Frankfurt am Main – The United Services Union (ver.di), IG Metall, the NGG trade union, and the German Trade Union Federation (DGB) welcome today’s decision by the Federal Labor Court (BAG), which definitively establishes that the DHV (“DHV – Die Berufsgewerkschaft e.V.”) lacks collective bargaining authority after nearly eight years of litigation. As a result, the DHV can no longer effectively conclude collective bargaining agreements (Case No.: 1 ABR 28/20).
“This is another important step in the fight against the spread of ‘low-wage collective agreements,’” explained ver.di Vice Chair Andrea Kocsis. “The demands on the effectiveness and sustainability of unions are increasing, as the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, among other things. This makes it all the more important to counter the activities of sham unions!”
Jörg Hofmann, President of IG Metall: “IG Metall welcomes the Federal Labor Court’s decision and the resulting strengthening of collective bargaining autonomy. This ruling enhances the value of IG Metall’s collective bargaining agreements. Collective bargaining agreements are not an end in themselves. They are fought for by our members and set the standard for income redistribution within companies. Undermining them means depriving employees of money.”
Freddy Adjan, Vice Chair of the Food, Beverages, and Restaurants Union (NGG): “This ruling is an important milestone, including on the path to good working conditions in the meat industry. It undermines the basis for ‘favor-based’ collective bargaining agreements.”
Anja Piel, a member of the DGB Executive Board, echoes this sentiment. “It was important that we stayed on top of this issue. The fact that the unions involved in the proceedings fought for over eight years has now finally led to success,” said Piel. “This is another important step toward strengthening collective bargaining autonomy.”
In the case of an association that has no relevant representation among the workforce, it is absurd for it to presume to speak on their behalf and conclude collective bargaining agreements. “A collective bargaining system can only function—and collective bargaining autonomy, as provided for in the Basic Law, can only truly be realized—if collective bargaining takes place on an equal footing. Only in this way can workers’ interests be effectively advanced,” emphasized Kocsis.
In the BAG’s view, despite the collective bargaining agreements it has concluded, the DHV is not a union because it lacks the necessary influence. However, if unions wish to be eligible to negotiate collective agreements, they must possess the necessary clout. In the past, the DHV had concluded many “favor-based” collective bargaining agreements at the expense of employees. The unions involved feel that the BAG has fully confirmed their legal position. They stated that this decision improves the legal and, above all, financial situation of employees in a large part of the service sectors, including temporary work.
The current proceedings stem from a joint petition filed by the states of Berlin and North Rhine-Westphalia, along with the unions ver.di, IG Metall, and NGG, as well as the DGB, with the Hamburg Labor Court in late 2013. That court had ruled that the DHV e.V. was not a union eligible to negotiate collective agreements. The Hamburg Regional Labor Court (LAG) overturned that decision. Subsequently, the Federal Labor Court (BAG) reviewed the legal dispute and remanded it to the Hamburg Regional Labor Court. The BAG held that the Hamburg Regional Labor Court had erred in law by assuming that the DHV was eligible to negotiate collective agreements. The Hamburg Regional Labor Court corrected this decision and determined that the DHV was not eligible to negotiate collective agreements. In response to the appeal filed against this decision, the BAG fully upheld the Hamburg Regional Labor Court’s ruling. The BAG upheld the ruling of the Hamburg Regional Labor Court, which—following extensive investigations—had determined, among other things, that the membership figures claimed by the DHV were not verifiable. However, even if one were to assume these figures were correct, the stated membership number would not be sufficient to conclude that the DHV possessed the necessary influence to qualify as a collective bargaining party.
Over the past few years, the DHV had amended its bylaws on several occasions to expand its collective bargaining authority. As a result, the collective bargaining agreements concluded under its previous collective bargaining authority could no longer serve as evidence of its representativeness.
Further information and press photos of Jörg Hofmann
