Category Archive: Discrimination

Size (doesn’t) matter – Minimum size for police officers discriminates women

The ECJ ruled in a judgment on 18 October that a uniform minimum size as a requirement for men and women to get a job is inadmissible (docket number C-409/16). A Greek court had asked the ECJ whether “a height (in the case of men and women) of at least 1.70m”, is compatible with Directive …

Continue reading »

Age 60 as a legitimate reason to terminate a service relationship with a managing director

The attainment of age 60 can be agreed as an age limit in a service agreement allowing for the termination of the contract. This was decided by the Hamm Higher Regional Court in a judgment dated 19 June 2017, docket number 8 U 18/17. Such an age limit does not violate the General Equal Treatment …

Continue reading »

Discriminatory job advertisement – No claim for damages if applicant was not “seriously” applying for the job

If an applicant applies for a job solely to bring a claim then he will have no claim for damages, even if the job advertisement violates the General Act on Equal Treatment (judgement of the Munich labour court dated 24 November 2016, docket number 173 C 8860/16). A company advertised a voluntary job at a …

Continue reading »

New to age limits: What is allowed, what is not allowed?

Age limits remain a permanent issue in employment law in Europe. They come into play in different ways: On the one hand, as a maximum age limit for the commencement of a particular career;  on the other hand – even more relevant – as an age limit at which the employment relationship automatically terminates. A …

Continue reading »

Change of jurisdiction of the Federal Labour Court of Germany: Consequence of unauthorized instructions

Of central importance in German labour law is the right of the employer to issue instructions to employees with regard to the content, location and time of the work (sec 106 of the German Trade Regulation Act “Gewerbeordnung”). If admissible instructions are given, the employee is obliged to follow them. If he does not follow …

Continue reading »

New Act on Remuneration Transparency

Following up our blog post from December 19, 2016 where we reported about a legislative proposal to promote equal pay between women and men, the Remuneration Transparency Act has now entered into force. Arguing that women still earn 7 % less than men even if statistics account for women frequently working part-time, less often climbing …

Continue reading »

Age discrimination within the recruitment process and the burden of proof of justification

By judgment of 15 December 2016  (BAG, docket number 8 AZR 454/15), the Federal Labour Court has ruled that the employer bears the burden of proof for justification within the meaning of sec. 3 para 2 half sentence 2 of the General Equal Treatment Act (Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz, AGG) . In the present case, the plaintiff …

Continue reading »

Employer May Ban Employees From Wearing Headscarves

In a recent ruling made on March 14, 2017, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decided (docket nos. C-157/15, C-188/15) that employers may prohibit staff from wearing Islamic headscarves under certain circumstances. The ECJ held that such prohibitions do not constitute “direct discrimination”; instead, limits on visible religious wear shall be considered permitted under EU …

Continue reading »

Reverse discrimination – permissible privileged treatment of working experience with the same employer

Being one of the four fundamental freedoms of the European Union’s internal market, the free movement of persons as defined by Art. 45 TFEU (AEUV) grants all citizens of the member states the right to work cross-border as well as protecting them from any discrimination compared to domestic workers. If a national provision is incompatible …

Continue reading »

Increase of Working also for Disabled Employees!?

On 26 January 2017, the Federal State Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) ruled that a disabled part-time employee may not claim damages for discrimination where his employer did not offer him an increase in weekly working hours, unlike his colleagues (docket number: 8 AZR 736/15). In the case at hand, the employer, a courier service provider, employed …

Continue reading »

Older posts «