The Labour Code establishes a dual responsibility in employment relationships – namely, employers are liable for risks generated by their company's activity and employees are liable for damage caused by their wilful acts or gross negligence. In principle, for the courts to hold an employee responsible for wilful misconduct or gross negligence, the employer must prove not only the damage incurred, but also that this is attributable to the employee's wilful act or gross negligence, as interpreted by the courts.
The Labour Court of Appeal issued a number of notable decisions in 2018. For example, it held that the high level of freedom enjoyed by a senior manager with regard to the organisation of their work must be exercised within the limits of their relationship of subordination with their employer. Further, it held that the burden of proof of overtime falls on the employee who requests payment, and that the release of an employee from their duties during their notice period cannot lead to a reduction in their remuneration.
Following recent amendments to Article L 222-9 of the Labour Code, the monthly minimum social wage for a non-qualified employee paid per month has been fixed – as of 1 January 2019 – at €254.31 (with the index value of 100 weighted for the cost of living as of 1 January 1948). Thus, as of 1 January 2019 the new gross amounts of the monthly minimum social wage and the applicable legal thresholds and ceilings have been amended.
Bill 7381 modifying Article L 222-9 of the Labour Code was recently submitted to the Chamber of Deputies. The bill aims to amend the minimum social wage rates to reflect the average salaries of 2016 and 2017. If the bill is passed, the minimum social wage would increase by 1.1% as of 1 January 2019. The Governing Council has also decided to increase the social inclusion income and the income for those with severe disabilities by the same amount.
The Court of Appeal recently considered the conditions under which employers can access their employees' workplace correspondence and use such correspondence as evidence in court. This judgment confirms the current jurisprudential trend under which employers may occasionally access their employees' computers, including their work emails. Further, any document which concerns only professional data will, in principle, constitute a lawful means of proof.
The new Law on the Organisation of Luxembourg's National Commission for Data Protection and the General System for Protecting Data has, among other things, modified the Labour Code. The key changes introduced in this regard concern the processing of personal data in order to monitor employees, notifying employees of personal data processing, requesting advance compliance opinions and the co-decision system.
The Luxembourg Bankers' Association recently signed the new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) for Bank Employees 2018-2020 with the Luxembourg Association of Bank and Insurance Employees and the trade unions representative of the financial sector. Given the number of changes and their level of impact, the CBA will be introduced gradually over the next three years.
Under the Labour Code, part-time employees may exceed the daily and weekly work limits set out in their employment contracts without necessarily qualifying for overtime. However, certain conditions apply. The Court of Cassation recently considered the legal rules which apply in this regard.
A new bill that was recently submitted to the Chamber of Deputies aims to modify several articles of the Labour Code which concern social elections in order to make certain administrative processes paperless within the context of social dialogue. According to the bill, making certain processes paperless will result in a clear simplification of administrative tasks for managing directors and the Inspectorate of Labour and Mines.
A new law has modified various provisions of the Labour Code, including Article L121-6(3) regarding salary payments in the event of illness. Following the issuance of the new rules, the majority of case law in this regard has become redundant. Now, employers must prove whether employees received their work schedule before falling ill.
In a recent Court of Appeal case, an employee initiated various legal actions against his employer, seeking to have the decision to relocate him declared an improper termination of his employment contract for various reasons and his dismissal declared null and void. Although the tribunal found the decision to be a substantial modification of the employment contract which was detrimental to the employee, the Court of Appeal had a different interpretation.
A number of changes pertaining to the free movement of workers recently took effect. A new law partially transposed an EU directive on facilitating the exercising of rights granted to workers in the context of freedom of movement into Luxembourg law and amended the Labour Code to incorporate 'nationality' as a criterion for direct or indirect discrimination prohibited by law. Further, a ministerial regulation updated the minimum pay levels for highly qualified workers.
A new law, which recently came into force, has introduced a number of amendments regarding certain kinds of leave in order to improve the family and work-life balance of employees, while also taking into account existing social realities. The law makes a number of changes to extraordinary leave for personal reasons, post-natal and adoption leave and leave for family reasons.
The minister for the civil service and administrative reform recently submitted a bill to the Chamber of Deputies recommending the creation of the Centre for Health, Safety and Quality of Life at Work in the Civil Service. The bill also recommends that 'psychosocial risks' within the context of employment relationships be defined in line with Belgian employment legislation and aims to close the legal gap relating to procedures to combat harassment.
The Law of July 20 2017, which modified the Labour Code by introducing a new system to combat long-term unemployment, recently came into force. The law has introduced a new form of aid to promote the employment of the long-term unemployed and amended the aid system for hiring older unemployed persons. It has also extended the availability of the professional training internship and reduced the duration of compensated temporary occupations.
The Ministry of the Civil Service and Administrative Reform recently submitted Bill 7171, which defines the terms and conditions of so-called 'time savings accounts' for civil service officials, among other things. A time savings account is a tool whereby officials can accumulate free time and save it to use at a later date of their choice. Doing so will allow officials to achieve a better balance between their private and professional lives, within the limits of statutory conditions.
The legislature recently amended Article L211-29 of the Labour Code, which concerns special records of employee working hours. The new record-keeping requirements will ensure that foreign employers seconding employees to Luxembourg and employers based in Luxembourg are treated equally. In addition, a new article was recently added to the code, which imposes new obligations on clients and instructing parties entering into contracts with service providers.
A new law amending the Labour Code and Article 3 of the law laying down measures to safeguard employment, price stability and business competitiveness recently entered into force. Key changes introduced by the law include the strengthening of company responsibility in subcontracting chains, the introduction of an electronic platform for posting arrangements and the introduction of effective redress mechanisms to enable posted employees to lodge complaints or initiate legal proceedings.
The Court of Appeal recently ruled on the distinction between the obligation of an employee bound by a non-compete clause in his or her employment contract and the duty of loyalty inherent in any employment contract. The court clarified that the general principle of executing an employment contract in good faith means that an employee should not "develop a business that might be in competition with the employer during the course of the employment contract".
The Court of Appeal recently clarified the validity conditions of disciplinary penalties provided for by collective bargaining agreements. Taking into account an earlier decision, the court found that the evaluability of the penalty was deficient and that its wording failed to meet the precision requirements of the lawful punishment principle. The court therefore confirmed the annulment of the penalty imposed on the employee.