# C_2009044EN.01002602.xml

| 21.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/26

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Innsbruck (Austria) lodged on 12 November 2008 — Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenhauser Tirols v Land Tirol

(Case C-486/08)

(2009/C 44/44)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Innsbruck als Arbeits- und Sozialgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Zentralbetriebsrat der Landeskrankenhauser Tirols

Applicant:

Defendant: Land Tirol

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Is it compatible with Clause 4(1) of the Framework Agreement on part-time work of 6 June 1997 which was implemented by the Directive on part-time work (Council Directive 97/81/EC (1) of 15 December 1997, OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9), that workers employed under a private law contract by a local or regional authority or a public undertaking and who work less than 12 hours per week (30 % of the normal working time), be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers with regard to remuneration, classification in salary group, recognition of previous periods of service, entitlement to leave, additional payments and overtime supplements etc.? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it compatible with Clause 4(1) of the Framework Agreement on part-time work of 6 June 1997 which was implemented by the Directive on part-time work (Council Directive 97/81/EC (1) of 15 December 1997, OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9), that workers employed under a private law contract by a local or regional authority or a public undertaking and who work less than 12 hours per week (30 % of the normal working time), be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers with regard to remuneration, classification in salary group, recognition of previous periods of service, entitlement to leave, additional payments and overtime supplements etc.?

1

| 2. | Is the pro-rata-temporis principle, as set out in Clause 4(2) of the Framework Agreement, to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law such as Paragraph 55(5) of the L-VBG, under which in the event of a change in the working hours of an employee, the amount of leave not yet taken is adjusted proportionally to the new working hours, with the result that the worker who reduces his working hours from full-time to part-time, has his entitlement to leave accumulated while working full-time reduced or, as a part-time worker, he can only take that leave with a reduced level of payment for leave? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the pro-rata-temporis principle, as set out in Clause 4(2) of the Framework Agreement, to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law such as Paragraph 55(5) of the L-VBG, under which in the event of a change in the working hours of an employee, the amount of leave not yet taken is adjusted proportionally to the new working hours, with the result that the worker who reduces his working hours from full-time to part-time, has his entitlement to leave accumulated while working full-time reduced or, as a part-time worker, he can only take that leave with a reduced level of payment for leave?

| 3. | Is a provision of national law, such as Paragraph 1(2)(m) of the L-VBG, according to which workers employed for a period not exceeding 6 months or on a casual basis are treated less favourably with regard to remuneration, classification in salary group, recognition of previous periods of service, entitlement to leave, additional payments and overtime supplements etc., contrary to Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement of the European Social Partners as implemented by Directive on fixed-term work 1999/70/EC (2) of 28 June 1999 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43)? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is a provision of national law, such as Paragraph 1(2)(m) of the L-VBG, according to which workers employed for a period not exceeding 6 months or on a casual basis are treated less favourably with regard to remuneration, classification in salary group, recognition of previous periods of service, entitlement to leave, additional payments and overtime supplements etc., contrary to Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement of the European Social Partners as implemented by Directive on fixed-term work 1999/70/EC (2) of 28 June 1999 (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43)?

2

| 4. | Is there indirect discrimination on grounds of sex within the meaning of Article 14(1)(c) of the Equal Treatment Directive of 5 July 2006 (Directive 2006/54/EC (3), OJ 2006 L 204, p. 23), if, in the case of employees who take the full two years' parental leave permissible by law, the entitlement to annual leave from the year preceding the birth expires before the end of the parental leave, and the majority of the workers affected are women (97 %)? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Is there indirect discrimination on grounds of sex within the meaning of Article 14(1)(c) of the Equal Treatment Directive of 5 July 2006 (Directive 2006/54/EC (3), OJ 2006 L 204, p. 23), if, in the case of employees who take the full two years' parental leave permissible by law, the entitlement to annual leave from the year preceding the birth expires before the end of the parental leave, and the majority of the workers affected are women (97 %)?

3

---

(1)  OJ L 14, p. 9.

1

(2)  OJ L 175, p. 43.

2

(3)  OJ L 204, p. 23.

3

---