SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner with us中文AI newsFavorites
Skillskuendigungs-pruefung

kuendigungs-pruefung

Office & productivity

View repository

Updated 10-15 20:08

About this skill

/arbeitsrecht:kuendigungs-pruefung

Purpose

Most terminations are legally unproblematic. Some are lawsuits that have not yet been filed. This skill identifies the high-risk cases, before the 3-week period of § 4 KSchG begins to run: special protection against dismissal, missing works council consultation, deficient social selection, inadequate documentation, forgotten mass layoff notification.

Inputs

  • Reason for termination: operational / conduct-related / person-related
  • Employee data: length of employment, position, marital status (for social selection), severe disability, works council mandate, pregnancy / parental leave / caregiving leave
  • Company data: number of employees under § 23 KSchG, works council present? Collective agreement coverage?
  • Prior history: Previous warnings (for conduct-related termination)? BEM conducted (for person-related / illness-related)?
  • Planned measure: ordinary vs. extraordinary, notice period, severance offer § 1a KSchG?

Sub-agent architecture

  1. Researcher (../../agents/researcher.md) provides statutes with URL, relevant commentary passages (ErfK, APS, KR), up to three BAG decisions per question (with [unverifiziert]markers where necessary).
  2. Drafter (../../agents/drafter.md) prepares the review in the expert-opinion style with a built-in order of legal bases (KSchG → BGB → BetrVG → special protection → mass layoff).
  3. Reviewer (../../agents/reviewer.md) checks deadlines, special protection gaps, source markers, professional law and gives the final Pass/Fix.

Procedure

1. Scope of application of the KSchG (§ 23 KSchG)

Threshold: KSchG (First Section) applies to employees who have been employed for longer than 6 months (§ 1 para. 1 KSchG), if in the establishment more than 10 employees within the meaning of § 23 KSchG are employed (for employees whose employment began after 31.12.2003 — pre-existing: > 5 employees):

  • Full-time employees → 1.0
  • Part-time employees up to 20 h/week → 0.5
  • Part-time employees up to 30 h/week → 0.75
  • Temporary agency workers count in the hirer's establishment if their deployment is based on regular staffing needs (BAG, judgment of 24.01.2013 – 2 AZR 140/12, NZA 2013, 726 [unverifiziert – prüfen in juris]).

Small establishment (≤ 10 employees): No general KSchG protection, but fundamental rights protection. A termination in a small establishment must not be a disguised means of discrimination (BVerfG, order of 27.01.1998 – 1 BvL 15/87, NJW 1998, 1475 — [unverified – check in juris]).

2. Special protection against dismissal check (before everything else)

If one of the following elements is present: 🔴 BLOCKER – immediate escalation to the client's lawyer.

Protective element Norm Requirement
Pregnancy / Maternity protection § 17 MuSchG Official approval (Office for Occupational Safety) before issuance
Parental leave § 18 BEEG Official approval; exception in serious cases § 18 (1) sentence 2 BEEG
Severely disabled persons / persons treated as equivalent § 168 SGB IX Approval of the Inclusion Office before issuance; 3-week application period
Works council member, election committee, etc. § 15 KSchG Ordinary notice of termination excluded; extraordinary only with works council approval § 103 BetrVG
Data protection officer § 38 (2) BDSG in conjunction with § 6 (4) BDSG Protection against dismissal during term of office + 1 year thereafter
Care leave § 5 PflegeZG Protection as under BEEG

3. Works council consultation (§ 102 BetrVG)

If a works council exists: every termination must be heard before issuance. Without proper consultation, the termination is invalid (§ 102 (1) sentence 3 BetrVG).

Checklist:

  • Written information to the works council (email sufficient)
  • Content complete: personal details, type of termination (ordinary/extraordinary), notice period, termination reasons specifically (not merely keywords)
  • Deadline observed: 1 week for ordinary, 3 days for extraordinary termination (§ 102 (2) BetrVG)
  • Works council concerns documented (no veto rights for ordinary termination, but objection under § 102 (3) BetrVG gives right to continued employment under § 102 (5) BetrVG)

Detail skill: /arbeitsrecht:betriebsrat-anhoerung (planned; currently as stub).

References:

  • Becker/Wolff, in: APS, 6th ed. 2021, § 102 BetrVG marginal no. 12 ff.
  • BAG, judgment of 22.09.1994 – 2 AZR 31/94, NZA 1995, 363 (completeness of consultation) [unverifiziert – prüfen in juris]

4. Grounds for termination (§ 1 KSchG)

A — Termination for operational reasons

  1. Entrepreneurial decision free to the employer, but urgently required (no other reasonable employment). Cf. BAG, judgment of 29.03.2007 – 2 AZR 31/06, NZA 2007, 912 marginal no. 21 [unverifiziert – prüfen].
  2. Elimination of the workplace concrete and permanent (mere declines in turnover are not sufficient).
  3. Continued employment in a comparable workplace excluded (§ 1 (2) sentence 2 KSchG).
  4. Social selection (see No. 5).
  5. Mass dismissal (§§ 17–18 KSchG): thresholds depending on company size; notification to the Employment Agency BEFORE issuance of the terminations. Error → invalidity. Cf. BAG, judgment of 22.11.2012 – 2 AZR 371/11, NZA 2013, 437 [unverifiziert – prüfen].

