The oversized wage request dropped from a job interview – the professor wonders about the court’s decision
Wages|The Supreme Court accepted the ignore of a more distinguished jobseeker on the basis of too much payroll.
The abstract is made by artificial intelligence and checked by man.
The Supreme Court’s preliminary ruling may increase discrimination and reduce job seekers’ salary requests, says Seppo Koskinen, Professor Emeritus of Labor Law.
The KKO accepted the ignore of a more distinguished male applicant on the basis of too much wage request in the job search process.
According to Koskinen, the decision gives employers a way to circumvent the discrimination and threaten the legal protection of jobseekers.
Employers In the future, it will be easier to ignore a more distinguished jobseeker in the job search process and discriminate against gender. This is how the Emeritus Professor of Labor Law Seppo Koskinen.
According to Koskinen, the reason is the preliminary ruling given by the Supreme Court (KKO) in April. The KKO decision guides the decision -making practice of the lower institutions in similar situations.
« It’s a remarkable solution, » Koskinen describes the decision.
Supreme The court’s decision concerns whether a male jobseeker was discriminated against on the basis of gender when a less distinguished female applicant was selected. It was an expert in the employer association representing rural industries.
Seppo Koskinen
The association had dropped the male applicant from the job search process before the job interviews. He found that he had been discriminated against for gender and sued the association.
In his assessment, the Supreme Court concluded that the male applicant was more distinguished than the woman chosen.
Therefore, according to the Supreme Court, a presumption of discrimination was born. When the presumption of discrimination is created, the employer must demonstrate that there has been no discrimination.
The Supreme Court accepted the employer’s reasoning that the male applicant’s salary request was oversized and could be dropped from the application process. According to the preliminary ruling, the male applicant was thus not discriminated against on the basis of his gender.
The association had reported in advance that the salary could not exceed EUR 4,500. However, it was not reported in a job advertisement where the applicants were asked for wage requests.
The man had reported EUR 6,000 for his salary request and the woman selected for EUR 5,000. The woman was hired with a lower monthly salary of € 4,500 she wanted.
According to the Supreme Court, the salary request made by a jobseeker in a job application must be understood as a preliminary request, which often includes room for negotiation. If the preliminary wish exceeds the salary level specified by the employer by little, it is not an acceptable reasons under the Equality Act to displace a more distinguished applicant from a direct hand.
According to the Supreme Court, the man’s salary request had to be taken seriously in his merits and probably corresponded to his own view of the reasonable salary level.
However, from the point of view of the association, the man’s salary request was clearly oversized even when the conventional negotiating reserve, KKO estimates.
Emeritus professor Koskinen considers the KKO solution problematic. He also criticized the decision in his article published on Tuesday In Edilex.
According to Koskinen, the preliminary ruling may result in jobseekers to reduce their wage requests in the future.
« It is, of course, the interests of employers, » Emeritus Professor tells HS.
He also wonders that once an employer had decided in advance at the salary level, why not reported in the application notification.
According to Koskinen, the preliminary ruling gives employers a « dangerous instrument » to circumvent the presumption of discrimination.
According to Koskinen, the Supreme Court was confined to the employer’s unilateral claim of oversized wage request. There was no acceptable salary level or how the assessment of the oversized wage request was proportional to the general wage policy, the collective agreement or other transparent criteria.
« The emergence of the presumption of discrimination no longer genuinely transfer the burden of proof to the employer, but allows for the acceptance of subjective and ex -post reasoning without the obligation of evidence, » Koskinen describes.
According to Koskinen, the preliminary ruling thus waterates the regulation of contrary to discrimination. In his view, the decision gives employers almost free hands to eliminate applicants for wage request, invoking pre -declared grounds or documented criteria.
« It’s a serious threat to jobseekers’ legal protection, » Koskinen says.
