not entitled to arbitrarily set fixed 'fines' or automatically deduct the cost of an order from an employee's wages based solely on internal organizational practice. The procedure for wage deductions must comply with the requirements of Article 115 of the Code. In the absence of a legal basis or written consent from the employee, any dispute regarding compensation for damage shall be resolved in accordance with the procedure established by law," the agency reported.

Where to turn if labor rights are violated
The Labor Inspectorate stated that individuals may contact their local department of the Committee of the State Labor Inspectorate. Complaints can also be filed online via the e-Otinish system or the eGov Mobile app.
The committee advises providing detailed information, including:

the employer's name and address;
the period of employment;
a detailed account of what happened;
the amount of any debt or deductions, if applicable;
copies of the employment contract, pay slips, bank statements, and correspondence;
any other supporting documents.

However, not all labor disputes are handled by the Labor Inspectorate. In cases provided by law, an individual labor dispute must first be reviewed by a conciliation commission, and if the parties fail to reach an agreement, it proceeds to court. Certain categories of workers are entitled to take their cases directly to court.