Since the law has everything for accuracy and but the mere application of law and constitute a reference to unlawful discrimination. Sounds silly, but is (in the legal profession, almost anything is possible). The the Federal Labour Court proved by the decision of 15 February 2011 - 9 AZR 584/09 .
A worker received after retirement from active service in a company Transitional allowance based on a collective agreement . This agreement stipulated that the allowance only up to the possible entry in new pension contribution is paid. Since the worker to § 237 SGB VI s early as 60 years could retire (with discounts), was your paid this allowance only for 1 year, while men of the same, the allowance up to 63 Age alone (these were only to then go on discounts in rent). This difference in treatment based on the fact that older workers are still different retirement age by which women were allowed to go with 60 men and 63 retired. Who
later will claim retirement benefits and longer pays into the pension receive more benefits later. Better put, he (or she) minimizes or eliminates deductions from the monthly pension.
The worker sought benefits as that paid to men, everything else would be a prohibited sex discrimination . While the Labour Court dismissed the suit, gave the place its LAG. On appeal out, the case was again referred back to the LAG. Nevertheless, led the judges of the 9th Senate of the Federal Labour Court in the PM 14/11 of:
The links to the statutory pension insurance law may, of which the State Labor Court was right, by itself justify the different treatment of men and women.
specialist in labor law Dan Fehlberg Lawyers Dr. Kühl & Koll Elm Street 42 09112 Chemnitz Tel: 0371-355900 Fax: 0371-3559020 Email: buero@anwalt-in-chemnitz.de 
0 comments:
Post a Comment