Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

HUNGARY

HUNGARY Collective agreement - oral agreement with trade union inconsistent with provisions of written agreement HEADNOTES Facts The plaintiff had been employed by the defendant as from September 25, 1975, and according to the modification of his labour contract dated June 21, 1996 his position of maintenance manager was changed to subordinate engi- neer. The parties then agreed that his earnings of HUF 175,000 would remain unchanged in spite of his lower position. It can be established from the facts that on January 23, 1997 the employer and the relevant trade union agreed on a general pay rise of nine per cent. with respect to the basic wages to a minimum extent of HUF 7,230 covering all employees. During the wage bargaining the trade union and the employer made an oral agreement according to which the previously relieved leaders would not benefit from the pay rise of January, 1997 on account of their orig- inal manager's earnings being left unchanged. An agreement was made con- cerning this at the time of "relieving" the managers in question - including the plaintiff - of which the employees concerned were notified only later. The plaintiff initiated a legal labour dispute claiming that http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Labour Law Reports Online Brill

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/hungary-gM4AojkCTU

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
eISSN
2211-6028
DOI
10.1163/221160200X00303
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Collective agreement - oral agreement with trade union inconsistent with provisions of written agreement HEADNOTES Facts The plaintiff had been employed by the defendant as from September 25, 1975, and according to the modification of his labour contract dated June 21, 1996 his position of maintenance manager was changed to subordinate engi- neer. The parties then agreed that his earnings of HUF 175,000 would remain unchanged in spite of his lower position. It can be established from the facts that on January 23, 1997 the employer and the relevant trade union agreed on a general pay rise of nine per cent. with respect to the basic wages to a minimum extent of HUF 7,230 covering all employees. During the wage bargaining the trade union and the employer made an oral agreement according to which the previously relieved leaders would not benefit from the pay rise of January, 1997 on account of their orig- inal manager's earnings being left unchanged. An agreement was made con- cerning this at the time of "relieving" the managers in question - including the plaintiff - of which the employees concerned were notified only later. The plaintiff initiated a legal labour dispute claiming that

Journal

International Labour Law Reports OnlineBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1999

There are no references for this article.