B — Termination for conduct-related reasons

  1. Warning generally preceded, except in cases of serious breaches of duty. BAG leading decision "Emmely": BAG, judgment of 10.06.2010 – 2 AZR 541/09, NZA 2010, 1227 [unverifiziert – prüfen].
  2. Warning sufficiently specific: concrete description, clear behavioral expectation, threat of sanctions. BAG, judgment of 19.11.2015 – 2 AZR 217/15, NZA 2016, 540 [unverifiziert – prüfen].
  3. Balancing of interests: severity of the breach of duty vs. duration of employment, risk of repetition, social data.

Detail skill: /arbeitsrecht:abmahnung.

C — Termination for personal reasons (especially due to illness)

  1. Negative prognosis: are further significant absences to be expected?
  2. Significant operational impairment (continued remuneration > 6 weeks p.a., disruption of operations).
  3. Balancing of interests. BAG, judgment of 13.05.2015 – 2 AZR 565/14, NZA 2016, 116 [unverifiziert – prüfen].
  4. BEM (company integration management) under § 167(2) SGB IX must be carried out before termination, otherwise increased burden of proof. BAG, judgment of 12.07.2007 – 2 AZR 716/06, NZA 2008, 173 [unverifiziert – prüfen].

5. Social selection (§ 1(3) KSchG)

Central review point of termination for operational reasons. Among comparable employees, those least socially protected must be dismissed.

Criteria (§ 1(3) sentence 1 KSchG):

  • Length of service
  • Age
  • Maintenance obligations
  • Severe disability

Review scheme:

  1. Form comparison group (same hierarchy level, interchangeability through training ≤ 3 months).
  2. Calculate social points — there is nostatutory points table; works agreement / reconciliation of interests with a points scheme recommended.
  3. Exception for high performers (§ 1(3) sentence 2 KSchG) restrictively: only if continued employment is in the justified operational interest. BAG, judgment of 07.07.2011 – 2 AZR 476/10, NZA 2012, 150 [unverifiziert – prüfen].

6. Notice periods (§ 622 BGB)

Duration of employment Period (§ 622(2) BGB)
0–2 years 4 weeks to the 15th or end of month
2–5 years 1 month to end of month
5–8 years 2 months
8–10 years 3 months
10–12 years 4 months
12–15 years 5 months
15–20 years 6 months
> 20 years 7 months

Deviations under collective agreements must be reviewed as a priority.

Extraordinary termination (§ 626 BGB) Important reason + 2-week period from knowledge of the person entitled to terminate (§ 626(2) BGB). BAG, judgment of 21.06.2012 – 2 AZR 694/11, NZA 2013, 199 [unverifiziert – prüfen].

7. Settlement offer (§ 1a KSchG)

The employer may offer a severance payment in connection with a termination for operational reasons (0.5 × monthly salary × years of service), provided the employee does not file an action. Tax treatment: § 34 EStG (reduced tax rate, "fifth rule").

Sources and citation style

Binding authority: ../../references/zitierweise.md. Methodology: ../../references/methodik.md.

Material statutes (verified via gesetze-im-internet.de)

Commentaries

  • Linck, in: ErfK, 24th ed. 2024, § 1 KSchG marginal no. 100 ff. (social selection)
  • Preis, in: ErfK, 24th ed. 2024, § 626 BGB marginal no. 1 ff. (extraordinary termination)
  • Dörner / Vossen, in: KR, 13th ed. 2022, § 1 KSchG marginal no. 350 ff.
  • Becker / Wolff, in: APS, 6th ed. 2021, § 102 BetrVG marginal no. 12 ff.
  • Berkowsky, in: MüKoBGB, 9th ed. 2023, § 622 marginal no. 1 ff.

Case law (all [unverifiziert – prüfen in Beck-Online/juris])

  1. BAG, judgment of 10.06.2010 – 2 AZR 541/09, NZA 2010, 1227 ("Emmely")
  2. BAG, judgment of 19.11.2015 – 2 AZR 217/15, NZA 2016, 540 (specificity of warning)
  3. BAG, judgment of 07.07.2011 – 2 AZR 476/10, NZA 2012, 150 (high performers)
  4. BAG, judgment of 22.11.2012 – 2 AZR 371/11, NZA 2013, 437 (mass dismissal)
  5. BAG, judgment of 12.07.2007 – 2 AZR 716/06, NZA 2008, 173 (BEM)
  6. BAG, judgment of 21.06.2012 – 2 AZR 694/11, NZA 2013, 199 (§ 626 para. 2 BGB)
  7. BAG, judgment of 29.03.2007 – 2 AZR 31/06, NZA 2007, 912 (termination for operational reasons)
  8. BAG, judgment of 13.05.2015 – 2 AZR 565/14, NZA 2016, 116 (due to illness)
  9. BAG, judgment of 22.09.1994 – 2 AZR 31/94, NZA 1995, 363 (works council consultation)
  10. BVerfG, order of 27.01.1998 – 1 BvL 15/87, NJW 1998, 1475 (small business)

Verification: Before any use in client-related briefs, the above case numbers must be checked in openjur, BAG database or Beck-Online / juris.

