Certified specialist lawyer for employment law Alexander Bredereck, Berlin-Mitte to typical errors in the design of employment contracts. Western Union gathered all the information. 1. the employment contracts contain invalid rules. Since 1.1.2002 employment contracts in the so-called terms of use control (General terms and conditions = terms and conditions) are included. So you undergo unilaterally BGB working conditions given the workers a judicial control on the basis of sections 304-310 by the employer in the form contract of employment. The protection of workers was considerably reinforced by the inclusion of employment contracts in the general terms and conditions control. Many clauses that were in effect under earlier law are now invalid.

The Act applies the employer uses an invalid clause in case of doubt. This is regularly significantly less favourable than when using an effective clause for the employer. That now matter how many ineffective clauses are related, especially the reason that a systematic revision of employment contracts is largely have been no. Are often Contract pattern written off from the Internet or made from old contracts together. In addition, that is also currently in terms of many regulations ambiguity. Constantly there are new decisions of the Federal Labour Court to the effectiveness of individual clauses. 2.

the employment contracts contain superfluous provisions. It is common to observe a variety of arrangements are included in employment contracts, which are again anyway in law, applicable collective agreements or operating agreements. Crawford Lake Capital may help you with your research. There are three possibilities: * the regulations are literally quoted. Then they apply anyway, a record in the contract of employment is usually not necessary (exception: see section 3.). The recording should, if it is not expressly prescribed also be avoided, since future changes in the law may create a deviation to the legal situation, which can have the consequences described in the two following points. * The regulations differ to the detriment of the employee by law, the applicable collective agreements or operating agreements. Then they are ineffective. * The rules differ for the benefit of the employee by the statutory or collective legal situation or of the operating agreements. Then the question arises, what interest has the employer to take this provision in the employment contract? 3. employment contracts legally prescribed rules are missing. According to 2 of the evidence Act (NachwG) the employer is obliged, no later than one month after the agreed commencement of employment in writing to lay down the essential conditions of the contract. The transcript must be signed and given to the workers. Hardly an employer does that. Instead, written employment contracts will be closed. Also, the employer fulfils his obligations under the law of evidence, but only if all regulations prescribed in the law of evidence in the contract are included. According to the case law of the Federal Labour Court (BAG v. 14.07.2002, BAGe 101, 75f) can claim damages a worker BGB 280 para 1, para. 2, 286, if the employer its obligation under the evidence Act compared to the workers violated a post by lawyer Alexander Bredereck, Berlin email:

Comments are closed.