Application of the Temporary Agency Work Act

Labor Court Ruling of 19 August, 2025

In 2019, a temporary worker entered into an agreement with a temporary employment agency for a temporary position with a warehouse logistics and transportation company in Denmark. The temporary position was only extended once, after which the user company's warehouse was transferred to a new company. The temporary worker and the temp and recruitment agency then entered into an agreement for a temporary position with the new company. This agreement was extended 4 times in 2020, and in the last extension no end date was specified. The temporary worker was terminated by the temporary employment agency in 2022.

The case before the Labor Court primarily concerned whether the temporary worker fell outside the scope of the Temporary Agency Work Act because her posting to the user company was not "temporary" according to section 1(1) of the Temporary Agency Work Act. If this was the case, it had to be investigated whether she should instead be considered to be permanently employed by the user company.

The concept of temporary worker must be understood broadly

The Labor Court stated that emphasis must be placed on whether it was intended at the time of the posting, including any extensions, that the employment relationship should be temporary.

The word "temporary" must also be seen in light of section 3(4) of the Danish Temporary Agency Workers Act on successive postings without objective justification, which is punishable by a fine and may involve compensation to the temporary worker. This provision presupposes that even unjustified successive postings can be covered by the Temporary Agency Workers Act and thus be "temporary", cf. section 1(1) of the Temporary Agency Workers Act.

Finally, the Labor Court stated that the uncertainty that would arise if the "temporary worker" was not covered by the Temporary Agency Work Act but was not in an employment relationship with the user company, also spoke for a broad understanding of the word "temporary".

Not proven that the temporary worker was posted permanently

The Labor Court found that the temporary worker was posted "temporarily" to the user company with the consequence that the temporary employment relationship was covered by the Temporary Agency Workers Act. The Labor Court emphasized, among other things, that the user company's activity level was characterized by large fluctuations and great uncertainty, which was especially the case during the Corona lockdown, where the temporary worker had performed work for the user company. Therefore, the Labor Court did not have to rule on whether the temporary worker should instead be considered a permanent employee of the user company.

Littler notes

Temporary agency work is a special category within employment law, characterized, among other things, by the fact that the temporary worker is subject to the user company's instruction, but has the formal employment relationship with the temporary employment agency.

Labor Court's ruling confirms that there is a high threshold before temporary workers posted by a temporary employment agency will be considered permanently posted to a user company and thus fall outside the Temporary Agency Workers Act.