I had only looked into it in the case of collective dismissal (not doing it properly) and my impression is that the stakes are really low (a few months of salary). I’m curious if you have a pointer for case law where someone was reinstated (I wonder what the bar is).
1 Like
You mean for employee? Why is that a defense? (I think only things like pregnancy, military leave are protected, and only while they’re ongoing)
At least I’ve not seen that stop an employer from firing someone, the employee would still receive insurance money but is no longer employed. (And some insurances are really a pain, as they work with really difficult doctors to do their assessments)
FYI Sicke leave and other absences from work has the rules (protection depends on tenure, starts at 1 month and max is a 6 months protection).
Yes better than nothing (it’s just I know some people who are surprised when they learn you can be fired while on sick leave, I think it’s not very common in other European countries).
May I ask what´s the area? Curious what made you feel bored
I always enjoy your contributions so much!
I did some research for my own pleasure and culture, and came across this ruling: https://publications-droit.ch/files/arrets/droitdutravail/9-22-fev-8c-635-2021.pdf
In summary:
A government employee was dismissed and challenged the dismissal. It turns out that he was right to contest the dismissal, which was deemed unjustified. As a result, the state-employer had to reinstate the employee. The employee then applied for compensation for the time spent out of work. The Court held that, even though the employee had not offered his services to the State-employer during the time of his dismissal, the State-employer, in addition to having to reinstate the employee, had to pay compensation corresponding to the time spent between the day of his dismissal and the day of his reinstatement (approximately CHF 240,000).
Once reinstatement has been ordered by a ruling that has come into force, the employee is entitled to payment of the salary that would have been due had the employment relationship never ceased. The fact that the employee was not reinstated during the cantonal proceedings does not change this. The fact that the respondent did not offer her services to the appellant after being dismissed also appears irrelevant.
In this decision, the Federal Court confirms its jurisprudence - inaugurated in decision 8C_546/2020 - according to which an employee, whose immediate dismissal has been annulled and reinstatement ordered, may claim payment of her salary for the period between her dismissal and her reinstatement. Neither the course of the procedure nor the rules on the employer’s demeure are relevant in this respect.
Unfortunately, I have not found any cases in the private sector, although the possibility of reinstatement does exist:
Few authors have considered the question of possible reinstatement in the job held until dismissal. According to Gabriel Aubert, in principle, the employee is not obliged to return to his former position; however, he may be required to accept such a proposal if there is no harm to his personality as a result, taking into account the employer’s attitude, for example, if he immediately acknowledges an obvious error and apologizes (Commentaire romand, n. 11 ad art. 337c CO). For Streiff/von Kaenel, such a return is only conceivable if the animosity provoked by the immediate dismissal has completely disappeared (Federal Court ruling 4C.321/2005 of February 27, 2006, para. 6.2).
As I understand it, the reinstatement mechanism exists in Switzerland. It seems to be more effective in the public sector than in the private sector. It may therefore be that, in the private sector, the chances of being reinstated are slim, but not impossible. So I’ll nuance my comments quoted above 
6 Likes
I answer you by private message 
Wow, thanks for the research, super insightful!
After skimming the decision, it seems like most of the arguments are around the fact this was a public servant? (with specific applicable cantonal law, as well as jurisprudence from e.g. OIT about public servants)
While in private sector there’s likely no extra cantonal legislation, it’s just the standard federal stuff.
Yes, exactly, this caselaw is oriented towards the employment relationship between the State and the citizen (employment contracts between the State and the citizen are very different from those in the private sector).
If I find something in the private sector, I won’t hesitate to post it here.
2 Likes
This thread only just popped up on my screen so am late to reply but do have something to add: forget about the principle of “being fair”.
First an anecdote, when COVID hit i eliminated for that year the annual merit increase for a (part of a) business I was running. The official argument was because of tough times / uncertainty. Reality was the business wasn’t profitable enough and we had lots of overpaid legacy employees. Did we really eliminate the increase? No, target the key 5-10% people to still get increases in some way, shape or form.
My point is, you have no ‘right’ to an increase (at least in Switzerland). The reality is as follows
- There is a budget defined for increases (promotions, merit increases, equity grants, etc.)
- That budget needs to be split as effective as possible by ‘leaders’
- The more socialist approach of spreading it like butter will keep the masses happy but will hurt the business over time
- Hence, ensuring a disproportional part of the budget goes to the 10-20% of the people who are making truly the difference and who’s departure would create major pain
- This is only possible by giving low/no increases to others
I’m not suggesting such a process is inherently fair because sure there is politics, subjectivity, and sometimes key people fall between the cracks for various reasons. But get it out of your head that everybody ‘deserves’ to get an increase. In general, if companies would go down the route of giving everybody what was ‘fair’, the company (or: leader of that business) would often soon run into a profitability / performance issue. There may be exceptions (fast growing businesses with less focus on managing expenses) but in mature companies I’ve consistently found this to be the case.
Tough love, but this is how the real world works.
Your options
- I wouldn’t create a confrontation about it, but see nothing wrong in telling your boss you were surprised with a 0% increase and would like to understand the rationale. He’ll likely have some talking points from HR which he’ll repeat.
- Double down and make sure you’re perceived as a top performer AND flight risk
- Leave (but ask yourself: how do you ensure point 2 at your next employer?)
