What is temporary and what is permanent

The temporary transfer of a higher quality job in the public service

The employees in the public service are assigned to certain pay groups based on the activity they perform, according to which the amount of their remuneration is based. The assignment of activities to pay groups is known as grouping. Now it can happen that a public employer assigns a different job to an employee, which is to be assigned to a higher salary group than the previous job. Such a transfer of a higher-quality job basically has the consequence that the employee is then also to be classified higher and he is entitled to payment according to the higher pay group.

Because of this higher remuneration claim, an employee usually has an interest in ensuring that the higher-value work is not withdrawn from him, but that he keeps it for as long as possible or even permanently. Often, however, the higher-value job is not transferred permanently by the employer, but only temporarily. In these cases, the question arises for employees who want to carry out the higher-value job for longer or permanently whether the time limit on the transfer of the higher-level activity is permissible is. Since, according to the collective bargaining agreements of the public service, the permanent transfer of a higher-quality job should be the rule and the only temporary transfer the exception, the only temporary transfer of a higher-quality job is only permitted under certain conditions.

When is the only temporary transfer of a higher-quality job permissible?

The only temporary transfer of a higher-level activity is permitted just then, if it corresponds to “fair discretion”. If the time limit on the transfer does not correspond to “reasonable discretion” it is practically ineffective. In such a case, the labor court has to decide on the duration of the transfer. As a rule, the labor court then decides that the transfer of the higher-quality work is unlimited in time. In this case, the employee is permanently entitled to payment according to the higher salary group.

When answering the question of whether the only temporary transfer of a higher-quality activity corresponds to “reasonable discretion”, the labor courts have to examine, taking into account all the circumstances of the individual case, whether the employer's interest a temporary transfer only or the interest of the employee in maintaining the higher-quality work and higher remuneration predominates.

The basic requirement for the effectiveness of the only temporary transfer of a higher-level activity is that a factual reason there is a need to transfer the higher-level activity not permanently, but only for a limited time. Such a factual reason exists if the employer can assert on the basis of what he had at the time of the transfer forecast become one permanent employment of the employee with the transferred higher-level work not possible be. The employer must be able to base this forecast on concrete facts. Unsatisfactory is that at the time of the transfer of the higher-level activity onlyuncertain is whether the employee can be employed with this activity on a permanent basis. Only the possible Uncertainty about the length of the employment opportunity with the higher-level activity transferred is not enoughin order to only temporarily transfer the higher-level activity. Rather, it must be established with sufficient certainty on the basis of concrete facts that the employee cannot be permanently employed in the higher-value activities. If this is not certain, the higher-level activity must be transferred permanently.

Transfers the employer an employee multiple a higher-value job in a row only temporarily, the demands on the objective reason increasewhich is intended to justify the temporary transfer.

If employers and employees argue in court about the question of whether the only temporary transfer was effective, the employer bears the burden of presentation and proof ensuring that the time limit on the transfer of the higher-value activity corresponded to “reasonable discretion”. The employer must therefore explain and prove the reasons why the transfer of the activity was only temporary and not permanent. If he does not succeed in this, the labor court assumes that the time limit is ineffective.