Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2013:410
Date: 2013-06-20
Language of the case: Latvian
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Subject matter: Social Policy
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Latvia

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 20 June 2013 1. Social policy — Male and female workers — Access to employment and working conditions — Equal treatment — Framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Directive 96/34 — Abolishment of officials’ posts due to national economic difficulties — Transfer of a worker, at the end of parental leave, to a post intended to be abolished — Not permissible — Verification a matter for the national court (Council Directives 76/207 and 96/34, as amended by Directive 97/75, Annex, clause 2, para. 5) 2. Social policy — Male and female workers — Access to employment and working conditions — Equal treatment — Framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC — Directive 96/34 — Abolishment of officials’ posts due to national economic difficulties — Assessment of a worker on parental leave in her absence — Assessment placing her in a less favourable position as compared to workers who did not take parental leave — Assessment having to comply with a certain number of conditions — Verification a matter for the national court (Council Directives 76/207 and 96/34, as amended by Directive 97/75) 1. Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions, as amended by Directive 2002/73, where a much higher number of women than men take parental leave, which it is for the national court to verify, and the Framework Agreement on Parental Leave, contained in the Annex to Directive 96/34 on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, as amended by Directive 97/75, must be interpreted as precluding a situation where a female worker who has been transferred to another post at the end of her parental leave following an assessment is dismissed due to the abolishment of that new post, where it was not impossible for the employer to allow her to return to her former post or where the work assigned to her was not equivalent or similar and consistent with her employment contract or employment relationship, inter alia because, at the time of the transfer, the employer was informed that the new post was due to be abolished, which it is for the national court to verify. The Framework Agreement on Parental Leave does not preclude a situation where an employer, in the context of the abolishment of a post, proceeds with the assessment of a worker who has taken parental leave with a view to transferring that worker to an equivalent or similar post consistent with that worker’s employment contract or relationship, in accordance with clause 2.5 of the Framework Agreement. However, the employer may not render nugatory the right of a worker who has taken parental leave to be transferred to another post, in accordance with the conditions laid down in that clause, by offering that worker a post which is due to be abolished. (see paras 36, 54, 56, operative part) 2. Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions, as amended by Directive 2002/73, where a much higher number of women than men take parental leave, which it is for the national court to verify, and the Framework Agreement on Parental Leave, contained in the Annex to Directive 96/34 on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, as amended by Directive 97/75, must be interpreted as precluding a situation where, as part of an assessment of workers in the context of abolishment of officials’ posts due to national economic difficulties, a worker who has taken parental leave is assessed in his or her absence on the basis of assessment principles and criteria which place him or her in a less favourable position as compared to workers who did not take parental leave. In order to ascertain whether or not that is the case, the national court must inter alia ensure that the assessment encompasses all workers liable to be concerned by the abolishment of the post, that it is based on criteria which are absolutely identical to those applying to workers in active service and that the implementation of those criteria does not involve the physical presence of workers on parental leave. (see paras 42, 43, 56, operative part)