Restriction of second language in a job application procedure to English, French and German in selection procedure is invalid.

Austrian courts have to deal with an increasing number of cases concerning dismissal on grounds of (alleged) discrimination. The particular challenge is to a draw a conclusive distinction between the concepts of disability and sickness.

A decision taken by an employer based on gender which respects the national legislation was considered discriminatory based on EU legislation.

A new system of remuneration and advancement according to which the initial grading of the contractual public servants is calculated according to their last remuneration paid under the previous system of remuneration and advancement, which was based on discrimination on grounds of the age of the contractual public servants, is inconsistent with Articles 1, 2 and 6 of Directive 2000/78, read in combination with Article 21 of the Charter and inconsistent with Article 45(2) TFEU.

Following an appeal by Uber against the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s (EAT) finding last year, which was featured in EELC 2018/9, that drivers engaged by Uber are ‘workers’ rather than independent contractors (reported in EELC 2018-1), the Court of Appeal (CA) has now upheld the EAT’s decision. The CA also upheld the finding of the Employment Tribunal (ET), which was featured in EELC 2017/10, that drivers are working when they are signed into the Uber app and ready to work (reported in EECL 2017-1). Uber has approximately 40,000 drivers (and about 3.5 million users of its mobile phone application in London alone) and so this decision has potentially significant financial consequences for the company.

The Latvian Supreme Court recently used the ECJ Max Planck and Kreuziger judgments to explain how an employer can escape its obligation to compensate an employee for unused leave at the end of the employment relationship. The employer must prove that (a) it was possible for the employee to use the leave, and (b) the employer has in good time informed the employee that leave, if not used, might be lost and will not be compensated.

According to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia (Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije) (Supreme Court), reintegration of a formerly dismissed employee does not mean that the employment relationship had not been terminated earlier. Consequently, the employee is entitled to an allowance in lieu of the untaken leave at the time of the dismissal.

A recent decision by the Irish Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) found that a third level college lecturer had not been discriminated against on the grounds of gender in relation to her pay.