Output format

KÜNDIGUNGSPRÜFUNG — <Mandat-ID/Position> — <Datum>
VERTRAULICH — MANDATSGEHEIMNIS — § 43a Abs. 2 BRAO

Gesamtbefund: [🟢 Möglich / 🟡 Möglich mit Auflagen / 🔴 Nicht empfohlen]

⚠️ Verifikationshinweis: Alle BAG-Zitate dieser Prüfung sind mit
[unverifiziert] markiert und in Beck-Online/juris zu prüfen.

I.   KSchG-Anwendungsbereich         [🟢 / 🟡 / N/A]
     Begründung: <…>
II.  Sonderkündigungsschutz-Check    [🟢 / 🔴 Flag: <Tatbestand>]
III. Betriebsratsanhörung            [🟢 / 🔴 ausstehend / N/A kein BR]
IV.  Kündigungsgrund (§ 1 KSchG)     [🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴]
     Typ: <betriebsbedingt / verhaltensbedingt / personenbedingt>
     Begründung: <…>
V.   Sozialauswahl (nur bei bb)      [🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴]
     Vergleichsgruppe: <N AN>
     Sozialpunkte: <Tabelle oder Verweis auf Anlage>
VI.  Kündigungsfrist                 <Frist nach § 622 BGB oder TV>
VII. Massenentlassungsanzeige        [N/A / 🟢 erstattet / 🔴 fehlt]
VIII. Abfindungsangebot § 1a KSchG    <Betrag>  oder  keine Empfehlung

Offene Tatsachenfragen:
  - <…>

Offene Verifizierungen:
  - <BAG-Az.> in juris / openjur prüfen
  - <Kommentarstelle> aktuelle Auflage bestätigen

Empfehlung: <konkret, ohne Mandatsentscheidung vorzugreifen>
Eskalation: <ja/nein — Begründung>

Quellen: siehe references/zitierweise.md

Example — Termination for operational reasons with social selection (judgment style)

Facts. The client operates a mechanical engineering company with 35 employees, no works council. Plans to eliminate one of three positions in inside sales. Three employees in the comparison group:

  • A: 10 years, 45 years old, married, 2 children
  • B: 3 years, 30 years old, single, recognized severely disabled (GdB 50)
  • C: 8 years, 55 years old, divorced, 1 child

Assessment (judgment style). The intended termination is most readily justified vis-à-vis C. In the social selection pursuant to § 1 (3) KSchG, all three employees are to be placed in one comparison group (same function, interchangeability given). B enjoys special protection against dismissal pursuant to § 168 SGB IX; a termination requires the consent of the inclusion office (🔴 blocker). A and C are in direct selection comparison: A's longer company service (10 yrs.), age (45 yrs.) and the two maintenance obligations outweigh C's need for protection (8 yrs., 55 yrs., one child). C is the least worthy of protection according to social points — termination compliant with social selection if the selection process is documented in writing.

🟠 Recommendation. Before issuing: (1) file social selection documentation in the personnel file, (2) consider severance offer § 1a KSchG (4 BMG), (3) mass dismissal threshold not reached (1/35 < 6 % at < 60 employees), notification not required, (4) in case of litigation risk, consider settlement option (e.g. termination agreement, see /arbeitsrecht:aufhebungsvertrag).

Risks / typical mistakes

  • Forgetting mass dismissal notification (§§ 17–18 KSchG) — leads to the invalidity of all terminations. Thresholds from 5 employees at small, from 30 employees at large establishments within 30 days.
  • Works council hearing substantively incomplete — missing details on the person or the reason render the hearing invalid (§ 102 (1) sentence 3 BetrVG).
  • Special protection against dismissal overlooked — in particular for works council members, pregnant women, persons on parental leave, severely disabled persons.
  • Social selection without documentation — hardly possible to remedy after expiry of the action period pursuant to § 4 KSchG.
  • 2-week period § 626 (2) BGB — begins upon positive knowledge of the person entitled to terminate, not upon vague suspicion.
  • BEM not carried out — prior to termination due to illness increases the burden of presentation.
  • Application to small establishments overlooked — at ≤ 10 employees the KSchG does not apply; review only against fundamental rights + AGG.