A photographer is demanding back pay of over €10,000 salary and holiday pay from his former employer. According to the photographer, he had an employment contract for seven months. Despite previous summonses, only two months were paid. According to the employer, he left his employment after two months and went to work elsewhere. How does the judge rule in summary proceedings?
Dispute and outcome
At the heart of the dispute is whether the employer must pay the photographer the claimed back salary and holiday pay. The subdistrict court considered it plausible that the claim would be upheld in ordinary proceedings and therefore granted the claim. The following explains how the subdistrict court arrived at this judgment.
Judge's considerations
It is not in dispute that the photographer joined the employer on the basis of an employment contract concluded with the employer. It is also established that the photographer started to fulfil the employment contract by performing the work from then on.
According to the employer, the photographer left its employment after two months and went to work for another company, but this assertion was disputed by the photographer with reasons. The employer did not subsequently substantiate this claim further. For instance, the employer did not submit any documents from which it follows that the photographer left its employment. Moreover, the photographer has shown pay slips for the later months showing the employer.
Against this background, the fact that the photographer signed an employment contract a few months later stating that he would enter the other company's service retroactively does not lead to a different judgement, as this does not automatically mean that he left the employer's service as of that date. Moreover, it is plausible that the photographer signed this agreement only because he was promised that the other company would then pay his back salary. There is no evidence that this employment agreement was fulfilled in any way.
Judge's ruling
In view of the above, the subdistrict court considered it sufficiently plausible that the photographer remained employed until the end of the contract. The employer still has to pay the salary for the remaining period. In addition, holiday pay must be paid over the total period. Paying salary is one of the primary obligations of an employer towards an employee. In the absence of any reason for late payment of salary here, the subdistrict court granted the legal increment claimed by the photographer on the overdue salary. The statutory increase amounts to 50%.
Note: It seems that disappointment over the photographer's impending departure led the employer to stop paying salary. There may well have been more to it. The employer must pay the full statutory increment, 50% of the post-payment amount, as penalty.
EN 
NL 
ES 