A verbal promise to take over after the probationary period can be binding. A recent ruling shows that anyone who gets the green light from their boss shortly before the end of the probationary period and is then fired can legally defend themselves.
It is true that employers are allowed to terminate employees more easily during the probationary period – but the Düsseldorf Regional Labor Court ruled that limits also apply in this phase, for example in the event of contradictory behavior on the part of the employer.
Verbal commitment with weight: Who speaks is crucial
The Düsseldorf Regional Labor Court had to decide a case that will be familiar to many employees. As the specialist portal Haufe reports, a department head informed a commercial lawyer shortly before the end of the six-month probationary period that he would of course be taken on. A few days later, the employee received notice of termination.
The decisive factor in the verdict was the superior’s position: as authorized signatory and department head, he was not only responsible for personnel decisions, but also acted on behalf of the company. His statement was not made casually, but as a direct response to an inquiry from the human resources department about the takeover decision. According to Haufe, this commitment therefore had particular weight and created legitimate trust among the employee.
Unfaithful behavior renders termination invalid
The court saw the employer’s contradictory behavior as a violation of the principle of good faith according to Section 242 of the German Civil Code (BGB). Anyone who promises an employee a job shortly before the end of the probationary period and then suddenly quits is acting in breach of trust – at least if no serious new circumstances arise that would justify a change of opinion.
In the present case, the employer was unable to demonstrate such new circumstances. The added justification that the employee was not providing adequate services was not sufficient. The termination was therefore classified as ineffective, as it goes on to say.
Limits of case law: When terminations are still possible
However, the decision does not mean that every oral statement automatically protects against termination. What is important first is who made the commitment. If a superior without decision-making authority simply expresses his personal opinion, this has significantly less weight than the statement of an authorized representative responsible for human resources.
In addition, serious new circumstances may justify termination despite a prior agreement. These include gross breaches of duty such as repeated unexcused absences, refusal to work or serious violations of safety regulations. Finally, however, it is emphasized that the employer must specifically explain such circumstances – vague allegations of performance are not enough.
D. Maier / editorial team finanzen.net