Comment on Tesla workers in Germany complain about home visits from their bosses

Krzd@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• bleistift2@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Can you quote a law for this?

  source

  • Krzd@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It would fall under harassment by your employer.

    As the Entgeltfortzahlungsgesetz (Entgfg) § 5 Abs. 1 handles the duties and responsibilities of the employee, therefore limiting the employer. A Arbeitsunfähigkeitsbescheinigung (short AU) (certificate of incapacity for work) is always complete and full, without any compromise towards the employee. So you don’t even have to answer your phone at all, much less open your door.
    There are ways for your employer to officially doubt the validity of the AU with the health insurance, that then can, but don’t have to, order a medical examination to confirm the AU. Based on Sozialgesetzbuch, Fünftes Buch (SGB V), § 275 Abs. 1a Buchstabe a)
    This is an official inquiry though, so any and all suspicions about unhealthy work environments would be officially recorded and investigated, which in this case I imagine would be pretty bad for Tesla.

    source

    • bleistift2@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It would fall under harassment by your employer.

      §5 EntgFG doesn’t say anything about an employer visiting their employee. I couldn’t find a ruling stating that knocking on someones door constitutes harassment. Of course the employer doesn’t have to open, but you still haven’t produced evidence that the visit itself is illegal.

      source

      • Krzd@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Obviously the physical visit itself isn’t illegal, the employer is still another civilian that can knock on however many doors they want to. But as soon as the motivation behind it is to pressure the employee to return to work despite having an AU, or to doubt the validity of the AU, it violates the previously mentioned laws. The intent is what’s making the difference. Depending on how the employer phrases their requests, this might also violate §240 StGB.

        source