Hybrid Work in Türkiye: Contractual Certainty and Business Law Implications

Hybrid working is not new to Türkiye. Remote and hybrid arrangements became established business practices during and after the pandemic, while Turkish employment legislation already provided a legal framework for remote work. What has changed is the legal treatment of the hybrid model itself.

An amendment to the Remote Working Regulation published on 25 September 2026 expressly provides that employees may work partly at the workplace and partly remotely, with the relevant workplace days, remote-working days and working hours specified in the employment contract.

The amendment is therefore significant not because it introduces hybrid work, but because it brings an established working model more clearly within the contractual architecture of the employment relationship. For businesses, this provides greater legal certainty while raising practical questions around contractual flexibility, management authority and the treatment of existing hybrid arrangements.

From Remote Work to an Express Hybrid Framework

Article 14 of Labour Law No. 4857 and the Remote Working Regulation adopted in 2021 already established the principal legal framework for remote work. That framework was sufficiently broad to accommodate arrangements under which employees performed only part of their work remotely. The September 2026 amendment goes further by expressly addressing the hybrid model: work divided between the workplace and a remote location.

The distinction is important. The allocation of workplace and remote-working days, together with the applicable working hours, now forms part of the express contractual framework governing the employment relationship. For employers already operating hybrid models, the immediate issue is therefore one of legal alignment. Employment contracts, addenda, internal policies and actual working practices should be reviewed to ensure that they reflect the arrangements applied in practice.

The principal advantage of the amendment is greater contractual certainty. Employers and employees now have a clearer statutory basis for documenting an employment relationship that combines workplace and remote work. This may be particularly relevant for international employers whose group-wide employment models already incorporate formal hybrid arrangements.

The corresponding consequence is that hybrid working becomes more difficult to administer solely through internal policies, managerial decisions or established practice. Internal policies may continue to regulate operational matters, but they should operate consistently with the contractual terms required under the amended Regulation. Employment contracts, applicable policies and actual working arrangements should therefore form a coherent legal framework.

From a business-law perspective, the amendment places greater emphasis on contract management and consistency between documentation and practice.

Contractual Certainty and Employer Flexibility

A more difficult question arises when the business subsequently needs to change an agreed hybrid arrangement. An employee may, for example, be contracted to work three days at the workplace and two days remotely. Business requirements may later justify a different allocation. Temporary workplace attendance may also be required for meetings, projects, training or other operational reasons.

The amendment does not expressly determine when such adjustments remain within the employer’s ordinary management authority and when they amount to a change in contractual working conditions. An exceptional requirement to attend the workplace for a particular meeting is materially different from permanently changing an employee from two workplace days to five. Between those examples, however, the position may depend on the contractual wording, the nature and duration of the change and its practical effect on the employee.

Hybrid clauses should therefore be drafted with both legal certainty and operational flexibility in mind. They must be sufficiently clear to satisfy the Regulation without creating unnecessary contractual rigidity around legitimate business requirements.

The Turkish Code of Obligations and the Limits of Management Authority

The Turkish Code of Obligations (“TBK”) provides part of the general contractual framework for these questions, subject to the specific and mandatory provisions of Turkish employment law. Under Article 399 of the TBK, employers may issue general rules and specific instructions concerning the performance of work and workplace conduct, within the limits of good faith. That authority remains relevant in a hybrid environment, but it does not necessarily permit an employer to alter a working arrangement expressly incorporated into the employment contract. The distinction is important: management authority governs the performance of the employment relationship, but does not automatically extend to the unilateral amendment of agreed contractual terms.

The TBK provisions on contractual interpretation and standard terms may also become relevant where employers seek to preserve discretion over hybrid schedules. Broad clauses allowing workplace days, remote-working days or working hours to be changed entirely at the employer’s discretion may require particular care, particularly where they form part of standard employment documentation.

This does not mean that contractual flexibility mechanisms are necessarily ineffective. Their legal effect will depend on their wording, scope and interaction with mandatory employment-law protections. A carefully defined mechanism addressing specified operational circumstances is materially different from an unrestricted reservation of unilateral discretion.

Where a proposed adjustment amounts to a material change in working conditions, Article 22 of the Labour Law remains particularly relevant, including its requirements concerning written notification and employee acceptance. The practical question is therefore where ordinary management of a hybrid arrangement ends and contractual modification begins. The amended Regulation does not fully resolve that boundary, making careful drafting particularly important.

Connection with Qualified Service Centres and Relevance for International Employers

The amendment also coincides with the introduction of Türkiye’s Qualified Service Centre (Nitelikli Hizmet Merkezi) regime in 2026.

The Qualified Service Centre regime applies to Türkiye-based companies providing specified services to related businesses operating internationally and offers separate corporate and tax advantages, subject to statutory conditions. The hybrid-work amendment, by contrast, concerns the contractual organisation of the employment relationship. The connection is therefore limited.

Where a Qualified Service Centre chooses to organise some of its personnel on a hybrid basis, the amended Remote Working Regulation forms part of the employment-law framework through which that arrangement must be implemented. Hybrid working provides greater contractual clarity for qualifying businesses that choose to organise their workforce through a combination of workplace and remote work.

For international employers operating in Türkiye, the amendment also reinforces the importance of localising global hybrid-work policies. A multinational group may adopt a regional or global policy allowing employees to work remotely for a specified number of days each week. Its Turkish implementation must nevertheless be consistent with local contractual requirements.

From Working Practice to Contractual Architecture

Other legal issues associated with remote work—including data protection, confidentiality, cybersecurity, occupational health and safety and employee monitoring—remain relevant. They are not, however, new consequences of the September 2026 amendment and should be distinguished from the specific contractual implications of the new hybrid-work provision.

Türkiye’s 2026 hybrid-work amendment is ultimately a development of formalisation rather than transformation. Hybrid working already existed, as did the broader legal obligations associated with remote work. What has changed is the express incorporation of the hybrid model into the contractual structure of the employment relationship. For businesses, the amendment provides greater legal certainty while placing greater importance on the relationship between contractual drafting, management authority and actual working practice.

The central business-law issue is therefore not whether hybrid work is permitted, but how businesses can document hybrid arrangements with sufficient certainty while preserving legitimate operational flexibility within the limits of Turkish contract and employment law.

A well-structured hybrid framework should achieve that balance: clear contractual terms, appropriately defined management discretion and consistent implementation in practice. flexibility within the limits of Turkish contract and employment law.