When a termination without notice not note the statutory period of notice upon termination of employment, the employer in each case has to comply with the statutory notice period. An exception to this principle exists only for the case of extraordinary termination. In the latter, the employer is not reasonable with the separation of the employee so long to wait until the legal period of notice has expired. An extraordinary cancellation is possible but only under very narrow conditions. You represents the means for the employer as the ultima ratio, he must employ all last.
The scheme to terminate in the BGB is also not essential in particular. This means that neither the employer nor the workers are entitled to exclude this possibility of termination by agreement. Indeed the right of termination for good cause applies to both parties. Both the employer and the workers have the right to an employment contract without Taking into account the legal period of notice by notice to the contractor to stop, if there is an important reason. There are examples in the case-law, when an important reason justifies immediate termination, hundreds. So, for example, a worker may terminate his job with immediate effect, if she is sexually harassed by the employer. The employer in turn has the right to terminate without notice, if he must register that he is robbed of his workers. In this context some spectacular cases are taken lately by the labour courts, where the affected workers, his employer has stolen items of little value.
But even in these cases courts have considered a termination justified. The courts have made no social consideration in this case and that workers strongly dependent on were on the workplace, not apply to make the argument that. She was at the Centre of the grounds of this judgment Whereas that the relationship of trust between employer and employee is obviously so sustainably shattered by the extent undisputed theft, that the employer cannot be expected to, it is to wait until the end of the termination period. Although these judgments in public have caused no little excitement, you can understand the reasoning of judgments. The unions, however, saw the proposal that one must think to prevent undue hardship in these cases to a change in the laws. If the current legislation is clear confirmation of a terminate even in case of theft of low value items, then the legal basis must be changed so the unions, for the protection of the employee just. So far the legislature but not could convince themselves, to take up this proposal. Fritz Kuhn