Doesn’t the principle “equal pay for equal work” also apply to a large corporation like Daimler Truck? A high-ranking manager of the commercial vehicle manufacturer is fighting on Tuesday before the Baden-Württemberg State Labor Court (LAG) for the same pay as her male colleagues (ref. 2 Sa 14/24). The plaintiff has been employed by the Daimler Group for almost 30 years and was previously Promoted to department head almost 15 years ago. When she returned from parental leave a few years ago, she discovered that she was earning significantly less part-time than her male colleagues at the same level. The woman sued against this, now supported in the appeal court by the Society for Freedom Rights (GFF). Equal pay in the company The basis for this claim is the Pay Transparency Act, which came into force in 2017. It is intended to help women and men enforce the principle of equal pay in the company. The law prohibits gender-specific discrimination in pay components. In addition, the employer may not make any difference in pay between women and men for the same work or work of equal value. The Federal Labor Court (BAG) consolidated the equal pay principle in February 2023, and since then the employer can no longer rely on the fact that a man negotiated a salary better than a woman. The Federal Labor Court clarified some fundamental questions with its ruling says Sarah Lincoln from the GFF. “Nevertheless, we see that there is still a lot of confusion in the lower courts and there are apparently still some misunderstandings and a need for clarification,” says the lawyer who is assisting the plaintiff in the proceedings. In the first instance, the Stuttgart Labor Court sentenced Daimler Truck to do so in November 2023 to pay the plaintiff the difference to the so-called median salary of her male comparison group – the labor court did not want to grant her full compensation to the salary of her male comparison colleague in the group. For the GFF, this is in turn a contradiction to the case law of the BAG and the European Court of Justice. The aim of the appeal before the LAG is not only to achieve a correction of the first instance, but also to have the court determine that the employer must justify the salary differences between the genders based on objective criteria. More on the topic “At Daimler, there are no transparent criteria for the level of remuneration, such as length of service, performance or qualifications. That’s why Daimler has difficulty justifying the salary differences,” explains Lincoln. “Companies must be able to coherently justify pay differences between men and women, including in management. Many companies find it difficult to meet this requirement because they have a free hand in setting wages and do not want to be examined by the courts.” “Not an isolated case” The case is not an isolated case, the GFF claims in its press release on Monday and follows up verbally. “Wage discrimination is a structural problem at both Mercedes-Benz AG and Daimler AG, in all pay groups. Six other department heads alone sued or sued for equal pay, some of them in the second instance.” However, when asked by the F.A.Z., a spokesman for Daimler Truck explained. With regard to equal pay disputes, this is the “only pending case” against the company. The company is holding back from making any further statements about the specific dispute. It is said from Stuttgart that people generally do not comment on ongoing proceedings.
Go to Source