Apprentice Awarded DKK 97,000 in Compensation for Unlawful Termination of Training Agreement and Inadequate Handling of Sexual Harassment
In a decision dated September 8, 2026, the Danish Disputes Board (Tvistighedsnævnet) found that a company had unlawfully terminated an apprentice's training agreement following an extended period of illness resulting from a sexual harassment case. As a result, the company was ordered to pay compensation under both the Danish Vocational Education and Training Act and the Danish Equal Treatment Act.
The Apprentice Was Subjected to Sexual Harassment
The case concerned an apprentice floor layer. She was the first woman employed by the company. The apprentice explained that she was not allowed to participate in a shared Facebook group because she was a woman and supposedly could not tolerate vulgar jokes. She was also excluded from overnight stays.
During her employment, the apprentice was subject to sexual harassment by a colleague. The colleague was subsequently found guilty of sexual harassment and sentenced to 20 days of suspended imprisonment for indecent exposure. Following the incident, the apprentice took periods of sick leave due to psychological effects caused by the incident. The Danish Labour Market Insurance subsequently recognized the incident as an occupational injury and assessed her permanent impairment at 8%.
In June 2024, the company unilaterally terminated the training agreement on the grounds that it wished to end the working relationship. There were no written warnings, and the company did not provide any further explanation as to why the working relationship should end.
The Danish Disputes Board Found the Termination Unlawful
As a general rule, a training agreement cannot be terminated after the probationary period has expired. Accordingly, a training agreement may only be terminated if one of the parties materially breaches its obligations, or if a material precondition for the training agreement proves to be incorrect or subsequently ceases to exist. The company that terminates the training agreement bears the burden of proving that the termination was justified.
In this case, the Danish Disputes Board found that the company had not provided a reason for the termination and that the company merely had stated that it wished to end the working relationship, without providing any further justification. The company did not participate in the proceedings and therefore presented no evidence that the termination was justified.
The Committee further noted that the apprentice's sick leave, which resulted from the psychological effects of the sexual harassment case, could not in itself establish that the company's preconditions for the training agreement had ceased to exist. Consequently, the sick leave could not justify termination of the training relationship.
As a result, the apprentice was awarded DKK 53,000 in compensation for the loss of her training benefit.
The Employer's Responsibility for a Harassment-Free Work Environment
Another key issue in the case concerned the company's handling of the sexual harassment.
Under the Danish Equal Treatment Act, employers are required both to provide a harassment-free work environment and to actively address instances of sexual harassment.
The Danish Disputes Board found that the company had failed to fulfill its obligations under the Danish Equal Treatment Act and emphasized, among other things, that the company did not have an employee handbook or other guidelines for preventing and handling harassment. The company had also failed to adequately intervene in response to the gender-based harassment experienced by the apprentice in the workplace.
The Committee further emphasized that the company's director had left it to the apprentice herself to decide whether the employee who had subjected her to sexual harassment should be dismissed. At the same time, the employee continued working for the company for several weeks after the incident before any steps were taken to address the matter.
The apprentice was therefore awarded an additional DKK 44,000 in compensation for the inadequate handling of sexual harassment.
Littler Comments
The decision demonstrates that compelling reasons are required to terminate a training agreement after the probationary period has expired. A company that chooses to terminate a training agreement must be able to document that the termination was justified and bears the burden of proof in this regard.
Furthermore, the decision emphasizes that an employer's responsibility in cases of sexual harassment extends beyond handling the specific incident itself. Employers should not only respond promptly to reports of sexual harassment, but should also focus on how such situations can be prevented and handled. In this context, the absence of clear guidelines or procedures may be relevant in a potential case, including when assessing the employer’s handling of the matter.
At Littler, we regularly advise companies on preventing and handling sexual harassment cases, as well as the specific employment law rules applicable to apprentices and trainees.
You can contact us here.
Disclaimer: The above is not, and cannot replace, legal advice.
References: Afgørelse | Tvistighedsnævnet
____________________________________
Stephan Gheysen
Attorney & Partner
+45 27 21 05 06
