The European Court (hereinafter also referred to as “ECJ”) decided in its judgment of July 13.07.2023, 134 (Az: C-22/XNUMX) on information obligations to the responsible authority in the event of mass layoffs. The obligation to provide information is not intended to provide employees with individual protection. The communication is for informational and preparation purposes only.
1. FACTS
The plaintiff employee had received operational dismissal from the defendant company. This was based on the fact that the employer's operations were to be completely shut down due to insolvency proceedings. The defendant company reached a reconciliation of interests with the works council. This was also done in this context Section 17 Paragraph 2 KSchG necessary consultation procedures for the collective redundancy were carried out. The responsible one Employment Agency but was opposed Section 17 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 KSchG no copy of the communication addressed to the works council was sent. The employee, represented by a lawyer specializing in labor law, asserted the invalidity of the termination and based it in particular on the violation of the obligation to transmit the notice to the employment agency.
The lower courts decided that the transmission of the notification to the works council served (only) to inform the employment agency at an early stage.
The Federal Labor Court expressed doubts as to whether the violation would necessarily lead to the invalidity of a termination, since a failure to transmit the notice constitutes a violation of the German law implementing the Union Directive into national law, but neither the directive nor national law provides an express sanction for such a violation provide. It suspended the proceedings and referred the question to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling as to whether the provision in question had the purpose of granting employees individual protection.
2. DECISION
The European Court of Justice ruled that the employer's obligation to provide information in the event of mass layoffs was not intended to provide individual protection to the affected employees. The transmission of the information in question merely enables the competent authority to obtain an overview, inter alia, of the reasons for the planned redundancies, the number and categories of workers to be made redundant and the period over which the redundancies are to be carried out. This serves to assess possible solutions to the problems arising from the mass layoffs.
The authority does not have an active role in the consultation process. The information would not set any deadlines or establish the authority's obligations. At that point, the responsible authority should not concern itself with the individual situation of each individual employee, but rather consider the intended mass layoffs in general.
3. CONCLUSION
The ECJ decision reduces the risks for employers in collective dismissal proceedings. In the future, the Federal Labor Court will not be able to assume that operational dismissals are ineffective in the event of an isolated breach of the information obligation. Of course, the other and already known requirements for the mass layoff notice remain. Employers should continue to exercise the greatest care in ensuring compliance with the formal requirements for collective redundancies. Even a small mistake can jeopardize the entire “project”.
