In many states, civil servant salaries are a constant topic of debate. Now the Federal Constitutional Court has ruled: In Berlin, with a few exceptions, salaries have been unconstitutional for many years.
The salaries of some civil servants in Berlin have been unconstitutional for many years. This was decided by the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. Relevant regulations in Berlin’s salary law were largely inconsistent with the Basic Law between 2008 and 2020.
In this particular case, what is meant is the group called pay scale A, to which the majority of civil servants belong. The state of Berlin must now create new regulations by March 31, 2027.
The salary must be appropriate for the position
However, the decision does not mean that all civil servants in Berlin can now expect additional payments. The Federal Constitutional Court explained that retroactive correction of low wages is only necessary for claimants in the initial process and for civil servants whose claims have not yet been decided.
Salary refers to the remuneration of civil servants, judges and soldiers. According to the principle of benefits provided in the Constitution, employers are obliged to provide living wages to these people and their families in accordance with their position during the period of active work, in the event of disability and in old age.
Minimum distance to basic security
For years there have been disputes in many states over salary levels – which always end in Karlsruhe. Since 2015, the Federal Constitutional Court has set out a framework in several decisions regarding when remuneration is no longer appropriate for the position. For example, the security level must be at least 15 percent above the basic security level.
In its decision, the Federal Constitutional Court now emphasizes three steps to carry out a review of whether the salary violates the Constitution: First, it must be checked whether the minimum salary has been met. The second step is to check whether salaries are adjusted to “developments in general economic and financial conditions and the general standard of living”. If the first two steps result in violations, the third step should examine whether this can be justified under constitutional law.
Ref. 2 BvL 21/17 etc
