Federal Holidays Act

The labour questions around the topic of holiday and illness are not getting any easier – a brief statement against the backdrop of new judicial workers who cannot take paid annual leave due to illness within the period prescribed, do not lose their claim. He maintained them despite the contrary rule in the Federal Holidays Act is to pay in the event of termination of employment The employee dies, this claim is even hereditary. In a much-publicised decision, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decided that when workers who are due to illness, unable to take their leave, the leave entitlement persists and does not expire (cases C-350/06 and C-520/06). “Preservation” of entitlement through late March, this means that also was that not can take the holiday via the ubertragunsfristen provided in the Holidays Act, retain the entitlement to leave. Holiday entitlements can therefore ill both times the remuneration as also in times of sickness cover is not lost. This applies also after the date 31 March 7 para 3 Federal Holidays Act (BUrlG) and even for departing controlled more entitlement–so the legal holiday additional claims (see: BAG, judgment of the 04.05.2010, AZ.: 9 AZR 183/09).

Unless in the employment contract, something else is explicitly for this part of the leave entitlements determined the entitlement do not expire so, but from the employer later during reunion. The was again approached his work, he often has a mountain of old holiday ahead, which is added to the new vacation of the current vacation year. Special case of temporary disability benefits does this mean that even for employees who receive a temporary disability benefits after the end of the sickness benefit, vacation for the period of static employment claims? It is of the opinion that one from a dormant employment relationship basically no Acquires holiday entitlements, would you deny this, for the other point of view, but also good arguments can be found and so this question is answered differently by State Labor Court in North Rhine-Westphalia and in Baden-Wurttemberg (claims, no: Cologne by April 29, 2010, was AZ.: 6 103/10 SA, claims, Yes: was Baden – Wurttemberg by April 29, 2010, AZ.: 11 64/09 SA).

Tags: ,

{ Comments are closed! }