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

Learn More →

Austria

Austria Supreme Court 19 December 2012 8 Ob A 46/12s Promulgation and normative effect of the collective agreement HEADNOTES Facts The facts of the case must be assumed as follows (because there are only a few hints on the facts in the Court's judgment itself). The plaintiff, a blue collar worker, was lawfully dismissed, and claimed the aliquot amount of special payments for the time of the year that he or she had already worked. The employer denied the request, and submitted that it was not in compliance with the collective bargaining agreement. Yet, at the time of the dismissal, the regulation which the employer referred to had not been part of the collective bargaining agreement. Decision The complainant worker requests aliquot parts of the special payment. The defendant employer responds that according to the collective bargaining agreement ­ per analogiam ­ such an entitlement to aliquot parts of the payment would expire in cases of lawful dismissal. The Court of Appeal found for the complainant worker, and granted the entitlement. The defendant employer appealed. The Supreme Court rejected the extraordinary appeal according to § 508a para 2 Zivilprozessordnung due to lack of requirements in the sense of § http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Labour Law Reports Online Brill

Austria

Download PDF
6 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/austria-w1Z2B8HZ40

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 2015 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0168-6526
eISSN
2211-6028
DOI
10.1163/22116028-90000070
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Supreme Court 19 December 2012 8 Ob A 46/12s Promulgation and normative effect of the collective agreement HEADNOTES Facts The facts of the case must be assumed as follows (because there are only a few hints on the facts in the Court's judgment itself). The plaintiff, a blue collar worker, was lawfully dismissed, and claimed the aliquot amount of special payments for the time of the year that he or she had already worked. The employer denied the request, and submitted that it was not in compliance with the collective bargaining agreement. Yet, at the time of the dismissal, the regulation which the employer referred to had not been part of the collective bargaining agreement. Decision The complainant worker requests aliquot parts of the special payment. The defendant employer responds that according to the collective bargaining agreement ­ per analogiam ­ such an entitlement to aliquot parts of the payment would expire in cases of lawful dismissal. The Court of Appeal found for the complainant worker, and granted the entitlement. The defendant employer appealed. The Supreme Court rejected the extraordinary appeal according to § 508a para 2 Zivilprozessordnung due to lack of requirements in the sense of §

Journal

International Labour Law Reports Online – Brill

Published: Nov 25, 2015

There are no references for this article.