{"id":9031,"date":"2026-01-04T16:56:04","date_gmt":"2026-01-04T15:56:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/?p=9031"},"modified":"2026-01-04T16:56:04","modified_gmt":"2026-01-04T15:56:04","slug":"mitbestimmung-bei-erhoehung-der-verguetung-eines-freigestellten-betriebsratsmitglieds","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/mitbestimmung-bei-erhoehung-der-verguetung-eines-freigestellten-betriebsratsmitglieds\/","title":{"rendered":"Co determination in cases of salary increases for a fully released works council member"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On 26 November 2024, the Federal Labour Court (BAG) ruled (1 ABR 12\/23) that increasing the remuneration of a fully released works council member on the basis of statutory protection provisions <strong>does not<\/strong> constitute a job classification or reclassification within the meaning of \u00a7\u202f99 BetrVG. Such a classification or reclassification requires an assessment of the employee\u2019s actual duties and an assignment to a pay group. However, no assessment of work tasks takes place when adjusting the remuneration of released works council members.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If the remuneration of a released works council member is increased pursuant to \u00a7\u202f37 (4) BetrVG or \u00a7\u202f78 sentence 2 BetrVG, this adjustment is not carried out by assigning the employee to a collective pay scale. Instead, it is based on a comparison with the hypothetical career development of comparable employees (\u00a7\u202f37(4) BetrVG) or serves to ensure that the works council member does not suffer disadvantages as a result of holding office (\u00a7\u202f78 sentence 2 BetrVG). Because this adjustment is mandated by law and not made at the employer\u2019s discretion, the works council has no co determination rights.<\/p>\n<h5 style=\"text-align: justify;\">Practical relevance:<\/h5>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The decision provides clarity: Remuneration adjustments for released works council members that are made solely to comply with the statutory requirements pursuant to \u00a7\u00a7\u202f37(4) and 78 sentence 2 BetrVG are not subject to co determination under \u00a7\u202f99 BetrVG.<\/p>\n<p>&zwnj;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 100%\"><small>You're in need of professional advice on the topic of 'co determination under \u00a7\u202f99 BetrVG'?<br \/>Contact us!<br \/>For a free initial assessment of your concern, please call us at 0341-23 08 4988 or send a message to office@leipzig-recht.de.<\/small><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Das Bundesarbeitsgericht (BAG) hat am 26.11.2024 (1 ABR 12\/23) entschieden, dass die Erh\u00f6hung der Verg\u00fctung eines freigestellten Betriebsratsmitglieds aufgrund gesetzlicher Schutzvorschriften nicht als Ein- oder Umgruppierung im Sinne des \u00a7\u202f99 BetrVG zu bewerten ist. Eine solche Ein- oder Umgruppierung setzt voraus, dass die tats\u00e4chlich ausge\u00fcbte T\u00e4tigkeit eines Arbeitnehmers bewertet und einer Verg\u00fctungsgruppe zugeordnet wird. Bei [&hellip;]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[95],"tags":[288,98,287,289,290,291],"class_list":["post-9031","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-arbeitsrecht","tag-arbeitsentgelt","tag-arbeitsrecht","tag-betriebsrat","tag-freigestellt","tag-mitbestimmung","tag-mitbestimmungsrecht"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9031","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9031"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9031\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9035,"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9031\/revisions\/9035"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9031"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9031"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/leipzig-recht.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9031"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}