An hourly-paid employee was entitled to salary for 20 hours per week despite ongoing agreements for fewer hours

A new ruling has confirmed that an employee was entitled to pay for 20 hours per week, in line with the working hours agreed in the employment contract, despite the employee having worked fewer hours in a given period by agreement with the employer. 

The employee was hired to work 20 hours per week

The case concerned an employee who, in October 2023, was hired as a weekend operator in a company. The employment contract stated that the employee’s working time was 20 hours per week, and that the working hours were primarily scheduled for weekends. It was also stated that the work would be organized in accordance with the employer’s needs.  

During the employment, the parties agreed that the employee could work fewer than 20 hours per week. When this happened, the employee received pay for the actual hours worked per week.  

Following the company's Christmas closure in 2024, the employee was not called to work due to a lack of work at the company. The employee remained available until his dismissal on 2 April 2025 but did not receive pay during this period. The employee subsequently brought a case against the employer, claiming unpaid wages and holiday pay for 20 hours per week during this period. 

The district court based its decision on the wording of the employment contract

The District Court took into account the wording of the employment contract, which stated that the employee was employed to work 20 hours per week. 

The fact that the parties had agreed that the employee could work fewer than 20 hours per week and be paid for fewer hours could not lead to the working time conditions in the employment contract being completely disregarded.  

As the employee was available to work and was not called in due to a lack of work at the company, the court found that the employee was entitled to be paid for 20 hours of work per week during the relevant period.

Accordingly, the company was ordered to pay the employee his salary for the period.

The Court of Appeal rejected the appeal 

The company appealed the ruling to the Eastern High Court, but the court found that there was no prospect of a different outcome to that in the District Court, and that the case was not of a principled nature. The appeal was therefore dismissed. 

Littler remarks: 

The decision emphasizes that the agreed working hours in an employment contract are crucial, even if working hours have been administered more flexibly in practice. The fact that an employee has worked fewer hours than agreed in the employment contract and has only been paid for the hours actually worked is not sufficient to override the employment contract's indication of the weekly working time. 

If an employee stands ready to work but is not called to work due to circumstances of the employer, the employee is still entitled to wages equivalent to the number of hours agreed in the employment contract. 

At Littler, we advise businesses on employment and labour law issues, including the drafting and amending of employment contracts, working hours, wage obligations and handling changes in workforce requirements. You can contact us here. 

Disclaimer: The above is not, and cannot be, a substitute for legal advice.