A ZDF reporter has failed in the second instance before the regional labour court of Berlin-Brandenburg with a claim for equal pay. The judge announced on Tuesday that there is no sufficient evidence that the applicant has not received because of their gender less money than male colleagues. The lawyer of the journalist criticized the verdict as a “slap in the face”.

there is No comparability between fixed-free and pay-scale employees

The applicant Birte Meier is a solid-free to an employee of the ZDF-political magazine “Frontal 21”. She was dragged before court after they had found that they earn for the same work performance significantly less than their also as a fixed-free employees employees male colleagues. This experience also less professional and were employed for a shorter time at the ZDF.

The regional labour court confirmed this with its decision, a judgment of the labour court of Berlin from February 2017. Already, in the first instance, the court had decided that the conditions for wage discrimination, were not given. It has justified the rejection at that time, among other things, that the applicant could not compare with permanent employees or employees in other collective bargaining agreements.

#The court ruled on Tuesday that the journalist did not claim to know exactly how much money their male counterparts earn. The fee transparency act does not apply in your case, since you had only a worker-like assistant and not a regular employee.
“The verdict is a slap in the face for all women and men who want to that all my colleagues earn the same as us,” said Chris Ambrosi, one of the lawyers of the applicant. The impression is made that an action for wage equality can only be successful if the employer admit to the discrimination, and this will be documented. Equal pay is a fundamental European right to be prevented in this case by “artificial barriers”.

daily mirror tomorrow location

for Free

Sharp criticism from legal scholar

to order, According to Ambrosi, the information about the remuneration of their male colleagues would have been necessary in order to make a discrimination without a doubt prove. The court allowed a Revision of the procedure to the right to information. A Revision of the discrimination lawsuit could be the beginning of the riding, said a lawyer Ambrosi. Your client have already indicated that they would like to go in Revision. First of all, it had to be made in the written grounds of judgment awaited: “The process is not over yet.”

Nora Markard, Junior Professor for Public law at the University of Hamburg, criticized the court’s decision sharply: “The judgment today has once again shown that the principle of equal pay is a principle without practice.” Structures of discrimination were before the court, apparently not a sufficient reason to wage equality to enforce. Instead, the employer has to admit, either orally or in writing, that he paid a woman aware of the poor: “we will get rid of the Gender Pay Gap.”

More about

Equal Pay Day balance on the 18. March

Markus Ehrenberg

Maren Weber, the Chairman of the Association “Pro-quota”, which is working for more female managers in the media industry, showed solidarity with the applicant: “Our colleague has let himself be intimidated or discouraged and, even after a first lost process not to be abandoned.” For her the highest recognition fees. In the cultural and media sector, the Gender Pay Gap amounts to 24 percent. “The merit of Birte Meier is to have determination, a broad public awareness of this injustice.” (epd)