Search result: 4 articles

x
The search results will be filtered on:
Journal European Employment Law Cases x Year 2019 x
Rulings

ECJ 8 May 2019, case C-24/17, (Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund), Age Discrimination

Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund, Gewerkschaft Öffentlicher Dienst – v – Republik Österreich, Austrian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Keywords Age Discrimination
Abstract

    A new system of remuneration and advancement according to which the initial grading of the contractual public servants is calculated according to their last remuneration paid under the previous system of remuneration and advancement, which was based on discrimination on grounds of the age of the contractual public servants, is inconsistent with Articles 1, 2 and 6 of Directive 2000/78, read in combination with Article 21 of the Charter and inconsistent with Article 45(2) TFEU.

Rulings

ECJ 8 May 2019, case C-396/17, (Leitner), Age Discrimination

Martin Leitner – v – Landespolizeidirektion Tirol, Austrian case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2019
Keywords Age Discrimination
Abstract

    A new system of remuneration and advancement according to which the initial grading of the contractual public servants is calculated according to their last remuneration paid under the previous system of remuneration and advancement, that was based on discrimination on grounds of the age of the contractual public servants, is inconsistent with Articles 1, 2 and 6 of Directive 2000/78, read in combination with Article 21 of the Charter.
    National legislation which obstructs the effective judicial protection by reducing the scope of the review which national courts are entitled to conduct, by excluding questions concerning the basis of the transition amount, calculated according to the rules of the previous discriminatory remuneration and advancement system, is inconsistent with Article 47 of the Charter and Article 9 of Directive 2000/78.

Case Reports

2019/10 Employee’s right of choice between transferor and transferee in the event of a business transfer (NO)

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2019
Keywords Transfer of undertakings, Employees who transfer/refuse to transfer
Authors Bernard Johann Mulder
AbstractAuthor's information

    As a result of a transfer of an undertaking an employee lost her pension scheme rights. The transferor was bound by the pension scheme covering the employee which had been agreed upon in a collective agreement. However, the transferee company gave notification that it did not want to be bound by the collective agreement and, thus, the pension scheme. The Norwegian Supreme Court (Høyesterett) considered this loss a material negative change to the employment relationship. Therefore, the employee had the right to make use of the non-statutory exception rule of the right to insist upon continuation of the employment with the transferor, a non-statutory right of choice.


Bernard Johann Mulder
Bernard Johann Mulder is a professor at University of Oslo, Faculty of Law, Department of Private Law.

    On 8 November 2018 the Italian Constitutional Court prohibited the reform of the protection against unfair dismissal introduced by the so-called Jobs Act (Legislative Decree no. 23 of 4 March 2015), insofar as it imposed a requirement on the judge to quantify the compensation due for unfair dismissal based on an employee’s seniority only. According to the Court, such a requirement violated not just internal constitutional norms, but also Article 24 of the (Revised) European Social Charter of 1996. This contribution focuses particularly on the EU law questions deriving from such an important judgment.


Andrea Pilati
Andrea Pilati is an Associate Professor of Labour Law at the University of Verona, Italy.
Showing all 4 results
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.