Wed, Aug. 13, 2008

Lost Between the Lines

MJW - Washington.   A peculiar aspect of German labor law is the letter of recommendation known as Arbeitszeugnis. It reflects part of an employment record issued with an employer and provides details on the term and scope of employment. The letter is also expected to contain information on performance and conduct. Generally, prospective employers expect to receive copies of such letters with an application.

Therefore, the exact wording is important and sometimes hotly disputed in employment litigation. As a result, personnel managers have developed codes to convey information in a manner that meets the legal requirements for such letters as laid down by statute in § 109 Gewerbeordnung or § 630 Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch and construed in a long lines of precedent by Germany's Federal Labor Court, Bundesarbeitsgericht.

Employees fear that such codes, including omissions of specific language, may contain kind words that a prospective employer may decypher in a way they themselves do not understand. Others believe that certain carefully crafted nuances may be lost on a less sophisticated HR department.

On August 12, 2008, the Federal Labor Court laid out general guidelines in the matter 9 AZR 632/07. A journalist, dissatisfied with his Arbeitszeugnis, sued his former employer. His complaint focused on a statement regarding his performance and conduct that he thought was deliberately omitted. The letter did not mention his ability to work under pressure.

The court used the case to reiterate the basic principles governing such letters. The employee's performance and conduct must be described favourably and truthfully, Grundsatz der Zeugniswahrheit, it held. Excluding certain elements that prospective employers usually expect from their employees without proper justification collides with this principle.

The omission itself can serve as a secret message which--depending on usages in particular trades and professions--may adversely reflect on the employee. In such instances, an employee may demand from the employer an amendment of the letter of recommendation, the supreme labor court held.


      CURRENT :: 2003 :: 2004 :: 2005 :: 2006 :: 2007 :: 2008 :: 2009 :: 2010 :: 2011 :: 2012 :: 2013 :: 2014 :: 2015 :: 2016 :: 2017