Search
Contact
09.08.2019 | KPMG Law Insights

The ECJ and working time

The ECJ and working time

In May, the ECJ ruled that all employee working time must be recorded, not just overtime. The employer is responsible for this. He must create the necessary conditions for time recording and at least randomly check that these are also used.

The problem lies in the scope of the term “working time”. The tasks, working hours and not least the self-image of the employees differ fundamentally, for example, between tax consultants and kindergarten teachers or between surgeons and architects. While one employee may find it important to get home as punctually as possible, another may see no problem with overtime, at least as long as it is within a manageable amount.

At its core is the distinction between payment based on time spent at work and payment based on work results achieved. A waitress in a beer garden will want to go home at the end of her shift, even if orders are still open and new guests are just arriving. In contrast, a surgeon in the hospital will certainly not put away the scalpel until the operation is completed.

Therefore, the ruling does not do justice to the life situation and wishes of many employees. It prevents or at least makes more difficult flexible workplace and working time arrangements, such as trust-based work or home office work. In addition, there is a data protection component: The mandatory recording of working hours facilitates the monitoring of the employee.

What companies can do

With its decision, the ECJ does not hold the companies in the member states responsible, but the states themselves. They must now transpose the requirements into national law.

Although a direct effect of the ruling is being discussed – in which case employers would have to introduce a corresponding system for recording working hours immediately – the better arguments speak against such a direct effect, because then the member states would no longer have any leeway in implementing the ruling.

This means that a wave of lawsuits against German employers is not to be feared for the time being. The German regulations on the recording of working time, in particular on the burden of proof, will continue to apply for the time being. Companies should keep an eye on developments – but there is no reason to react quickly for the time being.

What the state can do

Nevertheless, the ruling will not remain without consequences, as it calls on member states to act, including Germany. The focus should be on ensuring as much flexibility as possible, in the interest of employers and employees alike.

There are certainly starting points for this: EU Directive 2003/88, on which the ECJ based its ruling, allows exceptions, for example, if the working time cannot be measured and/or determined in advance due to the special characteristics of the activity. This is likely to be the case in many of today’s professions, as the few examples above already show by way of example. The directive also allows an exception when employees determine their own working hours – in other words, in the case of trust-based working time. There may also be leeway in the definition of working time. The place of residence, i.e. at home or at the workplace, as the sole criterion no longer does justice to a modern understanding of working time.

The EU Commission will certainly deal with the Working Time Directive in the foreseeable future and adapt it – this was already true, but even more so after the ECJ decision. Within this framework, Germany could exert its influence, as could every member state, and work toward more flexible regulation.

Explore #more

31.07.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Modernizing the state and reducing bureaucracy: the plans in the 2025 coalition agreement

The coalition has set itself ambitious goals in the areas of bureaucracy reduction, state modernization and modern justice. And for good reason: comprehensive structural reforms…

31.07.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

AI in insurance companies – exploiting opportunities, managing risks

Insurance companies can use artificial intelligence (AI) to make their processes considerably more efficient. At the same time, special compliance requirements apply to the financial…

31.07.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law expert in Handelsblatt: New EU regulation affects 370,000 companies

At the end of the year, the EU will ban products associated with the destruction of forests. The hopes of many importers, who had hoped…

29.07.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

The Savings and Investment Union (SIU) – these are the EU’s plans

The EU lacks money in many areas, including for infrastructure, the expansion of digitalization and defence. At the same time, Europeans have large savings. These…

28.07.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises the shareholder of Schubert Touristik GmbH on the negotiation and implementation of a strategic partnership with the Austrian private equity firm AG Capital

The Schubert Group, headquartered in Aschersleben, specializes in organized and escorted coach, air and cruise trips worldwide, specially tailored to seniors aged 60 and over.…

25.07.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises BETOMAX, a company of INDUS Holding AG, on the acquisition of TRIGOSYS GmbH

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) has provided legal advice to BETOMAX systems GmbH & Co KG, a company of INDUS Holding AG, on the…

24.07.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG advise Q.ANT GmbH on a EUR 62 million Series A financing round

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) advised Q.ANT GmbH with a cross-service team on a Series A financing round with a…

23.07.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Tax evasion by influencers: Why voluntary disclosure can help now

Further authors and contact persons: inside: Dr. Anne Schäfer, Marco Strootmann, Anastasia Podolak The tax authorities are targeting influencer marketing. Authorities in…

22.07.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Act on the implementation of RED III speeds up approval procedures for wind energy expansion

The law implementing the Renewable Energy Directive can enter into force soon after the Bundestag approved the draft on July 10 and the Bundesrat on…

22.07.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

BGH: Building cost subsidies for battery storage systems still permissible

Electricity distribution grid operators may charge construction cost subsidies for grid connections of battery storage systems. This was decided by the Federal Court of Justice…

Contact

Dr. Stefan Middendorf

Partner
Duesseldorf Site Manager

Tersteegenstraße 19-23
40474 Düsseldorf

Tel.: +49 211 4155597316
smiddendorf@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll