Post by account_disabled on Dec 31, 2023 22:45:02 GMT -5
Arefused to give its consent to the said distribution for the reason that it was not meant to be temporary and would as a consequence be contrary to Article paragraph of the Law on making available of the labor force which prohibits the provision of workers to user companies this not having a temporary nature. Considering that refusal to be unfounded under the conditions in which the abovementioned article would not be applicable in the case Ruhrlandklinik employed Mrs. K. on a temporary basis and requested the court to authorize by court decision her permanent employment . As the lower courts granted that request the works council appealed to the referring court the.
Federal Labor Disputes Court. According to the latter court the prohibition Country Email List of nontemporary provision of labor provided for in Article paragraph of the Law on the provision of labor applies only to salaried workers of a temporary employment agency. However the members of the community including Mrs. K. would not have the status of worker under German law since they did not conclude an employment contract with that community even if they provide in exchange for remuneration a work performance for another person and under their guidance. Thus according to the jurisprudence of the Federal Court for Labor Disputes according to German law a worker is one.
Who is obliged under a contract of private law to provide another person with a work performance determined by someone else being subject to certain instructions in within a bond of personal subordination. whether despite the fact that she does not have the status of worker under German law Ms K. could be considered as such under EU law and more specifically within the meaning of Article from Directive . From this perspective the referring court also asks to determine whether the communitys provision of Mrs K.s Ruhrlandklinik constitutes.
Federal Labor Disputes Court. According to the latter court the prohibition Country Email List of nontemporary provision of labor provided for in Article paragraph of the Law on the provision of labor applies only to salaried workers of a temporary employment agency. However the members of the community including Mrs. K. would not have the status of worker under German law since they did not conclude an employment contract with that community even if they provide in exchange for remuneration a work performance for another person and under their guidance. Thus according to the jurisprudence of the Federal Court for Labor Disputes according to German law a worker is one.
Who is obliged under a contract of private law to provide another person with a work performance determined by someone else being subject to certain instructions in within a bond of personal subordination. whether despite the fact that she does not have the status of worker under German law Ms K. could be considered as such under EU law and more specifically within the meaning of Article from Directive . From this perspective the referring court also asks to determine whether the communitys provision of Mrs K.s Ruhrlandklinik constitutes.