- GIve yourself a virtual increase - i.e. work-to-rule… you have a 40 hour contract? then work 40 hours, not a minute more, no laptop open in evenings/weekends; etc.
I’ve seen people do point 4 or otherwise just stay below the radar screen, get socialist increases year after year (culture in such firm), no promotions, and often this ultimately does not end well. The increases start adding up and over the years the person becomes very expensive for the role they are in and eventually somebody notices it (perhaps even because they specifically ask HR to generate a list of such people - e.g. in case of a recession).
Bottom line, your manager would love to give 99% of the people under him/her more $$$ but simply can’t. There is not enough budget. To give you 1% more may even require giving a top performer several % less (e.g. if hipo is younger, on lower base).
6 Likes
Don’t talk with HR. They are not your friend. They also did not make the decision (your manager did). They simply facilitate the process. Going to HR on a topic like this will
- Make HR perceive you as a pain
- Dilute trust with your manager (and potentially waste his time)
HR’s mission is not to help people, care for people, etc. - they are paid to support the company’s objectives.
I’m going a bit extreme here, but watch this video and apply its lessons to dealing with HR:
7 Likes
AHV will not pay any inflation increase 2026 other than the 8.33% of the voted 13th salary. (It is more than that for everybody who gets retired in 2026).
I did vote no, as I don’t see much sense in taking out money from one of your pockets (tax, VAT etc.) to put in in your other pocket. But now of course I have to take the 13th, the money is already being taken out of my other pocket…
Very good advice. However, does it apply to Switzerland? Reminds me a bit of all fellow Mustachians counting their blessings in USD…
5 Likes
In the private sector in industry you can aso get a promotion to senior or principal level with zero salary change but increased workload and responsibilities. The “selling” point being, now you salary band is wider, so you have more potential. And of course larger potential bonus, when/if there’s one of course.
3 Likes
Such a blessing 
1 Like
Classic, had watched it by chance many many years ago. Off-topic, two caveats: a) have never found and anticipate I won’t ever find myself in need of this advice, b) probably more applicable to countries known to respect human rights. When living in the UK I trusted the police, even though I never had to get in contact with them, same in CH. in Greece I’d steer clear, there’s simply no reason to invite trouble. If one is a local, straight white male over 30 they’ll most likely be ok, or clearly from NW Europe/US/CA/ANZ/JP. Bonus armour points if they are well-dressed (wearing a jacket in Greece is like full plate armour - “he must be someone to dress like that”). Bonus Charisma points if they speak in a countryside accent/dialect.
I was in Turkey with an ex who’s Turkish, we were in a town she hadn’t been to and got a bit lost, I saw some policemen in a street corner and said “Let’s ask them”, she immediately pulled me the other way saying “YOU DON’T TALK TO THE POLICE IN TURKEY”, a sentiment shared by many people I’ve known who, like me, aren’t from NW European countries (or CA, AUS, JP). It’s a sad fact that in many, no, in most countries the police is something to be in constant fear of.
5 Likes
Yes, I’ve seen it for the first time many years ago as well. It was a bit of an eye opener with some perspectives that I hadn’t thought of before.
I was never one of those “keep the windows of the car rolled up and refused non-mandatory cooperation if the police pulls you over” extremists as I figure if you behave reasonably you’ll be treated just fine, but…
A few things in the video really drove strong points home - among other
- We’re all violating the law whether we realize or not because there’s just so many laws, rules, regulations
- There is no rush to talk with the police… you can always do so later, after speaking with a lawyer and/or calmly structuring your story
Have also thought back about interactions in the past:
- In US: police would always let me go because a) they were confused with the fact that I was living in country A, had a passport from country B, a drivers license from country C while on a business trip in country D… and b) they’d ask why I was there on business and I worked for a supplier to the US military/police/fire service so they always warmed up to that and would give me a warning instead of a ticket
- In Transdniester: was there on a driving trip during much darker times there… it felt like every time a cop saw my car (foreign license plate) they thought “an ATM on wheels” and came after me with all kinds of BS (“where is your environmental license?”) - i had to flee the ‘country’
- In Syria (pre-civil war): I was on a solo driving vacation and would get lost sometimes and would approach a cop to ask directions and they were consistently extremely civil and helpful, even going so far as to escort me to the right highway and wish me well on my way
…nonetheless… it feels like with US customs: answer the question crisply and shut up… a strategy serving me well with authorities. The more you talk, the more angles to pin you down - as the video shows, EVEN if you did nothing wrong, obeyed the law, and are trying to help the police.
I’ve found the Swiss police to be very friendly, approachable and professional… but I’ve also run into a case where I signed something at their urging which I should have NOT signed. It made their life easier, but boxed me in legally.
I think the video shouldn’t be taken too literally but does provide a useful wake up call.
I have been switching my efforts for a better yearly bonus, instead of expecting a salary increase.
This could be a nice strategy.
Unfortunately where I work the bonus is tied to the performance, which is a number in the set {100, 110}. This number is picked at random despite all the framework surrounding the Yearly Performance Review™.
The difference between performance 100 and 110 in monetary value (CHF) is something like 200 CHF (before taxes)… so not worth optimizing.
3 Likes