Austria
| Author | Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion (European Commission), European Centre of Expertise (ECE) |
| Pages | 1-3 |
Flash Re por t 1 2/2018
Decem ber 20 18
1
Austria
Sum ma ry
(I ) The Act on Civil Serv an ts has been amended to include the r ight to ‘part-tim e
reintegr ation ’.
(I I ) The A ust rian Sup rem e Co urt ha s issu ed a ru lin g on th e qu esti on o f d iffe ren t for ms
of continuation of paym ent f or part -t ime and full-t im e employ ees
wh ile perf or m ing
wo rks council activ ities.
____ ___ ________ ___ ________ ___ ________ ___ _____ ___ ___ _____ ___ ___ _____ __
1 Nation al Le gislat ion
1.1 ‘Part -tim e r ein tegr ation’ sch em e f or civil se rva nts
The governm ent pr op osal on t he am endm en t of t he legislat ion on civi l ser v an t s ( ‘2.
Dienst r ech ts-Novelle’ 201 8, BGBl I , 1 02/ 18 ; see a lso N ovem ber 20 18 Flash Repo rt) h as
been passed. The part-tim e reintegration schem e for civil ser v an ts entered in t o force
on 01 January 2019. The schem e aims to facilitat e and part ially fund t he r eintegration
of em ployees in their w ork place, who h av e suff er ed severe illness (see § 5 0f Act on
Appoin ted Civ il Serv ants – ‘Beamten-Dienstr echt sgesetz’) .
This l egisla tion neither transposes nor tou ches u pon Eur opean Union law.
2 Cou rt Rulings
2.1 Contin uatio n of pay me nt o f part-tim e em ployees f or w orks
cou ncil act ivitie s
Sup rem e Cour t, No. 9 ObA 72/ 18f , 30 Octob er 2 018
§ 116 Wo rks Cons tit ut ion Act (‘Arbeitsverfassungsgeset z’) p rov ides as fol low s ( un off icial
tr anslat ion by th e aut hor ):
“The m ember s of the wor ks council shall be gr ant ed the necessar y t ime off to
fulfil their dut ies, wit h con tinued pay ment of t heir rem uneration (…) . ”
An emp loy ee w ork ed p art -tim e (3 0 h ours per we ek) as a nu rsin g as sista nt and was able
to flexi bly alloca te h er wo rkin g hours. She w as also a m embe r of th e wo rks council and
claim ed 2 7 h ou rs of additional paym ent , arguing that she perform ed works council
act ivit ies dur ing her work ing hour s. Ot herw ise t his w ould const itute a d iscrim inat ion of
par t -t im e wor kers and indirect gender discr im ination pursuant to the decision of t he
The em ployer r ejected h er demand, p oint ing out t hat the wor ker w as able to allocate
her wo rkin g h our s fl exib ly a nd tha t sh e ob viou sly per for med her wo rks coun cil acti vit ies
outside her worki ng h ours.
The labour cou rt of first instance reject ed the employee’s claim , arguing that being a
work s council m ember is an un paid h on or ar y posit ion an d t hat th is j ust ifies
dif ferenti ated tr eatm ent bet ween full-t ime and part -tim e w orker s.
The cour t of ap peal decided in fav ou r of the employee, ar guing t hat the honor ar y
posit ion does not justify diff er en t iated t r eatment bet ween fu ll-tim e and par t-t ime
work ers. Wor ks council activit ies th at ar e carr ied out b y full-t ime em ploy ees during
work ing tim e m ust be paid to the same extent t o part -tim e workers as w ell. The cour t
refer red t he case back t o the labo ur court to establ ish w hether the tim es the par t-ti me
To continue reading
Request your trial